Datasets:

pszemraj

/

qmsum-cleaned

like 9

tr-sq-1201

tr-sq-1201_0

Summarize the discussion on the performance of the deployed model Professor D: OK. So, uh You can fill those out, uh {pause} after, actually, so So, I got, uh {pause} these results from, uh, Stephane. Also, um, I think that, uh {pause} um {pause} we might hear later today, about other results. I think s that, uh, there were some other very good results that we're gonna wanna compare to. But, {vocalsound} r our results from other {disfmarker} other places, yeah. PhD A: I I'm sorry? I didn't Professor D: Um, I got this from you PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: and then I sent a note to Sunil about the {disfmarker} cuz he has been running some other systems PhD A: Mm - hmm. Professor D: other than the {disfmarker} the ICSI OGI one. PhD A: Oh yeah. Professor D: So {pause} um, I wan wanna {disfmarker} wanna see what that is. But, uh, you know, so we'll see what it is comparatively later. But {pause} it looks like, um PhD A: M yeah. Professor D: You know most of the time, even {disfmarker} I mean even though it's true that the overall number for Danish {disfmarker} we didn't improve it If you look at it individually, what it really says is that there's, um, uh Looks like out of the six cases, between the different kinds of, uh, matching conditions {pause} out of the six cases, there's basically, um, a couple where it stays about the same, uh, three where it gets better, and one where it gets worse. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Uh, go ahead. PhD A: Y Actually, uh, um, for the Danish, there's still some kind of mystery because, um, um, when we use the straight features, we are not able to get these nice number with the ICSI OGI one, I mean. We don't have this ninety - three seventy - eight, we have eight PhD E: Eighty - nine forty - four. PhD A: yeah. Uh, so, uh, that's probably something wrong with the features that we get from OGI. Uh, and Sunil is working on {disfmarker} on trying to {disfmarker} to check everything. Professor D: Oh, and {disfmarker} and we have a little time on that {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} actually so PhD A: Hmm? Professor D: We have a little bit of time on that, actually. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: We have a day or so, so When {disfmarker} when {disfmarker} when do you folks leave? PhD A: Uh, Sunday. Professor D: Sunday? So So, uh Yeah, until Saturday midnight, or something, we have W we {disfmarker} we have time, yeah. Well, that would be good. That'd be good. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Yeah. Uh, and, you know, i u when whenever anybody figures it out they should also, for sure, email Hynek because Hynek will be over there {vocalsound} telling people {vocalsound} what we did, so he should know. PhD A: Mmm. Yeah. Professor D: Good, OK. So, um So, we'll {disfmarker} we'll hold off on that a little bit. I mean, even with these results as they are, it's {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} it's really not that bad. But {disfmarker} but, uh, um And it looks like the overall result as they are now, even without, you know, any {disfmarker} any bugs being fixed is that, uh, on the {disfmarker} the other tasks, we had this average of, uh, forty uh {disfmarker} nine percent, or so, improvement. And here we have somewhat better than that than the Danish, and somewhat worse than that on the German, but I mean, it sounds like, uh, one way or another, the methods that we're doing can reduce the error rate from {disfmarker} from mel ceptrum {pause} down by, you know {pause} a fourth of them to, uh, a half of them. Somewhere in there, depending on the {pause} exact case. So So that's good. I mean, I think that, uh, one of the things that Hynek was talking about was understanding what was in the other really good proposals and {disfmarker} and trying to see if what should ultimately be proposed is some, uh, combination of things. Um, if, uh {disfmarker} Cuz there's things that they are doing {pause} there that we certainly are not doing. And there's things that we're doing that {pause} they're not doing. And {disfmarker} and they all seem like good things. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: So PhD E: Mmm, yeah. PhD C: How much {disfmarker} how much better was the best system than ours? Professor D: So Well, we don't know yet. PhD C: Mmm. Professor D: Uh, I mean, first place, there's still this thing to {disfmarker} to work out, and second place {disfmarker} second thing is that the only results that we have so far from before were really development set results. PhD C: Oh, OK. Professor D: So, I think in this community that's of interest. It's not like everything is being pinned on the evaluation set. But, um, for the development set, our best result was a little bit short of fifty percent. And the best result of any system was about fifty - four, where these numbers are the, uh, relative, uh, reduction in, uh, word error rate. PhD C: Oh, OK. Professor D: And, um, the other systems were, uh, somewhat lower than that. There was actually {disfmarker} there was much less of a huge range than there was in Aurora one. In Aurora one there were {disfmarker} there were systems that ba basically didn't improve things. PhD C: Hmm. Professor D: And here the {disfmarker} the worst system {pause} still reduced the error rate by thirty - three percent, or something, in development set. PhD C: Oh, wow. Professor D: So {disfmarker} so, you know, sort of everybody is doing things between, well, roughly a third of the errors, and half the errors being eliminated, {vocalsound} uh, and varying on different test sets and so forth. PhD C: Mm - hmm. Professor D: So I think Um {pause} It's probably a good time to look at what's really going on and seeing if there's a {disfmarker} there's a way to combine the best ideas while at the same time not blowing up the amount of, uh, resources used, cuz that's {disfmarker} that's critical for this {disfmarker} this test. PhD C: Do we know anything about {disfmarker} who {disfmarker} who's was it that had the lowest on the dev set? Professor D: Um, uh, the, uh, the there were two systems that were put forth by a combination of {disfmarker} of, uh, French Telecom and Alcatel. And, um they {disfmarker} they differed in some respects, but they e em one was called the French Telecom Alcatel System the other was called the Alcatel French Telecom System, {vocalsound} uh, which is the biggest difference, I think. But {disfmarker} but there're {disfmarker} there're {disfmarker} there're some other differences, too. Uh, and {disfmarker} and, uh, they both did very well, PhD C: Uh - huh. Professor D: you know? So, {vocalsound} um, my impression is they also did very well on {disfmarker} on the {disfmarker} the, uh, evaluation set, but, um, I {disfmarker} I we haven't seen {disfmarker} you've - you haven't seen any final results for that PhD C: And they used {disfmarker} the main thing that {disfmarker} that they used was spectral subtraction? Professor D: yeah. PhD C: Or Professor D: There is a couple pieces to it. There's a spectral subtraction style piece {disfmarker} it was basically, you know, Wiener filtering. And then {disfmarker} then there was some p some modification of the cepstral parameters, where they {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah, actually, something that's close to cepstral mean subtraction. But, uh, the way the mean is adapted {disfmarker} um, it's signal dependent. I'm {disfmarker} I'm, uh So, basically, the mean is adapted during speech and not during silence. Professor D: Yeah. PhD A: But it's very close to {disfmarker} to cepstral mean subtraction. Professor D: But some people have done {vocalsound} {pause} exactly that sort of thing, of {disfmarker} of {disfmarker} and the {disfmarker} I mean it's not {disfmarker} To {disfmarker} to look in {pause} speech only, to try to m to measure these things during speech, PhD A: Yeah, yeah. Professor D: that's p that's not that uncommon. But i it it {disfmarker} so it looks like they did some {disfmarker} some, uh, reasonable things, uh, and they're not things that we did, precisely. We did unreasonable things, {vocalsound} which {disfmarker} because we like to try strange things, and {disfmarker} and, uh, and our things worked too. PhD C: Hmm. Professor D: And so, um, uh, it's possible that some combination of these different things that were done would be the best thing to do. But the only caveat to that is that everybody's being real conscious of how much memory and how much CPU they're using PhD C: Mm - hmm. Professor D: because these, {vocalsound} {vocalsound} {vocalsound} uh, standards are supposed to go on cell phones with m moderate resources in both respects. PhD C: Did anybody, uh, do anything with the models as a {disfmarker} an experiment? Or Professor D: Uh, they didn't report it, if they did. PhD C: N nobody reported it? Professor D: Yeah. I think everybody was focused elsewhere. Um, now, one of the things that's nice about what we did is, we do have a {disfmarker} a, uh {disfmarker} a filtering, which leads to a {disfmarker} a, uh {disfmarker} a reduction in the bandwidth in the modulation spectrum, which allows us to downsample. So, uh, as a result of that we have a reduced, um, transmission rate for the bits. PhD C: Mm - hmm. Professor D: That was misreported the first time out. It {disfmarker} it said the same amount because for convenience sake in the particular way that this is being tested, uh, they were repeating the packets. So it was {disfmarker} they were s they {disfmarker} they had twenty - four hundred bits per second, but they were literally creating forty - eight hundred bits per second, {vocalsound} um, even though y it was just repeated. PhD C: Oh. Mm - hmm. Right. Professor D: So, uh, in practice PhD C: So you could've had a repeat count in there or something. Professor D: Well, n I mean, this was just a ph phoney thing just to {disfmarker} to fit into the {disfmarker} the software that was testing the errors {disfmarker} channel errors and so on. PhD C: Oh. Oh. Professor D: So {disfmarker} so in reality, if you put this {disfmarker} this system in into, uh, the field, it would be twenty - four hundred bits per second, not forty - eight hundred. So, um, so that's a nice feature of what {disfmarker} what we did. Um, but, um, well, we still have to see how it all comes out. PhD C: Hmm. Professor D: Um, and then there's the whole standards process, which is another thing altogether. PhD C: When is the development set {disfmarker} I mean, the, uh, uh, test set results due? Like the day before you leave or something? Professor D: Uh, probably the day after they leave, but we'll have to {disfmarker} {vocalsound} we'll have to stop it the day before {comment} we leave. PhD A: Yeah, yeah. So PhD C: Huh. Professor D: I think tha I think the {disfmarker} the meeting is on the thirteenth or something. PhD A: Yeah, this Tuesday, yeah. Professor D: And, uh, they, uh Right. And the {disfmarker} the, uh, results are due like the day before the meeting or something. So PhD A: Yeah, probably, well Professor D: I th I think {disfmarker} I I think they are, PhD A: Yeah, well Professor D: yeah. So {pause} {vocalsound} um, since we have a bit farther to travel than {vocalsound} some of the others, {vocalsound} uh, we'll have to get done a little quicker. But, um, I mean, it's just tracing down these bugs. I mean, just exactly this sort of thing of, you know, why {disfmarker} why these features seem to be behaving differently, uh, in California than in Oregon. PhD C: Hmm. Professor D: Might have something to do with electricity shortage. Uh, we didn't {disfmarker} we didn't have enough electrons here and Uh, but, um Uh, I think, you know, the main reason for having {disfmarker} I mean, it only takes w to run the {disfmarker} the two test sets in {disfmarker} just in computer time is just a day or so, right? PhD A: Yeah, Professor D: So PhD A: it's very short interval. Professor D: yeah. So, I think the who the whole reason for having as long as we have, which was {pause} like a week and a half, is {disfmarker} is because of bugs like that. So Huh So, we're gonna end up with these same kind of sheets that have the {pause} the percentages and so on just for the {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah, so there are two more columns in the sheets, Professor D: Oh, I guess it's the same sheets, PhD A: two. Yeah, it's the same sheets, Professor D: yeah, yeah {disfmarker} PhD A: yeah. Professor D: just with the missing columns filled in. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Yeah. Well, that'll be good. So, I'll dis I'll disregard these numbers. That's {disfmarker} that's {disfmarker} that's good. PhD A: So, Hynek will try to push for trying to combine, uh, different things? Or Hmm? Professor D: Uh, well that's {pause} um yeah I mean, I think the question is" Is there {disfmarker} is there some advantage?" I mean, you could just take the best system and say that's the standard. But the thing is that if different systems are getting at good things, um, a again within the constraint of the resources, if there's something simple that you can do Now for instance, uh, it's, I think, very reasonable to have a standard for the terminal's side and then for the server's side say," Here's a number of things that could be done." So, um, everything that we did could probably just be added on to what Alcatel did, and i it'd probably work pretty well with them, too. So, um, uh, that's one {disfmarker} one aspect of it. And then on the terminal's side, I don't know how much, um, memory and {disfmarker} and CPU it takes, but it seems like the filtering {pause} Uh, I mean, the VAD stuff they both had, right? And, um, so {disfmarker} and they both had some kind of on - line normalization, right? PhD A: Uh, yeah. Professor D: Of sorts, yeah? So {disfmarker} so, it seems like the main different there is the {disfmarker} is the, uh, filtering. And the filtering {disfmarker} I think if you can {disfmarker} shouldn't take a lot of memory to do that Uh, and I also wouldn't think the CPU, uh, would be much either for that part. So, if you can {disfmarker} if you can add those in {pause} um {pause} then, uh, you can cut the data rate in half. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: So it seems like the right thing to do is to {disfmarker} on the {disfmarker} on the terminal's side, take what they did, if it {disfmarker} if it does seem to generalize well to German and Danish, uh, take what they did add in a filter, and add in some stuff on the server's side and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and that's probably a reasonable standard. Um {pause} Uh PhD A: They are working on this already? Because {disfmarker} yeah, Su - Sunil told me that he was trying already to put some kind of, uh, filtering in the {vocalsound} {pause} France Telecom. Professor D: Yeah, so that's {disfmarker} that's {disfmarker} that's what That would be ideal {disfmarker} would be is that they could, you know, they could actually show that, in fact, a combination of some sort, {vocalsound} uh, would work even better than what {disfmarker} what any of the systems had. And, um, then it would {disfmarker} it would, uh {pause} be something to {disfmarker} to discuss in the meeting. But, uh, not clear what will go on. Um, I mean, on the one hand, um, sometimes people are just anxious to get a standard out there. I mean, you can always have another standard after that, but {vocalsound} this process has gone on for a while on {disfmarker} already and {disfmarker} and people might just wanna pick something and say," OK, this is it." And then, that's a standard. Uh, standards are always optional. It's just that, uh, if you disobey them, then you risk not being able to sell your product, or {pause} {vocalsound} Uh {pause} um And people often work on new standards while an old standard is in place and so on. So it's not final even if they declared a standard. The other hand, they might just say they just don't know enough yet to {disfmarker} to declare a standard. So you {disfmarker} you {disfmarker} you will be {disfmarker} you will become experts on this and know more {disfmarker} far more than me about the tha this particular standards process once you {disfmarker} you go to this meeting. So, be interested in hearing. So, uh, I'd be, uh, interested in hearing, uh, your thoughts now I mean you're almost done. I mean, you're done in the sense that, um, you may be able to get some new features from Sunil, and we'll re - run it. Uh, but other than that, you're {disfmarker} you're basically done, right? So, uh, I'm interested in hearing {disfmarker} hearing your thoughts about {pause} where you think we should go from this. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: I mean, we tried a lot of things in a hurry, and, uh, if we can back off from this now and sort of take our time with something, and not have doing things quickly be quite so much the constraint, what {disfmarker} what you think would be the best thing to do. PhD A: Uh, well Hmm Well, first, uh, to really have a look at {disfmarker} at the speech {pause} {vocalsound} from these databases because, well, we tried several thing, but we did not really look {vocalsound} at what what's happening, and {vocalsound} where is the noise, and Professor D: OK. PhD A: Eh Professor D: It's a novel idea. Look at the data. OK. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Or more generally, I guess, what {disfmarker} what is causing the degradation. PhD A: Yeah, yeah. Actually, there is one thing that {disfmarker} well {pause} Um, generally we {disfmarker} we think that {vocalsound} most of the errors are within phoneme classes, and so I think it could be interesting to {disfmarker} to see if it {disfmarker} I don't think it's still true when we add noise, and {vocalsound} so we have {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I guess the confusion ma the confusion matrices are very different when {disfmarker} when we have noise, and when it's clean speech. And probably, there is much more {pause} between classes errors for noisy speech. Professor D: Mm - hmm. PhD A: And {vocalsound} so, um Yeah, so perhaps we could have a {disfmarker} a large gain, eh, just by looking at improving the, uh, recognition, not of phonemes, but of phoneme classes, simply. Professor D: Mm - hmm. PhD A: And {vocalsound} which is a s a s a simpler problem, perhaps, but {disfmarker} which is perhaps important for noisy speech. Professor D: The other thing that strikes me, just looking at these numbers is, just taking the best cases, I mean, some of these, of course, even with all of our {disfmarker} our wonderful processing, still are horrible kinds of numbers. But just take the best case, the well - matched {pause} uh, German case after {disfmarker} er well - matched Danish after we {disfmarker} PhD A: Mm - hmm. Professor D: the kind of numbers we're getting are about eight or nine {pause} uh {pause} p percent {pause} error {pause} per digit. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Yeah. Professor D: This is obviously not usable, PhD A: No. Professor D: right? PhD A: Sure. Professor D: I mean, if you have ten digits for a phone number {comment} I mean, every now and then you'll get it right. I mean, it's {disfmarker} it's, uh, {vocalsound} um So, I mean, the other thing is that, uh {disfmarker} And {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} a and {disfmarker} and also, um {pause} part of what's nice about this is that this is, uh, {vocalsound} um {pause} a realistic {disfmarker} almost realistic database. I mean, it's still not people who are really trying to accomplish something, but {disfmarker} but, uh, within the artificial setup, it isn't noise artificially added, you know, simulated, uh, additive noise. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Professor D: It's real noise condition. And, um, {vocalsound} the {disfmarker} the training {disfmarker} the training, I guess, is always done on the close talking PhD A: No, actually {disfmarker} actually the well - matched condition {pause} is {pause} still quite di still quite difficult. Professor D: No? PhD A: I mean, it's {disfmarker} they have all these data from the close mike and from the distant mike, {vocalsound} from different driving condition, open window, closed window, Professor D: Yeah. PhD A: and they take all of this and they take seventy percent, I think, for training and thirty percent for testing. PhD E: Mm - hmm. PhD A: So, training is done {vocalsound} on different conditions and different microphones, and testing also is done {pause} on different microphone and conditions. So, probably if we only take the close microphones, {vocalsound} I guess the results should be much much better than this. Professor D: I see. PhD A: Mmm. Professor D: Oh, OK, PhD A: Uh Professor D: that explains it partially. Wha - what about i in {disfmarker} so the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah, so {disfmarker} there is this, the mismatched is, um {pause} the same kind of thing, Professor D: go ahead. PhD A: but {pause} the driving conditions, I mean the speed and the kind of road, is different for training and testing, is that right? PhD E: Yeah. PhD A: And the last condition is close microphone for training and distant for testing. Yeah. Professor D: Uh, OK, PhD A: So {disfmarker} {vocalsound} s so {disfmarker} Professor D: so I see. So, yeah, so the high {disfmarker} so the {disfmarker} right {disfmarker} so the highly mismatched {vocalsound} case {pause} is in some sense a good model for what we've been, you know, typically talking about when we talk about additive noise in {disfmarker} And so {disfmarker} and i i k it does correspond to a realistic situation in the sense that, {vocalsound} um, people might really be trying to, uh, call out telephone numbers or some or something like that, in {disfmarker} in their cars PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: and they're trying to connect to something. PhD A: Mmm. Professor D: Um PhD A: Actually, yeah, it's very close to clean speech training because, well, because the close microphone {vocalsound} and noisy speech testing, Professor D: Yeah. Yeah. PhD A: yeah. Mmm. Professor D: Yeah. And the well - matched condition {pause} is what you might imagine that you might be able to approach, if you know that this is the application. You're gonna record a bunch on people in cars and so forth, and do these training. And then, uh, when y you sell it to somebody, they will be a different person with a different car, and so on. So it's {disfmarker} this is a an optim somewhat optimistic view on it, uh, so, you know, the real thing is somewhere in between the two. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Uh, uh, but PhD A: But the {disfmarker} I mean, the {pause} th th Professor D: Even the optimistic one is PhD A: it doesn't work. Professor D: Yeah, PhD A: It {disfmarker} Professor D: right. Right, it doesn't work. So, in a way, that's, you know, that's sort of the dominant thing is that even, say on the development set stuff that we saw, the, uh, the numbers that, uh, that Alcatel was getting when choosing out the best single numbers, {vocalsound} it was just {disfmarker} you know, it wasn't good enough for {disfmarker} for {pause} a {disfmarker} a {disfmarker} for a real system. PhD A: Mmm. Mm - hmm. Professor D: You {disfmarker} you {disfmarker} you, {vocalsound} um So, uh, we still have stuff to do. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Uh, and, uh I don't know So, looking at the data, where, you know {disfmarker} what's the {disfmarker} what's {disfmarker} what's th what's characteristic i e yeah, I think that's {disfmarker} that's a good thing. Does a any you have any thoughts about what else {vocalsound} y you're thinking that you didn't get to that you would like to do if you had more time? Uh PhD E: Oh, f a lot of thing. Because we trying a lot of s {pause} thing, and we doesn't work, {vocalsound} we remove these. Maybe {vocalsound} we trying again with the articulatory feature. I don't know exactly because we tried {disfmarker} we {disfmarker} some {disfmarker} one experiment that doesn't work. Um, forgot it, something {pause} I don't know exactly Professor D: Mm - hmm. PhD E: because, tsk {comment} {vocalsound} maybe do better some step the general, {vocalsound} eh, diagram. Professor D: Mm - hmm. PhD E: I don't know exactly s to think what we can improve. Professor D: Yeah, cuz a lot of time it's true, there were a lot of times when we've tried something and it didn't work right away, even though we had an intuition that there should be something there. And so then we would just stop it. Um And, uh, one of the things {disfmarker} I don't remember the details on, but I remember at some point, when you were working with a second stream, and you tried a low - pass filtering to cepstrum, in some case you got {disfmarker} PhD E: MSG Yeah. Professor D: Well, but it was {comment} an MSG - like thing, but it wasn't MSG, right? Uh, you {disfmarker} y I think in some case you got some little improvement, but it was, you know, sort of a small improvement, and it was a {disfmarker} a big added complication, so you dropped it. But, um, that was just sort of one try, right? You just took one filter, threw it there, PhD A: Yeah, Professor D: right? And it seems to me that, um, if that is an important idea, which, you know, might be, that one could work at it for a while, as you're saying. PhD A: Hmm. Professor D: And, uh Uh, and you had, you know, you had the multi - band things also, and, you know, there was issue of that. PhD A: Yeah, Professor D: Um, Barry's going to be, uh, continuing working on multi - band things as well. PhD E: Mm - hmm. Professor D: We were just talking about, um, {vocalsound} some, uh, some work that we're interested in. Kind of inspired by the stuff by Larry Saul with the, uh {pause} uh, learning articulatory feature in {disfmarker} I think, in the case of his paper {disfmarker} with sonorance based on, uh, multi - band information where you have a {disfmarker} a combination of gradient learning an and, uh, EM. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Professor D: Um, and {pause} {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Um, so, I think that, you know, this is a, uh {disfmarker} this is a neat data set. Um, and then, uh, as we mentioned before, we also have the {disfmarker} the new, uh, digit set coming up from recordings in this room. So, there's a lot of things to work with. Um and, uh what I like about it, in a way, is that, uh, the results are still so terrible. Uh {pause} {vocalsound} Uh {pause} {vocalsound} I mean, they're much better than they were, you know. We're talking about thirty to sixty percent, uh, error rate reduction. That's {disfmarker} that's really great stuff to {disfmarker} to do that in relatively short time. But even after that it's still, you know, so poor that {disfmarker} that, uh, no one could really use it. So, um I think that's great that {disfmarker} because {disfmarker} and y also because again, it's not something {disfmarker} sometimes we've gotten terrible results by taking some data, and artificially, you know, convolving it with some room response, or something {disfmarker} we take a very {disfmarker} Uh, at one point, uh, Brian and I went downstairs into the {disfmarker} the basement where it was {disfmarker} it was in a hallway where it was very reverberant and we {disfmarker} we made some recordings there. And then we {vocalsound} {disfmarker} we, uh {disfmarker} uh, made a simulation of the {disfmarker} of the room acoustics there and {disfmarker} and applied it to other things, PhD A: Mm - hmm. Professor D: and uh But it was all pretty artificial, and {disfmarker} and, you know, how often would you really try to have your most crucial conversations in this very reverberant hallway? Um {pause} So, uh {pause} This is what's nice about the Aurora data and the data here, is that {disfmarker} is that it's sort of a realistic room situation {pause} uh, acoustics {disfmarker} acoustic situation, both terms in noise and reflections, and so on and n n And, uh, uh, with something that's still relatively realistic, it's still very very hard to do very well. So Yeah. PhD A: Yeah, so d well Actually, this is {disfmarker} tha that's why we {disfmarker} well, it's a different kind of data. We're not {disfmarker} we're not used to work with this kind of data. That's why we should have a loo more closer look at what's going on. Professor D: Yeah. PhD E: Mm - hmm. PhD A: Um Yeah. So this would be the first thing, and then, of course, try to {disfmarker} well, {vocalsound} kind of debug what was wrong, eh, when we do Aurora test on the MSG {pause} particularly, and on the multi - band. Professor D: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. PhD A: Uh Professor D: Yeah. Yeah. No, I {disfmarker} I think there's lots of {disfmarker} lots of good things to do with this. So Um So let's {disfmarker} I guess {pause} You were gonna say something else? Oh, OK. What do you think? PhD C: About Professor D: Anything PhD C: About other experiments? Uh, now, I'm interested in, um, uh {pause} looking at the experiments where you use, um {pause} uh, data from multiple languages to train the neural net. And I don't know how far, or if you guys even had a chance to try that, but {pause} that would be some it'd be interesting to me. PhD A: Yeah, but Professor D: S b PhD A: Again, it's the kind of {disfmarker} of thing that, uh, we were thin thinking {disfmarker} thinking that it would work, but it didn't work. And, eh, so there is kind of {disfmarker} of {pause} not a bug, but something wrong in what we are doing, perhaps. Professor D: Yeah. PhD C: Right. Right. PhD A: Uh, something wrong, perhaps in the {disfmarker} just in the {disfmarker} the fact that the labels are {disfmarker} PhD C: Right. PhD A: well PhD C: Mm - hmm. PhD A: What worked best is the hand - labeled data. PhD C: Mm - hmm. PhD A: Um Uh, so, yeah. I don't know if we can get some hand - labeled data from other languages. PhD C: Yeah. PhD A: It's not so easy to find. PhD C: Right. PhD A: But {pause} that would be something interesting t to {disfmarker} to see. PhD C: Yeah, yeah. Professor D: Yeah. Also, uh, {vocalsound} I mean, there was just the whole notion of having multiple nets that were trained on different data. So one form of different data was {disfmarker} is from different languages, but the other Well, i in fact, uh, m in those experiments it wasn't so much combining multiple nets, it was a single net that had different PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: So, first thing is would it be better if they were multiple nets, for some reason? Second thing is, never mind the different languages, just having acoustic conditions rather than training them all up in one, would it be helpful to have different ones? So, um That was a question that was kind of raised by Mike Shire's thesis, and on {disfmarker} in that case in terms of reverberation. Right? That {disfmarker} that sometimes it might be better to do that. But, um, {vocalsound} I don't think we know for sure. So, um Right. So, next week, we, uh, won't meet because you'll be in Europe. Whe - when are you two getting back? PhD E: Um, I'm PhD A: You on Friday or S on Saturday or {pause}? PhD E: Sunday PhD A: S oh yeah, Sunday, yeah. PhD E: because it's {disfmarker} it's less expensive, the price {disfmarker} the price the ticket. PhD C: Professor D: Yeah, that's right. You've gotta S have a Saturday overnight, right? PhD A: I'll be back on Tuesday. Professor D: Tuesday. PhD C: Where {disfmarker} where's the meeting? Professor D: Uh, Amsterdam, I think, yeah? PhD A: Yeah, Amsterdam. PhD C: Uh - huh. Professor D: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Yep. Um {pause} So, we'll skip next week, and we'll meet two weeks from now. And, uh, I guess the main topic will be, uh, you telling us what happened. PhD A: Yeah. PhD E: Yeah. Professor D: Uh, so Yeah, well, if we don't have an anything else to discuss, we should, uh, turn off the machine and then say the real nasty things. PhD C: Should we do digits first? PhD A: Yeah. Grad B: Oh, yeah, digits. Professor D: Oh yeah, digits! Yeah. Good point. Yeah, good thinking. Why don't you go ahead. PhD C: OK. OK.

The deployed model generally decreased error rates, but the extent to which it did so varied based on the language as well as where it was deployed. They learned that similar projects experienced the same challenges. Still, the model was not efficient and likely used too much CPU and memory for the benefit it provided.

tr-sq-1202

tr-sq-1202_0

What was the range of errors in the models? Professor D: OK. So, uh You can fill those out, uh {pause} after, actually, so So, I got, uh {pause} these results from, uh, Stephane. Also, um, I think that, uh {pause} um {pause} we might hear later today, about other results. I think s that, uh, there were some other very good results that we're gonna wanna compare to. But, {vocalsound} r our results from other {disfmarker} other places, yeah. PhD A: I I'm sorry? I didn't Professor D: Um, I got this from you PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: and then I sent a note to Sunil about the {disfmarker} cuz he has been running some other systems PhD A: Mm - hmm. Professor D: other than the {disfmarker} the ICSI OGI one. PhD A: Oh yeah. Professor D: So {pause} um, I wan wanna {disfmarker} wanna see what that is. But, uh, you know, so we'll see what it is comparatively later. But {pause} it looks like, um PhD A: M yeah. Professor D: You know most of the time, even {disfmarker} I mean even though it's true that the overall number for Danish {disfmarker} we didn't improve it If you look at it individually, what it really says is that there's, um, uh Looks like out of the six cases, between the different kinds of, uh, matching conditions {pause} out of the six cases, there's basically, um, a couple where it stays about the same, uh, three where it gets better, and one where it gets worse. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Uh, go ahead. PhD A: Y Actually, uh, um, for the Danish, there's still some kind of mystery because, um, um, when we use the straight features, we are not able to get these nice number with the ICSI OGI one, I mean. We don't have this ninety - three seventy - eight, we have eight PhD E: Eighty - nine forty - four. PhD A: yeah. Uh, so, uh, that's probably something wrong with the features that we get from OGI. Uh, and Sunil is working on {disfmarker} on trying to {disfmarker} to check everything. Professor D: Oh, and {disfmarker} and we have a little time on that {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} actually so PhD A: Hmm? Professor D: We have a little bit of time on that, actually. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: We have a day or so, so When {disfmarker} when {disfmarker} when do you folks leave? PhD A: Uh, Sunday. Professor D: Sunday? So So, uh Yeah, until Saturday midnight, or something, we have W we {disfmarker} we have time, yeah. Well, that would be good. That'd be good. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Yeah. Uh, and, you know, i u when whenever anybody figures it out they should also, for sure, email Hynek because Hynek will be over there {vocalsound} telling people {vocalsound} what we did, so he should know. PhD A: Mmm. Yeah. Professor D: Good, OK. So, um So, we'll {disfmarker} we'll hold off on that a little bit. I mean, even with these results as they are, it's {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} it's really not that bad. But {disfmarker} but, uh, um And it looks like the overall result as they are now, even without, you know, any {disfmarker} any bugs being fixed is that, uh, on the {disfmarker} the other tasks, we had this average of, uh, forty uh {disfmarker} nine percent, or so, improvement. And here we have somewhat better than that than the Danish, and somewhat worse than that on the German, but I mean, it sounds like, uh, one way or another, the methods that we're doing can reduce the error rate from {disfmarker} from mel ceptrum {pause} down by, you know {pause} a fourth of them to, uh, a half of them. Somewhere in there, depending on the {pause} exact case. So So that's good. I mean, I think that, uh, one of the things that Hynek was talking about was understanding what was in the other really good proposals and {disfmarker} and trying to see if what should ultimately be proposed is some, uh, combination of things. Um, if, uh {disfmarker} Cuz there's things that they are doing {pause} there that we certainly are not doing. And there's things that we're doing that {pause} they're not doing. And {disfmarker} and they all seem like good things. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: So PhD E: Mmm, yeah. PhD C: How much {disfmarker} how much better was the best system than ours? Professor D: So Well, we don't know yet. PhD C: Mmm. Professor D: Uh, I mean, first place, there's still this thing to {disfmarker} to work out, and second place {disfmarker} second thing is that the only results that we have so far from before were really development set results. PhD C: Oh, OK. Professor D: So, I think in this community that's of interest. It's not like everything is being pinned on the evaluation set. But, um, for the development set, our best result was a little bit short of fifty percent. And the best result of any system was about fifty - four, where these numbers are the, uh, relative, uh, reduction in, uh, word error rate. PhD C: Oh, OK. Professor D: And, um, the other systems were, uh, somewhat lower than that. There was actually {disfmarker} there was much less of a huge range than there was in Aurora one. In Aurora one there were {disfmarker} there were systems that ba basically didn't improve things. PhD C: Hmm. Professor D: And here the {disfmarker} the worst system {pause} still reduced the error rate by thirty - three percent, or something, in development set. PhD C: Oh, wow. Professor D: So {disfmarker} so, you know, sort of everybody is doing things between, well, roughly a third of the errors, and half the errors being eliminated, {vocalsound} uh, and varying on different test sets and so forth. PhD C: Mm - hmm. Professor D: So I think Um {pause} It's probably a good time to look at what's really going on and seeing if there's a {disfmarker} there's a way to combine the best ideas while at the same time not blowing up the amount of, uh, resources used, cuz that's {disfmarker} that's critical for this {disfmarker} this test. PhD C: Do we know anything about {disfmarker} who {disfmarker} who's was it that had the lowest on the dev set? Professor D: Um, uh, the, uh, the there were two systems that were put forth by a combination of {disfmarker} of, uh, French Telecom and Alcatel. And, um they {disfmarker} they differed in some respects, but they e em one was called the French Telecom Alcatel System the other was called the Alcatel French Telecom System, {vocalsound} uh, which is the biggest difference, I think. But {disfmarker} but there're {disfmarker} there're {disfmarker} there're some other differences, too. Uh, and {disfmarker} and, uh, they both did very well, PhD C: Uh - huh. Professor D: you know? So, {vocalsound} um, my impression is they also did very well on {disfmarker} on the {disfmarker} the, uh, evaluation set, but, um, I {disfmarker} I we haven't seen {disfmarker} you've - you haven't seen any final results for that PhD C: And they used {disfmarker} the main thing that {disfmarker} that they used was spectral subtraction? Professor D: yeah. PhD C: Or Professor D: There is a couple pieces to it. There's a spectral subtraction style piece {disfmarker} it was basically, you know, Wiener filtering. And then {disfmarker} then there was some p some modification of the cepstral parameters, where they {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah, actually, something that's close to cepstral mean subtraction. But, uh, the way the mean is adapted {disfmarker} um, it's signal dependent. I'm {disfmarker} I'm, uh So, basically, the mean is adapted during speech and not during silence. Professor D: Yeah. PhD A: But it's very close to {disfmarker} to cepstral mean subtraction. Professor D: But some people have done {vocalsound} {pause} exactly that sort of thing, of {disfmarker} of {disfmarker} and the {disfmarker} I mean it's not {disfmarker} To {disfmarker} to look in {pause} speech only, to try to m to measure these things during speech, PhD A: Yeah, yeah. Professor D: that's p that's not that uncommon. But i it it {disfmarker} so it looks like they did some {disfmarker} some, uh, reasonable things, uh, and they're not things that we did, precisely. We did unreasonable things, {vocalsound} which {disfmarker} because we like to try strange things, and {disfmarker} and, uh, and our things worked too. PhD C: Hmm. Professor D: And so, um, uh, it's possible that some combination of these different things that were done would be the best thing to do. But the only caveat to that is that everybody's being real conscious of how much memory and how much CPU they're using PhD C: Mm - hmm. Professor D: because these, {vocalsound} {vocalsound} {vocalsound} uh, standards are supposed to go on cell phones with m moderate resources in both respects. PhD C: Did anybody, uh, do anything with the models as a {disfmarker} an experiment? Or Professor D: Uh, they didn't report it, if they did. PhD C: N nobody reported it? Professor D: Yeah. I think everybody was focused elsewhere. Um, now, one of the things that's nice about what we did is, we do have a {disfmarker} a, uh {disfmarker} a filtering, which leads to a {disfmarker} a, uh {disfmarker} a reduction in the bandwidth in the modulation spectrum, which allows us to downsample. So, uh, as a result of that we have a reduced, um, transmission rate for the bits. PhD C: Mm - hmm. Professor D: That was misreported the first time out. It {disfmarker} it said the same amount because for convenience sake in the particular way that this is being tested, uh, they were repeating the packets. So it was {disfmarker} they were s they {disfmarker} they had twenty - four hundred bits per second, but they were literally creating forty - eight hundred bits per second, {vocalsound} um, even though y it was just repeated. PhD C: Oh. Mm - hmm. Right. Professor D: So, uh, in practice PhD C: So you could've had a repeat count in there or something. Professor D: Well, n I mean, this was just a ph phoney thing just to {disfmarker} to fit into the {disfmarker} the software that was testing the errors {disfmarker} channel errors and so on. PhD C: Oh. Oh. Professor D: So {disfmarker} so in reality, if you put this {disfmarker} this system in into, uh, the field, it would be twenty - four hundred bits per second, not forty - eight hundred. So, um, so that's a nice feature of what {disfmarker} what we did. Um, but, um, well, we still have to see how it all comes out. PhD C: Hmm. Professor D: Um, and then there's the whole standards process, which is another thing altogether. PhD C: When is the development set {disfmarker} I mean, the, uh, uh, test set results due? Like the day before you leave or something? Professor D: Uh, probably the day after they leave, but we'll have to {disfmarker} {vocalsound} we'll have to stop it the day before {comment} we leave. PhD A: Yeah, yeah. So PhD C: Huh. Professor D: I think tha I think the {disfmarker} the meeting is on the thirteenth or something. PhD A: Yeah, this Tuesday, yeah. Professor D: And, uh, they, uh Right. And the {disfmarker} the, uh, results are due like the day before the meeting or something. So PhD A: Yeah, probably, well Professor D: I th I think {disfmarker} I I think they are, PhD A: Yeah, well Professor D: yeah. So {pause} {vocalsound} um, since we have a bit farther to travel than {vocalsound} some of the others, {vocalsound} uh, we'll have to get done a little quicker. But, um, I mean, it's just tracing down these bugs. I mean, just exactly this sort of thing of, you know, why {disfmarker} why these features seem to be behaving differently, uh, in California than in Oregon. PhD C: Hmm. Professor D: Might have something to do with electricity shortage. Uh, we didn't {disfmarker} we didn't have enough electrons here and Uh, but, um Uh, I think, you know, the main reason for having {disfmarker} I mean, it only takes w to run the {disfmarker} the two test sets in {disfmarker} just in computer time is just a day or so, right? PhD A: Yeah, Professor D: So PhD A: it's very short interval. Professor D: yeah. So, I think the who the whole reason for having as long as we have, which was {pause} like a week and a half, is {disfmarker} is because of bugs like that. So Huh So, we're gonna end up with these same kind of sheets that have the {pause} the percentages and so on just for the {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah, so there are two more columns in the sheets, Professor D: Oh, I guess it's the same sheets, PhD A: two. Yeah, it's the same sheets, Professor D: yeah, yeah {disfmarker} PhD A: yeah. Professor D: just with the missing columns filled in. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Yeah. Well, that'll be good. So, I'll dis I'll disregard these numbers. That's {disfmarker} that's {disfmarker} that's good. PhD A: So, Hynek will try to push for trying to combine, uh, different things? Or Hmm? Professor D: Uh, well that's {pause} um yeah I mean, I think the question is" Is there {disfmarker} is there some advantage?" I mean, you could just take the best system and say that's the standard. But the thing is that if different systems are getting at good things, um, a again within the constraint of the resources, if there's something simple that you can do Now for instance, uh, it's, I think, very reasonable to have a standard for the terminal's side and then for the server's side say," Here's a number of things that could be done." So, um, everything that we did could probably just be added on to what Alcatel did, and i it'd probably work pretty well with them, too. So, um, uh, that's one {disfmarker} one aspect of it. And then on the terminal's side, I don't know how much, um, memory and {disfmarker} and CPU it takes, but it seems like the filtering {pause} Uh, I mean, the VAD stuff they both had, right? And, um, so {disfmarker} and they both had some kind of on - line normalization, right? PhD A: Uh, yeah. Professor D: Of sorts, yeah? So {disfmarker} so, it seems like the main different there is the {disfmarker} is the, uh, filtering. And the filtering {disfmarker} I think if you can {disfmarker} shouldn't take a lot of memory to do that Uh, and I also wouldn't think the CPU, uh, would be much either for that part. So, if you can {disfmarker} if you can add those in {pause} um {pause} then, uh, you can cut the data rate in half. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: So it seems like the right thing to do is to {disfmarker} on the {disfmarker} on the terminal's side, take what they did, if it {disfmarker} if it does seem to generalize well to German and Danish, uh, take what they did add in a filter, and add in some stuff on the server's side and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and that's probably a reasonable standard. Um {pause} Uh PhD A: They are working on this already? Because {disfmarker} yeah, Su - Sunil told me that he was trying already to put some kind of, uh, filtering in the {vocalsound} {pause} France Telecom. Professor D: Yeah, so that's {disfmarker} that's {disfmarker} that's what That would be ideal {disfmarker} would be is that they could, you know, they could actually show that, in fact, a combination of some sort, {vocalsound} uh, would work even better than what {disfmarker} what any of the systems had. And, um, then it would {disfmarker} it would, uh {pause} be something to {disfmarker} to discuss in the meeting. But, uh, not clear what will go on. Um, I mean, on the one hand, um, sometimes people are just anxious to get a standard out there. I mean, you can always have another standard after that, but {vocalsound} this process has gone on for a while on {disfmarker} already and {disfmarker} and people might just wanna pick something and say," OK, this is it." And then, that's a standard. Uh, standards are always optional. It's just that, uh, if you disobey them, then you risk not being able to sell your product, or {pause} {vocalsound} Uh {pause} um And people often work on new standards while an old standard is in place and so on. So it's not final even if they declared a standard. The other hand, they might just say they just don't know enough yet to {disfmarker} to declare a standard. So you {disfmarker} you {disfmarker} you will be {disfmarker} you will become experts on this and know more {disfmarker} far more than me about the tha this particular standards process once you {disfmarker} you go to this meeting. So, be interested in hearing. So, uh, I'd be, uh, interested in hearing, uh, your thoughts now I mean you're almost done. I mean, you're done in the sense that, um, you may be able to get some new features from Sunil, and we'll re - run it. Uh, but other than that, you're {disfmarker} you're basically done, right? So, uh, I'm interested in hearing {disfmarker} hearing your thoughts about {pause} where you think we should go from this. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: I mean, we tried a lot of things in a hurry, and, uh, if we can back off from this now and sort of take our time with something, and not have doing things quickly be quite so much the constraint, what {disfmarker} what you think would be the best thing to do. PhD A: Uh, well Hmm Well, first, uh, to really have a look at {disfmarker} at the speech {pause} {vocalsound} from these databases because, well, we tried several thing, but we did not really look {vocalsound} at what what's happening, and {vocalsound} where is the noise, and Professor D: OK. PhD A: Eh Professor D: It's a novel idea. Look at the data. OK. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Or more generally, I guess, what {disfmarker} what is causing the degradation. PhD A: Yeah, yeah. Actually, there is one thing that {disfmarker} well {pause} Um, generally we {disfmarker} we think that {vocalsound} most of the errors are within phoneme classes, and so I think it could be interesting to {disfmarker} to see if it {disfmarker} I don't think it's still true when we add noise, and {vocalsound} so we have {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I guess the confusion ma the confusion matrices are very different when {disfmarker} when we have noise, and when it's clean speech. And probably, there is much more {pause} between classes errors for noisy speech. Professor D: Mm - hmm. PhD A: And {vocalsound} so, um Yeah, so perhaps we could have a {disfmarker} a large gain, eh, just by looking at improving the, uh, recognition, not of phonemes, but of phoneme classes, simply. Professor D: Mm - hmm. PhD A: And {vocalsound} which is a s a s a simpler problem, perhaps, but {disfmarker} which is perhaps important for noisy speech. Professor D: The other thing that strikes me, just looking at these numbers is, just taking the best cases, I mean, some of these, of course, even with all of our {disfmarker} our wonderful processing, still are horrible kinds of numbers. But just take the best case, the well - matched {pause} uh, German case after {disfmarker} er well - matched Danish after we {disfmarker} PhD A: Mm - hmm. Professor D: the kind of numbers we're getting are about eight or nine {pause} uh {pause} p percent {pause} error {pause} per digit. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Yeah. Professor D: This is obviously not usable, PhD A: No. Professor D: right? PhD A: Sure. Professor D: I mean, if you have ten digits for a phone number {comment} I mean, every now and then you'll get it right. I mean, it's {disfmarker} it's, uh, {vocalsound} um So, I mean, the other thing is that, uh {disfmarker} And {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} a and {disfmarker} and also, um {pause} part of what's nice about this is that this is, uh, {vocalsound} um {pause} a realistic {disfmarker} almost realistic database. I mean, it's still not people who are really trying to accomplish something, but {disfmarker} but, uh, within the artificial setup, it isn't noise artificially added, you know, simulated, uh, additive noise. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Professor D: It's real noise condition. And, um, {vocalsound} the {disfmarker} the training {disfmarker} the training, I guess, is always done on the close talking PhD A: No, actually {disfmarker} actually the well - matched condition {pause} is {pause} still quite di still quite difficult. Professor D: No? PhD A: I mean, it's {disfmarker} they have all these data from the close mike and from the distant mike, {vocalsound} from different driving condition, open window, closed window, Professor D: Yeah. PhD A: and they take all of this and they take seventy percent, I think, for training and thirty percent for testing. PhD E: Mm - hmm. PhD A: So, training is done {vocalsound} on different conditions and different microphones, and testing also is done {pause} on different microphone and conditions. So, probably if we only take the close microphones, {vocalsound} I guess the results should be much much better than this. Professor D: I see. PhD A: Mmm. Professor D: Oh, OK, PhD A: Uh Professor D: that explains it partially. Wha - what about i in {disfmarker} so the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah, so {disfmarker} there is this, the mismatched is, um {pause} the same kind of thing, Professor D: go ahead. PhD A: but {pause} the driving conditions, I mean the speed and the kind of road, is different for training and testing, is that right? PhD E: Yeah. PhD A: And the last condition is close microphone for training and distant for testing. Yeah. Professor D: Uh, OK, PhD A: So {disfmarker} {vocalsound} s so {disfmarker} Professor D: so I see. So, yeah, so the high {disfmarker} so the {disfmarker} right {disfmarker} so the highly mismatched {vocalsound} case {pause} is in some sense a good model for what we've been, you know, typically talking about when we talk about additive noise in {disfmarker} And so {disfmarker} and i i k it does correspond to a realistic situation in the sense that, {vocalsound} um, people might really be trying to, uh, call out telephone numbers or some or something like that, in {disfmarker} in their cars PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: and they're trying to connect to something. PhD A: Mmm. Professor D: Um PhD A: Actually, yeah, it's very close to clean speech training because, well, because the close microphone {vocalsound} and noisy speech testing, Professor D: Yeah. Yeah. PhD A: yeah. Mmm. Professor D: Yeah. And the well - matched condition {pause} is what you might imagine that you might be able to approach, if you know that this is the application. You're gonna record a bunch on people in cars and so forth, and do these training. And then, uh, when y you sell it to somebody, they will be a different person with a different car, and so on. So it's {disfmarker} this is a an optim somewhat optimistic view on it, uh, so, you know, the real thing is somewhere in between the two. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Uh, uh, but PhD A: But the {disfmarker} I mean, the {pause} th th Professor D: Even the optimistic one is PhD A: it doesn't work. Professor D: Yeah, PhD A: It {disfmarker} Professor D: right. Right, it doesn't work. So, in a way, that's, you know, that's sort of the dominant thing is that even, say on the development set stuff that we saw, the, uh, the numbers that, uh, that Alcatel was getting when choosing out the best single numbers, {vocalsound} it was just {disfmarker} you know, it wasn't good enough for {disfmarker} for {pause} a {disfmarker} a {disfmarker} for a real system. PhD A: Mmm. Mm - hmm. Professor D: You {disfmarker} you {disfmarker} you, {vocalsound} um So, uh, we still have stuff to do. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Uh, and, uh I don't know So, looking at the data, where, you know {disfmarker} what's the {disfmarker} what's {disfmarker} what's th what's characteristic i e yeah, I think that's {disfmarker} that's a good thing. Does a any you have any thoughts about what else {vocalsound} y you're thinking that you didn't get to that you would like to do if you had more time? Uh PhD E: Oh, f a lot of thing. Because we trying a lot of s {pause} thing, and we doesn't work, {vocalsound} we remove these. Maybe {vocalsound} we trying again with the articulatory feature. I don't know exactly because we tried {disfmarker} we {disfmarker} some {disfmarker} one experiment that doesn't work. Um, forgot it, something {pause} I don't know exactly Professor D: Mm - hmm. PhD E: because, tsk {comment} {vocalsound} maybe do better some step the general, {vocalsound} eh, diagram. Professor D: Mm - hmm. PhD E: I don't know exactly s to think what we can improve. Professor D: Yeah, cuz a lot of time it's true, there were a lot of times when we've tried something and it didn't work right away, even though we had an intuition that there should be something there. And so then we would just stop it. Um And, uh, one of the things {disfmarker} I don't remember the details on, but I remember at some point, when you were working with a second stream, and you tried a low - pass filtering to cepstrum, in some case you got {disfmarker} PhD E: MSG Yeah. Professor D: Well, but it was {comment} an MSG - like thing, but it wasn't MSG, right? Uh, you {disfmarker} y I think in some case you got some little improvement, but it was, you know, sort of a small improvement, and it was a {disfmarker} a big added complication, so you dropped it. But, um, that was just sort of one try, right? You just took one filter, threw it there, PhD A: Yeah, Professor D: right? And it seems to me that, um, if that is an important idea, which, you know, might be, that one could work at it for a while, as you're saying. PhD A: Hmm. Professor D: And, uh Uh, and you had, you know, you had the multi - band things also, and, you know, there was issue of that. PhD A: Yeah, Professor D: Um, Barry's going to be, uh, continuing working on multi - band things as well. PhD E: Mm - hmm. Professor D: We were just talking about, um, {vocalsound} some, uh, some work that we're interested in. Kind of inspired by the stuff by Larry Saul with the, uh {pause} uh, learning articulatory feature in {disfmarker} I think, in the case of his paper {disfmarker} with sonorance based on, uh, multi - band information where you have a {disfmarker} a combination of gradient learning an and, uh, EM. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Professor D: Um, and {pause} {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Um, so, I think that, you know, this is a, uh {disfmarker} this is a neat data set. Um, and then, uh, as we mentioned before, we also have the {disfmarker} the new, uh, digit set coming up from recordings in this room. So, there's a lot of things to work with. Um and, uh what I like about it, in a way, is that, uh, the results are still so terrible. Uh {pause} {vocalsound} Uh {pause} {vocalsound} I mean, they're much better than they were, you know. We're talking about thirty to sixty percent, uh, error rate reduction. That's {disfmarker} that's really great stuff to {disfmarker} to do that in relatively short time. But even after that it's still, you know, so poor that {disfmarker} that, uh, no one could really use it. So, um I think that's great that {disfmarker} because {disfmarker} and y also because again, it's not something {disfmarker} sometimes we've gotten terrible results by taking some data, and artificially, you know, convolving it with some room response, or something {disfmarker} we take a very {disfmarker} Uh, at one point, uh, Brian and I went downstairs into the {disfmarker} the basement where it was {disfmarker} it was in a hallway where it was very reverberant and we {disfmarker} we made some recordings there. And then we {vocalsound} {disfmarker} we, uh {disfmarker} uh, made a simulation of the {disfmarker} of the room acoustics there and {disfmarker} and applied it to other things, PhD A: Mm - hmm. Professor D: and uh But it was all pretty artificial, and {disfmarker} and, you know, how often would you really try to have your most crucial conversations in this very reverberant hallway? Um {pause} So, uh {pause} This is what's nice about the Aurora data and the data here, is that {disfmarker} is that it's sort of a realistic room situation {pause} uh, acoustics {disfmarker} acoustic situation, both terms in noise and reflections, and so on and n n And, uh, uh, with something that's still relatively realistic, it's still very very hard to do very well. So Yeah. PhD A: Yeah, so d well Actually, this is {disfmarker} tha that's why we {disfmarker} well, it's a different kind of data. We're not {disfmarker} we're not used to work with this kind of data. That's why we should have a loo more closer look at what's going on. Professor D: Yeah. PhD E: Mm - hmm. PhD A: Um Yeah. So this would be the first thing, and then, of course, try to {disfmarker} well, {vocalsound} kind of debug what was wrong, eh, when we do Aurora test on the MSG {pause} particularly, and on the multi - band. Professor D: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. PhD A: Uh Professor D: Yeah. Yeah. No, I {disfmarker} I think there's lots of {disfmarker} lots of good things to do with this. So Um So let's {disfmarker} I guess {pause} You were gonna say something else? Oh, OK. What do you think? PhD C: About Professor D: Anything PhD C: About other experiments? Uh, now, I'm interested in, um, uh {pause} looking at the experiments where you use, um {pause} uh, data from multiple languages to train the neural net. And I don't know how far, or if you guys even had a chance to try that, but {pause} that would be some it'd be interesting to me. PhD A: Yeah, but Professor D: S b PhD A: Again, it's the kind of {disfmarker} of thing that, uh, we were thin thinking {disfmarker} thinking that it would work, but it didn't work. And, eh, so there is kind of {disfmarker} of {pause} not a bug, but something wrong in what we are doing, perhaps. Professor D: Yeah. PhD C: Right. Right. PhD A: Uh, something wrong, perhaps in the {disfmarker} just in the {disfmarker} the fact that the labels are {disfmarker} PhD C: Right. PhD A: well PhD C: Mm - hmm. PhD A: What worked best is the hand - labeled data. PhD C: Mm - hmm. PhD A: Um Uh, so, yeah. I don't know if we can get some hand - labeled data from other languages. PhD C: Yeah. PhD A: It's not so easy to find. PhD C: Right. PhD A: But {pause} that would be something interesting t to {disfmarker} to see. PhD C: Yeah, yeah. Professor D: Yeah. Also, uh, {vocalsound} I mean, there was just the whole notion of having multiple nets that were trained on different data. So one form of different data was {disfmarker} is from different languages, but the other Well, i in fact, uh, m in those experiments it wasn't so much combining multiple nets, it was a single net that had different PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: So, first thing is would it be better if they were multiple nets, for some reason? Second thing is, never mind the different languages, just having acoustic conditions rather than training them all up in one, would it be helpful to have different ones? So, um That was a question that was kind of raised by Mike Shire's thesis, and on {disfmarker} in that case in terms of reverberation. Right? That {disfmarker} that sometimes it might be better to do that. But, um, {vocalsound} I don't think we know for sure. So, um Right. So, next week, we, uh, won't meet because you'll be in Europe. Whe - when are you two getting back? PhD E: Um, I'm PhD A: You on Friday or S on Saturday or {pause}? PhD E: Sunday PhD A: S oh yeah, Sunday, yeah. PhD E: because it's {disfmarker} it's less expensive, the price {disfmarker} the price the ticket. PhD C: Professor D: Yeah, that's right. You've gotta S have a Saturday overnight, right? PhD A: I'll be back on Tuesday. Professor D: Tuesday. PhD C: Where {disfmarker} where's the meeting? Professor D: Uh, Amsterdam, I think, yeah? PhD A: Yeah, Amsterdam. PhD C: Uh - huh. Professor D: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Yep. Um {pause} So, we'll skip next week, and we'll meet two weeks from now. And, uh, I guess the main topic will be, uh, you telling us what happened. PhD A: Yeah. PhD E: Yeah. Professor D: Uh, so Yeah, well, if we don't have an anything else to discuss, we should, uh, turn off the machine and then say the real nasty things. PhD C: Should we do digits first? PhD A: Yeah. Grad B: Oh, yeah, digits. Professor D: Oh yeah, digits! Yeah. Good point. Yeah, good thinking. Why don't you go ahead. PhD C: OK. OK.

The worst systems were still reducing errors between a third to half of the time. Though, there was a system in Aurora that did not do very well and the Alcatel systems seemed to do better.

tr-sq-1203

tr-sq-1203_0

What did the Professor think about Danish and German models? Professor D: OK. So, uh You can fill those out, uh {pause} after, actually, so So, I got, uh {pause} these results from, uh, Stephane. Also, um, I think that, uh {pause} um {pause} we might hear later today, about other results. I think s that, uh, there were some other very good results that we're gonna wanna compare to. But, {vocalsound} r our results from other {disfmarker} other places, yeah. PhD A: I I'm sorry? I didn't Professor D: Um, I got this from you PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: and then I sent a note to Sunil about the {disfmarker} cuz he has been running some other systems PhD A: Mm - hmm. Professor D: other than the {disfmarker} the ICSI OGI one. PhD A: Oh yeah. Professor D: So {pause} um, I wan wanna {disfmarker} wanna see what that is. But, uh, you know, so we'll see what it is comparatively later. But {pause} it looks like, um PhD A: M yeah. Professor D: You know most of the time, even {disfmarker} I mean even though it's true that the overall number for Danish {disfmarker} we didn't improve it If you look at it individually, what it really says is that there's, um, uh Looks like out of the six cases, between the different kinds of, uh, matching conditions {pause} out of the six cases, there's basically, um, a couple where it stays about the same, uh, three where it gets better, and one where it gets worse. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Uh, go ahead. PhD A: Y Actually, uh, um, for the Danish, there's still some kind of mystery because, um, um, when we use the straight features, we are not able to get these nice number with the ICSI OGI one, I mean. We don't have this ninety - three seventy - eight, we have eight PhD E: Eighty - nine forty - four. PhD A: yeah. Uh, so, uh, that's probably something wrong with the features that we get from OGI. Uh, and Sunil is working on {disfmarker} on trying to {disfmarker} to check everything. Professor D: Oh, and {disfmarker} and we have a little time on that {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} actually so PhD A: Hmm? Professor D: We have a little bit of time on that, actually. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: We have a day or so, so When {disfmarker} when {disfmarker} when do you folks leave? PhD A: Uh, Sunday. Professor D: Sunday? So So, uh Yeah, until Saturday midnight, or something, we have W we {disfmarker} we have time, yeah. Well, that would be good. That'd be good. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Yeah. Uh, and, you know, i u when whenever anybody figures it out they should also, for sure, email Hynek because Hynek will be over there {vocalsound} telling people {vocalsound} what we did, so he should know. PhD A: Mmm. Yeah. Professor D: Good, OK. So, um So, we'll {disfmarker} we'll hold off on that a little bit. I mean, even with these results as they are, it's {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} it's really not that bad. But {disfmarker} but, uh, um And it looks like the overall result as they are now, even without, you know, any {disfmarker} any bugs being fixed is that, uh, on the {disfmarker} the other tasks, we had this average of, uh, forty uh {disfmarker} nine percent, or so, improvement. And here we have somewhat better than that than the Danish, and somewhat worse than that on the German, but I mean, it sounds like, uh, one way or another, the methods that we're doing can reduce the error rate from {disfmarker} from mel ceptrum {pause} down by, you know {pause} a fourth of them to, uh, a half of them. Somewhere in there, depending on the {pause} exact case. So So that's good. I mean, I think that, uh, one of the things that Hynek was talking about was understanding what was in the other really good proposals and {disfmarker} and trying to see if what should ultimately be proposed is some, uh, combination of things. Um, if, uh {disfmarker} Cuz there's things that they are doing {pause} there that we certainly are not doing. And there's things that we're doing that {pause} they're not doing. And {disfmarker} and they all seem like good things. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: So PhD E: Mmm, yeah. PhD C: How much {disfmarker} how much better was the best system than ours? Professor D: So Well, we don't know yet. PhD C: Mmm. Professor D: Uh, I mean, first place, there's still this thing to {disfmarker} to work out, and second place {disfmarker} second thing is that the only results that we have so far from before were really development set results. PhD C: Oh, OK. Professor D: So, I think in this community that's of interest. It's not like everything is being pinned on the evaluation set. But, um, for the development set, our best result was a little bit short of fifty percent. And the best result of any system was about fifty - four, where these numbers are the, uh, relative, uh, reduction in, uh, word error rate. PhD C: Oh, OK. Professor D: And, um, the other systems were, uh, somewhat lower than that. There was actually {disfmarker} there was much less of a huge range than there was in Aurora one. In Aurora one there were {disfmarker} there were systems that ba basically didn't improve things. PhD C: Hmm. Professor D: And here the {disfmarker} the worst system {pause} still reduced the error rate by thirty - three percent, or something, in development set. PhD C: Oh, wow. Professor D: So {disfmarker} so, you know, sort of everybody is doing things between, well, roughly a third of the errors, and half the errors being eliminated, {vocalsound} uh, and varying on different test sets and so forth. PhD C: Mm - hmm. Professor D: So I think Um {pause} It's probably a good time to look at what's really going on and seeing if there's a {disfmarker} there's a way to combine the best ideas while at the same time not blowing up the amount of, uh, resources used, cuz that's {disfmarker} that's critical for this {disfmarker} this test. PhD C: Do we know anything about {disfmarker} who {disfmarker} who's was it that had the lowest on the dev set? Professor D: Um, uh, the, uh, the there were two systems that were put forth by a combination of {disfmarker} of, uh, French Telecom and Alcatel. And, um they {disfmarker} they differed in some respects, but they e em one was called the French Telecom Alcatel System the other was called the Alcatel French Telecom System, {vocalsound} uh, which is the biggest difference, I think. But {disfmarker} but there're {disfmarker} there're {disfmarker} there're some other differences, too. Uh, and {disfmarker} and, uh, they both did very well, PhD C: Uh - huh. Professor D: you know? So, {vocalsound} um, my impression is they also did very well on {disfmarker} on the {disfmarker} the, uh, evaluation set, but, um, I {disfmarker} I we haven't seen {disfmarker} you've - you haven't seen any final results for that PhD C: And they used {disfmarker} the main thing that {disfmarker} that they used was spectral subtraction? Professor D: yeah. PhD C: Or Professor D: There is a couple pieces to it. There's a spectral subtraction style piece {disfmarker} it was basically, you know, Wiener filtering. And then {disfmarker} then there was some p some modification of the cepstral parameters, where they {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah, actually, something that's close to cepstral mean subtraction. But, uh, the way the mean is adapted {disfmarker} um, it's signal dependent. I'm {disfmarker} I'm, uh So, basically, the mean is adapted during speech and not during silence. Professor D: Yeah. PhD A: But it's very close to {disfmarker} to cepstral mean subtraction. Professor D: But some people have done {vocalsound} {pause} exactly that sort of thing, of {disfmarker} of {disfmarker} and the {disfmarker} I mean it's not {disfmarker} To {disfmarker} to look in {pause} speech only, to try to m to measure these things during speech, PhD A: Yeah, yeah. Professor D: that's p that's not that uncommon. But i it it {disfmarker} so it looks like they did some {disfmarker} some, uh, reasonable things, uh, and they're not things that we did, precisely. We did unreasonable things, {vocalsound} which {disfmarker} because we like to try strange things, and {disfmarker} and, uh, and our things worked too. PhD C: Hmm. Professor D: And so, um, uh, it's possible that some combination of these different things that were done would be the best thing to do. But the only caveat to that is that everybody's being real conscious of how much memory and how much CPU they're using PhD C: Mm - hmm. Professor D: because these, {vocalsound} {vocalsound} {vocalsound} uh, standards are supposed to go on cell phones with m moderate resources in both respects. PhD C: Did anybody, uh, do anything with the models as a {disfmarker} an experiment? Or Professor D: Uh, they didn't report it, if they did. PhD C: N nobody reported it? Professor D: Yeah. I think everybody was focused elsewhere. Um, now, one of the things that's nice about what we did is, we do have a {disfmarker} a, uh {disfmarker} a filtering, which leads to a {disfmarker} a, uh {disfmarker} a reduction in the bandwidth in the modulation spectrum, which allows us to downsample. So, uh, as a result of that we have a reduced, um, transmission rate for the bits. PhD C: Mm - hmm. Professor D: That was misreported the first time out. It {disfmarker} it said the same amount because for convenience sake in the particular way that this is being tested, uh, they were repeating the packets. So it was {disfmarker} they were s they {disfmarker} they had twenty - four hundred bits per second, but they were literally creating forty - eight hundred bits per second, {vocalsound} um, even though y it was just repeated. PhD C: Oh. Mm - hmm. Right. Professor D: So, uh, in practice PhD C: So you could've had a repeat count in there or something. Professor D: Well, n I mean, this was just a ph phoney thing just to {disfmarker} to fit into the {disfmarker} the software that was testing the errors {disfmarker} channel errors and so on. PhD C: Oh. Oh. Professor D: So {disfmarker} so in reality, if you put this {disfmarker} this system in into, uh, the field, it would be twenty - four hundred bits per second, not forty - eight hundred. So, um, so that's a nice feature of what {disfmarker} what we did. Um, but, um, well, we still have to see how it all comes out. PhD C: Hmm. Professor D: Um, and then there's the whole standards process, which is another thing altogether. PhD C: When is the development set {disfmarker} I mean, the, uh, uh, test set results due? Like the day before you leave or something? Professor D: Uh, probably the day after they leave, but we'll have to {disfmarker} {vocalsound} we'll have to stop it the day before {comment} we leave. PhD A: Yeah, yeah. So PhD C: Huh. Professor D: I think tha I think the {disfmarker} the meeting is on the thirteenth or something. PhD A: Yeah, this Tuesday, yeah. Professor D: And, uh, they, uh Right. And the {disfmarker} the, uh, results are due like the day before the meeting or something. So PhD A: Yeah, probably, well Professor D: I th I think {disfmarker} I I think they are, PhD A: Yeah, well Professor D: yeah. So {pause} {vocalsound} um, since we have a bit farther to travel than {vocalsound} some of the others, {vocalsound} uh, we'll have to get done a little quicker. But, um, I mean, it's just tracing down these bugs. I mean, just exactly this sort of thing of, you know, why {disfmarker} why these features seem to be behaving differently, uh, in California than in Oregon. PhD C: Hmm. Professor D: Might have something to do with electricity shortage. Uh, we didn't {disfmarker} we didn't have enough electrons here and Uh, but, um Uh, I think, you know, the main reason for having {disfmarker} I mean, it only takes w to run the {disfmarker} the two test sets in {disfmarker} just in computer time is just a day or so, right? PhD A: Yeah, Professor D: So PhD A: it's very short interval. Professor D: yeah. So, I think the who the whole reason for having as long as we have, which was {pause} like a week and a half, is {disfmarker} is because of bugs like that. So Huh So, we're gonna end up with these same kind of sheets that have the {pause} the percentages and so on just for the {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah, so there are two more columns in the sheets, Professor D: Oh, I guess it's the same sheets, PhD A: two. Yeah, it's the same sheets, Professor D: yeah, yeah {disfmarker} PhD A: yeah. Professor D: just with the missing columns filled in. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Yeah. Well, that'll be good. So, I'll dis I'll disregard these numbers. That's {disfmarker} that's {disfmarker} that's good. PhD A: So, Hynek will try to push for trying to combine, uh, different things? Or Hmm? Professor D: Uh, well that's {pause} um yeah I mean, I think the question is" Is there {disfmarker} is there some advantage?" I mean, you could just take the best system and say that's the standard. But the thing is that if different systems are getting at good things, um, a again within the constraint of the resources, if there's something simple that you can do Now for instance, uh, it's, I think, very reasonable to have a standard for the terminal's side and then for the server's side say," Here's a number of things that could be done." So, um, everything that we did could probably just be added on to what Alcatel did, and i it'd probably work pretty well with them, too. So, um, uh, that's one {disfmarker} one aspect of it. And then on the terminal's side, I don't know how much, um, memory and {disfmarker} and CPU it takes, but it seems like the filtering {pause} Uh, I mean, the VAD stuff they both had, right? And, um, so {disfmarker} and they both had some kind of on - line normalization, right? PhD A: Uh, yeah. Professor D: Of sorts, yeah? So {disfmarker} so, it seems like the main different there is the {disfmarker} is the, uh, filtering. And the filtering {disfmarker} I think if you can {disfmarker} shouldn't take a lot of memory to do that Uh, and I also wouldn't think the CPU, uh, would be much either for that part. So, if you can {disfmarker} if you can add those in {pause} um {pause} then, uh, you can cut the data rate in half. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: So it seems like the right thing to do is to {disfmarker} on the {disfmarker} on the terminal's side, take what they did, if it {disfmarker} if it does seem to generalize well to German and Danish, uh, take what they did add in a filter, and add in some stuff on the server's side and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and that's probably a reasonable standard. Um {pause} Uh PhD A: They are working on this already? Because {disfmarker} yeah, Su - Sunil told me that he was trying already to put some kind of, uh, filtering in the {vocalsound} {pause} France Telecom. Professor D: Yeah, so that's {disfmarker} that's {disfmarker} that's what That would be ideal {disfmarker} would be is that they could, you know, they could actually show that, in fact, a combination of some sort, {vocalsound} uh, would work even better than what {disfmarker} what any of the systems had. And, um, then it would {disfmarker} it would, uh {pause} be something to {disfmarker} to discuss in the meeting. But, uh, not clear what will go on. Um, I mean, on the one hand, um, sometimes people are just anxious to get a standard out there. I mean, you can always have another standard after that, but {vocalsound} this process has gone on for a while on {disfmarker} already and {disfmarker} and people might just wanna pick something and say," OK, this is it." And then, that's a standard. Uh, standards are always optional. It's just that, uh, if you disobey them, then you risk not being able to sell your product, or {pause} {vocalsound} Uh {pause} um And people often work on new standards while an old standard is in place and so on. So it's not final even if they declared a standard. The other hand, they might just say they just don't know enough yet to {disfmarker} to declare a standard. So you {disfmarker} you {disfmarker} you will be {disfmarker} you will become experts on this and know more {disfmarker} far more than me about the tha this particular standards process once you {disfmarker} you go to this meeting. So, be interested in hearing. So, uh, I'd be, uh, interested in hearing, uh, your thoughts now I mean you're almost done. I mean, you're done in the sense that, um, you may be able to get some new features from Sunil, and we'll re - run it. Uh, but other than that, you're {disfmarker} you're basically done, right? So, uh, I'm interested in hearing {disfmarker} hearing your thoughts about {pause} where you think we should go from this. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: I mean, we tried a lot of things in a hurry, and, uh, if we can back off from this now and sort of take our time with something, and not have doing things quickly be quite so much the constraint, what {disfmarker} what you think would be the best thing to do. PhD A: Uh, well Hmm Well, first, uh, to really have a look at {disfmarker} at the speech {pause} {vocalsound} from these databases because, well, we tried several thing, but we did not really look {vocalsound} at what what's happening, and {vocalsound} where is the noise, and Professor D: OK. PhD A: Eh Professor D: It's a novel idea. Look at the data. OK. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Or more generally, I guess, what {disfmarker} what is causing the degradation. PhD A: Yeah, yeah. Actually, there is one thing that {disfmarker} well {pause} Um, generally we {disfmarker} we think that {vocalsound} most of the errors are within phoneme classes, and so I think it could be interesting to {disfmarker} to see if it {disfmarker} I don't think it's still true when we add noise, and {vocalsound} so we have {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I guess the confusion ma the confusion matrices are very different when {disfmarker} when we have noise, and when it's clean speech. And probably, there is much more {pause} between classes errors for noisy speech. Professor D: Mm - hmm. PhD A: And {vocalsound} so, um Yeah, so perhaps we could have a {disfmarker} a large gain, eh, just by looking at improving the, uh, recognition, not of phonemes, but of phoneme classes, simply. Professor D: Mm - hmm. PhD A: And {vocalsound} which is a s a s a simpler problem, perhaps, but {disfmarker} which is perhaps important for noisy speech. Professor D: The other thing that strikes me, just looking at these numbers is, just taking the best cases, I mean, some of these, of course, even with all of our {disfmarker} our wonderful processing, still are horrible kinds of numbers. But just take the best case, the well - matched {pause} uh, German case after {disfmarker} er well - matched Danish after we {disfmarker} PhD A: Mm - hmm. Professor D: the kind of numbers we're getting are about eight or nine {pause} uh {pause} p percent {pause} error {pause} per digit. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Yeah. Professor D: This is obviously not usable, PhD A: No. Professor D: right? PhD A: Sure. Professor D: I mean, if you have ten digits for a phone number {comment} I mean, every now and then you'll get it right. I mean, it's {disfmarker} it's, uh, {vocalsound} um So, I mean, the other thing is that, uh {disfmarker} And {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} a and {disfmarker} and also, um {pause} part of what's nice about this is that this is, uh, {vocalsound} um {pause} a realistic {disfmarker} almost realistic database. I mean, it's still not people who are really trying to accomplish something, but {disfmarker} but, uh, within the artificial setup, it isn't noise artificially added, you know, simulated, uh, additive noise. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Professor D: It's real noise condition. And, um, {vocalsound} the {disfmarker} the training {disfmarker} the training, I guess, is always done on the close talking PhD A: No, actually {disfmarker} actually the well - matched condition {pause} is {pause} still quite di still quite difficult. Professor D: No? PhD A: I mean, it's {disfmarker} they have all these data from the close mike and from the distant mike, {vocalsound} from different driving condition, open window, closed window, Professor D: Yeah. PhD A: and they take all of this and they take seventy percent, I think, for training and thirty percent for testing. PhD E: Mm - hmm. PhD A: So, training is done {vocalsound} on different conditions and different microphones, and testing also is done {pause} on different microphone and conditions. So, probably if we only take the close microphones, {vocalsound} I guess the results should be much much better than this. Professor D: I see. PhD A: Mmm. Professor D: Oh, OK, PhD A: Uh Professor D: that explains it partially. Wha - what about i in {disfmarker} so the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah, so {disfmarker} there is this, the mismatched is, um {pause} the same kind of thing, Professor D: go ahead. PhD A: but {pause} the driving conditions, I mean the speed and the kind of road, is different for training and testing, is that right? PhD E: Yeah. PhD A: And the last condition is close microphone for training and distant for testing. Yeah. Professor D: Uh, OK, PhD A: So {disfmarker} {vocalsound} s so {disfmarker} Professor D: so I see. So, yeah, so the high {disfmarker} so the {disfmarker} right {disfmarker} so the highly mismatched {vocalsound} case {pause} is in some sense a good model for what we've been, you know, typically talking about when we talk about additive noise in {disfmarker} And so {disfmarker} and i i k it does correspond to a realistic situation in the sense that, {vocalsound} um, people might really be trying to, uh, call out telephone numbers or some or something like that, in {disfmarker} in their cars PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: and they're trying to connect to something. PhD A: Mmm. Professor D: Um PhD A: Actually, yeah, it's very close to clean speech training because, well, because the close microphone {vocalsound} and noisy speech testing, Professor D: Yeah. Yeah. PhD A: yeah. Mmm. Professor D: Yeah. And the well - matched condition {pause} is what you might imagine that you might be able to approach, if you know that this is the application. You're gonna record a bunch on people in cars and so forth, and do these training. And then, uh, when y you sell it to somebody, they will be a different person with a different car, and so on. So it's {disfmarker} this is a an optim somewhat optimistic view on it, uh, so, you know, the real thing is somewhere in between the two. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Uh, uh, but PhD A: But the {disfmarker} I mean, the {pause} th th Professor D: Even the optimistic one is PhD A: it doesn't work. Professor D: Yeah, PhD A: It {disfmarker} Professor D: right. Right, it doesn't work. So, in a way, that's, you know, that's sort of the dominant thing is that even, say on the development set stuff that we saw, the, uh, the numbers that, uh, that Alcatel was getting when choosing out the best single numbers, {vocalsound} it was just {disfmarker} you know, it wasn't good enough for {disfmarker} for {pause} a {disfmarker} a {disfmarker} for a real system. PhD A: Mmm. Mm - hmm. Professor D: You {disfmarker} you {disfmarker} you, {vocalsound} um So, uh, we still have stuff to do. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Uh, and, uh I don't know So, looking at the data, where, you know {disfmarker} what's the {disfmarker} what's {disfmarker} what's th what's characteristic i e yeah, I think that's {disfmarker} that's a good thing. Does a any you have any thoughts about what else {vocalsound} y you're thinking that you didn't get to that you would like to do if you had more time? Uh PhD E: Oh, f a lot of thing. Because we trying a lot of s {pause} thing, and we doesn't work, {vocalsound} we remove these. Maybe {vocalsound} we trying again with the articulatory feature. I don't know exactly because we tried {disfmarker} we {disfmarker} some {disfmarker} one experiment that doesn't work. Um, forgot it, something {pause} I don't know exactly Professor D: Mm - hmm. PhD E: because, tsk {comment} {vocalsound} maybe do better some step the general, {vocalsound} eh, diagram. Professor D: Mm - hmm. PhD E: I don't know exactly s to think what we can improve. Professor D: Yeah, cuz a lot of time it's true, there were a lot of times when we've tried something and it didn't work right away, even though we had an intuition that there should be something there. And so then we would just stop it. Um And, uh, one of the things {disfmarker} I don't remember the details on, but I remember at some point, when you were working with a second stream, and you tried a low - pass filtering to cepstrum, in some case you got {disfmarker} PhD E: MSG Yeah. Professor D: Well, but it was {comment} an MSG - like thing, but it wasn't MSG, right? Uh, you {disfmarker} y I think in some case you got some little improvement, but it was, you know, sort of a small improvement, and it was a {disfmarker} a big added complication, so you dropped it. But, um, that was just sort of one try, right? You just took one filter, threw it there, PhD A: Yeah, Professor D: right? And it seems to me that, um, if that is an important idea, which, you know, might be, that one could work at it for a while, as you're saying. PhD A: Hmm. Professor D: And, uh Uh, and you had, you know, you had the multi - band things also, and, you know, there was issue of that. PhD A: Yeah, Professor D: Um, Barry's going to be, uh, continuing working on multi - band things as well. PhD E: Mm - hmm. Professor D: We were just talking about, um, {vocalsound} some, uh, some work that we're interested in. Kind of inspired by the stuff by Larry Saul with the, uh {pause} uh, learning articulatory feature in {disfmarker} I think, in the case of his paper {disfmarker} with sonorance based on, uh, multi - band information where you have a {disfmarker} a combination of gradient learning an and, uh, EM. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Professor D: Um, and {pause} {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Um, so, I think that, you know, this is a, uh {disfmarker} this is a neat data set. Um, and then, uh, as we mentioned before, we also have the {disfmarker} the new, uh, digit set coming up from recordings in this room. So, there's a lot of things to work with. Um and, uh what I like about it, in a way, is that, uh, the results are still so terrible. Uh {pause} {vocalsound} Uh {pause} {vocalsound} I mean, they're much better than they were, you know. We're talking about thirty to sixty percent, uh, error rate reduction. That's {disfmarker} that's really great stuff to {disfmarker} to do that in relatively short time. But even after that it's still, you know, so poor that {disfmarker} that, uh, no one could really use it. So, um I think that's great that {disfmarker} because {disfmarker} and y also because again, it's not something {disfmarker} sometimes we've gotten terrible results by taking some data, and artificially, you know, convolving it with some room response, or something {disfmarker} we take a very {disfmarker} Uh, at one point, uh, Brian and I went downstairs into the {disfmarker} the basement where it was {disfmarker} it was in a hallway where it was very reverberant and we {disfmarker} we made some recordings there. And then we {vocalsound} {disfmarker} we, uh {disfmarker} uh, made a simulation of the {disfmarker} of the room acoustics there and {disfmarker} and applied it to other things, PhD A: Mm - hmm. Professor D: and uh But it was all pretty artificial, and {disfmarker} and, you know, how often would you really try to have your most crucial conversations in this very reverberant hallway? Um {pause} So, uh {pause} This is what's nice about the Aurora data and the data here, is that {disfmarker} is that it's sort of a realistic room situation {pause} uh, acoustics {disfmarker} acoustic situation, both terms in noise and reflections, and so on and n n And, uh, uh, with something that's still relatively realistic, it's still very very hard to do very well. So Yeah. PhD A: Yeah, so d well Actually, this is {disfmarker} tha that's why we {disfmarker} well, it's a different kind of data. We're not {disfmarker} we're not used to work with this kind of data. That's why we should have a loo more closer look at what's going on. Professor D: Yeah. PhD E: Mm - hmm. PhD A: Um Yeah. So this would be the first thing, and then, of course, try to {disfmarker} well, {vocalsound} kind of debug what was wrong, eh, when we do Aurora test on the MSG {pause} particularly, and on the multi - band. Professor D: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. PhD A: Uh Professor D: Yeah. Yeah. No, I {disfmarker} I think there's lots of {disfmarker} lots of good things to do with this. So Um So let's {disfmarker} I guess {pause} You were gonna say something else? Oh, OK. What do you think? PhD C: About Professor D: Anything PhD C: About other experiments? Uh, now, I'm interested in, um, uh {pause} looking at the experiments where you use, um {pause} uh, data from multiple languages to train the neural net. And I don't know how far, or if you guys even had a chance to try that, but {pause} that would be some it'd be interesting to me. PhD A: Yeah, but Professor D: S b PhD A: Again, it's the kind of {disfmarker} of thing that, uh, we were thin thinking {disfmarker} thinking that it would work, but it didn't work. And, eh, so there is kind of {disfmarker} of {pause} not a bug, but something wrong in what we are doing, perhaps. Professor D: Yeah. PhD C: Right. Right. PhD A: Uh, something wrong, perhaps in the {disfmarker} just in the {disfmarker} the fact that the labels are {disfmarker} PhD C: Right. PhD A: well PhD C: Mm - hmm. PhD A: What worked best is the hand - labeled data. PhD C: Mm - hmm. PhD A: Um Uh, so, yeah. I don't know if we can get some hand - labeled data from other languages. PhD C: Yeah. PhD A: It's not so easy to find. PhD C: Right. PhD A: But {pause} that would be something interesting t to {disfmarker} to see. PhD C: Yeah, yeah. Professor D: Yeah. Also, uh, {vocalsound} I mean, there was just the whole notion of having multiple nets that were trained on different data. So one form of different data was {disfmarker} is from different languages, but the other Well, i in fact, uh, m in those experiments it wasn't so much combining multiple nets, it was a single net that had different PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: So, first thing is would it be better if they were multiple nets, for some reason? Second thing is, never mind the different languages, just having acoustic conditions rather than training them all up in one, would it be helpful to have different ones? So, um That was a question that was kind of raised by Mike Shire's thesis, and on {disfmarker} in that case in terms of reverberation. Right? That {disfmarker} that sometimes it might be better to do that. But, um, {vocalsound} I don't think we know for sure. So, um Right. So, next week, we, uh, won't meet because you'll be in Europe. Whe - when are you two getting back? PhD E: Um, I'm PhD A: You on Friday or S on Saturday or {pause}? PhD E: Sunday PhD A: S oh yeah, Sunday, yeah. PhD E: because it's {disfmarker} it's less expensive, the price {disfmarker} the price the ticket. PhD C: Professor D: Yeah, that's right. You've gotta S have a Saturday overnight, right? PhD A: I'll be back on Tuesday. Professor D: Tuesday. PhD C: Where {disfmarker} where's the meeting? Professor D: Uh, Amsterdam, I think, yeah? PhD A: Yeah, Amsterdam. PhD C: Uh - huh. Professor D: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Yep. Um {pause} So, we'll skip next week, and we'll meet two weeks from now. And, uh, I guess the main topic will be, uh, you telling us what happened. PhD A: Yeah. PhD E: Yeah. Professor D: Uh, so Yeah, well, if we don't have an anything else to discuss, we should, uh, turn off the machine and then say the real nasty things. PhD C: Should we do digits first? PhD A: Yeah. Grad B: Oh, yeah, digits. Professor D: Oh yeah, digits! Yeah. Good point. Yeah, good thinking. Why don't you go ahead. PhD C: OK. OK.

The professor explained that while the Danish model did not improve overall, the results were mixed over six cases. The team's models led to improvements, even without bug fixes, but they were better on the Danish than German.

tr-sq-1204

tr-sq-1204_0

Summarize discussion on the pragmatic overview of the project Professor D: OK. So, uh You can fill those out, uh {pause} after, actually, so So, I got, uh {pause} these results from, uh, Stephane. Also, um, I think that, uh {pause} um {pause} we might hear later today, about other results. I think s that, uh, there were some other very good results that we're gonna wanna compare to. But, {vocalsound} r our results from other {disfmarker} other places, yeah. PhD A: I I'm sorry? I didn't Professor D: Um, I got this from you PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: and then I sent a note to Sunil about the {disfmarker} cuz he has been running some other systems PhD A: Mm - hmm. Professor D: other than the {disfmarker} the ICSI OGI one. PhD A: Oh yeah. Professor D: So {pause} um, I wan wanna {disfmarker} wanna see what that is. But, uh, you know, so we'll see what it is comparatively later. But {pause} it looks like, um PhD A: M yeah. Professor D: You know most of the time, even {disfmarker} I mean even though it's true that the overall number for Danish {disfmarker} we didn't improve it If you look at it individually, what it really says is that there's, um, uh Looks like out of the six cases, between the different kinds of, uh, matching conditions {pause} out of the six cases, there's basically, um, a couple where it stays about the same, uh, three where it gets better, and one where it gets worse. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Uh, go ahead. PhD A: Y Actually, uh, um, for the Danish, there's still some kind of mystery because, um, um, when we use the straight features, we are not able to get these nice number with the ICSI OGI one, I mean. We don't have this ninety - three seventy - eight, we have eight PhD E: Eighty - nine forty - four. PhD A: yeah. Uh, so, uh, that's probably something wrong with the features that we get from OGI. Uh, and Sunil is working on {disfmarker} on trying to {disfmarker} to check everything. Professor D: Oh, and {disfmarker} and we have a little time on that {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} actually so PhD A: Hmm? Professor D: We have a little bit of time on that, actually. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: We have a day or so, so When {disfmarker} when {disfmarker} when do you folks leave? PhD A: Uh, Sunday. Professor D: Sunday? So So, uh Yeah, until Saturday midnight, or something, we have W we {disfmarker} we have time, yeah. Well, that would be good. That'd be good. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Yeah. Uh, and, you know, i u when whenever anybody figures it out they should also, for sure, email Hynek because Hynek will be over there {vocalsound} telling people {vocalsound} what we did, so he should know. PhD A: Mmm. Yeah. Professor D: Good, OK. So, um So, we'll {disfmarker} we'll hold off on that a little bit. I mean, even with these results as they are, it's {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} it's really not that bad. But {disfmarker} but, uh, um And it looks like the overall result as they are now, even without, you know, any {disfmarker} any bugs being fixed is that, uh, on the {disfmarker} the other tasks, we had this average of, uh, forty uh {disfmarker} nine percent, or so, improvement. And here we have somewhat better than that than the Danish, and somewhat worse than that on the German, but I mean, it sounds like, uh, one way or another, the methods that we're doing can reduce the error rate from {disfmarker} from mel ceptrum {pause} down by, you know {pause} a fourth of them to, uh, a half of them. Somewhere in there, depending on the {pause} exact case. So So that's good. I mean, I think that, uh, one of the things that Hynek was talking about was understanding what was in the other really good proposals and {disfmarker} and trying to see if what should ultimately be proposed is some, uh, combination of things. Um, if, uh {disfmarker} Cuz there's things that they are doing {pause} there that we certainly are not doing. And there's things that we're doing that {pause} they're not doing. And {disfmarker} and they all seem like good things. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: So PhD E: Mmm, yeah. PhD C: How much {disfmarker} how much better was the best system than ours? Professor D: So Well, we don't know yet. PhD C: Mmm. Professor D: Uh, I mean, first place, there's still this thing to {disfmarker} to work out, and second place {disfmarker} second thing is that the only results that we have so far from before were really development set results. PhD C: Oh, OK. Professor D: So, I think in this community that's of interest. It's not like everything is being pinned on the evaluation set. But, um, for the development set, our best result was a little bit short of fifty percent. And the best result of any system was about fifty - four, where these numbers are the, uh, relative, uh, reduction in, uh, word error rate. PhD C: Oh, OK. Professor D: And, um, the other systems were, uh, somewhat lower than that. There was actually {disfmarker} there was much less of a huge range than there was in Aurora one. In Aurora one there were {disfmarker} there were systems that ba basically didn't improve things. PhD C: Hmm. Professor D: And here the {disfmarker} the worst system {pause} still reduced the error rate by thirty - three percent, or something, in development set. PhD C: Oh, wow. Professor D: So {disfmarker} so, you know, sort of everybody is doing things between, well, roughly a third of the errors, and half the errors being eliminated, {vocalsound} uh, and varying on different test sets and so forth. PhD C: Mm - hmm. Professor D: So I think Um {pause} It's probably a good time to look at what's really going on and seeing if there's a {disfmarker} there's a way to combine the best ideas while at the same time not blowing up the amount of, uh, resources used, cuz that's {disfmarker} that's critical for this {disfmarker} this test. PhD C: Do we know anything about {disfmarker} who {disfmarker} who's was it that had the lowest on the dev set? Professor D: Um, uh, the, uh, the there were two systems that were put forth by a combination of {disfmarker} of, uh, French Telecom and Alcatel. And, um they {disfmarker} they differed in some respects, but they e em one was called the French Telecom Alcatel System the other was called the Alcatel French Telecom System, {vocalsound} uh, which is the biggest difference, I think. But {disfmarker} but there're {disfmarker} there're {disfmarker} there're some other differences, too. Uh, and {disfmarker} and, uh, they both did very well, PhD C: Uh - huh. Professor D: you know? So, {vocalsound} um, my impression is they also did very well on {disfmarker} on the {disfmarker} the, uh, evaluation set, but, um, I {disfmarker} I we haven't seen {disfmarker} you've - you haven't seen any final results for that PhD C: And they used {disfmarker} the main thing that {disfmarker} that they used was spectral subtraction? Professor D: yeah. PhD C: Or Professor D: There is a couple pieces to it. There's a spectral subtraction style piece {disfmarker} it was basically, you know, Wiener filtering. And then {disfmarker} then there was some p some modification of the cepstral parameters, where they {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah, actually, something that's close to cepstral mean subtraction. But, uh, the way the mean is adapted {disfmarker} um, it's signal dependent. I'm {disfmarker} I'm, uh So, basically, the mean is adapted during speech and not during silence. Professor D: Yeah. PhD A: But it's very close to {disfmarker} to cepstral mean subtraction. Professor D: But some people have done {vocalsound} {pause} exactly that sort of thing, of {disfmarker} of {disfmarker} and the {disfmarker} I mean it's not {disfmarker} To {disfmarker} to look in {pause} speech only, to try to m to measure these things during speech, PhD A: Yeah, yeah. Professor D: that's p that's not that uncommon. But i it it {disfmarker} so it looks like they did some {disfmarker} some, uh, reasonable things, uh, and they're not things that we did, precisely. We did unreasonable things, {vocalsound} which {disfmarker} because we like to try strange things, and {disfmarker} and, uh, and our things worked too. PhD C: Hmm. Professor D: And so, um, uh, it's possible that some combination of these different things that were done would be the best thing to do. But the only caveat to that is that everybody's being real conscious of how much memory and how much CPU they're using PhD C: Mm - hmm. Professor D: because these, {vocalsound} {vocalsound} {vocalsound} uh, standards are supposed to go on cell phones with m moderate resources in both respects. PhD C: Did anybody, uh, do anything with the models as a {disfmarker} an experiment? Or Professor D: Uh, they didn't report it, if they did. PhD C: N nobody reported it? Professor D: Yeah. I think everybody was focused elsewhere. Um, now, one of the things that's nice about what we did is, we do have a {disfmarker} a, uh {disfmarker} a filtering, which leads to a {disfmarker} a, uh {disfmarker} a reduction in the bandwidth in the modulation spectrum, which allows us to downsample. So, uh, as a result of that we have a reduced, um, transmission rate for the bits. PhD C: Mm - hmm. Professor D: That was misreported the first time out. It {disfmarker} it said the same amount because for convenience sake in the particular way that this is being tested, uh, they were repeating the packets. So it was {disfmarker} they were s they {disfmarker} they had twenty - four hundred bits per second, but they were literally creating forty - eight hundred bits per second, {vocalsound} um, even though y it was just repeated. PhD C: Oh. Mm - hmm. Right. Professor D: So, uh, in practice PhD C: So you could've had a repeat count in there or something. Professor D: Well, n I mean, this was just a ph phoney thing just to {disfmarker} to fit into the {disfmarker} the software that was testing the errors {disfmarker} channel errors and so on. PhD C: Oh. Oh. Professor D: So {disfmarker} so in reality, if you put this {disfmarker} this system in into, uh, the field, it would be twenty - four hundred bits per second, not forty - eight hundred. So, um, so that's a nice feature of what {disfmarker} what we did. Um, but, um, well, we still have to see how it all comes out. PhD C: Hmm. Professor D: Um, and then there's the whole standards process, which is another thing altogether. PhD C: When is the development set {disfmarker} I mean, the, uh, uh, test set results due? Like the day before you leave or something? Professor D: Uh, probably the day after they leave, but we'll have to {disfmarker} {vocalsound} we'll have to stop it the day before {comment} we leave. PhD A: Yeah, yeah. So PhD C: Huh. Professor D: I think tha I think the {disfmarker} the meeting is on the thirteenth or something. PhD A: Yeah, this Tuesday, yeah. Professor D: And, uh, they, uh Right. And the {disfmarker} the, uh, results are due like the day before the meeting or something. So PhD A: Yeah, probably, well Professor D: I th I think {disfmarker} I I think they are, PhD A: Yeah, well Professor D: yeah. So {pause} {vocalsound} um, since we have a bit farther to travel than {vocalsound} some of the others, {vocalsound} uh, we'll have to get done a little quicker. But, um, I mean, it's just tracing down these bugs. I mean, just exactly this sort of thing of, you know, why {disfmarker} why these features seem to be behaving differently, uh, in California than in Oregon. PhD C: Hmm. Professor D: Might have something to do with electricity shortage. Uh, we didn't {disfmarker} we didn't have enough electrons here and Uh, but, um Uh, I think, you know, the main reason for having {disfmarker} I mean, it only takes w to run the {disfmarker} the two test sets in {disfmarker} just in computer time is just a day or so, right? PhD A: Yeah, Professor D: So PhD A: it's very short interval. Professor D: yeah. So, I think the who the whole reason for having as long as we have, which was {pause} like a week and a half, is {disfmarker} is because of bugs like that. So Huh So, we're gonna end up with these same kind of sheets that have the {pause} the percentages and so on just for the {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah, so there are two more columns in the sheets, Professor D: Oh, I guess it's the same sheets, PhD A: two. Yeah, it's the same sheets, Professor D: yeah, yeah {disfmarker} PhD A: yeah. Professor D: just with the missing columns filled in. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Yeah. Well, that'll be good. So, I'll dis I'll disregard these numbers. That's {disfmarker} that's {disfmarker} that's good. PhD A: So, Hynek will try to push for trying to combine, uh, different things? Or Hmm? Professor D: Uh, well that's {pause} um yeah I mean, I think the question is" Is there {disfmarker} is there some advantage?" I mean, you could just take the best system and say that's the standard. But the thing is that if different systems are getting at good things, um, a again within the constraint of the resources, if there's something simple that you can do Now for instance, uh, it's, I think, very reasonable to have a standard for the terminal's side and then for the server's side say," Here's a number of things that could be done." So, um, everything that we did could probably just be added on to what Alcatel did, and i it'd probably work pretty well with them, too. So, um, uh, that's one {disfmarker} one aspect of it. And then on the terminal's side, I don't know how much, um, memory and {disfmarker} and CPU it takes, but it seems like the filtering {pause} Uh, I mean, the VAD stuff they both had, right? And, um, so {disfmarker} and they both had some kind of on - line normalization, right? PhD A: Uh, yeah. Professor D: Of sorts, yeah? So {disfmarker} so, it seems like the main different there is the {disfmarker} is the, uh, filtering. And the filtering {disfmarker} I think if you can {disfmarker} shouldn't take a lot of memory to do that Uh, and I also wouldn't think the CPU, uh, would be much either for that part. So, if you can {disfmarker} if you can add those in {pause} um {pause} then, uh, you can cut the data rate in half. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: So it seems like the right thing to do is to {disfmarker} on the {disfmarker} on the terminal's side, take what they did, if it {disfmarker} if it does seem to generalize well to German and Danish, uh, take what they did add in a filter, and add in some stuff on the server's side and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and that's probably a reasonable standard. Um {pause} Uh PhD A: They are working on this already? Because {disfmarker} yeah, Su - Sunil told me that he was trying already to put some kind of, uh, filtering in the {vocalsound} {pause} France Telecom. Professor D: Yeah, so that's {disfmarker} that's {disfmarker} that's what That would be ideal {disfmarker} would be is that they could, you know, they could actually show that, in fact, a combination of some sort, {vocalsound} uh, would work even better than what {disfmarker} what any of the systems had. And, um, then it would {disfmarker} it would, uh {pause} be something to {disfmarker} to discuss in the meeting. But, uh, not clear what will go on. Um, I mean, on the one hand, um, sometimes people are just anxious to get a standard out there. I mean, you can always have another standard after that, but {vocalsound} this process has gone on for a while on {disfmarker} already and {disfmarker} and people might just wanna pick something and say," OK, this is it." And then, that's a standard. Uh, standards are always optional. It's just that, uh, if you disobey them, then you risk not being able to sell your product, or {pause} {vocalsound} Uh {pause} um And people often work on new standards while an old standard is in place and so on. So it's not final even if they declared a standard. The other hand, they might just say they just don't know enough yet to {disfmarker} to declare a standard. So you {disfmarker} you {disfmarker} you will be {disfmarker} you will become experts on this and know more {disfmarker} far more than me about the tha this particular standards process once you {disfmarker} you go to this meeting. So, be interested in hearing. So, uh, I'd be, uh, interested in hearing, uh, your thoughts now I mean you're almost done. I mean, you're done in the sense that, um, you may be able to get some new features from Sunil, and we'll re - run it. Uh, but other than that, you're {disfmarker} you're basically done, right? So, uh, I'm interested in hearing {disfmarker} hearing your thoughts about {pause} where you think we should go from this. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: I mean, we tried a lot of things in a hurry, and, uh, if we can back off from this now and sort of take our time with something, and not have doing things quickly be quite so much the constraint, what {disfmarker} what you think would be the best thing to do. PhD A: Uh, well Hmm Well, first, uh, to really have a look at {disfmarker} at the speech {pause} {vocalsound} from these databases because, well, we tried several thing, but we did not really look {vocalsound} at what what's happening, and {vocalsound} where is the noise, and Professor D: OK. PhD A: Eh Professor D: It's a novel idea. Look at the data. OK. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Or more generally, I guess, what {disfmarker} what is causing the degradation. PhD A: Yeah, yeah. Actually, there is one thing that {disfmarker} well {pause} Um, generally we {disfmarker} we think that {vocalsound} most of the errors are within phoneme classes, and so I think it could be interesting to {disfmarker} to see if it {disfmarker} I don't think it's still true when we add noise, and {vocalsound} so we have {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I guess the confusion ma the confusion matrices are very different when {disfmarker} when we have noise, and when it's clean speech. And probably, there is much more {pause} between classes errors for noisy speech. Professor D: Mm - hmm. PhD A: And {vocalsound} so, um Yeah, so perhaps we could have a {disfmarker} a large gain, eh, just by looking at improving the, uh, recognition, not of phonemes, but of phoneme classes, simply. Professor D: Mm - hmm. PhD A: And {vocalsound} which is a s a s a simpler problem, perhaps, but {disfmarker} which is perhaps important for noisy speech. Professor D: The other thing that strikes me, just looking at these numbers is, just taking the best cases, I mean, some of these, of course, even with all of our {disfmarker} our wonderful processing, still are horrible kinds of numbers. But just take the best case, the well - matched {pause} uh, German case after {disfmarker} er well - matched Danish after we {disfmarker} PhD A: Mm - hmm. Professor D: the kind of numbers we're getting are about eight or nine {pause} uh {pause} p percent {pause} error {pause} per digit. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Yeah. Professor D: This is obviously not usable, PhD A: No. Professor D: right? PhD A: Sure. Professor D: I mean, if you have ten digits for a phone number {comment} I mean, every now and then you'll get it right. I mean, it's {disfmarker} it's, uh, {vocalsound} um So, I mean, the other thing is that, uh {disfmarker} And {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} a and {disfmarker} and also, um {pause} part of what's nice about this is that this is, uh, {vocalsound} um {pause} a realistic {disfmarker} almost realistic database. I mean, it's still not people who are really trying to accomplish something, but {disfmarker} but, uh, within the artificial setup, it isn't noise artificially added, you know, simulated, uh, additive noise. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Professor D: It's real noise condition. And, um, {vocalsound} the {disfmarker} the training {disfmarker} the training, I guess, is always done on the close talking PhD A: No, actually {disfmarker} actually the well - matched condition {pause} is {pause} still quite di still quite difficult. Professor D: No? PhD A: I mean, it's {disfmarker} they have all these data from the close mike and from the distant mike, {vocalsound} from different driving condition, open window, closed window, Professor D: Yeah. PhD A: and they take all of this and they take seventy percent, I think, for training and thirty percent for testing. PhD E: Mm - hmm. PhD A: So, training is done {vocalsound} on different conditions and different microphones, and testing also is done {pause} on different microphone and conditions. So, probably if we only take the close microphones, {vocalsound} I guess the results should be much much better than this. Professor D: I see. PhD A: Mmm. Professor D: Oh, OK, PhD A: Uh Professor D: that explains it partially. Wha - what about i in {disfmarker} so the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah, so {disfmarker} there is this, the mismatched is, um {pause} the same kind of thing, Professor D: go ahead. PhD A: but {pause} the driving conditions, I mean the speed and the kind of road, is different for training and testing, is that right? PhD E: Yeah. PhD A: And the last condition is close microphone for training and distant for testing. Yeah. Professor D: Uh, OK, PhD A: So {disfmarker} {vocalsound} s so {disfmarker} Professor D: so I see. So, yeah, so the high {disfmarker} so the {disfmarker} right {disfmarker} so the highly mismatched {vocalsound} case {pause} is in some sense a good model for what we've been, you know, typically talking about when we talk about additive noise in {disfmarker} And so {disfmarker} and i i k it does correspond to a realistic situation in the sense that, {vocalsound} um, people might really be trying to, uh, call out telephone numbers or some or something like that, in {disfmarker} in their cars PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: and they're trying to connect to something. PhD A: Mmm. Professor D: Um PhD A: Actually, yeah, it's very close to clean speech training because, well, because the close microphone {vocalsound} and noisy speech testing, Professor D: Yeah. Yeah. PhD A: yeah. Mmm. Professor D: Yeah. And the well - matched condition {pause} is what you might imagine that you might be able to approach, if you know that this is the application. You're gonna record a bunch on people in cars and so forth, and do these training. And then, uh, when y you sell it to somebody, they will be a different person with a different car, and so on. So it's {disfmarker} this is a an optim somewhat optimistic view on it, uh, so, you know, the real thing is somewhere in between the two. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Uh, uh, but PhD A: But the {disfmarker} I mean, the {pause} th th Professor D: Even the optimistic one is PhD A: it doesn't work. Professor D: Yeah, PhD A: It {disfmarker} Professor D: right. Right, it doesn't work. So, in a way, that's, you know, that's sort of the dominant thing is that even, say on the development set stuff that we saw, the, uh, the numbers that, uh, that Alcatel was getting when choosing out the best single numbers, {vocalsound} it was just {disfmarker} you know, it wasn't good enough for {disfmarker} for {pause} a {disfmarker} a {disfmarker} for a real system. PhD A: Mmm. Mm - hmm. Professor D: You {disfmarker} you {disfmarker} you, {vocalsound} um So, uh, we still have stuff to do. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Uh, and, uh I don't know So, looking at the data, where, you know {disfmarker} what's the {disfmarker} what's {disfmarker} what's th what's characteristic i e yeah, I think that's {disfmarker} that's a good thing. Does a any you have any thoughts about what else {vocalsound} y you're thinking that you didn't get to that you would like to do if you had more time? Uh PhD E: Oh, f a lot of thing. Because we trying a lot of s {pause} thing, and we doesn't work, {vocalsound} we remove these. Maybe {vocalsound} we trying again with the articulatory feature. I don't know exactly because we tried {disfmarker} we {disfmarker} some {disfmarker} one experiment that doesn't work. Um, forgot it, something {pause} I don't know exactly Professor D: Mm - hmm. PhD E: because, tsk {comment} {vocalsound} maybe do better some step the general, {vocalsound} eh, diagram. Professor D: Mm - hmm. PhD E: I don't know exactly s to think what we can improve. Professor D: Yeah, cuz a lot of time it's true, there were a lot of times when we've tried something and it didn't work right away, even though we had an intuition that there should be something there. And so then we would just stop it. Um And, uh, one of the things {disfmarker} I don't remember the details on, but I remember at some point, when you were working with a second stream, and you tried a low - pass filtering to cepstrum, in some case you got {disfmarker} PhD E: MSG Yeah. Professor D: Well, but it was {comment} an MSG - like thing, but it wasn't MSG, right? Uh, you {disfmarker} y I think in some case you got some little improvement, but it was, you know, sort of a small improvement, and it was a {disfmarker} a big added complication, so you dropped it. But, um, that was just sort of one try, right? You just took one filter, threw it there, PhD A: Yeah, Professor D: right? And it seems to me that, um, if that is an important idea, which, you know, might be, that one could work at it for a while, as you're saying. PhD A: Hmm. Professor D: And, uh Uh, and you had, you know, you had the multi - band things also, and, you know, there was issue of that. PhD A: Yeah, Professor D: Um, Barry's going to be, uh, continuing working on multi - band things as well. PhD E: Mm - hmm. Professor D: We were just talking about, um, {vocalsound} some, uh, some work that we're interested in. Kind of inspired by the stuff by Larry Saul with the, uh {pause} uh, learning articulatory feature in {disfmarker} I think, in the case of his paper {disfmarker} with sonorance based on, uh, multi - band information where you have a {disfmarker} a combination of gradient learning an and, uh, EM. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Professor D: Um, and {pause} {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Um, so, I think that, you know, this is a, uh {disfmarker} this is a neat data set. Um, and then, uh, as we mentioned before, we also have the {disfmarker} the new, uh, digit set coming up from recordings in this room. So, there's a lot of things to work with. Um and, uh what I like about it, in a way, is that, uh, the results are still so terrible. Uh {pause} {vocalsound} Uh {pause} {vocalsound} I mean, they're much better than they were, you know. We're talking about thirty to sixty percent, uh, error rate reduction. That's {disfmarker} that's really great stuff to {disfmarker} to do that in relatively short time. But even after that it's still, you know, so poor that {disfmarker} that, uh, no one could really use it. So, um I think that's great that {disfmarker} because {disfmarker} and y also because again, it's not something {disfmarker} sometimes we've gotten terrible results by taking some data, and artificially, you know, convolving it with some room response, or something {disfmarker} we take a very {disfmarker} Uh, at one point, uh, Brian and I went downstairs into the {disfmarker} the basement where it was {disfmarker} it was in a hallway where it was very reverberant and we {disfmarker} we made some recordings there. And then we {vocalsound} {disfmarker} we, uh {disfmarker} uh, made a simulation of the {disfmarker} of the room acoustics there and {disfmarker} and applied it to other things, PhD A: Mm - hmm. Professor D: and uh But it was all pretty artificial, and {disfmarker} and, you know, how often would you really try to have your most crucial conversations in this very reverberant hallway? Um {pause} So, uh {pause} This is what's nice about the Aurora data and the data here, is that {disfmarker} is that it's sort of a realistic room situation {pause} uh, acoustics {disfmarker} acoustic situation, both terms in noise and reflections, and so on and n n And, uh, uh, with something that's still relatively realistic, it's still very very hard to do very well. So Yeah. PhD A: Yeah, so d well Actually, this is {disfmarker} tha that's why we {disfmarker} well, it's a different kind of data. We're not {disfmarker} we're not used to work with this kind of data. That's why we should have a loo more closer look at what's going on. Professor D: Yeah. PhD E: Mm - hmm. PhD A: Um Yeah. So this would be the first thing, and then, of course, try to {disfmarker} well, {vocalsound} kind of debug what was wrong, eh, when we do Aurora test on the MSG {pause} particularly, and on the multi - band. Professor D: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. PhD A: Uh Professor D: Yeah. Yeah. No, I {disfmarker} I think there's lots of {disfmarker} lots of good things to do with this. So Um So let's {disfmarker} I guess {pause} You were gonna say something else? Oh, OK. What do you think? PhD C: About Professor D: Anything PhD C: About other experiments? Uh, now, I'm interested in, um, uh {pause} looking at the experiments where you use, um {pause} uh, data from multiple languages to train the neural net. And I don't know how far, or if you guys even had a chance to try that, but {pause} that would be some it'd be interesting to me. PhD A: Yeah, but Professor D: S b PhD A: Again, it's the kind of {disfmarker} of thing that, uh, we were thin thinking {disfmarker} thinking that it would work, but it didn't work. And, eh, so there is kind of {disfmarker} of {pause} not a bug, but something wrong in what we are doing, perhaps. Professor D: Yeah. PhD C: Right. Right. PhD A: Uh, something wrong, perhaps in the {disfmarker} just in the {disfmarker} the fact that the labels are {disfmarker} PhD C: Right. PhD A: well PhD C: Mm - hmm. PhD A: What worked best is the hand - labeled data. PhD C: Mm - hmm. PhD A: Um Uh, so, yeah. I don't know if we can get some hand - labeled data from other languages. PhD C: Yeah. PhD A: It's not so easy to find. PhD C: Right. PhD A: But {pause} that would be something interesting t to {disfmarker} to see. PhD C: Yeah, yeah. Professor D: Yeah. Also, uh, {vocalsound} I mean, there was just the whole notion of having multiple nets that were trained on different data. So one form of different data was {disfmarker} is from different languages, but the other Well, i in fact, uh, m in those experiments it wasn't so much combining multiple nets, it was a single net that had different PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: So, first thing is would it be better if they were multiple nets, for some reason? Second thing is, never mind the different languages, just having acoustic conditions rather than training them all up in one, would it be helpful to have different ones? So, um That was a question that was kind of raised by Mike Shire's thesis, and on {disfmarker} in that case in terms of reverberation. Right? That {disfmarker} that sometimes it might be better to do that. But, um, {vocalsound} I don't think we know for sure. So, um Right. So, next week, we, uh, won't meet because you'll be in Europe. Whe - when are you two getting back? PhD E: Um, I'm PhD A: You on Friday or S on Saturday or {pause}? PhD E: Sunday PhD A: S oh yeah, Sunday, yeah. PhD E: because it's {disfmarker} it's less expensive, the price {disfmarker} the price the ticket. PhD C: Professor D: Yeah, that's right. You've gotta S have a Saturday overnight, right? PhD A: I'll be back on Tuesday. Professor D: Tuesday. PhD C: Where {disfmarker} where's the meeting? Professor D: Uh, Amsterdam, I think, yeah? PhD A: Yeah, Amsterdam. PhD C: Uh - huh. Professor D: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Yep. Um {pause} So, we'll skip next week, and we'll meet two weeks from now. And, uh, I guess the main topic will be, uh, you telling us what happened. PhD A: Yeah. PhD E: Yeah. Professor D: Uh, so Yeah, well, if we don't have an anything else to discuss, we should, uh, turn off the machine and then say the real nasty things. PhD C: Should we do digits first? PhD A: Yeah. Grad B: Oh, yeah, digits. Professor D: Oh yeah, digits! Yeah. Good point. Yeah, good thinking. Why don't you go ahead. PhD C: OK. OK.

The team gathered some ideas on how they could further improve the model, perhaps by focusing more so on MSG and multi-band. The professor iterated that the task was pretty hard, and their model was still not good enough for a real system. The team was generally excited about the Aurora data, as it was more realistic, and about further pursuing the task.

tr-sq-1205

tr-sq-1205_0

What did the professor think about the pragmatic overview of the project? Professor D: OK. So, uh You can fill those out, uh {pause} after, actually, so So, I got, uh {pause} these results from, uh, Stephane. Also, um, I think that, uh {pause} um {pause} we might hear later today, about other results. I think s that, uh, there were some other very good results that we're gonna wanna compare to. But, {vocalsound} r our results from other {disfmarker} other places, yeah. PhD A: I I'm sorry? I didn't Professor D: Um, I got this from you PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: and then I sent a note to Sunil about the {disfmarker} cuz he has been running some other systems PhD A: Mm - hmm. Professor D: other than the {disfmarker} the ICSI OGI one. PhD A: Oh yeah. Professor D: So {pause} um, I wan wanna {disfmarker} wanna see what that is. But, uh, you know, so we'll see what it is comparatively later. But {pause} it looks like, um PhD A: M yeah. Professor D: You know most of the time, even {disfmarker} I mean even though it's true that the overall number for Danish {disfmarker} we didn't improve it If you look at it individually, what it really says is that there's, um, uh Looks like out of the six cases, between the different kinds of, uh, matching conditions {pause} out of the six cases, there's basically, um, a couple where it stays about the same, uh, three where it gets better, and one where it gets worse. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Uh, go ahead. PhD A: Y Actually, uh, um, for the Danish, there's still some kind of mystery because, um, um, when we use the straight features, we are not able to get these nice number with the ICSI OGI one, I mean. We don't have this ninety - three seventy - eight, we have eight PhD E: Eighty - nine forty - four. PhD A: yeah. Uh, so, uh, that's probably something wrong with the features that we get from OGI. Uh, and Sunil is working on {disfmarker} on trying to {disfmarker} to check everything. Professor D: Oh, and {disfmarker} and we have a little time on that {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} actually so PhD A: Hmm? Professor D: We have a little bit of time on that, actually. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: We have a day or so, so When {disfmarker} when {disfmarker} when do you folks leave? PhD A: Uh, Sunday. Professor D: Sunday? So So, uh Yeah, until Saturday midnight, or something, we have W we {disfmarker} we have time, yeah. Well, that would be good. That'd be good. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Yeah. Uh, and, you know, i u when whenever anybody figures it out they should also, for sure, email Hynek because Hynek will be over there {vocalsound} telling people {vocalsound} what we did, so he should know. PhD A: Mmm. Yeah. Professor D: Good, OK. So, um So, we'll {disfmarker} we'll hold off on that a little bit. I mean, even with these results as they are, it's {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} it's really not that bad. But {disfmarker} but, uh, um And it looks like the overall result as they are now, even without, you know, any {disfmarker} any bugs being fixed is that, uh, on the {disfmarker} the other tasks, we had this average of, uh, forty uh {disfmarker} nine percent, or so, improvement. And here we have somewhat better than that than the Danish, and somewhat worse than that on the German, but I mean, it sounds like, uh, one way or another, the methods that we're doing can reduce the error rate from {disfmarker} from mel ceptrum {pause} down by, you know {pause} a fourth of them to, uh, a half of them. Somewhere in there, depending on the {pause} exact case. So So that's good. I mean, I think that, uh, one of the things that Hynek was talking about was understanding what was in the other really good proposals and {disfmarker} and trying to see if what should ultimately be proposed is some, uh, combination of things. Um, if, uh {disfmarker} Cuz there's things that they are doing {pause} there that we certainly are not doing. And there's things that we're doing that {pause} they're not doing. And {disfmarker} and they all seem like good things. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: So PhD E: Mmm, yeah. PhD C: How much {disfmarker} how much better was the best system than ours? Professor D: So Well, we don't know yet. PhD C: Mmm. Professor D: Uh, I mean, first place, there's still this thing to {disfmarker} to work out, and second place {disfmarker} second thing is that the only results that we have so far from before were really development set results. PhD C: Oh, OK. Professor D: So, I think in this community that's of interest. It's not like everything is being pinned on the evaluation set. But, um, for the development set, our best result was a little bit short of fifty percent. And the best result of any system was about fifty - four, where these numbers are the, uh, relative, uh, reduction in, uh, word error rate. PhD C: Oh, OK. Professor D: And, um, the other systems were, uh, somewhat lower than that. There was actually {disfmarker} there was much less of a huge range than there was in Aurora one. In Aurora one there were {disfmarker} there were systems that ba basically didn't improve things. PhD C: Hmm. Professor D: And here the {disfmarker} the worst system {pause} still reduced the error rate by thirty - three percent, or something, in development set. PhD C: Oh, wow. Professor D: So {disfmarker} so, you know, sort of everybody is doing things between, well, roughly a third of the errors, and half the errors being eliminated, {vocalsound} uh, and varying on different test sets and so forth. PhD C: Mm - hmm. Professor D: So I think Um {pause} It's probably a good time to look at what's really going on and seeing if there's a {disfmarker} there's a way to combine the best ideas while at the same time not blowing up the amount of, uh, resources used, cuz that's {disfmarker} that's critical for this {disfmarker} this test. PhD C: Do we know anything about {disfmarker} who {disfmarker} who's was it that had the lowest on the dev set? Professor D: Um, uh, the, uh, the there were two systems that were put forth by a combination of {disfmarker} of, uh, French Telecom and Alcatel. And, um they {disfmarker} they differed in some respects, but they e em one was called the French Telecom Alcatel System the other was called the Alcatel French Telecom System, {vocalsound} uh, which is the biggest difference, I think. But {disfmarker} but there're {disfmarker} there're {disfmarker} there're some other differences, too. Uh, and {disfmarker} and, uh, they both did very well, PhD C: Uh - huh. Professor D: you know? So, {vocalsound} um, my impression is they also did very well on {disfmarker} on the {disfmarker} the, uh, evaluation set, but, um, I {disfmarker} I we haven't seen {disfmarker} you've - you haven't seen any final results for that PhD C: And they used {disfmarker} the main thing that {disfmarker} that they used was spectral subtraction? Professor D: yeah. PhD C: Or Professor D: There is a couple pieces to it. There's a spectral subtraction style piece {disfmarker} it was basically, you know, Wiener filtering. And then {disfmarker} then there was some p some modification of the cepstral parameters, where they {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah, actually, something that's close to cepstral mean subtraction. But, uh, the way the mean is adapted {disfmarker} um, it's signal dependent. I'm {disfmarker} I'm, uh So, basically, the mean is adapted during speech and not during silence. Professor D: Yeah. PhD A: But it's very close to {disfmarker} to cepstral mean subtraction. Professor D: But some people have done {vocalsound} {pause} exactly that sort of thing, of {disfmarker} of {disfmarker} and the {disfmarker} I mean it's not {disfmarker} To {disfmarker} to look in {pause} speech only, to try to m to measure these things during speech, PhD A: Yeah, yeah. Professor D: that's p that's not that uncommon. But i it it {disfmarker} so it looks like they did some {disfmarker} some, uh, reasonable things, uh, and they're not things that we did, precisely. We did unreasonable things, {vocalsound} which {disfmarker} because we like to try strange things, and {disfmarker} and, uh, and our things worked too. PhD C: Hmm. Professor D: And so, um, uh, it's possible that some combination of these different things that were done would be the best thing to do. But the only caveat to that is that everybody's being real conscious of how much memory and how much CPU they're using PhD C: Mm - hmm. Professor D: because these, {vocalsound} {vocalsound} {vocalsound} uh, standards are supposed to go on cell phones with m moderate resources in both respects. PhD C: Did anybody, uh, do anything with the models as a {disfmarker} an experiment? Or Professor D: Uh, they didn't report it, if they did. PhD C: N nobody reported it? Professor D: Yeah. I think everybody was focused elsewhere. Um, now, one of the things that's nice about what we did is, we do have a {disfmarker} a, uh {disfmarker} a filtering, which leads to a {disfmarker} a, uh {disfmarker} a reduction in the bandwidth in the modulation spectrum, which allows us to downsample. So, uh, as a result of that we have a reduced, um, transmission rate for the bits. PhD C: Mm - hmm. Professor D: That was misreported the first time out. It {disfmarker} it said the same amount because for convenience sake in the particular way that this is being tested, uh, they were repeating the packets. So it was {disfmarker} they were s they {disfmarker} they had twenty - four hundred bits per second, but they were literally creating forty - eight hundred bits per second, {vocalsound} um, even though y it was just repeated. PhD C: Oh. Mm - hmm. Right. Professor D: So, uh, in practice PhD C: So you could've had a repeat count in there or something. Professor D: Well, n I mean, this was just a ph phoney thing just to {disfmarker} to fit into the {disfmarker} the software that was testing the errors {disfmarker} channel errors and so on. PhD C: Oh. Oh. Professor D: So {disfmarker} so in reality, if you put this {disfmarker} this system in into, uh, the field, it would be twenty - four hundred bits per second, not forty - eight hundred. So, um, so that's a nice feature of what {disfmarker} what we did. Um, but, um, well, we still have to see how it all comes out. PhD C: Hmm. Professor D: Um, and then there's the whole standards process, which is another thing altogether. PhD C: When is the development set {disfmarker} I mean, the, uh, uh, test set results due? Like the day before you leave or something? Professor D: Uh, probably the day after they leave, but we'll have to {disfmarker} {vocalsound} we'll have to stop it the day before {comment} we leave. PhD A: Yeah, yeah. So PhD C: Huh. Professor D: I think tha I think the {disfmarker} the meeting is on the thirteenth or something. PhD A: Yeah, this Tuesday, yeah. Professor D: And, uh, they, uh Right. And the {disfmarker} the, uh, results are due like the day before the meeting or something. So PhD A: Yeah, probably, well Professor D: I th I think {disfmarker} I I think they are, PhD A: Yeah, well Professor D: yeah. So {pause} {vocalsound} um, since we have a bit farther to travel than {vocalsound} some of the others, {vocalsound} uh, we'll have to get done a little quicker. But, um, I mean, it's just tracing down these bugs. I mean, just exactly this sort of thing of, you know, why {disfmarker} why these features seem to be behaving differently, uh, in California than in Oregon. PhD C: Hmm. Professor D: Might have something to do with electricity shortage. Uh, we didn't {disfmarker} we didn't have enough electrons here and Uh, but, um Uh, I think, you know, the main reason for having {disfmarker} I mean, it only takes w to run the {disfmarker} the two test sets in {disfmarker} just in computer time is just a day or so, right? PhD A: Yeah, Professor D: So PhD A: it's very short interval. Professor D: yeah. So, I think the who the whole reason for having as long as we have, which was {pause} like a week and a half, is {disfmarker} is because of bugs like that. So Huh So, we're gonna end up with these same kind of sheets that have the {pause} the percentages and so on just for the {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah, so there are two more columns in the sheets, Professor D: Oh, I guess it's the same sheets, PhD A: two. Yeah, it's the same sheets, Professor D: yeah, yeah {disfmarker} PhD A: yeah. Professor D: just with the missing columns filled in. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Yeah. Well, that'll be good. So, I'll dis I'll disregard these numbers. That's {disfmarker} that's {disfmarker} that's good. PhD A: So, Hynek will try to push for trying to combine, uh, different things? Or Hmm? Professor D: Uh, well that's {pause} um yeah I mean, I think the question is" Is there {disfmarker} is there some advantage?" I mean, you could just take the best system and say that's the standard. But the thing is that if different systems are getting at good things, um, a again within the constraint of the resources, if there's something simple that you can do Now for instance, uh, it's, I think, very reasonable to have a standard for the terminal's side and then for the server's side say," Here's a number of things that could be done." So, um, everything that we did could probably just be added on to what Alcatel did, and i it'd probably work pretty well with them, too. So, um, uh, that's one {disfmarker} one aspect of it. And then on the terminal's side, I don't know how much, um, memory and {disfmarker} and CPU it takes, but it seems like the filtering {pause} Uh, I mean, the VAD stuff they both had, right? And, um, so {disfmarker} and they both had some kind of on - line normalization, right? PhD A: Uh, yeah. Professor D: Of sorts, yeah? So {disfmarker} so, it seems like the main different there is the {disfmarker} is the, uh, filtering. And the filtering {disfmarker} I think if you can {disfmarker} shouldn't take a lot of memory to do that Uh, and I also wouldn't think the CPU, uh, would be much either for that part. So, if you can {disfmarker} if you can add those in {pause} um {pause} then, uh, you can cut the data rate in half. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: So it seems like the right thing to do is to {disfmarker} on the {disfmarker} on the terminal's side, take what they did, if it {disfmarker} if it does seem to generalize well to German and Danish, uh, take what they did add in a filter, and add in some stuff on the server's side and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and that's probably a reasonable standard. Um {pause} Uh PhD A: They are working on this already? Because {disfmarker} yeah, Su - Sunil told me that he was trying already to put some kind of, uh, filtering in the {vocalsound} {pause} France Telecom. Professor D: Yeah, so that's {disfmarker} that's {disfmarker} that's what That would be ideal {disfmarker} would be is that they could, you know, they could actually show that, in fact, a combination of some sort, {vocalsound} uh, would work even better than what {disfmarker} what any of the systems had. And, um, then it would {disfmarker} it would, uh {pause} be something to {disfmarker} to discuss in the meeting. But, uh, not clear what will go on. Um, I mean, on the one hand, um, sometimes people are just anxious to get a standard out there. I mean, you can always have another standard after that, but {vocalsound} this process has gone on for a while on {disfmarker} already and {disfmarker} and people might just wanna pick something and say," OK, this is it." And then, that's a standard. Uh, standards are always optional. It's just that, uh, if you disobey them, then you risk not being able to sell your product, or {pause} {vocalsound} Uh {pause} um And people often work on new standards while an old standard is in place and so on. So it's not final even if they declared a standard. The other hand, they might just say they just don't know enough yet to {disfmarker} to declare a standard. So you {disfmarker} you {disfmarker} you will be {disfmarker} you will become experts on this and know more {disfmarker} far more than me about the tha this particular standards process once you {disfmarker} you go to this meeting. So, be interested in hearing. So, uh, I'd be, uh, interested in hearing, uh, your thoughts now I mean you're almost done. I mean, you're done in the sense that, um, you may be able to get some new features from Sunil, and we'll re - run it. Uh, but other than that, you're {disfmarker} you're basically done, right? So, uh, I'm interested in hearing {disfmarker} hearing your thoughts about {pause} where you think we should go from this. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: I mean, we tried a lot of things in a hurry, and, uh, if we can back off from this now and sort of take our time with something, and not have doing things quickly be quite so much the constraint, what {disfmarker} what you think would be the best thing to do. PhD A: Uh, well Hmm Well, first, uh, to really have a look at {disfmarker} at the speech {pause} {vocalsound} from these databases because, well, we tried several thing, but we did not really look {vocalsound} at what what's happening, and {vocalsound} where is the noise, and Professor D: OK. PhD A: Eh Professor D: It's a novel idea. Look at the data. OK. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Or more generally, I guess, what {disfmarker} what is causing the degradation. PhD A: Yeah, yeah. Actually, there is one thing that {disfmarker} well {pause} Um, generally we {disfmarker} we think that {vocalsound} most of the errors are within phoneme classes, and so I think it could be interesting to {disfmarker} to see if it {disfmarker} I don't think it's still true when we add noise, and {vocalsound} so we have {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I guess the confusion ma the confusion matrices are very different when {disfmarker} when we have noise, and when it's clean speech. And probably, there is much more {pause} between classes errors for noisy speech. Professor D: Mm - hmm. PhD A: And {vocalsound} so, um Yeah, so perhaps we could have a {disfmarker} a large gain, eh, just by looking at improving the, uh, recognition, not of phonemes, but of phoneme classes, simply. Professor D: Mm - hmm. PhD A: And {vocalsound} which is a s a s a simpler problem, perhaps, but {disfmarker} which is perhaps important for noisy speech. Professor D: The other thing that strikes me, just looking at these numbers is, just taking the best cases, I mean, some of these, of course, even with all of our {disfmarker} our wonderful processing, still are horrible kinds of numbers. But just take the best case, the well - matched {pause} uh, German case after {disfmarker} er well - matched Danish after we {disfmarker} PhD A: Mm - hmm. Professor D: the kind of numbers we're getting are about eight or nine {pause} uh {pause} p percent {pause} error {pause} per digit. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Yeah. Professor D: This is obviously not usable, PhD A: No. Professor D: right? PhD A: Sure. Professor D: I mean, if you have ten digits for a phone number {comment} I mean, every now and then you'll get it right. I mean, it's {disfmarker} it's, uh, {vocalsound} um So, I mean, the other thing is that, uh {disfmarker} And {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} a and {disfmarker} and also, um {pause} part of what's nice about this is that this is, uh, {vocalsound} um {pause} a realistic {disfmarker} almost realistic database. I mean, it's still not people who are really trying to accomplish something, but {disfmarker} but, uh, within the artificial setup, it isn't noise artificially added, you know, simulated, uh, additive noise. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Professor D: It's real noise condition. And, um, {vocalsound} the {disfmarker} the training {disfmarker} the training, I guess, is always done on the close talking PhD A: No, actually {disfmarker} actually the well - matched condition {pause} is {pause} still quite di still quite difficult. Professor D: No? PhD A: I mean, it's {disfmarker} they have all these data from the close mike and from the distant mike, {vocalsound} from different driving condition, open window, closed window, Professor D: Yeah. PhD A: and they take all of this and they take seventy percent, I think, for training and thirty percent for testing. PhD E: Mm - hmm. PhD A: So, training is done {vocalsound} on different conditions and different microphones, and testing also is done {pause} on different microphone and conditions. So, probably if we only take the close microphones, {vocalsound} I guess the results should be much much better than this. Professor D: I see. PhD A: Mmm. Professor D: Oh, OK, PhD A: Uh Professor D: that explains it partially. Wha - what about i in {disfmarker} so the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah, so {disfmarker} there is this, the mismatched is, um {pause} the same kind of thing, Professor D: go ahead. PhD A: but {pause} the driving conditions, I mean the speed and the kind of road, is different for training and testing, is that right? PhD E: Yeah. PhD A: And the last condition is close microphone for training and distant for testing. Yeah. Professor D: Uh, OK, PhD A: So {disfmarker} {vocalsound} s so {disfmarker} Professor D: so I see. So, yeah, so the high {disfmarker} so the {disfmarker} right {disfmarker} so the highly mismatched {vocalsound} case {pause} is in some sense a good model for what we've been, you know, typically talking about when we talk about additive noise in {disfmarker} And so {disfmarker} and i i k it does correspond to a realistic situation in the sense that, {vocalsound} um, people might really be trying to, uh, call out telephone numbers or some or something like that, in {disfmarker} in their cars PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: and they're trying to connect to something. PhD A: Mmm. Professor D: Um PhD A: Actually, yeah, it's very close to clean speech training because, well, because the close microphone {vocalsound} and noisy speech testing, Professor D: Yeah. Yeah. PhD A: yeah. Mmm. Professor D: Yeah. And the well - matched condition {pause} is what you might imagine that you might be able to approach, if you know that this is the application. You're gonna record a bunch on people in cars and so forth, and do these training. And then, uh, when y you sell it to somebody, they will be a different person with a different car, and so on. So it's {disfmarker} this is a an optim somewhat optimistic view on it, uh, so, you know, the real thing is somewhere in between the two. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Uh, uh, but PhD A: But the {disfmarker} I mean, the {pause} th th Professor D: Even the optimistic one is PhD A: it doesn't work. Professor D: Yeah, PhD A: It {disfmarker} Professor D: right. Right, it doesn't work. So, in a way, that's, you know, that's sort of the dominant thing is that even, say on the development set stuff that we saw, the, uh, the numbers that, uh, that Alcatel was getting when choosing out the best single numbers, {vocalsound} it was just {disfmarker} you know, it wasn't good enough for {disfmarker} for {pause} a {disfmarker} a {disfmarker} for a real system. PhD A: Mmm. Mm - hmm. Professor D: You {disfmarker} you {disfmarker} you, {vocalsound} um So, uh, we still have stuff to do. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Uh, and, uh I don't know So, looking at the data, where, you know {disfmarker} what's the {disfmarker} what's {disfmarker} what's th what's characteristic i e yeah, I think that's {disfmarker} that's a good thing. Does a any you have any thoughts about what else {vocalsound} y you're thinking that you didn't get to that you would like to do if you had more time? Uh PhD E: Oh, f a lot of thing. Because we trying a lot of s {pause} thing, and we doesn't work, {vocalsound} we remove these. Maybe {vocalsound} we trying again with the articulatory feature. I don't know exactly because we tried {disfmarker} we {disfmarker} some {disfmarker} one experiment that doesn't work. Um, forgot it, something {pause} I don't know exactly Professor D: Mm - hmm. PhD E: because, tsk {comment} {vocalsound} maybe do better some step the general, {vocalsound} eh, diagram. Professor D: Mm - hmm. PhD E: I don't know exactly s to think what we can improve. Professor D: Yeah, cuz a lot of time it's true, there were a lot of times when we've tried something and it didn't work right away, even though we had an intuition that there should be something there. And so then we would just stop it. Um And, uh, one of the things {disfmarker} I don't remember the details on, but I remember at some point, when you were working with a second stream, and you tried a low - pass filtering to cepstrum, in some case you got {disfmarker} PhD E: MSG Yeah. Professor D: Well, but it was {comment} an MSG - like thing, but it wasn't MSG, right? Uh, you {disfmarker} y I think in some case you got some little improvement, but it was, you know, sort of a small improvement, and it was a {disfmarker} a big added complication, so you dropped it. But, um, that was just sort of one try, right? You just took one filter, threw it there, PhD A: Yeah, Professor D: right? And it seems to me that, um, if that is an important idea, which, you know, might be, that one could work at it for a while, as you're saying. PhD A: Hmm. Professor D: And, uh Uh, and you had, you know, you had the multi - band things also, and, you know, there was issue of that. PhD A: Yeah, Professor D: Um, Barry's going to be, uh, continuing working on multi - band things as well. PhD E: Mm - hmm. Professor D: We were just talking about, um, {vocalsound} some, uh, some work that we're interested in. Kind of inspired by the stuff by Larry Saul with the, uh {pause} uh, learning articulatory feature in {disfmarker} I think, in the case of his paper {disfmarker} with sonorance based on, uh, multi - band information where you have a {disfmarker} a combination of gradient learning an and, uh, EM. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Professor D: Um, and {pause} {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Um, so, I think that, you know, this is a, uh {disfmarker} this is a neat data set. Um, and then, uh, as we mentioned before, we also have the {disfmarker} the new, uh, digit set coming up from recordings in this room. So, there's a lot of things to work with. Um and, uh what I like about it, in a way, is that, uh, the results are still so terrible. Uh {pause} {vocalsound} Uh {pause} {vocalsound} I mean, they're much better than they were, you know. We're talking about thirty to sixty percent, uh, error rate reduction. That's {disfmarker} that's really great stuff to {disfmarker} to do that in relatively short time. But even after that it's still, you know, so poor that {disfmarker} that, uh, no one could really use it. So, um I think that's great that {disfmarker} because {disfmarker} and y also because again, it's not something {disfmarker} sometimes we've gotten terrible results by taking some data, and artificially, you know, convolving it with some room response, or something {disfmarker} we take a very {disfmarker} Uh, at one point, uh, Brian and I went downstairs into the {disfmarker} the basement where it was {disfmarker} it was in a hallway where it was very reverberant and we {disfmarker} we made some recordings there. And then we {vocalsound} {disfmarker} we, uh {disfmarker} uh, made a simulation of the {disfmarker} of the room acoustics there and {disfmarker} and applied it to other things, PhD A: Mm - hmm. Professor D: and uh But it was all pretty artificial, and {disfmarker} and, you know, how often would you really try to have your most crucial conversations in this very reverberant hallway? Um {pause} So, uh {pause} This is what's nice about the Aurora data and the data here, is that {disfmarker} is that it's sort of a realistic room situation {pause} uh, acoustics {disfmarker} acoustic situation, both terms in noise and reflections, and so on and n n And, uh, uh, with something that's still relatively realistic, it's still very very hard to do very well. So Yeah. PhD A: Yeah, so d well Actually, this is {disfmarker} tha that's why we {disfmarker} well, it's a different kind of data. We're not {disfmarker} we're not used to work with this kind of data. That's why we should have a loo more closer look at what's going on. Professor D: Yeah. PhD E: Mm - hmm. PhD A: Um Yeah. So this would be the first thing, and then, of course, try to {disfmarker} well, {vocalsound} kind of debug what was wrong, eh, when we do Aurora test on the MSG {pause} particularly, and on the multi - band. Professor D: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. PhD A: Uh Professor D: Yeah. Yeah. No, I {disfmarker} I think there's lots of {disfmarker} lots of good things to do with this. So Um So let's {disfmarker} I guess {pause} You were gonna say something else? Oh, OK. What do you think? PhD C: About Professor D: Anything PhD C: About other experiments? Uh, now, I'm interested in, um, uh {pause} looking at the experiments where you use, um {pause} uh, data from multiple languages to train the neural net. And I don't know how far, or if you guys even had a chance to try that, but {pause} that would be some it'd be interesting to me. PhD A: Yeah, but Professor D: S b PhD A: Again, it's the kind of {disfmarker} of thing that, uh, we were thin thinking {disfmarker} thinking that it would work, but it didn't work. And, eh, so there is kind of {disfmarker} of {pause} not a bug, but something wrong in what we are doing, perhaps. Professor D: Yeah. PhD C: Right. Right. PhD A: Uh, something wrong, perhaps in the {disfmarker} just in the {disfmarker} the fact that the labels are {disfmarker} PhD C: Right. PhD A: well PhD C: Mm - hmm. PhD A: What worked best is the hand - labeled data. PhD C: Mm - hmm. PhD A: Um Uh, so, yeah. I don't know if we can get some hand - labeled data from other languages. PhD C: Yeah. PhD A: It's not so easy to find. PhD C: Right. PhD A: But {pause} that would be something interesting t to {disfmarker} to see. PhD C: Yeah, yeah. Professor D: Yeah. Also, uh, {vocalsound} I mean, there was just the whole notion of having multiple nets that were trained on different data. So one form of different data was {disfmarker} is from different languages, but the other Well, i in fact, uh, m in those experiments it wasn't so much combining multiple nets, it was a single net that had different PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: So, first thing is would it be better if they were multiple nets, for some reason? Second thing is, never mind the different languages, just having acoustic conditions rather than training them all up in one, would it be helpful to have different ones? So, um That was a question that was kind of raised by Mike Shire's thesis, and on {disfmarker} in that case in terms of reverberation. Right? That {disfmarker} that sometimes it might be better to do that. But, um, {vocalsound} I don't think we know for sure. So, um Right. So, next week, we, uh, won't meet because you'll be in Europe. Whe - when are you two getting back? PhD E: Um, I'm PhD A: You on Friday or S on Saturday or {pause}? PhD E: Sunday PhD A: S oh yeah, Sunday, yeah. PhD E: because it's {disfmarker} it's less expensive, the price {disfmarker} the price the ticket. PhD C: Professor D: Yeah, that's right. You've gotta S have a Saturday overnight, right? PhD A: I'll be back on Tuesday. Professor D: Tuesday. PhD C: Where {disfmarker} where's the meeting? Professor D: Uh, Amsterdam, I think, yeah? PhD A: Yeah, Amsterdam. PhD C: Uh - huh. Professor D: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Yep. Um {pause} So, we'll skip next week, and we'll meet two weeks from now. And, uh, I guess the main topic will be, uh, you telling us what happened. PhD A: Yeah. PhD E: Yeah. Professor D: Uh, so Yeah, well, if we don't have an anything else to discuss, we should, uh, turn off the machine and then say the real nasty things. PhD C: Should we do digits first? PhD A: Yeah. Grad B: Oh, yeah, digits. Professor D: Oh yeah, digits! Yeah. Good point. Yeah, good thinking. Why don't you go ahead. PhD C: OK. OK.

The professor thought that they needed to work more and asked who had ideas on how they could pursue new directions. He himself wanted to try out playing with MSG and multi-band. He also thought that they should try learning more about different acoustic environments.

tr-sq-1206

tr-sq-1206_0

What did PhD C and the professor discuss about multiple languages? Professor D: OK. So, uh You can fill those out, uh {pause} after, actually, so So, I got, uh {pause} these results from, uh, Stephane. Also, um, I think that, uh {pause} um {pause} we might hear later today, about other results. I think s that, uh, there were some other very good results that we're gonna wanna compare to. But, {vocalsound} r our results from other {disfmarker} other places, yeah. PhD A: I I'm sorry? I didn't Professor D: Um, I got this from you PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: and then I sent a note to Sunil about the {disfmarker} cuz he has been running some other systems PhD A: Mm - hmm. Professor D: other than the {disfmarker} the ICSI OGI one. PhD A: Oh yeah. Professor D: So {pause} um, I wan wanna {disfmarker} wanna see what that is. But, uh, you know, so we'll see what it is comparatively later. But {pause} it looks like, um PhD A: M yeah. Professor D: You know most of the time, even {disfmarker} I mean even though it's true that the overall number for Danish {disfmarker} we didn't improve it If you look at it individually, what it really says is that there's, um, uh Looks like out of the six cases, between the different kinds of, uh, matching conditions {pause} out of the six cases, there's basically, um, a couple where it stays about the same, uh, three where it gets better, and one where it gets worse. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Uh, go ahead. PhD A: Y Actually, uh, um, for the Danish, there's still some kind of mystery because, um, um, when we use the straight features, we are not able to get these nice number with the ICSI OGI one, I mean. We don't have this ninety - three seventy - eight, we have eight PhD E: Eighty - nine forty - four. PhD A: yeah. Uh, so, uh, that's probably something wrong with the features that we get from OGI. Uh, and Sunil is working on {disfmarker} on trying to {disfmarker} to check everything. Professor D: Oh, and {disfmarker} and we have a little time on that {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} actually so PhD A: Hmm? Professor D: We have a little bit of time on that, actually. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: We have a day or so, so When {disfmarker} when {disfmarker} when do you folks leave? PhD A: Uh, Sunday. Professor D: Sunday? So So, uh Yeah, until Saturday midnight, or something, we have W we {disfmarker} we have time, yeah. Well, that would be good. That'd be good. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Yeah. Uh, and, you know, i u when whenever anybody figures it out they should also, for sure, email Hynek because Hynek will be over there {vocalsound} telling people {vocalsound} what we did, so he should know. PhD A: Mmm. Yeah. Professor D: Good, OK. So, um So, we'll {disfmarker} we'll hold off on that a little bit. I mean, even with these results as they are, it's {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} it's really not that bad. But {disfmarker} but, uh, um And it looks like the overall result as they are now, even without, you know, any {disfmarker} any bugs being fixed is that, uh, on the {disfmarker} the other tasks, we had this average of, uh, forty uh {disfmarker} nine percent, or so, improvement. And here we have somewhat better than that than the Danish, and somewhat worse than that on the German, but I mean, it sounds like, uh, one way or another, the methods that we're doing can reduce the error rate from {disfmarker} from mel ceptrum {pause} down by, you know {pause} a fourth of them to, uh, a half of them. Somewhere in there, depending on the {pause} exact case. So So that's good. I mean, I think that, uh, one of the things that Hynek was talking about was understanding what was in the other really good proposals and {disfmarker} and trying to see if what should ultimately be proposed is some, uh, combination of things. Um, if, uh {disfmarker} Cuz there's things that they are doing {pause} there that we certainly are not doing. And there's things that we're doing that {pause} they're not doing. And {disfmarker} and they all seem like good things. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: So PhD E: Mmm, yeah. PhD C: How much {disfmarker} how much better was the best system than ours? Professor D: So Well, we don't know yet. PhD C: Mmm. Professor D: Uh, I mean, first place, there's still this thing to {disfmarker} to work out, and second place {disfmarker} second thing is that the only results that we have so far from before were really development set results. PhD C: Oh, OK. Professor D: So, I think in this community that's of interest. It's not like everything is being pinned on the evaluation set. But, um, for the development set, our best result was a little bit short of fifty percent. And the best result of any system was about fifty - four, where these numbers are the, uh, relative, uh, reduction in, uh, word error rate. PhD C: Oh, OK. Professor D: And, um, the other systems were, uh, somewhat lower than that. There was actually {disfmarker} there was much less of a huge range than there was in Aurora one. In Aurora one there were {disfmarker} there were systems that ba basically didn't improve things. PhD C: Hmm. Professor D: And here the {disfmarker} the worst system {pause} still reduced the error rate by thirty - three percent, or something, in development set. PhD C: Oh, wow. Professor D: So {disfmarker} so, you know, sort of everybody is doing things between, well, roughly a third of the errors, and half the errors being eliminated, {vocalsound} uh, and varying on different test sets and so forth. PhD C: Mm - hmm. Professor D: So I think Um {pause} It's probably a good time to look at what's really going on and seeing if there's a {disfmarker} there's a way to combine the best ideas while at the same time not blowing up the amount of, uh, resources used, cuz that's {disfmarker} that's critical for this {disfmarker} this test. PhD C: Do we know anything about {disfmarker} who {disfmarker} who's was it that had the lowest on the dev set? Professor D: Um, uh, the, uh, the there were two systems that were put forth by a combination of {disfmarker} of, uh, French Telecom and Alcatel. And, um they {disfmarker} they differed in some respects, but they e em one was called the French Telecom Alcatel System the other was called the Alcatel French Telecom System, {vocalsound} uh, which is the biggest difference, I think. But {disfmarker} but there're {disfmarker} there're {disfmarker} there're some other differences, too. Uh, and {disfmarker} and, uh, they both did very well, PhD C: Uh - huh. Professor D: you know? So, {vocalsound} um, my impression is they also did very well on {disfmarker} on the {disfmarker} the, uh, evaluation set, but, um, I {disfmarker} I we haven't seen {disfmarker} you've - you haven't seen any final results for that PhD C: And they used {disfmarker} the main thing that {disfmarker} that they used was spectral subtraction? Professor D: yeah. PhD C: Or Professor D: There is a couple pieces to it. There's a spectral subtraction style piece {disfmarker} it was basically, you know, Wiener filtering. And then {disfmarker} then there was some p some modification of the cepstral parameters, where they {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah, actually, something that's close to cepstral mean subtraction. But, uh, the way the mean is adapted {disfmarker} um, it's signal dependent. I'm {disfmarker} I'm, uh So, basically, the mean is adapted during speech and not during silence. Professor D: Yeah. PhD A: But it's very close to {disfmarker} to cepstral mean subtraction. Professor D: But some people have done {vocalsound} {pause} exactly that sort of thing, of {disfmarker} of {disfmarker} and the {disfmarker} I mean it's not {disfmarker} To {disfmarker} to look in {pause} speech only, to try to m to measure these things during speech, PhD A: Yeah, yeah. Professor D: that's p that's not that uncommon. But i it it {disfmarker} so it looks like they did some {disfmarker} some, uh, reasonable things, uh, and they're not things that we did, precisely. We did unreasonable things, {vocalsound} which {disfmarker} because we like to try strange things, and {disfmarker} and, uh, and our things worked too. PhD C: Hmm. Professor D: And so, um, uh, it's possible that some combination of these different things that were done would be the best thing to do. But the only caveat to that is that everybody's being real conscious of how much memory and how much CPU they're using PhD C: Mm - hmm. Professor D: because these, {vocalsound} {vocalsound} {vocalsound} uh, standards are supposed to go on cell phones with m moderate resources in both respects. PhD C: Did anybody, uh, do anything with the models as a {disfmarker} an experiment? Or Professor D: Uh, they didn't report it, if they did. PhD C: N nobody reported it? Professor D: Yeah. I think everybody was focused elsewhere. Um, now, one of the things that's nice about what we did is, we do have a {disfmarker} a, uh {disfmarker} a filtering, which leads to a {disfmarker} a, uh {disfmarker} a reduction in the bandwidth in the modulation spectrum, which allows us to downsample. So, uh, as a result of that we have a reduced, um, transmission rate for the bits. PhD C: Mm - hmm. Professor D: That was misreported the first time out. It {disfmarker} it said the same amount because for convenience sake in the particular way that this is being tested, uh, they were repeating the packets. So it was {disfmarker} they were s they {disfmarker} they had twenty - four hundred bits per second, but they were literally creating forty - eight hundred bits per second, {vocalsound} um, even though y it was just repeated. PhD C: Oh. Mm - hmm. Right. Professor D: So, uh, in practice PhD C: So you could've had a repeat count in there or something. Professor D: Well, n I mean, this was just a ph phoney thing just to {disfmarker} to fit into the {disfmarker} the software that was testing the errors {disfmarker} channel errors and so on. PhD C: Oh. Oh. Professor D: So {disfmarker} so in reality, if you put this {disfmarker} this system in into, uh, the field, it would be twenty - four hundred bits per second, not forty - eight hundred. So, um, so that's a nice feature of what {disfmarker} what we did. Um, but, um, well, we still have to see how it all comes out. PhD C: Hmm. Professor D: Um, and then there's the whole standards process, which is another thing altogether. PhD C: When is the development set {disfmarker} I mean, the, uh, uh, test set results due? Like the day before you leave or something? Professor D: Uh, probably the day after they leave, but we'll have to {disfmarker} {vocalsound} we'll have to stop it the day before {comment} we leave. PhD A: Yeah, yeah. So PhD C: Huh. Professor D: I think tha I think the {disfmarker} the meeting is on the thirteenth or something. PhD A: Yeah, this Tuesday, yeah. Professor D: And, uh, they, uh Right. And the {disfmarker} the, uh, results are due like the day before the meeting or something. So PhD A: Yeah, probably, well Professor D: I th I think {disfmarker} I I think they are, PhD A: Yeah, well Professor D: yeah. So {pause} {vocalsound} um, since we have a bit farther to travel than {vocalsound} some of the others, {vocalsound} uh, we'll have to get done a little quicker. But, um, I mean, it's just tracing down these bugs. I mean, just exactly this sort of thing of, you know, why {disfmarker} why these features seem to be behaving differently, uh, in California than in Oregon. PhD C: Hmm. Professor D: Might have something to do with electricity shortage. Uh, we didn't {disfmarker} we didn't have enough electrons here and Uh, but, um Uh, I think, you know, the main reason for having {disfmarker} I mean, it only takes w to run the {disfmarker} the two test sets in {disfmarker} just in computer time is just a day or so, right? PhD A: Yeah, Professor D: So PhD A: it's very short interval. Professor D: yeah. So, I think the who the whole reason for having as long as we have, which was {pause} like a week and a half, is {disfmarker} is because of bugs like that. So Huh So, we're gonna end up with these same kind of sheets that have the {pause} the percentages and so on just for the {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah, so there are two more columns in the sheets, Professor D: Oh, I guess it's the same sheets, PhD A: two. Yeah, it's the same sheets, Professor D: yeah, yeah {disfmarker} PhD A: yeah. Professor D: just with the missing columns filled in. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Yeah. Well, that'll be good. So, I'll dis I'll disregard these numbers. That's {disfmarker} that's {disfmarker} that's good. PhD A: So, Hynek will try to push for trying to combine, uh, different things? Or Hmm? Professor D: Uh, well that's {pause} um yeah I mean, I think the question is" Is there {disfmarker} is there some advantage?" I mean, you could just take the best system and say that's the standard. But the thing is that if different systems are getting at good things, um, a again within the constraint of the resources, if there's something simple that you can do Now for instance, uh, it's, I think, very reasonable to have a standard for the terminal's side and then for the server's side say," Here's a number of things that could be done." So, um, everything that we did could probably just be added on to what Alcatel did, and i it'd probably work pretty well with them, too. So, um, uh, that's one {disfmarker} one aspect of it. And then on the terminal's side, I don't know how much, um, memory and {disfmarker} and CPU it takes, but it seems like the filtering {pause} Uh, I mean, the VAD stuff they both had, right? And, um, so {disfmarker} and they both had some kind of on - line normalization, right? PhD A: Uh, yeah. Professor D: Of sorts, yeah? So {disfmarker} so, it seems like the main different there is the {disfmarker} is the, uh, filtering. And the filtering {disfmarker} I think if you can {disfmarker} shouldn't take a lot of memory to do that Uh, and I also wouldn't think the CPU, uh, would be much either for that part. So, if you can {disfmarker} if you can add those in {pause} um {pause} then, uh, you can cut the data rate in half. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: So it seems like the right thing to do is to {disfmarker} on the {disfmarker} on the terminal's side, take what they did, if it {disfmarker} if it does seem to generalize well to German and Danish, uh, take what they did add in a filter, and add in some stuff on the server's side and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and that's probably a reasonable standard. Um {pause} Uh PhD A: They are working on this already? Because {disfmarker} yeah, Su - Sunil told me that he was trying already to put some kind of, uh, filtering in the {vocalsound} {pause} France Telecom. Professor D: Yeah, so that's {disfmarker} that's {disfmarker} that's what That would be ideal {disfmarker} would be is that they could, you know, they could actually show that, in fact, a combination of some sort, {vocalsound} uh, would work even better than what {disfmarker} what any of the systems had. And, um, then it would {disfmarker} it would, uh {pause} be something to {disfmarker} to discuss in the meeting. But, uh, not clear what will go on. Um, I mean, on the one hand, um, sometimes people are just anxious to get a standard out there. I mean, you can always have another standard after that, but {vocalsound} this process has gone on for a while on {disfmarker} already and {disfmarker} and people might just wanna pick something and say," OK, this is it." And then, that's a standard. Uh, standards are always optional. It's just that, uh, if you disobey them, then you risk not being able to sell your product, or {pause} {vocalsound} Uh {pause} um And people often work on new standards while an old standard is in place and so on. So it's not final even if they declared a standard. The other hand, they might just say they just don't know enough yet to {disfmarker} to declare a standard. So you {disfmarker} you {disfmarker} you will be {disfmarker} you will become experts on this and know more {disfmarker} far more than me about the tha this particular standards process once you {disfmarker} you go to this meeting. So, be interested in hearing. So, uh, I'd be, uh, interested in hearing, uh, your thoughts now I mean you're almost done. I mean, you're done in the sense that, um, you may be able to get some new features from Sunil, and we'll re - run it. Uh, but other than that, you're {disfmarker} you're basically done, right? So, uh, I'm interested in hearing {disfmarker} hearing your thoughts about {pause} where you think we should go from this. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: I mean, we tried a lot of things in a hurry, and, uh, if we can back off from this now and sort of take our time with something, and not have doing things quickly be quite so much the constraint, what {disfmarker} what you think would be the best thing to do. PhD A: Uh, well Hmm Well, first, uh, to really have a look at {disfmarker} at the speech {pause} {vocalsound} from these databases because, well, we tried several thing, but we did not really look {vocalsound} at what what's happening, and {vocalsound} where is the noise, and Professor D: OK. PhD A: Eh Professor D: It's a novel idea. Look at the data. OK. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Or more generally, I guess, what {disfmarker} what is causing the degradation. PhD A: Yeah, yeah. Actually, there is one thing that {disfmarker} well {pause} Um, generally we {disfmarker} we think that {vocalsound} most of the errors are within phoneme classes, and so I think it could be interesting to {disfmarker} to see if it {disfmarker} I don't think it's still true when we add noise, and {vocalsound} so we have {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I guess the confusion ma the confusion matrices are very different when {disfmarker} when we have noise, and when it's clean speech. And probably, there is much more {pause} between classes errors for noisy speech. Professor D: Mm - hmm. PhD A: And {vocalsound} so, um Yeah, so perhaps we could have a {disfmarker} a large gain, eh, just by looking at improving the, uh, recognition, not of phonemes, but of phoneme classes, simply. Professor D: Mm - hmm. PhD A: And {vocalsound} which is a s a s a simpler problem, perhaps, but {disfmarker} which is perhaps important for noisy speech. Professor D: The other thing that strikes me, just looking at these numbers is, just taking the best cases, I mean, some of these, of course, even with all of our {disfmarker} our wonderful processing, still are horrible kinds of numbers. But just take the best case, the well - matched {pause} uh, German case after {disfmarker} er well - matched Danish after we {disfmarker} PhD A: Mm - hmm. Professor D: the kind of numbers we're getting are about eight or nine {pause} uh {pause} p percent {pause} error {pause} per digit. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Yeah. Professor D: This is obviously not usable, PhD A: No. Professor D: right? PhD A: Sure. Professor D: I mean, if you have ten digits for a phone number {comment} I mean, every now and then you'll get it right. I mean, it's {disfmarker} it's, uh, {vocalsound} um So, I mean, the other thing is that, uh {disfmarker} And {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} a and {disfmarker} and also, um {pause} part of what's nice about this is that this is, uh, {vocalsound} um {pause} a realistic {disfmarker} almost realistic database. I mean, it's still not people who are really trying to accomplish something, but {disfmarker} but, uh, within the artificial setup, it isn't noise artificially added, you know, simulated, uh, additive noise. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Professor D: It's real noise condition. And, um, {vocalsound} the {disfmarker} the training {disfmarker} the training, I guess, is always done on the close talking PhD A: No, actually {disfmarker} actually the well - matched condition {pause} is {pause} still quite di still quite difficult. Professor D: No? PhD A: I mean, it's {disfmarker} they have all these data from the close mike and from the distant mike, {vocalsound} from different driving condition, open window, closed window, Professor D: Yeah. PhD A: and they take all of this and they take seventy percent, I think, for training and thirty percent for testing. PhD E: Mm - hmm. PhD A: So, training is done {vocalsound} on different conditions and different microphones, and testing also is done {pause} on different microphone and conditions. So, probably if we only take the close microphones, {vocalsound} I guess the results should be much much better than this. Professor D: I see. PhD A: Mmm. Professor D: Oh, OK, PhD A: Uh Professor D: that explains it partially. Wha - what about i in {disfmarker} so the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah, so {disfmarker} there is this, the mismatched is, um {pause} the same kind of thing, Professor D: go ahead. PhD A: but {pause} the driving conditions, I mean the speed and the kind of road, is different for training and testing, is that right? PhD E: Yeah. PhD A: And the last condition is close microphone for training and distant for testing. Yeah. Professor D: Uh, OK, PhD A: So {disfmarker} {vocalsound} s so {disfmarker} Professor D: so I see. So, yeah, so the high {disfmarker} so the {disfmarker} right {disfmarker} so the highly mismatched {vocalsound} case {pause} is in some sense a good model for what we've been, you know, typically talking about when we talk about additive noise in {disfmarker} And so {disfmarker} and i i k it does correspond to a realistic situation in the sense that, {vocalsound} um, people might really be trying to, uh, call out telephone numbers or some or something like that, in {disfmarker} in their cars PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: and they're trying to connect to something. PhD A: Mmm. Professor D: Um PhD A: Actually, yeah, it's very close to clean speech training because, well, because the close microphone {vocalsound} and noisy speech testing, Professor D: Yeah. Yeah. PhD A: yeah. Mmm. Professor D: Yeah. And the well - matched condition {pause} is what you might imagine that you might be able to approach, if you know that this is the application. You're gonna record a bunch on people in cars and so forth, and do these training. And then, uh, when y you sell it to somebody, they will be a different person with a different car, and so on. So it's {disfmarker} this is a an optim somewhat optimistic view on it, uh, so, you know, the real thing is somewhere in between the two. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Uh, uh, but PhD A: But the {disfmarker} I mean, the {pause} th th Professor D: Even the optimistic one is PhD A: it doesn't work. Professor D: Yeah, PhD A: It {disfmarker} Professor D: right. Right, it doesn't work. So, in a way, that's, you know, that's sort of the dominant thing is that even, say on the development set stuff that we saw, the, uh, the numbers that, uh, that Alcatel was getting when choosing out the best single numbers, {vocalsound} it was just {disfmarker} you know, it wasn't good enough for {disfmarker} for {pause} a {disfmarker} a {disfmarker} for a real system. PhD A: Mmm. Mm - hmm. Professor D: You {disfmarker} you {disfmarker} you, {vocalsound} um So, uh, we still have stuff to do. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Uh, and, uh I don't know So, looking at the data, where, you know {disfmarker} what's the {disfmarker} what's {disfmarker} what's th what's characteristic i e yeah, I think that's {disfmarker} that's a good thing. Does a any you have any thoughts about what else {vocalsound} y you're thinking that you didn't get to that you would like to do if you had more time? Uh PhD E: Oh, f a lot of thing. Because we trying a lot of s {pause} thing, and we doesn't work, {vocalsound} we remove these. Maybe {vocalsound} we trying again with the articulatory feature. I don't know exactly because we tried {disfmarker} we {disfmarker} some {disfmarker} one experiment that doesn't work. Um, forgot it, something {pause} I don't know exactly Professor D: Mm - hmm. PhD E: because, tsk {comment} {vocalsound} maybe do better some step the general, {vocalsound} eh, diagram. Professor D: Mm - hmm. PhD E: I don't know exactly s to think what we can improve. Professor D: Yeah, cuz a lot of time it's true, there were a lot of times when we've tried something and it didn't work right away, even though we had an intuition that there should be something there. And so then we would just stop it. Um And, uh, one of the things {disfmarker} I don't remember the details on, but I remember at some point, when you were working with a second stream, and you tried a low - pass filtering to cepstrum, in some case you got {disfmarker} PhD E: MSG Yeah. Professor D: Well, but it was {comment} an MSG - like thing, but it wasn't MSG, right? Uh, you {disfmarker} y I think in some case you got some little improvement, but it was, you know, sort of a small improvement, and it was a {disfmarker} a big added complication, so you dropped it. But, um, that was just sort of one try, right? You just took one filter, threw it there, PhD A: Yeah, Professor D: right? And it seems to me that, um, if that is an important idea, which, you know, might be, that one could work at it for a while, as you're saying. PhD A: Hmm. Professor D: And, uh Uh, and you had, you know, you had the multi - band things also, and, you know, there was issue of that. PhD A: Yeah, Professor D: Um, Barry's going to be, uh, continuing working on multi - band things as well. PhD E: Mm - hmm. Professor D: We were just talking about, um, {vocalsound} some, uh, some work that we're interested in. Kind of inspired by the stuff by Larry Saul with the, uh {pause} uh, learning articulatory feature in {disfmarker} I think, in the case of his paper {disfmarker} with sonorance based on, uh, multi - band information where you have a {disfmarker} a combination of gradient learning an and, uh, EM. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Professor D: Um, and {pause} {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Um, so, I think that, you know, this is a, uh {disfmarker} this is a neat data set. Um, and then, uh, as we mentioned before, we also have the {disfmarker} the new, uh, digit set coming up from recordings in this room. So, there's a lot of things to work with. Um and, uh what I like about it, in a way, is that, uh, the results are still so terrible. Uh {pause} {vocalsound} Uh {pause} {vocalsound} I mean, they're much better than they were, you know. We're talking about thirty to sixty percent, uh, error rate reduction. That's {disfmarker} that's really great stuff to {disfmarker} to do that in relatively short time. But even after that it's still, you know, so poor that {disfmarker} that, uh, no one could really use it. So, um I think that's great that {disfmarker} because {disfmarker} and y also because again, it's not something {disfmarker} sometimes we've gotten terrible results by taking some data, and artificially, you know, convolving it with some room response, or something {disfmarker} we take a very {disfmarker} Uh, at one point, uh, Brian and I went downstairs into the {disfmarker} the basement where it was {disfmarker} it was in a hallway where it was very reverberant and we {disfmarker} we made some recordings there. And then we {vocalsound} {disfmarker} we, uh {disfmarker} uh, made a simulation of the {disfmarker} of the room acoustics there and {disfmarker} and applied it to other things, PhD A: Mm - hmm. Professor D: and uh But it was all pretty artificial, and {disfmarker} and, you know, how often would you really try to have your most crucial conversations in this very reverberant hallway? Um {pause} So, uh {pause} This is what's nice about the Aurora data and the data here, is that {disfmarker} is that it's sort of a realistic room situation {pause} uh, acoustics {disfmarker} acoustic situation, both terms in noise and reflections, and so on and n n And, uh, uh, with something that's still relatively realistic, it's still very very hard to do very well. So Yeah. PhD A: Yeah, so d well Actually, this is {disfmarker} tha that's why we {disfmarker} well, it's a different kind of data. We're not {disfmarker} we're not used to work with this kind of data. That's why we should have a loo more closer look at what's going on. Professor D: Yeah. PhD E: Mm - hmm. PhD A: Um Yeah. So this would be the first thing, and then, of course, try to {disfmarker} well, {vocalsound} kind of debug what was wrong, eh, when we do Aurora test on the MSG {pause} particularly, and on the multi - band. Professor D: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. PhD A: Uh Professor D: Yeah. Yeah. No, I {disfmarker} I think there's lots of {disfmarker} lots of good things to do with this. So Um So let's {disfmarker} I guess {pause} You were gonna say something else? Oh, OK. What do you think? PhD C: About Professor D: Anything PhD C: About other experiments? Uh, now, I'm interested in, um, uh {pause} looking at the experiments where you use, um {pause} uh, data from multiple languages to train the neural net. And I don't know how far, or if you guys even had a chance to try that, but {pause} that would be some it'd be interesting to me. PhD A: Yeah, but Professor D: S b PhD A: Again, it's the kind of {disfmarker} of thing that, uh, we were thin thinking {disfmarker} thinking that it would work, but it didn't work. And, eh, so there is kind of {disfmarker} of {pause} not a bug, but something wrong in what we are doing, perhaps. Professor D: Yeah. PhD C: Right. Right. PhD A: Uh, something wrong, perhaps in the {disfmarker} just in the {disfmarker} the fact that the labels are {disfmarker} PhD C: Right. PhD A: well PhD C: Mm - hmm. PhD A: What worked best is the hand - labeled data. PhD C: Mm - hmm. PhD A: Um Uh, so, yeah. I don't know if we can get some hand - labeled data from other languages. PhD C: Yeah. PhD A: It's not so easy to find. PhD C: Right. PhD A: But {pause} that would be something interesting t to {disfmarker} to see. PhD C: Yeah, yeah. Professor D: Yeah. Also, uh, {vocalsound} I mean, there was just the whole notion of having multiple nets that were trained on different data. So one form of different data was {disfmarker} is from different languages, but the other Well, i in fact, uh, m in those experiments it wasn't so much combining multiple nets, it was a single net that had different PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: So, first thing is would it be better if they were multiple nets, for some reason? Second thing is, never mind the different languages, just having acoustic conditions rather than training them all up in one, would it be helpful to have different ones? So, um That was a question that was kind of raised by Mike Shire's thesis, and on {disfmarker} in that case in terms of reverberation. Right? That {disfmarker} that sometimes it might be better to do that. But, um, {vocalsound} I don't think we know for sure. So, um Right. So, next week, we, uh, won't meet because you'll be in Europe. Whe - when are you two getting back? PhD E: Um, I'm PhD A: You on Friday or S on Saturday or {pause}? PhD E: Sunday PhD A: S oh yeah, Sunday, yeah. PhD E: because it's {disfmarker} it's less expensive, the price {disfmarker} the price the ticket. PhD C: Professor D: Yeah, that's right. You've gotta S have a Saturday overnight, right? PhD A: I'll be back on Tuesday. Professor D: Tuesday. PhD C: Where {disfmarker} where's the meeting? Professor D: Uh, Amsterdam, I think, yeah? PhD A: Yeah, Amsterdam. PhD C: Uh - huh. Professor D: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Yep. Um {pause} So, we'll skip next week, and we'll meet two weeks from now. And, uh, I guess the main topic will be, uh, you telling us what happened. PhD A: Yeah. PhD E: Yeah. Professor D: Uh, so Yeah, well, if we don't have an anything else to discuss, we should, uh, turn off the machine and then say the real nasty things. PhD C: Should we do digits first? PhD A: Yeah. Grad B: Oh, yeah, digits. Professor D: Oh yeah, digits! Yeah. Good point. Yeah, good thinking. Why don't you go ahead. PhD C: OK. OK.

PhD C and the professor expressed a desire to learn more about nets that incorporated multiple languages. They thought they could explore whether it was better to have one net for many languages or different nets for each language.

tr-gq-1207

tr-gq-1207_0

Summarize the meeting Professor D: OK. So, uh You can fill those out, uh {pause} after, actually, so So, I got, uh {pause} these results from, uh, Stephane. Also, um, I think that, uh {pause} um {pause} we might hear later today, about other results. I think s that, uh, there were some other very good results that we're gonna wanna compare to. But, {vocalsound} r our results from other {disfmarker} other places, yeah. PhD A: I I'm sorry? I didn't Professor D: Um, I got this from you PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: and then I sent a note to Sunil about the {disfmarker} cuz he has been running some other systems PhD A: Mm - hmm. Professor D: other than the {disfmarker} the ICSI OGI one. PhD A: Oh yeah. Professor D: So {pause} um, I wan wanna {disfmarker} wanna see what that is. But, uh, you know, so we'll see what it is comparatively later. But {pause} it looks like, um PhD A: M yeah. Professor D: You know most of the time, even {disfmarker} I mean even though it's true that the overall number for Danish {disfmarker} we didn't improve it If you look at it individually, what it really says is that there's, um, uh Looks like out of the six cases, between the different kinds of, uh, matching conditions {pause} out of the six cases, there's basically, um, a couple where it stays about the same, uh, three where it gets better, and one where it gets worse. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Uh, go ahead. PhD A: Y Actually, uh, um, for the Danish, there's still some kind of mystery because, um, um, when we use the straight features, we are not able to get these nice number with the ICSI OGI one, I mean. We don't have this ninety - three seventy - eight, we have eight PhD E: Eighty - nine forty - four. PhD A: yeah. Uh, so, uh, that's probably something wrong with the features that we get from OGI. Uh, and Sunil is working on {disfmarker} on trying to {disfmarker} to check everything. Professor D: Oh, and {disfmarker} and we have a little time on that {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} actually so PhD A: Hmm? Professor D: We have a little bit of time on that, actually. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: We have a day or so, so When {disfmarker} when {disfmarker} when do you folks leave? PhD A: Uh, Sunday. Professor D: Sunday? So So, uh Yeah, until Saturday midnight, or something, we have W we {disfmarker} we have time, yeah. Well, that would be good. That'd be good. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Yeah. Uh, and, you know, i u when whenever anybody figures it out they should also, for sure, email Hynek because Hynek will be over there {vocalsound} telling people {vocalsound} what we did, so he should know. PhD A: Mmm. Yeah. Professor D: Good, OK. So, um So, we'll {disfmarker} we'll hold off on that a little bit. I mean, even with these results as they are, it's {disfmarker} it's {disfmarker} it's really not that bad. But {disfmarker} but, uh, um And it looks like the overall result as they are now, even without, you know, any {disfmarker} any bugs being fixed is that, uh, on the {disfmarker} the other tasks, we had this average of, uh, forty uh {disfmarker} nine percent, or so, improvement. And here we have somewhat better than that than the Danish, and somewhat worse than that on the German, but I mean, it sounds like, uh, one way or another, the methods that we're doing can reduce the error rate from {disfmarker} from mel ceptrum {pause} down by, you know {pause} a fourth of them to, uh, a half of them. Somewhere in there, depending on the {pause} exact case. So So that's good. I mean, I think that, uh, one of the things that Hynek was talking about was understanding what was in the other really good proposals and {disfmarker} and trying to see if what should ultimately be proposed is some, uh, combination of things. Um, if, uh {disfmarker} Cuz there's things that they are doing {pause} there that we certainly are not doing. And there's things that we're doing that {pause} they're not doing. And {disfmarker} and they all seem like good things. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: So PhD E: Mmm, yeah. PhD C: How much {disfmarker} how much better was the best system than ours? Professor D: So Well, we don't know yet. PhD C: Mmm. Professor D: Uh, I mean, first place, there's still this thing to {disfmarker} to work out, and second place {disfmarker} second thing is that the only results that we have so far from before were really development set results. PhD C: Oh, OK. Professor D: So, I think in this community that's of interest. It's not like everything is being pinned on the evaluation set. But, um, for the development set, our best result was a little bit short of fifty percent. And the best result of any system was about fifty - four, where these numbers are the, uh, relative, uh, reduction in, uh, word error rate. PhD C: Oh, OK. Professor D: And, um, the other systems were, uh, somewhat lower than that. There was actually {disfmarker} there was much less of a huge range than there was in Aurora one. In Aurora one there were {disfmarker} there were systems that ba basically didn't improve things. PhD C: Hmm. Professor D: And here the {disfmarker} the worst system {pause} still reduced the error rate by thirty - three percent, or something, in development set. PhD C: Oh, wow. Professor D: So {disfmarker} so, you know, sort of everybody is doing things between, well, roughly a third of the errors, and half the errors being eliminated, {vocalsound} uh, and varying on different test sets and so forth. PhD C: Mm - hmm. Professor D: So I think Um {pause} It's probably a good time to look at what's really going on and seeing if there's a {disfmarker} there's a way to combine the best ideas while at the same time not blowing up the amount of, uh, resources used, cuz that's {disfmarker} that's critical for this {disfmarker} this test. PhD C: Do we know anything about {disfmarker} who {disfmarker} who's was it that had the lowest on the dev set? Professor D: Um, uh, the, uh, the there were two systems that were put forth by a combination of {disfmarker} of, uh, French Telecom and Alcatel. And, um they {disfmarker} they differed in some respects, but they e em one was called the French Telecom Alcatel System the other was called the Alcatel French Telecom System, {vocalsound} uh, which is the biggest difference, I think. But {disfmarker} but there're {disfmarker} there're {disfmarker} there're some other differences, too. Uh, and {disfmarker} and, uh, they both did very well, PhD C: Uh - huh. Professor D: you know? So, {vocalsound} um, my impression is they also did very well on {disfmarker} on the {disfmarker} the, uh, evaluation set, but, um, I {disfmarker} I we haven't seen {disfmarker} you've - you haven't seen any final results for that PhD C: And they used {disfmarker} the main thing that {disfmarker} that they used was spectral subtraction? Professor D: yeah. PhD C: Or Professor D: There is a couple pieces to it. There's a spectral subtraction style piece {disfmarker} it was basically, you know, Wiener filtering. And then {disfmarker} then there was some p some modification of the cepstral parameters, where they {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah, actually, something that's close to cepstral mean subtraction. But, uh, the way the mean is adapted {disfmarker} um, it's signal dependent. I'm {disfmarker} I'm, uh So, basically, the mean is adapted during speech and not during silence. Professor D: Yeah. PhD A: But it's very close to {disfmarker} to cepstral mean subtraction. Professor D: But some people have done {vocalsound} {pause} exactly that sort of thing, of {disfmarker} of {disfmarker} and the {disfmarker} I mean it's not {disfmarker} To {disfmarker} to look in {pause} speech only, to try to m to measure these things during speech, PhD A: Yeah, yeah. Professor D: that's p that's not that uncommon. But i it it {disfmarker} so it looks like they did some {disfmarker} some, uh, reasonable things, uh, and they're not things that we did, precisely. We did unreasonable things, {vocalsound} which {disfmarker} because we like to try strange things, and {disfmarker} and, uh, and our things worked too. PhD C: Hmm. Professor D: And so, um, uh, it's possible that some combination of these different things that were done would be the best thing to do. But the only caveat to that is that everybody's being real conscious of how much memory and how much CPU they're using PhD C: Mm - hmm. Professor D: because these, {vocalsound} {vocalsound} {vocalsound} uh, standards are supposed to go on cell phones with m moderate resources in both respects. PhD C: Did anybody, uh, do anything with the models as a {disfmarker} an experiment? Or Professor D: Uh, they didn't report it, if they did. PhD C: N nobody reported it? Professor D: Yeah. I think everybody was focused elsewhere. Um, now, one of the things that's nice about what we did is, we do have a {disfmarker} a, uh {disfmarker} a filtering, which leads to a {disfmarker} a, uh {disfmarker} a reduction in the bandwidth in the modulation spectrum, which allows us to downsample. So, uh, as a result of that we have a reduced, um, transmission rate for the bits. PhD C: Mm - hmm. Professor D: That was misreported the first time out. It {disfmarker} it said the same amount because for convenience sake in the particular way that this is being tested, uh, they were repeating the packets. So it was {disfmarker} they were s they {disfmarker} they had twenty - four hundred bits per second, but they were literally creating forty - eight hundred bits per second, {vocalsound} um, even though y it was just repeated. PhD C: Oh. Mm - hmm. Right. Professor D: So, uh, in practice PhD C: So you could've had a repeat count in there or something. Professor D: Well, n I mean, this was just a ph phoney thing just to {disfmarker} to fit into the {disfmarker} the software that was testing the errors {disfmarker} channel errors and so on. PhD C: Oh. Oh. Professor D: So {disfmarker} so in reality, if you put this {disfmarker} this system in into, uh, the field, it would be twenty - four hundred bits per second, not forty - eight hundred. So, um, so that's a nice feature of what {disfmarker} what we did. Um, but, um, well, we still have to see how it all comes out. PhD C: Hmm. Professor D: Um, and then there's the whole standards process, which is another thing altogether. PhD C: When is the development set {disfmarker} I mean, the, uh, uh, test set results due? Like the day before you leave or something? Professor D: Uh, probably the day after they leave, but we'll have to {disfmarker} {vocalsound} we'll have to stop it the day before {comment} we leave. PhD A: Yeah, yeah. So PhD C: Huh. Professor D: I think tha I think the {disfmarker} the meeting is on the thirteenth or something. PhD A: Yeah, this Tuesday, yeah. Professor D: And, uh, they, uh Right. And the {disfmarker} the, uh, results are due like the day before the meeting or something. So PhD A: Yeah, probably, well Professor D: I th I think {disfmarker} I I think they are, PhD A: Yeah, well Professor D: yeah. So {pause} {vocalsound} um, since we have a bit farther to travel than {vocalsound} some of the others, {vocalsound} uh, we'll have to get done a little quicker. But, um, I mean, it's just tracing down these bugs. I mean, just exactly this sort of thing of, you know, why {disfmarker} why these features seem to be behaving differently, uh, in California than in Oregon. PhD C: Hmm. Professor D: Might have something to do with electricity shortage. Uh, we didn't {disfmarker} we didn't have enough electrons here and Uh, but, um Uh, I think, you know, the main reason for having {disfmarker} I mean, it only takes w to run the {disfmarker} the two test sets in {disfmarker} just in computer time is just a day or so, right? PhD A: Yeah, Professor D: So PhD A: it's very short interval. Professor D: yeah. So, I think the who the whole reason for having as long as we have, which was {pause} like a week and a half, is {disfmarker} is because of bugs like that. So Huh So, we're gonna end up with these same kind of sheets that have the {pause} the percentages and so on just for the {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah, so there are two more columns in the sheets, Professor D: Oh, I guess it's the same sheets, PhD A: two. Yeah, it's the same sheets, Professor D: yeah, yeah {disfmarker} PhD A: yeah. Professor D: just with the missing columns filled in. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Yeah. Well, that'll be good. So, I'll dis I'll disregard these numbers. That's {disfmarker} that's {disfmarker} that's good. PhD A: So, Hynek will try to push for trying to combine, uh, different things? Or Hmm? Professor D: Uh, well that's {pause} um yeah I mean, I think the question is" Is there {disfmarker} is there some advantage?" I mean, you could just take the best system and say that's the standard. But the thing is that if different systems are getting at good things, um, a again within the constraint of the resources, if there's something simple that you can do Now for instance, uh, it's, I think, very reasonable to have a standard for the terminal's side and then for the server's side say," Here's a number of things that could be done." So, um, everything that we did could probably just be added on to what Alcatel did, and i it'd probably work pretty well with them, too. So, um, uh, that's one {disfmarker} one aspect of it. And then on the terminal's side, I don't know how much, um, memory and {disfmarker} and CPU it takes, but it seems like the filtering {pause} Uh, I mean, the VAD stuff they both had, right? And, um, so {disfmarker} and they both had some kind of on - line normalization, right? PhD A: Uh, yeah. Professor D: Of sorts, yeah? So {disfmarker} so, it seems like the main different there is the {disfmarker} is the, uh, filtering. And the filtering {disfmarker} I think if you can {disfmarker} shouldn't take a lot of memory to do that Uh, and I also wouldn't think the CPU, uh, would be much either for that part. So, if you can {disfmarker} if you can add those in {pause} um {pause} then, uh, you can cut the data rate in half. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: So it seems like the right thing to do is to {disfmarker} on the {disfmarker} on the terminal's side, take what they did, if it {disfmarker} if it does seem to generalize well to German and Danish, uh, take what they did add in a filter, and add in some stuff on the server's side and {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} and that's probably a reasonable standard. Um {pause} Uh PhD A: They are working on this already? Because {disfmarker} yeah, Su - Sunil told me that he was trying already to put some kind of, uh, filtering in the {vocalsound} {pause} France Telecom. Professor D: Yeah, so that's {disfmarker} that's {disfmarker} that's what That would be ideal {disfmarker} would be is that they could, you know, they could actually show that, in fact, a combination of some sort, {vocalsound} uh, would work even better than what {disfmarker} what any of the systems had. And, um, then it would {disfmarker} it would, uh {pause} be something to {disfmarker} to discuss in the meeting. But, uh, not clear what will go on. Um, I mean, on the one hand, um, sometimes people are just anxious to get a standard out there. I mean, you can always have another standard after that, but {vocalsound} this process has gone on for a while on {disfmarker} already and {disfmarker} and people might just wanna pick something and say," OK, this is it." And then, that's a standard. Uh, standards are always optional. It's just that, uh, if you disobey them, then you risk not being able to sell your product, or {pause} {vocalsound} Uh {pause} um And people often work on new standards while an old standard is in place and so on. So it's not final even if they declared a standard. The other hand, they might just say they just don't know enough yet to {disfmarker} to declare a standard. So you {disfmarker} you {disfmarker} you will be {disfmarker} you will become experts on this and know more {disfmarker} far more than me about the tha this particular standards process once you {disfmarker} you go to this meeting. So, be interested in hearing. So, uh, I'd be, uh, interested in hearing, uh, your thoughts now I mean you're almost done. I mean, you're done in the sense that, um, you may be able to get some new features from Sunil, and we'll re - run it. Uh, but other than that, you're {disfmarker} you're basically done, right? So, uh, I'm interested in hearing {disfmarker} hearing your thoughts about {pause} where you think we should go from this. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: I mean, we tried a lot of things in a hurry, and, uh, if we can back off from this now and sort of take our time with something, and not have doing things quickly be quite so much the constraint, what {disfmarker} what you think would be the best thing to do. PhD A: Uh, well Hmm Well, first, uh, to really have a look at {disfmarker} at the speech {pause} {vocalsound} from these databases because, well, we tried several thing, but we did not really look {vocalsound} at what what's happening, and {vocalsound} where is the noise, and Professor D: OK. PhD A: Eh Professor D: It's a novel idea. Look at the data. OK. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Or more generally, I guess, what {disfmarker} what is causing the degradation. PhD A: Yeah, yeah. Actually, there is one thing that {disfmarker} well {pause} Um, generally we {disfmarker} we think that {vocalsound} most of the errors are within phoneme classes, and so I think it could be interesting to {disfmarker} to see if it {disfmarker} I don't think it's still true when we add noise, and {vocalsound} so we have {disfmarker} I {disfmarker} I guess the confusion ma the confusion matrices are very different when {disfmarker} when we have noise, and when it's clean speech. And probably, there is much more {pause} between classes errors for noisy speech. Professor D: Mm - hmm. PhD A: And {vocalsound} so, um Yeah, so perhaps we could have a {disfmarker} a large gain, eh, just by looking at improving the, uh, recognition, not of phonemes, but of phoneme classes, simply. Professor D: Mm - hmm. PhD A: And {vocalsound} which is a s a s a simpler problem, perhaps, but {disfmarker} which is perhaps important for noisy speech. Professor D: The other thing that strikes me, just looking at these numbers is, just taking the best cases, I mean, some of these, of course, even with all of our {disfmarker} our wonderful processing, still are horrible kinds of numbers. But just take the best case, the well - matched {pause} uh, German case after {disfmarker} er well - matched Danish after we {disfmarker} PhD A: Mm - hmm. Professor D: the kind of numbers we're getting are about eight or nine {pause} uh {pause} p percent {pause} error {pause} per digit. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Yeah. Professor D: This is obviously not usable, PhD A: No. Professor D: right? PhD A: Sure. Professor D: I mean, if you have ten digits for a phone number {comment} I mean, every now and then you'll get it right. I mean, it's {disfmarker} it's, uh, {vocalsound} um So, I mean, the other thing is that, uh {disfmarker} And {disfmarker} and {disfmarker} a and {disfmarker} and also, um {pause} part of what's nice about this is that this is, uh, {vocalsound} um {pause} a realistic {disfmarker} almost realistic database. I mean, it's still not people who are really trying to accomplish something, but {disfmarker} but, uh, within the artificial setup, it isn't noise artificially added, you know, simulated, uh, additive noise. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Professor D: It's real noise condition. And, um, {vocalsound} the {disfmarker} the training {disfmarker} the training, I guess, is always done on the close talking PhD A: No, actually {disfmarker} actually the well - matched condition {pause} is {pause} still quite di still quite difficult. Professor D: No? PhD A: I mean, it's {disfmarker} they have all these data from the close mike and from the distant mike, {vocalsound} from different driving condition, open window, closed window, Professor D: Yeah. PhD A: and they take all of this and they take seventy percent, I think, for training and thirty percent for testing. PhD E: Mm - hmm. PhD A: So, training is done {vocalsound} on different conditions and different microphones, and testing also is done {pause} on different microphone and conditions. So, probably if we only take the close microphones, {vocalsound} I guess the results should be much much better than this. Professor D: I see. PhD A: Mmm. Professor D: Oh, OK, PhD A: Uh Professor D: that explains it partially. Wha - what about i in {disfmarker} so the {disfmarker} the {disfmarker} PhD A: Yeah, so {disfmarker} there is this, the mismatched is, um {pause} the same kind of thing, Professor D: go ahead. PhD A: but {pause} the driving conditions, I mean the speed and the kind of road, is different for training and testing, is that right? PhD E: Yeah. PhD A: And the last condition is close microphone for training and distant for testing. Yeah. Professor D: Uh, OK, PhD A: So {disfmarker} {vocalsound} s so {disfmarker} Professor D: so I see. So, yeah, so the high {disfmarker} so the {disfmarker} right {disfmarker} so the highly mismatched {vocalsound} case {pause} is in some sense a good model for what we've been, you know, typically talking about when we talk about additive noise in {disfmarker} And so {disfmarker} and i i k it does correspond to a realistic situation in the sense that, {vocalsound} um, people might really be trying to, uh, call out telephone numbers or some or something like that, in {disfmarker} in their cars PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: and they're trying to connect to something. PhD A: Mmm. Professor D: Um PhD A: Actually, yeah, it's very close to clean speech training because, well, because the close microphone {vocalsound} and noisy speech testing, Professor D: Yeah. Yeah. PhD A: yeah. Mmm. Professor D: Yeah. And the well - matched condition {pause} is what you might imagine that you might be able to approach, if you know that this is the application. You're gonna record a bunch on people in cars and so forth, and do these training. And then, uh, when y you sell it to somebody, they will be a different person with a different car, and so on. So it's {disfmarker} this is a an optim somewhat optimistic view on it, uh, so, you know, the real thing is somewhere in between the two. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Uh, uh, but PhD A: But the {disfmarker} I mean, the {pause} th th Professor D: Even the optimistic one is PhD A: it doesn't work. Professor D: Yeah, PhD A: It {disfmarker} Professor D: right. Right, it doesn't work. So, in a way, that's, you know, that's sort of the dominant thing is that even, say on the development set stuff that we saw, the, uh, the numbers that, uh, that Alcatel was getting when choosing out the best single numbers, {vocalsound} it was just {disfmarker} you know, it wasn't good enough for {disfmarker} for {pause} a {disfmarker} a {disfmarker} for a real system. PhD A: Mmm. Mm - hmm. Professor D: You {disfmarker} you {disfmarker} you, {vocalsound} um So, uh, we still have stuff to do. PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: Uh, and, uh I don't know So, looking at the data, where, you know {disfmarker} what's the {disfmarker} what's {disfmarker} what's th what's characteristic i e yeah, I think that's {disfmarker} that's a good thing. Does a any you have any thoughts about what else {vocalsound} y you're thinking that you didn't get to that you would like to do if you had more time? Uh PhD E: Oh, f a lot of thing. Because we trying a lot of s {pause} thing, and we doesn't work, {vocalsound} we remove these. Maybe {vocalsound} we trying again with the articulatory feature. I don't know exactly because we tried {disfmarker} we {disfmarker} some {disfmarker} one experiment that doesn't work. Um, forgot it, something {pause} I don't know exactly Professor D: Mm - hmm. PhD E: because, tsk {comment} {vocalsound} maybe do better some step the general, {vocalsound} eh, diagram. Professor D: Mm - hmm. PhD E: I don't know exactly s to think what we can improve. Professor D: Yeah, cuz a lot of time it's true, there were a lot of times when we've tried something and it didn't work right away, even though we had an intuition that there should be something there. And so then we would just stop it. Um And, uh, one of the things {disfmarker} I don't remember the details on, but I remember at some point, when you were working with a second stream, and you tried a low - pass filtering to cepstrum, in some case you got {disfmarker} PhD E: MSG Yeah. Professor D: Well, but it was {comment} an MSG - like thing, but it wasn't MSG, right? Uh, you {disfmarker} y I think in some case you got some little improvement, but it was, you know, sort of a small improvement, and it was a {disfmarker} a big added complication, so you dropped it. But, um, that was just sort of one try, right? You just took one filter, threw it there, PhD A: Yeah, Professor D: right? And it seems to me that, um, if that is an important idea, which, you know, might be, that one could work at it for a while, as you're saying. PhD A: Hmm. Professor D: And, uh Uh, and you had, you know, you had the multi - band things also, and, you know, there was issue of that. PhD A: Yeah, Professor D: Um, Barry's going to be, uh, continuing working on multi - band things as well. PhD E: Mm - hmm. Professor D: We were just talking about, um, {vocalsound} some, uh, some work that we're interested in. Kind of inspired by the stuff by Larry Saul with the, uh {pause} uh, learning articulatory feature in {disfmarker} I think, in the case of his paper {disfmarker} with sonorance based on, uh, multi - band information where you have a {disfmarker} a combination of gradient learning an and, uh, EM. PhD A: Mm - hmm. Professor D: Um, and {pause} {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Um, so, I think that, you know, this is a, uh {disfmarker} this is a neat data set. Um, and then, uh, as we mentioned before, we also have the {disfmarker} the new, uh, digit set coming up from recordings in this room. So, there's a lot of things to work with. Um and, uh what I like about it, in a way, is that, uh, the results are still so terrible. Uh {pause} {vocalsound} Uh {pause} {vocalsound} I mean, they're much better than they were, you know. We're talking about thirty to sixty percent, uh, error rate reduction. That's {disfmarker} that's really great stuff to {disfmarker} to do that in relatively short time. But even after that it's still, you know, so poor that {disfmarker} that, uh, no one could really use it. So, um I think that's great that {disfmarker} because {disfmarker} and y also because again, it's not something {disfmarker} sometimes we've gotten terrible results by taking some data, and artificially, you know, convolving it with some room response, or something {disfmarker} we take a very {disfmarker} Uh, at one point, uh, Brian and I went downstairs into the {disfmarker} the basement where it was {disfmarker} it was in a hallway where it was very reverberant and we {disfmarker} we made some recordings there. And then we {vocalsound} {disfmarker} we, uh {disfmarker} uh, made a simulation of the {disfmarker} of the room acoustics there and {disfmarker} and applied it to other things, PhD A: Mm - hmm. Professor D: and uh But it was all pretty artificial, and {disfmarker} and, you know, how often would you really try to have your most crucial conversations in this very reverberant hallway? Um {pause} So, uh {pause} This is what's nice about the Aurora data and the data here, is that {disfmarker} is that it's sort of a realistic room situation {pause} uh, acoustics {disfmarker} acoustic situation, both terms in noise and reflections, and so on and n n And, uh, uh, with something that's still relatively realistic, it's still very very hard to do very well. So Yeah. PhD A: Yeah, so d well Actually, this is {disfmarker} tha that's why we {disfmarker} well, it's a different kind of data. We're not {disfmarker} we're not used to work with this kind of data. That's why we should have a loo more closer look at what's going on. Professor D: Yeah. PhD E: Mm - hmm. PhD A: Um Yeah. So this would be the first thing, and then, of course, try to {disfmarker} well, {vocalsound} kind of debug what was wrong, eh, when we do Aurora test on the MSG {pause} particularly, and on the multi - band. Professor D: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. PhD A: Uh Professor D: Yeah. Yeah. No, I {disfmarker} I think there's lots of {disfmarker} lots of good things to do with this. So Um So let's {disfmarker} I guess {pause} You were gonna say something else? Oh, OK. What do you think? PhD C: About Professor D: Anything PhD C: About other experiments? Uh, now, I'm interested in, um, uh {pause} looking at the experiments where you use, um {pause} uh, data from multiple languages to train the neural net. And I don't know how far, or if you guys even had a chance to try that, but {pause} that would be some it'd be interesting to me. PhD A: Yeah, but Professor D: S b PhD A: Again, it's the kind of {disfmarker} of thing that, uh, we were thin thinking {disfmarker} thinking that it would work, but it didn't work. And, eh, so there is kind of {disfmarker} of {pause} not a bug, but something wrong in what we are doing, perhaps. Professor D: Yeah. PhD C: Right. Right. PhD A: Uh, something wrong, perhaps in the {disfmarker} just in the {disfmarker} the fact that the labels are {disfmarker} PhD C: Right. PhD A: well PhD C: Mm - hmm. PhD A: What worked best is the hand - labeled data. PhD C: Mm - hmm. PhD A: Um Uh, so, yeah. I don't know if we can get some hand - labeled data from other languages. PhD C: Yeah. PhD A: It's not so easy to find. PhD C: Right. PhD A: But {pause} that would be something interesting t to {disfmarker} to see. PhD C: Yeah, yeah. Professor D: Yeah. Also, uh, {vocalsound} I mean, there was just the whole notion of having multiple nets that were trained on different data. So one form of different data was {disfmarker} is from different languages, but the other Well, i in fact, uh, m in those experiments it wasn't so much combining multiple nets, it was a single net that had different PhD A: Yeah. Professor D: So, first thing is would it be better if they were multiple nets, for some reason? Second thing is, never mind the different languages, just having acoustic conditions rather than training them all up in one, would it be helpful to have different ones? So, um That was a question that was kind of raised by Mike Shire's thesis, and on {disfmarker} in that case in terms of reverberation. Right? That {disfmarker} that sometimes it might be better to do that. But, um, {vocalsound} I don't think we know for sure. So, um Right. So, next week, we, uh, won't meet because you'll be in Europe. Whe - when are you two getting back? PhD E: Um, I'm PhD A: You on Friday or S on Saturday or {pause}? PhD E: Sunday PhD A: S oh yeah, Sunday, yeah. PhD E: because it's {disfmarker} it's less expensive, the price {disfmarker} the price the ticket. PhD C: Professor D: Yeah, that's right. You've gotta S have a Saturday overnight, right? PhD A: I'll be back on Tuesday. Professor D: Tuesday. PhD C: Where {disfmarker} where's the meeting? Professor D: Uh, Amsterdam, I think, yeah? PhD A: Yeah, Amsterdam. PhD C: Uh - huh. Professor D: Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Yep. Um {pause} So, we'll skip next week, and we'll meet two weeks from now. And, uh, I guess the main topic will be, uh, you telling us what happened. PhD A: Yeah. PhD E: Yeah. Professor D: Uh, so Yeah, well, if we don't have an anything else to discuss, we should, uh, turn off the machine and then say the real nasty things. PhD C: Should we do digits first? PhD A: Yeah. Grad B: Oh, yeah, digits. Professor D: Oh yeah, digits! Yeah. Good point. Yeah, good thinking. Why don't you go ahead. PhD C: OK. OK.

The project was finally coming to a conclusion and the team was getting ready to share their results. They achieved an error rate reduction for the task, but the error rate in itself was still significant. The team also had to think about how they could make their model efficient for it to be deployed as they continue with future research. They discussed some new directions and were reminded that while the initial phase was over, much work lied ahead of them.

tr-sq-1208

tr-sq-1208_0

Summarize the discussion about the economic update and systemic racism. The Chair (Hon. Anthony Rota (NipissingTimiskaming, Lib.) ): I call this meeting to order. Welcome to meeting number 22 of the House of Commons Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic. A reminder to all members that in order to avoid issues with sound, members participating in person should not also be connected to the video conference. For those joining via video conference, I would like to remind you that, when speaking, you should be on the same channel as the language you are speaking. As usual, please direct your remarks through the chair. I understand we don't have any ministerial announcements today, so we'll proceed to presenting petitions. I would like to remind members that any petition presented during a meeting of the special committee must have already been certified by the clerk of petitions. For members participating in person, we ask that they please come and drop the signed certificate off at the table once the petition is presented. The first petition will be presented by Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May (SaanichGulf Islands, GP): Mr. Chair, it's an honour to rise in meeting number 22 of the COVID-19 committee, otherwise known as something like the House of Commons. I'm here to present two petitions containing hundreds of signatures on the issue of the treatment of Falun Gong practitioners by the People's Republic of China, particularly the practice that's alleged of involuntary organ harvesting. The petitioners ask the Government of Canada to condemn this practice and to publicly call for an end to the persecution of Falun Gong in the People's Republic of China. The second petition is from residents throughout SaanichGulf Islands concerned about what was, at the time this petition was submitted, a future problem. It remains an issue, and I present it on behalf of petitioners who wish the Government of Canada not to put public funds into purchasing or maintaining the Trans Mountain pipeline or towards any expansion of the pipeline. The Chair: Next we'll go to Ms. Kwan. Ms. Jenny Kwan (Vancouver East, NDP): Mr. Chair, I rise to table two petitions. The first petition deals with the COVID-19 situation. The petitioners note the pandemic is having a devastating impact on many Canadians nationwide, especially those who have low to modest income, small business gig workers, freelancers, artists, film industry workers, non-salaried workers and individuals on fixed incomes such as seniors and those on disability. It further notes that rent, mortgage and utility payments are due at the end of each month, putting countless Canadians at risk of losing their housing. It is paramount there be safe self-isolation opportunities for all individuals in this country. To that end, the petitioners are calling for the government to immediately enact a nationwide rent freeze, eviction freeze, mortgage freeze and utility freeze, enforce mortgage deferrals for homeowners without penalty or interest charges from financial institutions and provide direct assistance in the form of a monthly, universal, direct payment of $2,000 per month for all, with an additional $250 per child immediately. The second petition deals with the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion. These petitioners join the hundreds of thousands of people who are opposed to the expansion. Trans Mountain, in building the pipeline, brings massive environmental and economic risk with no substantial benefit to British Columbia or to local residents. Approximately 40,000 barrels of oil have already leaked from existing Kinder Morgan pipelines, including two major spills in Burnaby since 2007. I might note, Mr. Chair, that just this past weekend there was yet another spill to the tune of 1,195 barrels here in British Columbia. There is no known scientific technology to clean up the bitumen when there is a spill, and the number of tankers would go from eight to 34 per month into the Burrard Inlet. It puts at risk many residential neighbourhoods and the traditional territories of at least 15 first nations. The Chair: May I interrupt for a moment, Ms. Kwan. I want to remind all members in the House that when presenting a petition, the idea is to be as concise as possible. Ms. Kwan, I'll let you wrap up, please. Ms. Jenny Kwan: Thank you, Mr. Chair. The petitioners are calling for the government to immediately act to prevent this new oil pipeline from proceeding through British Columbia. The Chair: Thank you. We'll now go to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood ParkFort Saskatchewan, CPC): Mr. Chair, I have four petitions to present today. The first petition reflects the outrage of my constituents at the ever-expanding order in council from the government banning more and more firearms. In particular, the petitioners highlight the failure of the government to act on the issue of illegal guns. The petitioners note that virtually all violent crimes committed in Canada, including the recent shooting in Nova Scotia, involve illegal firearms in the hands of those who are already not permitted to possess them. The petition has two asks. First of all, it asks that we reverse the order in council banning certain firearms, but also that we propose measures that will effectively address the illegal use of firearms by criminals while respecting the rights of law-abiding citizens. It also asks that we ensure that substantial changes to firearms laws in future actually be made by Parliament, not by the government acting in an unaccountable manner. The second petition deals with Bill C-8, which is the government's bill around conversion therapy. The petitioners support efforts to ban conversion therapy. They express concern about problems in the wording of the definition used in the legislation. They're asking the government to support amendments to fix the definition to address the issue of conversion therapy and ensure that the definition is correct and doesn't criminalize certain forms of counselling that individuals may voluntarily enter into. The third petition is regarding Bill S-204, a bill in the Senate that seeks to make it a criminal offence for a person to go abroad to receive an organ without consent, dealing especially with the horrific practice of forced organ harvesting and trafficking in China. The petitioners are supportive of Bill S-204 and want to see it move forward. The final petition is with respect to Bill C-7. There's been much discussion in this House about the need to do better in terms of long-term care. Rather than working to do better in long-term care, unfortunately we've seen the government removing vital safeguards in the area of euthanasia. I think our focus should be on assisting life rather than removing safeguards that are required in association with the euthanasia regime. The petitioners are particularly concerned about the government's plan to remove a 10-day reflection period that normally takes place. That period can already be waived under certain circumstances, but Bill C-7 proposes to remove it entirely as well as reduce the number of witnesses involved. The petitioners are quite concerned about what's going on in Bill C-7 and call for it to be stopped or amended. The Chair: Presenting petitions. We'll proceed to statements by members. We'll start off with Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly (NanaimoLadysmith, GP): Mr. Chair, we are in the midst of a global pandemic and an economic shock. Recent events have ripped open the wound of systemic racism in our country. Racialized and marginalized communities have been disproportionally affected by the pandemic. Thousands of seniors in long-term care facilities have died. It is clear that we need system change. In the past, governments have bailed out banks and corporations because they were too big to fail. It is time to bail out humanity and the planet. No one will be immune from the threat of climate change and mass extinction. Both are the result of the exploitation of the natural world in the name of the economy. Humans created the economy. We can choose to change it. We must protect our environment or perish. COVID-19 has demonstrated that together we can take courageous action for the common good. We need to do the same for the climate crisis, because humanity and our planet are too big to fail. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Spengemann. Mr. Sven Spengemann (MississaugaLakeshore, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, today marks World Elder Abuse Awareness Day. Underestimated and under-reported, elder abuse exists across the world. At risk of neglect and assault, many of the most vulnerable older persons reside in our long-term care facilities. They are the seniors who have built our country and shaped our communities, who have shown us resilience, courage and selflessness, who have made us stronger, and whose work and teachings continue to inspire us. They are parents and grandparents, brothers and sisters, friends and mentors. We have not been there for them in the same way they've been there for us throughout their lives. The Canadian Forces report, alongside the climbing disproportionate death toll in our long-term care facilities, has reconfirmed the ugly, indefensible reality of elder abuse and neglect in Canada. In my community, we mourn the deaths of 68 seniors from one long-term care facility alone, Camilla Care. We must make the same unwavering commitment to older persons as they have shown to us. We must protect and uphold their human rights. We must do better. The Chair: Before proceeding, I just want to bring up to the members in the background that we want to keep it as simple and as parliamentary as possible in keeping it neutral. We'll now move to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett (LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, CPC): During these trying times, the residents of LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes have risen to the challenge. They've made sacrifices and gone above and beyond to make the lives of their neighbours better and to keep our communities safe. It would be impossible to list everyone who has emerged as a community hero, but I'd like to highlight a few, like Lily, an eight-year-old from Elgin who raised funds for her local food bank by building and selling squirrel picnic tables, and Louise Boardman from Spencerville who's making masks for long-term care facilities and selling others in support of the Breast Cancer Action centre. The Knights of Columbus in Prescott raised funds and are distributing some $27,000 in support of charitable groups throughout the region. The Knights of Columbus in Kemptville are working overtime operating the local food bank. Who can forget our top-notch health care workers like Hannah and Mary at the Brockville COVID-19 testing centre? It is the people of LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes that make it so great. To everyone working to make a difference and to all of our essential workers, thank you. The Chair: Next is Mr. Anandasangaree. Mr. Gary Anandasangaree (ScarboroughRouge Park, Lib.): Mr. Chair, the Indian Act enshrined racism into Canadian law in 1876, and, through residential schools, the child welfare system, our legal system and our police, we criminalized and tore apart indigenous peoples. The deaths of Chantel Moore and Rodney Levi and the assault on Chief Allan Adam are recent examples of systemic racism within the RCMP. Sadly, the RCMP leadership has failed to acknowledge this reality and its root causes. These same systems negatively impact black Canadians. Anti-black racism has resulted in more young black men being jailed, children being streamed or excluded from schools and negative police interaction due to profiling. Black lives matter. No single Canadian is responsible for the prevalence of systemic racism; we all are. Collectively we build institutions that discriminate based on race. It is now time to reimagine and rework our institutions, starting with our police, to ensure that all Canadians can achieve their truest potential. The Chair: Ms. Larouche, you have the floor. Ms. Andranne Larouche (Shefford, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chair. June15 is World Elder Abuse Awareness Day. I want to remind members of the link between abuse and the problems of economic dependency among seniors. Improving their purchasing power means reducing the risk of them falling victim to abusive people. That's why the increase in the old age security benefit and the guaranteed income supplement must be extended beyond the pandemic. In three weeks, our seniors will receive their first cheque, when they should be receiving their second. A date must also be announced for the new horizons for seniors program, which helps several groups develop projects to break the isolation of seniors. In closing, I would like to mention the organization Justice alternative et mdiation that during the pandemic, along with other organizations in Shefford, has set up the project Une histoire pour la tienne, which also serves to mark this day. It's a virtual meeting between young people and seniors, allowing them to exchange some inspiring life experiences. Since age prejudice is very much present, I applaud this project, which aims to make us understand each other better and judge each other less. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Sangha. Mr. Ramesh Sangha (Brampton Centre, Lib.): Mr. Chair, in the time of this terrible crisis affecting all Canadians, when we are all thinking about how best to deal with it, let's all think about the people around us. Let's show our representation not only to those in the sector of sanctioned workers, but also to all those Canadians who day by day stand up and make a difference. Every day I am proud of the reactions of Canadians to this crisis. I want to acknowledge and celebrate all the contributions made by the people of Brampton Centre, all religious institutions, civil society and community organizations like Knights Table in my riding. We are all standing together to fight COVID-19. Let's continue working hard with that same spirit to get positive results out. Thank you very much. The Chair: I will proceed to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff (BruceGreyOwen Sound, CPC): Mr. Chair, whether graduating from elementary school, high school, Georgian College or graduating from colleges or universities across the country, I am proud of the accomplishments of all the graduates across BruceGreyOwen Sound. I would also like to congratulate and thank all the teachers and parents who have adapted to teaching online or from home and who have supported these graduates over the course of their academic careers. I'd like to extend special congratulations to Cameron Lovell, who just graduated from grade eight, as well as to Neebeesh and Neebin Elliott, originally from the Nawash unceded first nation on the Bruce Peninsula, who will be headed to Michigan State University, and to Jared Lumley from Owen Sound, who just graduated from my alma mater, the Royal Military College of Canada. The college motto of Truth, Duty, Valour is something all Canadians should aspire to live by. I wish all the best to these graduates on their next adventures. I and Canada cannot wait to see how their dreams and goals impact and change the world. I congratulate BruceGreyOwen Sound graduates. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Cormier. Mr. Serge Cormier (AcadieBathurst, Lib.): Today I pay tribute to RichardLosier, an entrepreneur, visionary and builder who died on June9,2020, surrounded by his family. Mr. Losier is a giant in the Acadian Peninsula business community. In1968, he co-founded St. Isidore Asphalte, a company that now has more than 200employees. He also launched many other businesses over the years. He was unifying and generous, a philanthropist who cared about young people and never missed an opportunity to improve their lives. I met Mr. Losier when I was 14years old, and I can say that he has been a positive influence in my life. Every time I met him, he gave me a lot of advice and encouragement, which I've never forgotten. Mr. Losier's legacy to his community is invaluable. His commitment remains an example for all of us to follow. Mr. Losier now joins his wife, Nolla. I offer my most sincere condolences to his children, Richard Jr. , Ronald, Nathalie, Caroline and Stphane, and to his family and friends. Rest in peace, Mr. Losier. You will be greatly missed. Thank you for everything you've done for our region. The Chair: We will now go to Ms. Dabrusin. Ms. Julie Dabrusin (TorontoDanforth, Lib.): Hello from my community in east end Toronto. People talk about how a city the size of Toronto can be cold, but that's far from the truth in my community. I want to give a shout-out to our teachers, like Mr. Wong of Earl Grey Senior Public School, who delivered home-baked cookies and handwritten notes to all of his students, or Monsieur Steve, who's offering online French classes, or the teachers of Riverdale Collegiate, who paraded through our streets to celebrate our graduates. Our local Michael Garron Hospital put out a call for community members to sew masks and received over 60,000 masks, including those made by Lisa Tancre of Chartwell Avondale Retirement Residence. Michelle Beaton organized a front window scavenger hunt to entertain children and their families. Restaurants, even while facing adversity, have been generously donating food, like the members of the Leslieville BIA or Mezes. There are so many more stories of generosity that I could share, but I'm out of time. I thank everyone who has stepped up. We all appreciate all of their hard work. The Chair: We will now go to Ms. Sahota. Ms. Jag Sahota (Calgary Skyview, CPC): Mr. Chair, on Saturday night, Calgarians, particularly those in the northeast, in my riding of Calgary Skyview, witnessed a devastating storm, the likes of which I have not seen in my lifetime. Homes, vehicles, community buildings and structures suffered significant damage due to large hail, floods and high winds. People acted quickly to seek shelter. I'm so grateful that there have been no reports of personal injury or loss of life. I went around the community yesterday to survey the damage. It is extensive. My heart aches for those who have been impacted by the storm in an already incredibly difficult time, but we are resilient. We know that in the coming weeks there will be a lot of cleanup required, both to personal property and in the community. I know my constituents, and we will help one another get through this together. I will work hard to do everything I can to help rebuild this community. The Chair: Mr. Serr, you have the floor. Mr. Marc Serr (Nickel Belt, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to express my sincere gratitude to the people of West Nippissing who organized Pride activities to celebrate the LGBTQ community in June. This week, we are also celebrating National Public Service Week. I thank the public servants for their dedication to the Nickel Belt community and the Valley East and Rayside-Balfour areas. The Chair: Next is Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya (MarkhamUnionville, CPC): Mr. Chair, when COVID-19 began spreading across Ontario, Markham, like many other communities, was unprepared. Our front-line health care workers did not have enough personal protective equipment to do their jobs safely. When Markham residents heard about these shortages, my office was flooded with calls from people who had PPE and wanted to donate. Since then my office has been able to deliver tens of thousands of PPE supplies to front-line health care workers and five masks to each family in need. This pandemic has shown that no matter what the challenge is, the Markham community will overcome it. Today, I would like to thank the front-line health care workers who are doing incredible work. I would also like to thank all those who have helped in Markham's hour of need. The Chair: I understand we had a bit of a glitch there. I'm sorry. With the pause, we thought that was the end of it. Mr. Serr, I would ask you to continue. I understand you started to switch languages. Please continue. You have 30seconds. Mr. Marc Serr: Thank you. I'm switching to English now. Thank you to our nurses, doctors, pharmacists, cashiers, janitors. Thank you to various retail workers and first responders dealing with COVID-19. You keep our communities safe and healthy, and you feed us. Your dedication and sacrifice are greatly appreciated. As we start to see local businesses reopen, it is important for all of us to remember to follow best practices outlined by local public health. Our front-line workers deserve our respect. It is important for all of us to respect social distancing, to protect all workers and their families. Together we can remain strong and united as we continue to face this challenge together. The Chair: Again, my apologies for skipping over there, but now we'll to to Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod (KamloopsThompsonCariboo, CPC): Mr. Chair, in commemoration of Italian Heritage Month, I would like to pay tribute to the Colombo Lodge and Italian Cultural Centre in Kamloops, British Columbia. The Colombo Lodge was founded in 1914 and is an integral part of our community. Recently they began Colombo Cares take-home dinners with proceeds distributed to different non-profit organizations throughout the region. Last month they very generously gave away hundreds of dinners to Royal Inland Hospital staff and paramedics for their tireless work throughout the pandemic. In their own words they say, Colombo Lodge is very proud of the Italians that have made Kamloops their home. Community members of Italian ancestrypast and presenthave helped and continue to help Kamloops prosper as a giving, welcoming and inclusive community. Personally, I want to thank all members for their friendship and generosity over the years. Our community is forever grateful for their kindness. The Chair: We'll now proceed to Mr. Harris. Mr. Jack Harris (St. John's East, NDP): Mr. Chair, many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are facing a serious financial crisis. Most people with disabilities are waiting to be included in the Liberals'promised program. Fish plant workers will need support to avoid a disastrous year. Many small businesses don't qualify for programs. Municipalities need emergency help to meet the crisis. People are worried about what will happen when the CERB runs out in two weeks'time, and the coming tourism season looks very grim. The province itself is in serious financial crisis due to the pandemic and the decline in oil prices. The federal government must overhaul and enhance the fiscal stabilization program to help Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and other oil-producing provinces through this crisis. Both the province and the oil and gas industry players have committed to net zero emissions by 2050. This is a challenge and an opportunity to transition to a sustainable energy future, but it will require significant investment and support by government to keep the industry strong and make this a just transition for workers. Much has been done. Much more needs to be done. The Chair: Ms. Gaudreau, you have the floor. Ms. Marie-Hlne Gaudreau (LaurentidesLabelle, BQ): Mr. Chair, all 44elected municipal officials in the riding of LaurentidesLabelle and I have sent a letter to the government asking that cellular and high-speed Internet networks be made available to all. The crisis has accelerated the demonstration of the need for these networks in daily life. The territorial complexity of the Laurentians means that there are areas where the signal is weak, unstable or non-existent. There is an urgent and essential need to change the infrastructure of the current networks. Also, because of the lockdown, Internet failures are being felt, and they prevent distance learning, telemedicine and teleworking, among other things. How can our municipalities develop economically if they can't provide their community with adequate communication tools? We are therefore calling on the government to put the interests of its people first by investing massively right now in the construction of high-speed Internet and cellular infrastructure. The Chair: Mr. Waugh. Mr. Kevin Waugh (SaskatoonGrasswood, CPC): I rise today to pay tribute to Sir Winston Churchill, the former prime minister of Great Britain and one of the greatest leaders history has ever known. In what can only be called a lifetime of service, Churchill's contributions to the Commonwealth and to the world are without equal. During the Second World War he led the allied forces in Europe against the tyranny and fascism of Adolph Hitler and his Nazi regime. When our world was in its darkest hour, Churchill's leadership was a beacon of hope and freedom. I am reminded of something he once said, All the greatest things are simple, and many can be expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honour, duty, mercy, hope. Sir Winston Churchill himself embodied all of these great things and will forever be a symbol of freedom, democracy and hope. The Chair: Mr. Gerretsen. Mr. Mark Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands, Lib.): Mr. Chair, I would like to add my voice to the recognition and celebration of Pride Month, which is celebrated annually during June. Pride Month is important for Canadians because we can be proud of who we are and celebrate our diversity. This June is different from previous years as we cannot celebrate in person all together. However, I know the ongoing pandemic will not stop us from showing our love and support for the LGBTQ+ community. To celebrate Pride Month this year, my office distributed 3,000 pride maple leaf pins across the country; whoever asked received one. Although the majority was sent to constituents in my riding, over 500 pins were sent to the neighbouring ridings of LanarkFrontenacKingston, LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, and HastingsLennox and Addington. It warms my heart to see so many Canadians showing their support. Happy Pride, everyone. The Chair: We will now proceed to the questioning of ministers. Please note that we will suspend the proceedings twice to allow employees who provide support for the sitting to substitute for each other safely. Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell (Louis-Saint-Laurent, CPC): Mr. Chair, I am very pleased to take part in today's meeting of this parliamentary committee. Canada has been dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic for three months now. The situation now seems to be improving, although we must remain vigilant. Economically, business people and the entire Canadian economy depend on government decisions. My question is very simple: when will the economic update take place? Hon. Chrystia Freeland (Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): Mr. Chair, I thank the hon. member for his question. I agree with him that Canada and Canadians are doing an excellent and difficult job in the fight against coronavirus. As for the economy, our government is there for Canadians, for workers and for businesses, and it will continue to be. Mr. Grard Deltell: Canadians, business people and businesses want to know where the government is headed. When will the economic update take place? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, Canadians know that the government is there to support them. Eight The Chair: We return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Canadians and Quebeckers also know that the Government of Quebec will table its economic update this week. Why isn't the federal government doing the same? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I'm pleased to explain to hon. members and to Canadians what the government is doing for the economy The Chair: We return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, it is a real pleasure for me to explain to the minister and everybody in the House of Commons that today the Saskatchewan government will table its economic update. Why can't Ottawa do that? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I'm delighted to have the opportunity to share with Canadians what our government is doing to support workers, businesses and the economy. Eight million Canadians have received the CERB, essential support for Canadian workers and their families. The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, 11 days ago the Newfoundland government tabled its own economic update. We see governments acting correctly for their people, except for the Liberal government, which cannot table an economic update. When will the Liberal government table an economic update, which Canadians would like to see? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I am delighted to share with the member opposite and with Canadians what we are doing practically that has meaning for Canadians. Let me talk about what we are doing for Canadian businesses. Nearly 670,000 Canadian businesses have received support The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: In Canada, the Quebec government will table its economic update this week. The Saskatchewan government tabled its economic update today. The Newfoundland government has tabled its economic update. Everybody is working hard in Canada, and the business community would like to know where the Liberal government is going. The question is crystal clear. When will the Liberal government table an economic update? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, Canadian workers and Canadian businesses want to know that our government is here to support them. I have shared with this House our support for Canadian workers through the CERB. I've spoken about the CEBA, and let me point out that more than $26 billion of support has been given through that essential program. Let me talk about the wage subsidy. More than 2. 6 million The Chair: We'll return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, this is starting to get interesting; the minister is revealing some of these expenses. Could the minister tell us how much the government has spent in the last three months? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I will continue in French by explaining what our government is doing for Canadians and workers The Chair: Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, this is a little bit concerning for all Canadians, because this government cannot say when they will table the economic update, cannot identify how much money they have spent in the last three months and cannot say what is the deficit of Canada. Is somebody in this government running this country correctly? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, absolutely we are running this country, and we are supporting our economy. In fact, we appreciate that Canada currently is experiencing its greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression. That is why we have devoted nearly 11% of GDP to support Canadian workers and Canadian businesses. I want to assure Canadians The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Normandin. Ms. Normandin, you have the floor. Ms. Christine Normandin (Saint-Jean, BQ): Mr. Chair, there are times when Quebec and the provinces are not just two solitudes, but they get along and speak as one, such as when the time comes to tell the government to mind its own business. On reading section91 of the Constitution Act, 1982, which sets out the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal government, nowhere do I find that the federal government must meddle by attaching conditions to health transfers. It is Quebec and the provinces that hire the medical personnel, doctors, nurses and caretakers. It is Quebec and the provinces that are responsible for purchasing the necessary equipment. It is Quebec and the provinces that know what is happening on the ground and what their needs are. Will the government do the only thing within its authority, which is to take the cheque, sign it and put it in the mail? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I thank the hon. member for her question. We fully understand the importance of federal support for the provinces, especially in our national fight against the coronavirus. I agree with the hon. member that we must give financial support to the provinces, including Quebec absolutely. I would also like to point out the importance of the support of the Canadian Armed Forces, who are doing an important and excellent job in Quebec and Ontario today, right now. Ms. Christine Normandin: Mr. Chair, I am glad to see that there is recognition of the importance of transferring this money. My question is whether it can be transferred unconditionally; that's what I'm asking. There's a state of emergency. In the past, we have seen that it takes a long time to negotiate conditions with the federal government. We saw it in the case of the Quebec City tramway, and we are still seeing it now in the case of transfers for housing in Quebec, for which there is no agreement and, therefore, no transfer of money. Will the federal government send the money free of conditions? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the hon. member said in her first question that the only thing the federal government had to do on health care was to sign the cheques. I can't agree because, today, at this time, at the request of the Premier of Quebec, the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces are in Quebec today; they're there to save the lives of seniors The Chair: We now return to Ms. Normandin. Ms. Christine Normandin: It was indeed at Quebec's request. What I'm saying is that, at present, the provinces are unanimously asking that there be no conditions. It's urgent that the money be transferred. The federal government's job here is to sign the cheque and send it to the provinces. The government's job is also to make Parliament work. This is where there should be negotiations so that we can work, among other things, to send money to people living with disabilities, to make sure we fight CERB fraud and to make sure that court time limits are effective in the current crisis. Can the government focus on the issue in order to respect the provinces and transfer money for health care? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: I thank the hon. member for her question, Mr. Chair. I agree with the hon. member that the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces are in Quebec today at the request of the Province of Quebec. That said, I hope that the hon. member will agree with me that being there for Quebec's seniors, that saving the lives of Quebec's seniors, is much more than simply signing cheques. I am very proud of the work the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces are doing. I think we all should thank these people who are working for Canada, for Quebec, and who are doing an important and excellent job. Ms. Christine Normandin: Mr. Chair, I think the Deputy Prime Minister misunderstood me when I was talking about the importance of acting quickly. Negotiations between the government and the provinces take an awfully long time because the federal government decides to place conditions where there shouldn't be any. Right now, the only important thing is to transfer the money quickly so that it can be used in our hospitals and our long-term care facilities, where the need is desperate. Quebec and the provinces know exactly what their needs are. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I would like to point out the extent to which the federal government is there to support the provinces, including Quebec. We have increased funding to the provinces and territories by $500million to help them prepare for COVID-19 outbreaks. This funding is in addition to the $40billion that we already provide annually to the provinces and territories. That's a lot of money. It is strong endorsement The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh (Burnaby South, NDP): Mr. Chair, systemic racism is killing people. It's killing black people and it's killing indigenous people. Recently, Rodney Levi was another victim of systemic racism. He was killed in New Brunswick by the RCMP. To deal with systemic racism, we need systemic change. Will the Liberal government commit to systemic change so that not another life is ever taken again? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I thank the member opposite for the extremely important question, and I'll take this opportunity to acknowledge the work that he has done for many years fighting racism in Canada. Our government absolutely acknowledges that systemic racism exists in Canada. It exists in all of our institutions, including the police and the RCMP. I agree with the member opposite that now is the moment to fight this The Chair: Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, I thank the Deputy Prime Minister very much for the response, but there are some specific actions we need to take. There are movements. Black Lives Matter, as a movement, is calling for the defunding of police. What they're saying is we need to make better choices with how money is being spent. When someone is in need of a wellness check or a mental health check, money, financing and support should go to mental health workers and health care workers, not the police. Is the government prepared to fund and prioritize health care workers over the police? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the member quite rightly began his questions by speaking about systemic racism against indigenous people in Canada, and I would like to speak about that for a moment. I spoke to Perry Bellegarde this morning, because it is such a crucial issue. We can describe it as the original sin of our country. I absolutely agree that we need root and branch reform, including in how policing is done in Canada. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, will the Liberal government commit to a review of the use of force as outlined for the RCMP? Will the Liberals commit to that change? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister and the Minister of Public Safety had many conversations last week with the RCMP. We all accept that The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, will the government commit to ensuring that de-escalation receives priority? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Let me continue, Mr. Chair. Systemic racism exists in all of our federal institutions, including the RCMP. It's time to put an end to it. Let me just say The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, I'm not getting an answer. Will the Prime Minister or the Liberal government commit to something simple and ensure that at the federal level, racial profiling, street checks and carding are expressly prohibited? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, sadly, I can't agree that rooting out systemic racism is going to be simple, but I can agree that racial profiling is absolutely inappropriate. It is not something that we should The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Well, I'm going to try to get another commitment from the government, because they don't seem able to commit to something as clear as ending racial profiling. We know that millions of Canadians in a couple of weeks are going to be faced with the reality of their CERB ending. These families are worried about how they're going to put food on the table, because they can't return to a job. Will the Liberal government commit today so that those families will have some concrete support, yes or no? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, let me be clear, as I was in my previous answer, that our government clearly is opposed to racial profiling. This is a wrong practice and we're very clear about our position there. Now when it comes to the CERB, I absolutely share the concern of the member opposite. The Canadian economy is in its direst state since the Great Depression. We know that all the jobs have not yet come back. We know that Canadian workers, Canadian families, continue to need The Chair: We'll now pause for a short time to allow staff to change within the safety parameters for the COVID-19 virus, and as we resume, we will go to Ms. Harder. Ms. Rachael Harder (Lethbridge, CPC): Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister has mandated his ministers, and I quote, to govern in a positive, open and collaborative way. Ironically, as it stands, Parliament is currently closed for business. Opposition parties have little opportunity to hold the ruling party to account, private members'bills cannot be tabled and legislation cannot be debated. Can the Prime Minister, Mr. Trudeau himself, help us understand how all of this fits into his definition of so-called open government? The Honourable Pablo Rodriguez (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons): Well, Mr. Chair, we're here, right? We're here, and the opposition is asking questions. They have the equivalent of eight question periods instead of five to ask questions. They have more time than before, so I don't know why they're not happy about it. Ms. Rachael Harder: That's like when I'm asking for a full meal and your handing me a few jellybeans and saying, Why aren't you happy with that? Mr. Chair, here's the thing. It's like switching a light on and off when it's convenient for the Prime Minister and for the Liberal Party. That's what they want to do here. That's not Parliament. That's not democracy. When will Mr. Trudeau do the right thing, turn the lights on and get back to work for Canadians? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I'm really sorry to hear that my colleague's not working. I can assure you, Mr. Chair, on this side of the House, we're all actually working very hard and we're answering the questions from the opposition. Why? It's because it's extremely important. I sat there for seven years asking questions. I understand important Ms. Rachael Harder: The member opposite knows very well that he is misleading the Canadian public. This is not true Parliament. This is simply a special committee. Here's the thing. On the Liberal Party website, under the platform commitment, it says that Parliament works best when its members are free to do what they have been elected to do, and that is be the voice for their communities and hold the government to account. This is a Liberal document. Did the Prime Minister forget that strengthening Parliament was part of his 2019 platform commitment? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague for quoting our excellent platform. That was a very very good document. The thing is, I think we've reached a balance whereby MPs can come from different places, mostly around Ottawa, and ask questions; but also we can have colleagues from across the country asking questions. Why does my colleague think it is better to have only 35 MPs participating instead of 338? Ms. Rachael Harder: Does the Prime Minister value democracy, or does he still look up to China's basic dictatorship? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, we're answering all the questions from the opposition, not only from the people in this room, but we're answering The Chair: It's back to Ms. Harder now. Ms. Rachael Harder: I'll ask the question again. Does the Prime Minister still value the basic dictatorship of China over Canada's democracy? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I don't know where the colleague wants to go from here, Mr. Chair. I'd like to know from her why it is not important to her that her colleagues participate directly. Ms. Rachael Harder: Mr. Trudeau wrote to his ministers and said to them that they continue to raise the bar on openness, effectiveness and transparency. He went on to explain that This means. . . government that is open by default. We now have a parliament that is currently shut down. Mr. Trudeau has shut it down and has prevented us from being able to do to the good work that Canadians expect us to do. Is this Mr. Trudeau's idea of open by default? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, do they want to talk about shutting down Parliament? How about the time they prorogued Parliament twicenot only once, but twice? The Conservative government shut down Parliament twice. I was here. I was sitting on the other side of the aisle. It's quite the opposite now. We're taking all the questions. This place is open, and we're answering questions. The Chair: One moment, please. I haven't acknowledged you yet, Ms. Harder. We've stopped the time there. I want to remind honourable members that questions and answers are being given, and we want to hear both sides. Please keep the heckling down. Ms. Harder, please proceed. Ms. Rachael Harder: In 2014, the leader of the Liberal Party developed a policy resolution entitled Restoring Trust in Canada's Democracy. That's ironic, because right now, again, Parliament is currently shut down. We are prevented from being able to do the good work that we are expected to do. At the time, the Prime Minister said, Canadians want their Members of Parliament to be effective voices for their communities in Ottawa, and not merely mouthpieces in their communities for an all-too-powerful Prime Minister. Sadly, Mr. Trudeau has become the all-too-powerful prime minister that he once believed should not exist. Why did he change his mind? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, I'd like to know why my colleague wants to shut down the voices of her colleagues who could not speak and could not participate in this room. Mr. Chair, how would we vote on private members'bills, for example? As you know, it is not a government vote or a party vote; it's per row. You want to come back? Are you going to acceptMr. Chair, through youthat we have electronic voting, yes or no? The Chair: We'll go on to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, we know that the Minister of Foreign Affairs has champagne tastes and London flats, but it's his champagne mortgages that Canadians are concerned about. Specifically, why did the minister only disclose the complete extent of his personal debt to the Chinese government on June 4 of this year? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, as you know, since the minister entered politics, his two mortgages and other liabilities and assets have been fully disclosed to the Ethics Commissioner and placed on the online public registry. It's public, Mr. Chair. It's public. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Now it's public and it's terrible. When will the foreign affairs minister be here to answer these questions himself? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, it's always been public. We're in the middle of a pandemic here, trying to help Canadians, and the best they can do is ask questions about The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: When the minister owes over a million dollars to the Chinese government, people have a right to ask him questions. When will the Minister of Foreign Affairs show up? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: The minister shows up every day, Mr. Chair. He shows up and works for Canadians. Once again, those are public documents. Everything the minister did is public. I still don't know why they ask The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, he doesn't even have to come to the House. All he has to do is appear on the screen. Where is the minister? Why is he hiding? Why won't he answer questions about his personal debt to the Chinese government? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, if he goes online he's going to get the information. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, the minister is hiding. Let's ask some specific questions about their China policy. What is the impact on the decision-making? Three-quarters of Canadians don't want Huawei involved in our 5G network. Will the minister put the interests of Canadians ahead of the interests of his creditors and say no to Huawei? Hon. Navdeep Bains (Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry): Mr. Chair, when it comes to 5G deployment, we are right now currently undergoing a comprehensive review. We have been absolutely clear with allies and with Canadians that we never have and never will compromise Canadians'national interests. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, that is not an answer, and it is completely out of step with what our allies have already recognized. Reports are emerging of multiple deadly viruses exported from Winnipeg's microbiology laboratory to the Wuhan Institute of Virology right before scientists were expelled for policy breaches. In spite of that, scientific co-operation between Canadian institutions and the military-affiliated Wuhan Institute of Virology is continuing. Why hasn't the government put in place new guidelines to prevent the export of sensitive pathogens and information to China? Hon. Patty Hajdu (Minister of Health): Mr. Chair, he's right that in 2019 the National Microbiology Laboratory shared lab samples with the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The National Microbiology Laboratory routinely shares samples with other labs to help advance the international community's understanding of viruses and the research that is ongoing around those viruses. There are strict protocols in place for these transfers, and these samples were transported according to Canadian laws and regulations. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, I think Canadians would be concerned to hear that it's routine to transport viruses to Chinese military-affiliated labs. When Champagne was the parliamentary secretary for finance, the government decided to give hundreds of millions of dollars to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, bankrolling Chinese state-controlled development projects in Asia with weak standards in labour, human rights and environment. Will the minister put Canadian taxpayers ahead of his personal creditors and support a pullout from the Communist Party-controlled development bank? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Once again, Mr. Chair, my colleague is trying to connect the dots, and I don't know exactly where he is going from here, but everything is public. There's a thing called Google. He can go on it and check the information. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, the public can listen to this. I'm sure this exchange will also be available on Google, and the public can draw their own conclusions. We have failures on 5G, failures when it comes to the transport of deadly viruses and failures when it comes to giving over $400 million to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. It's clear that the Bank of China's investment in Minister Champagne is paying off. It's time for the minister to settle his debt with the Communist government and not settle it on the backs of Canadians. When will the minister be here in the House and answer questions about this mortgage? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: My colleague should be cautious with what he is saying in the House, Mr. Chair. This is serious stuff. He should be careful about what he says. The minister is actually working extremely hard for all Canadians and is doing his job correctly, Mr. Chair. We're talking about public information. Once again, let him go to Google and google it. That's it. The Chair: Now we'll go to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett: Canada's ambassador to the United Nations sent a letter last week to all member states of the UN promising that Canada would consider providing more funding for UNRRA, the same UNRRA that is a front for Hamas, which allows weapons of terror to be stored in schools and provides textbooks that call for the destruction of Israel. Do these Liberals have no shame when it comes to their quest for a seat on the UN Security Council? Hon. Mary Ng (Minister of Small Business, Export Promotion and International Trade): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to thank the honourable member for that question. We know that at this time Canada must show leadership in the face of global challenges. More than ever, Canada is playing a positive role by being a champion in diversity and inclusion, supporting the global fight against COVID-19, addressing climate change, leading peace and security efforts and helping the most vulnerable. A seat on the Security Council will allow Canada to be a strong voice for a fairer, more inclusive and prosperous The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett: Mr. Chair, I received a letter from Bob Anderson this week, who's advocating for his neighbours like Jean Grevelding, who owns a cottage at Butternut Bay. Like many people, Jean is an American who owns a property on our side of the border. These people are taxpaying members of our communities. These folks have plans in place to follow all Canadian quarantine rules. They're concerned about leaving their properties uncared for over the summer. Will folks like Jean be allowed to cross the border to check on their properties this summer? Hon. Bill Blair (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Of course, our priority is and always has been and always must be the protection of the health and safety of Canadians. That's why we put in place these restrictions for non-essential travel and have required, through the Public Health Agency of Canada, a 14-day quarantine. I don't know the specifics of the person for whom you advocate, but we want to make sure that if they come into Canada, it is for an essential purpose and that they do it safely and respect the quarantine that has been put in place. Mr. Michael Barrett: With nine branches throughout my riding, the Royal Canadian Legion offers a great deal to veterans and rural communities alike. They have been experiencing hardship and a loss of revenue, to the point where they may be forced to shut their doors. The Zone G2 commander and local mayors such as Roger Haley have reached out to me expressing their dire need. Will the government offer support to Legions across the country so they can continue to carry out their vital work for our veterans? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (Minister of Veterans Affairs): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Yes, we have done a lot to help support groups like the Legions. There is a $350-million emergency community support fund. If they're supplying any help to people regarding COVID, this fund is there. Indeed, we're doing everything we can to make sure that we help the Legions and other groups that do so much to help veterans right across the country. Mr. Michael Barrett: On May 21, the minister stated that her team was working as quickly as it could to fill the gaps in CEBA. It has now been three weeks, and many business owners, such as mortgage broker Corinna Smith-Gatcke, are still left in the lurch amid the delays, which are pushing businesses closer to shutting their doors for good. Will these businesses have access to CEBA before it's too late for them? Hon. Mary Ng: Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I thank the honourable member for that really important question on our Canadian small businesses. Those businesses can absolutely have access to the loan at their financial institution this Friday, and I would encourage them to go and see their bank or credit union. I want businesses to know that nothing is more important for us than making sure they get the support they need during this difficult time. Mr. Michael Barrett: The County Road 43 expansion project is critical for my riding and the region as a whole. This project will widen the road, increasing safety for the 18,000 motorists who travel the road every day. It's been 334 days since the provincial and local governments announced funding, but there has been nothing from this Liberal government. It's been 181 days since Minister McKenna told me her staff were reviewing the project. Today, there is still nothing, and for the last month the minister's team has not even found the time to respond to my request for an update. Will Minister McKenna finally stop with the delays and commit to funding this project today? Hon. Catherine McKenna (Minister of Infrastructure and Communities): Mr. Chair, as the member opposite knows, we work with provinces and territories to advance our infrastructure investments. We're making investments across the country. They are making a real difference in people's lives. We're always happy to work with members of Parliament, but they must also work with provinces and territories so that projects are advanced by them to our office. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall (YorktonMelville, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Through you, has Mr. MacAulay read ombudsman Dalton's May 2020 report, Financial Compensation for Canadian Veterans: A comparative analysis of benefit regimes? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I apologize, but I'll have to ask my honourable colleague to repeat the question. The Chair: Mrs. Wagantall, we'll freeze the time so that there's no extra time taken. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Thank you, Chair. My question was whether Mr. MacAulay has read ombudsman Dalton's May 2020 report, Financial Compensation for Canadian Veterans: A comparative analysis of benefit regimes. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I appreciate my honourable colleague's question. Of course, I appreciate Mr. Dalton's input and all that he has done for veterans. We've discussed it many times. I've done everything and worked with him in order to make sure that we bring the proper compensation to veterans The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: As a result of that study, are the financial outcomes Canada seeks to provide for ill and injured veterans now clearly defined within the Department of Veterans Affairs? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, as the member would know, I am to bring a report to the veterans affairs committee, and there are a number of things done in order to make sure that report is The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Then I would suggest that we get our committee up and going as it should be. Where are these financial directions published? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Well, of course, lockdown, but just under $90 million that the government put in supplementary estimates to make sure we address the backlog for Veterans Affairs. It's a major help The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Minister, are Canadian Armed Forces members provided with a copy of this document? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, my honourable colleague would have to ask the Canadian Armed Forces that question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: There are three different providing lifetime benefits for ill and injured veterans. In Ombudsman Dalton's recent report, did any one of these three provide the best compensation in all nine scenarios that were studied? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Of course, as she knows, there's been a lot of work done in order to make sure that we provide the proper compensation to veterans. We're working very hard, with a lot of help from Mr. Dalton, to make sure that the appropriate The Chair: We'll now continue with Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: In the undisclosed settlement of Sean Bruyea's legal case against Seamus O'Regan and the Liberal government, a joint statement says. . . Canadians, especially all Veterans and their families, are encouraged to enter the public debate about policies and programs that affect our Veterans and their families. Does Mr. MacAulay agree with this statement? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I can assure you that anybody is welcome to enter any discussion on compensation of veterans. We're always open to what we can do in order to make sure that we provide appropriate compensation. I don't think the term would be appropriate, but it would provide some compensation to veterans who truly deserve it. They defend our democracy The Chair: We'll go back to Ms. Wagantall. Oh, I'm sorry Ms. Andranne Larouche: Mr. Chair, I have a point of order. The interpretation hasn't worked for a few interventions. It's difficult to follow the exchange between the hon. member and the minister. The Chair: We're having a problem with the interpretation. Minister and Ms. Wagantall, you are joining us virtually. I'm wondering if you have the right language on at the bottom of your screen. We'll start with that for troubleshooting. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: I have English. The Chair: Very good. Minister MacAulay, what do you have? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I have English, Mr. Chair. The Chair: Very good. Then we'll check on our side. Ms. Larouche, did I understand correctly that the interpretation didn't work for both speakers? Ms. Andranne Larouche: The sound didn't allow the interpreters to do their job. It seemed to be a problem with the sound. The Chair: In that case, I would ask both members to maybe put their mike a little bit close to their mouth. We'll see how that works. I'm looking at the screen, and I notice the mike is a little bit far. Could we bend it in a little bit more? I appreciate that. Thank you for your patience. We'll give it another try. Ms. Wagantall, please go ahead. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: On a point of order, quite often while I'm trying to speak, there are lots of other voices in the background. The Chair: I would ask everyone to please be on mute, as well as for anyone in the chamber to please refrain from speaking loudly. Just whisper among yourselves if you have something to say. We'll take this one from the top. We have a minute and 45 seconds left. Ms. Wagantall, please proceed with your next question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: You said next question, so we're not going backwards, Chair? The Chair: Did we have an answer from Minister MacAulay? No? We'll go to Minister MacAulay to finish up the answer. We'll start at 27 seconds, freeze the clock and hear his answer. Then, because of all of the confusion, we'll start at one minute and 45 seconds when we get going again. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Should I repeat the question, sir? The Chair: Please do. The clock is frozen. After we go through the question and the answer, we'll start the clock again. Mr. Wagantall, please repeat the question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Thank you, Chair. In the undisclosed settlement to Sean Bruyea's legal case against Seamus O'Regan and the Liberal government, a joint statement says, Canadians, especially all Veterans and their families, are encouraged to enter the public debate about policies and programs that affect our Veterans and their families. Does Mr. MacAulay agree with this statement? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I appreciate my honourable colleague's question and concern. Of course I agree. Anybody is quite open to indicate whatever they wish in order to make sure we provide as appropriate a compensation as possible. You can never totally compensate veterans truly for what they deserve, but we want to make sure we provide the best compensation possible. That's what we will do and want to do. The Chair: Ms. Wagantall, we will start the clock again. You have one minute and 45 seconds remaining. Please proceed. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: If that's the case, is Minister MacAulay aware of the practice of red-flagging veterans'files? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I'm not aware. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Since the deputy minister has indicated that he runs the department, will the minister ask him for the names of veterans and the dates and the reasons that they are, or have been, red-flagged by VAC? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I would certainly ask any veteran or anybody who has a concern to contact my office. I will do anything I can to make sure that the veterans The Chair: We'll go back to Ms. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Do the most ill and injured still receive from the pension up to $300,000 less for life? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, as you know and as the Prime Minister indicated when the pension for life was put in place, it was stated that if anybody receives lessthe Prime Minister himself indicated it quite clearlythat must be adjusted. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: For veterans in similar circumstances, should the date of their application for compensation be a factor in determining whether they're treated equitably? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Yes, of course, the date is when the compensation would start. Of course, it's very important and very appropriate. The Chair: Now we will proceed to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd (Sturgeon RiverParkland, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Retired Major Mark Campbell in my riding of Sturgeon RiverParkland lost both legs in the line of duty in Afghanistan. He is an avid sport shooter, but understandably, due to his disability, he is very limited in the kinds of firearms he can use, and all of these firearms have now been banned under the Liberal OIC. My question to the Minister of Public Safety is this: Did their department do a legal analysis and consider the section 15 charter rights of disabled Canadians not to be discriminated against when they passed their OIC? Hon. Bill Blair: Yes, there was a very thorough analysis done by the justice department to ensure that the prohibitions we put in place were, in fact, charter compliant. Let me also say, Mr. Chair, how important it was that we prohibited weapons that were not designed for sporting purposes at all. In fact, they were designed for soldiers to use in combat. They have no place in a civil society. We have prohibited them, and we believeand this has been echoed by many people across the countrythat this will make Canadians safer. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, is the minister aware that the AR-15 is the most popular sporting rifle in Canada, and is he aware that disabled veterans like Major Mark Campbell are unable to participate in the sport of sport shooting because of his OIC? Hon. Bill Blair: I can assure the member that what I am aware of is that the AR-15 and other weapons like them have been used in mass killings in Canada on many occasions, such as at cole Polytechnique, at Dawson College, again at the Quebec mosque and in Moncton. The AR-15s in particular were also used at the terrible tragedy in places like Sandy Hook, where a bunch of kids were killed, so there is no place for The Chair: We will go to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, it has been months since the Liberals shut down this Parliament and months since the Minister of Finance should have presented a budget or at least an economic update to Canadians. Since then we have seen billions spent with little oversight and no plan. The minister says that he needs certainty before he can table a budget. Well, that didn't stop Stephen Harper and the Conservatives from tabling a budget in the depth of the last great recession. When are these Liberals finally going to take their job seriously and table an economic update? Hon. Mona Fortier (Minister of Middle Class Prosperity and Associate Minister of Finance): Mr. Chair, we're taking this very seriously. We're working for Canadians and bringing forward supports to make sure that businesses, workers and Canadians can put food on the table and pay their rent. We will continue to support Canadians, and when we have a clear projection to present, we will do that. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, the results are in, and businesses aren't happy with the so-called support programs from these Liberals. In fact, the oil and gas industry has been shut out of many of these economic programs. When is the government going to recognize that their business support plans have been an absolute failure with only a fraction of the billions promised being accessible to businesses? Hon. Seamus O'Regan (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Chair, our government has taken swift and immediate action to support our sector throughout this challenging time. We had the BCAP, which is critically important to providing liquidity to support the SMEs that make up 85% of the jobs in our sector. It has taken an enormous team effort. People are working around the clock to get money where it needs to be. We are helping hard-working Canadians, small businesses and large businesses right across the country, but in particular in our energy sector. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, I'm pleased to see the Minister of Natural Resources online. He tweeted recently to praise the Alberta Carbon Trunk Line and the North West Redwater Partnership refinery in my riding. Can the minister tell us what, if any, support they have given to the innovative carbon capture and sequestration technology in this country? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Mr. Chair, we see carbon capture and sequestration as an integral part of lowering emissions, making emissions more competitive and making our oil and gas industry more competitive. We're seeing where the investment dollars are going. They are going to jurisdictions that are committed to lowering emissions. Obviously, this government is committing to net zero. Mr. Dane Lloyd: I note that the minister couldn't name a single example of government support for carbon capture, utilization and sequestration technology. We have spent a lot of time talking about the COVID-19 pandemic, but Canadians are living with another horrific reality, that being the intensifying opioid overdose epidemic. Reports indicate that in the past four years, 14,000 Canadians have died, and the numbers during COVID-19 have been skyrocketing, with British Columbia seeing a 39% increase this year alone. I know this because I've lost a family member to a fentanyl overdose. When is the government going to take this scourge seriously and take action to save the lives of Canadians? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Mr. Chair, I share the member's deep sadness about the number of lives we've lost to opioid overdose. Our government has been steadily making it easier for people who live with substance use to access medications to treat substance use, such as prescription Suboxone and methadone. We have made it easier to rapidly establish safe injection sites in communities and have supported community-based projects that work with people who are using substances. We need to understand that this is a complex issue, and we need to support people to get the help they need. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes (AlgomaManitoulinKapuskasing, NDP) ): The hon. member for Thrse-DeBlainville. Ms. Louise Chabot (Thrse-De Blainville, BQ): MadamChair, I will come back to the bill introduced last week. As parliamentarians, we felt like we were watching a very bad play, as I imagine the public did. I say that it was theatre, even though it shouldn't be in this place. The government decided to stage a play and act alone and, unfortunately, there were several acts missing. A very important part of this bill was about supporting people with disabilities in this time of crisis. However, the government did not see fit to negotiate with the opposition parties, even though it is in a minority position. Despite this arrogance, the Bloc Qubcois proposed solutions. One of the things we proposed was to split the bill so that we could give this support to people with disabilities, but the Conservatives did not want to do that. We came back and asked for time to negotiate and give support to people with disabilities, but the government defeated the motion. We asked that the House be recalled today so that we could pass this part of the bill concerning support for people with disabilities, but we are still in the dark. Why are we abandoning people with disabilities? Hon. Ahmed Hussen (Minister of Families, Children and Social Development): I thank the hon. member for her question. We know this pandemic has deeply affected the lives and health of all Canadians and has disproportionately affected Canadians with disabilities in particular. From the very beginning, we've taken a disability-inclusive approach to our emergency response to ensure that Canadians with disabilities get the support they need. That is why we announced a one-time payment of $600 for persons with disabilities to address these expenses. This will go a long way toward helping Canadians with disabilities. We encourage and urge all parties in the opposition to support this measure. We're confident that this measure, along with other investments, will benefit Canadians with disabilities, and we hope to get the support of the other parties very soon. Ms. Louise Chabot: MadamChair, I remind you that this measure wasn't passed because we weren't allowed to do so. A measure to help people with disabilities has been put in an omnibus bill. We've tried here, in the House, to provide the means to give that support, so I ask again, can the government be counted on to give a response to people with disabilities? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, it was absolutely not an omnibus bill. It contained assistance for the disabled, of course, but it also contained assistance for our seasonal workers, as well as a number of other measures that the Bloc Qubcois opposed. They refused to debate and, when the question of splitting the bill came up, the Conservatives refused to do that. That is why there is no bill at the moment, and that is very unfortunate. Ms. Louise Chabot: It was a Bloc Qubcois proposal to split the bill. The government had not thought of it, but they found that it was a good idea. Let me return to the attack. This bill proposed changes to the wage subsidy program, it was supposed to make the CERB more flexible, it proposed fines for fraudsters and, since there was a little section about a benefit for the disabled, the government took it for granted that we would support it without any negotiations with the parties. However, we set one very important condition: that the Liberal Party must get its hands out of taxpayers'pockets in terms of the wage subsidy. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, as we listen to the Bloc Qubcois members, we might think that they invented peanut butter and apple pie. This bill contained a number of measures that all Quebeckers and all Canadians needed, but the Bloc Qubcois refused to debate it. No, we did not follow the Bloc Qubcois'example in splitting the bill; we had thought of it a long time previously. We have not been able to do that because of the Conservatives. Because of them, we cannot help those living with disabilities. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Ms. Chabot, you have 45seconds left. Ms. Louise Chabot: We asked on a number of occasions for the House to be able to sit starting today to pass the part of the bill dealing with those with disabilities. What is the status of that, MadamChair? We have not heard about it since. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, my colleague knows very well that things are not as simple as that. There are procedural mechanisms unique to the House. I hope that, one day, we will be able to pass this bill and be able to provide assistance for those living with disabilities. I hope that the Conservatives will change their minds and give us their support. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Don Valley East, Ms. Ratansi. Ms. Yasmin Ratansi (Don Valley East, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be sharing my time with the member for Surrey Centre. Since 2015 our government has been focused on ensuring its policies mitigate the effects of climate change. Several measures have been implemented for phasing out coal, making polluters pay, providing climate incentives, investing in green technologies and much more, which all together have created a climate plan that is doing more to cut pollution than any other in Canada's history. In my riding of Don Valley East, many innovative businesses have benefited from these investments and initiatives. One area of particular interest is our government's work to protect 25% of Canada's land and 25% of its oceans by 2025. Our natural environment is something that Canadians and my constituents care about deeply. Could the minister update this House on the new conservation projects announced on June 5, World Environment Day, and on how our government is protecting our environment? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, protecting nature is an important part of how we will address climate change and the very real challenges it presents. That's why on June 5, World Environment Day, our government announced over 60 conservation projects under development across Canada. These projects are funded through the Canada Nature Fund's target 1 challenge initiative. They'll conserve Canadian nature and biodiversity and protect species at risk, enhance ecological integrity and connectivity, and enhance the size of Canada's vast network of protected areas. Nearly half of these projects are indigenous-led, with the aim of creating indigenous-protected conserved areas. Madam Chair, projects like these move us closer to our goal of protecting 25% of Canada's lands and oceans by 2025. By working together in partnership with the provinces, territories, municipalities, indigenous peoples and Canadians, together we can protect our natural environment for generations to come. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Ms. Ratansi, since you have 25 seconds left, we will go to the honourable member for Surrey Centre. Mr. Randeep Sarai (Surrey Centre, Lib.): Madam Chair, there are many small and medium-sized businesses in my riding of Surrey Centre. Many have been impacted by COVID-19. They saw a decrease in business or needed to close their doors completely in order to adhere to public safety measures to manage the spread of COVID-19. These measures helped keep our most vulnerable citizens safe and ensured that our hospital and health care providers did not become overwhelmed with a sharp spike in cases. Thanks to our government's COVID-19 emergency response, many of these businesses have been able to keep their employees and access important liquidity through the Canada emergency business account, which provides loans to small businesses and non-profits, and the Canada emergency wage subsidy, which is helping businesses to keep and rehire their employees while their revenues are down by providing up to 75% of wages for up to 24 weeks. As we begin to reopen the economy and Canadians across the country return to the job market, those benefits will be even more important to help businesses and industries rehire their staff and make important adjustments to align with public health guidelines to gradually increase their operations. Can the minister please update the committee on how many Canadian businesses have taken advantage of CEBA and CEWS since applications for each have been opened? Hon. Mary Ng: Madam Chair, I want to begin by thanking the member for Surrey Centre for all the work he does to support his constituents and small businesses. Canadians across the country need to know our government has been working tirelessly and will continue to work tirelessly on their behalf. This is why we put in place the important programs to help them get through this crisis during this difficult time, programs such as the wage subsidy program. We know that in so many businesses the employees are often like extended family members. The wage subsidy has helped these businesses keep their employees on the payroll and are now helping in their rehiring as they slowly and safely restart. There are 348,000 businesses being helped with the wage subsidy program, and this means that 2. 6 million workers are being helped. Businesses are also being helped through the interest-free $40,000 loan they can access through CEBA to help stay afloat and pay their expenses during this crisis. I'm pleased to inform this House that to date more than 669,000 The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for St. John's East. Mr. Jack Harris: Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with my colleague, the member for LondonFanshawe. Madam Chair, with so many recent reports and videos of police using force, sometimes deadly force, and violence against indigenous and black people in Canada, I've called for the public safety committee to reconvene. If the members agree, will the minister come to the committee and provide concrete answers as to how the government intends to address racism inherent in Canada's law enforcement, and in particular the RCMP? Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I thank my colleague for the question. It's perhaps the most important one facing Canada today. Madam Chair, indigenous people, black Canadians and other racialized people are far too often experiencing systemic racism and disparate outcomes within the entire criminal justice system. In order to respond appropriately, I think it's necessary to begin by acknowledging the lived experience of people who've known bias and discrimination at the hands of the police and our courts and within our prisons. We remain committed to working with all racialized people and all of the members of this House to ensure that we work toward social justice for all Canadians, and I look forward to discussing the member's motion further with him. Mr. Jack Harris: Will the minister and the government commit to facilitating such a meeting of this committee virtually? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, the decisions of the committee are the committee's, so I'm sure that this will be a discussion within the committee, but if called, I will certainly be pleased to come with my officials to provide the committee with whatever support and information it needs to contribute to this very important discussion. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Harris, you have 40 seconds. Mr. Jack Harris: In light of what we've seen with Chief Adam in Fort McMurray and the RCMP accepting that the actions were reasonable, will the minister commit to a full review of the use of force by the RCMP, in particular the philosophy, tactics and training that is given to RCMP officers in dealing with the public? Hon. Bill Blair: I thank the member and I want to assure him, first of all, that this is work that is ongoing, not just in the RCMP but throughout the police community. May I also take this opportunity, Madam Chair, to say that I think all police training has to begin with one very important principle, and that's the preservation of all life and the respect for all Canadians. We also know the importance of de-escalation training. We're committed to continuing to work with indigenous communities, racialized communities and with police services and all participants in the criminal justice system to make sure that it is fair for all Canadians. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for LondonFanshawe, Ms. Mathyssen. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen (LondonFanshawe, NDP): Madam Chair, we need more justice for black, indigenous and racialized people in Canada. They can't be asked to keep waiting. This government recognizes that systemic racism exists but refuses to collect race-based data that would allow us to quantify and truly address this injustice. We need data to protect Canadians. When will this government do the right thing and start collecting race-based data? Hon. Bardish Chagger (Minister of Diversity and Inclusion and Youth): Madam Chair, our government agrees that it's important that we collect data, and that's exactly why, in the anti-racism secretariat and the anti-racism strategy, there is a commitment to have money go to Statistics Canada to collect race-based data. We look forward to working with all members to ensure it happens. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen: Madam Chair, we know that Statistics Canada will start to collect job numbers based on race. This will allow us to identify systemic racism where it is and where we need to ensure a fair and more equal job market for black, indigenous and racialized people in Canada. Why is this government refusing to follow suit so we can tackle systemic racism everywhere, in every sector? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I'd like to thank my honourable colleague for her question. She's absolutely correct in her assessment that we need to collect more data, reliable data, data that will help us deal with some of the challenges we're seeing with systemic discrimination, but, more broadly, we want to make sure that we continue to engage with an anti-racism strategy that will allow us to collect that disaggregated data. That is why we allocated $6. 2 million to that initiative through Statistics Canada, but we know we must do more and we will do more. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen: We know that all people are susceptible to catching COVID-19, but health authorities are clear that parts of cities like Montreal and Toronto have been more impacted than others. For black and racialized people living in these cities, this data is a matter of life and death. Will the government collect and share disaggregated data so we can identify and erase systemic racism, yes or no? Hon. Bardish Chagger: Madam Chair, making decisions based on science and evidence is essential for our government. We took that practice from day one. It is exactly the step we will take moving forward and that's why we are making those investments to ensure that data exists. We are working across all departments. My mandate letter is public. I look forward to continuing to work not only with all ministers, departments and agencies, but all allies and all parties to get this work done. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Blaney, the honourable member for BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, has the floor. Hon. Steven Blaney (BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, CPC): Thank you, MadamChair. Last week, my plumber told me that, each time Justin Trudeau comes down the steps to make announcements totalling several billion dollars, he feels like someone is rifling through his pockets. My question is simple and goes to the Minister of Finance: where is this money coming from? Hon. Mona Fortier: MadamChair, I would like to thank my honourable colleague for his question. Currently, the health and safety of Canadians are our top priorities. We have implemented an emergency economic plan to support Canadians, workers and companies. We will continue to support them during this crisis. Hon. Steven Blaney: The answer I would have liked is simple: we are borrowing the money and we are going to have to pay it back one day. That is another Liberal craze: they borrow money, they make campaign promises, and off they go. Under the Conservative government, the Chantier Davie in Lvis had 1,700workers for the supply ship Asterix. In the election campaign, the Liberals promised icebreakers. When are the Liberals going to award the icebreaker contracts to the Chantier Davie? Hon. David Lametti (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada): MadamChair, we are very proud of the Chantier Davie and we completely understand its role in the system. We are currently assessing those requests. We are going to establish the process for the polar ice-breaker, which is essential for the work of the Coast Guard in northern communities, and we are going to make sure that The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Blaney has the floor. Hon. Steven Blaney: The workers do not need words; they need contracts and jobs. The same is true for young people who want to work. There is money in the Canada summer jobs program: in my constituency alone, $150,000has been approved. Companies want young people to work and want to hire them. What is the minister waiting for in order to confirm those positions? In my constituency, and everywhere else in the country, our young people want to work. What is the government waiting for in order to send some cash to the Canada summer jobs program? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we are proud of the Canada summer jobs program. We are introducing flexibilities into the system to enable employers to be able to hire summer students. We recognize the importance of this program to provide both financial resources and necessary experience for young people. We believe in continuing to invest in the Canada summer jobs program. Hon. Steven Blaney: The workers, the young people and the employers have been waiting for weeks. The money is available; where is the announcement? MadamChair, our young people are not the only ones who want to work. There are also the temporary foreign workers. Let me use Jessie Gito as an example; he has been working at Plate2000 in Saint-Anselme for years. When the time came to renew his work permit, he found out that he has to have some biometric tests. But he cannot get them because the offices are closed. Is the minister going to allow Jessie Gito and the thousands of other temporary foreign workers who want to work to be able to do so until the government biometric testing centres reopen? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, it is important for the honourable member to recognize that we are in the early recovery stage of the pandemic. Employers are slowly reopening businesses. We will ensure that we support both our students and our temporary foreign workers to make sure we get the recovery right. We will continue to invest in the Canada summer jobs program. We've introduced flexibilities into the program to ensure that employers are able to take advantage of the program and give opportunities to young people. Hon. Steven Blaney: It is very simple. Jessie Gito is a foreign worker, who is in a company that provides an essential service. He needs a decision that will let him go to work, rather than staying home and doing nothing. Then, when the government's biometric testing centres are open again, he will gladly go to one. Young people want to work in agriculture as well, and the minister has told us that the government wants young people working and that their files will be processed as quickly as possible. She wants to create 700positions and she knows that people can fill in an application on a first-come first-served basis. Of those 700positions, how many have been confirmed to date? The good weather has arrived, the corn is starting to grow, and this is the time when farmers need the young workers. Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food): MadamChair, the program for young workers in agriculture is open. I also encourage agricultural producers to register for it. This is a program that is not only intended to provide summer jobs, but also to interest young people in making a career in agriculture. As I have said before, the department is processing files as quickly as possible. Each employer will have an answer very shortly. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will now take a short break. Okay, we are ready to start again. We will go to the honourable member for BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte. Mr. Doug Shipley (BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Over the course of the pandemic, has the government been using all avenues possible to source much-needed PPE in Canada? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, we have been very clear that we have a made-in-Canada initiative that has engaged companies across the country. Over 700 companies have retooled and scaled up their operations for personal protective equipment to help front-line health care workers. Mr. Doug Shipley: Madam Chair, I need to ask very quickly which ministry and minister are responsible for the sourcing of PPE in Canada. Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, this is a collective effort. I work with the Minister of Health and the minister for procurement, and we coordinate with the provinces and territories to make sure there are appropriate levels of PPE to help front-line health care workers and essential workers across the country. Mr. Doug Shipley: Thank you for that clarification. That will make this question all the more pertinent. My riding of BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte is the home of Southmedic Inc. Southmedic is a renowned medical supply business. For over 37 years, it has provided front-line health care workers with an extensive line of PPE and other essential products required when dealing with respiratory illnesses. This company specializes in respiratory illness equipment. Southmedic currently employs over 700 people, and it has been recognized as one of Canada's best-managed companies by Deloitte on numerous occasions. Since the beginning of the pandemic, both I and the member for BarrieInnisfil have been attempting to obtain some assistance for Southmedic from the federal government. Calls and emails were falling on deaf ears. In early May, I wrote a letter to Minister Anand outlining the situation. I received a letter back from the minister dated May 27 indicating that this issue of Southmedic falls under the mandate of the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada. I have heard nothing more. When will the federal government reach out and help this great Canadian company and therefore ensure that all front-line workers will have the proper PPE they require? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I'd like to thank my honourable colleague for his question. He knows full well that this is a very challenging time. That is why we had a call to action to engage Canadians right across the country. Since then, we've seen over 6,000 companies step up to offer solutions and ideas, and over 700 companies have retooled their efforts. I acknowledge that some companies are still engaging with the government, and we'll continue to explore all possible options to make sure we continue to procure the necessary levels of personal protective equipment to protect Canadians and to protect front-line health care workers. That has always been our priority. I want to thank the outstanding Canadian companies that have come forward and have helped us in this endeavour. We continue to look forward to working with them. Mr. Doug Shipley: Thank you for that answer. Just to follow up, there's no retooling required at this company. They could have been up and going very quickly. They just needed a little assistance at the beginning. Moving on to a different issue, while walking to my office this morning, I stopped at my local small family-run coffee shop and was discussing the current economic situation with the two owners of the establishment. They indicated they are having a very tough time surviving this economic downturn. The only thing keeping them hopeful is that soon the public service will start returning to work, and therefore their business will begin to return. Could the government please give us some indication as to what the plans are for returning the civil service back to work safely, and when? Hon. Jean-Yves Duclos (President of the Treasury Board): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm delighted to answer this question. This is a very important topic, but I'd like to take the opportunity first to thank our public servants, who have worked very hard in the last few weeks, both personally and professionally. In fact, today is a wonderful day to say that, because today is the start of National Public Service Week. That's one more reason to thank them for their dedicated work. They are not going to go back to work. They've been at work for the last few monthsin different circumstances, but they have been working very hard to deliver the services and the support Canadians need and deserve. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Next we'll go to the honourable member for SelkirkInterlakeEastman, Mr. Bezan. Mr. James Bezan (SelkirkInterlakeEastman, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. My questions are for the Minister of National Defence. First of all, I want to thank the great men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces for the fantastic job they're doing in Operation LASER, serving on the front lines battling COVID-19. Can the Minister of National Defence give the House an update on exactly where we are at with the number of Canadian Armed Forces members who have been infected with COVID-19? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan (Minister of National Defence): Madam Chair, I want to echo the member opposite's comments in thanking our Canadian Armed Forces members. Currently, we have 13 active cases in the Canadian Armed Forces, but in the long-term care facilities we currently have 50 cases. No member has been currently hospitalized. We have also conducted very thorough reviews of our protection protocols as well. Mr. James Bezan: Through you, Chair, Minister Sajjan, does that number of active cases include the active cases that are in long-term care facilities right now in Operation LASER? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, as I stated, the 50 cases are strictly from the long-term care facilities. The 13 cases I mentioned are not in the long-term care facilities. Just to give the actual clarification, no member has been currently hospitalized. Mr. James Bezan: In those numbers, Madam Chair, can Mr. Sajjan say how many of those cases in long-term care facilities are active and how many are recovered? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, I don't have the exact number. What I can say to break it down further is that in Quebec we currently have 36 and in Ontario we have 14. As well, 36 of the members have been out of isolation. I'll get more details and pass them on directly to the member, Madam Chair. Mr. James Bezan: Thank you, Minister. Madam Chair, I have a quick question while we're still talking about Operation LASER. The President of the Treasury Board has said, The Canadian Armed Forces will be present as long as their presence is needed in Quebec. This contradicts what Prime Minister Trudeau is saying, which is that we have a hard deadline of June 26 for the withdrawal of our troops for Operation LASER. That means taking our troops out of our long-term care facilities. Minister, is June 26 the hard date for the winding down of Operation LASER? Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I'm delighted to have the opportunity to clarify for the House. We've been in very extensive discussions with the Province of Quebec, with my counterpart Minister Guilbault, and we are working very diligently to ensure we have a sustained, appropriate response to the request from Quebec for assistance. That response will result in a transition from the currently deployed Canadian Armed Forces to the deployment of paid volunteers, trained personnel who will take on the important role of providing services to those Canadians who need our help in Quebec. Mr. James Bezan: I'll go back to the Minister of National Defence. The Department of National Defence auditors have called out the Liberal government for mismanagement over the $553-billion investment in our Canadian military through the defence policy. Only three people have been assigned to oversee the rollout of this money. This is a $553-billion investment in our armed forces, and only three people are managing it. Could the minister tell us how that is even possible? Is this the reason that over 100 projects are currently behind schedule? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, first of all, I want to highlight the unprecedented investment that we're making in defence. We have conducted internal reviews of our procurement. The report the member opposite is talking about is from the previous year. This is the ongoing work we're doing to make sure that we make procurement better. When it comes to the management of this, it's conducted by me and the minister of procurement. We are working toward making our procurement even better. We have already streamlined some aspects of our procurement and we'll continue to do more as well. Mr. James Bezan: Minister Sajjan, you've had this report since November of 2019. You've been rolling out this plan since 2017. Only three people are overseeing an expenditure of $553 billion. This is taxpayers'money. Are we going to see more cuts because you have been unable to actually roll out these dollars? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, I can assure you we're not going to be cutting. We'll be investing in our defence. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Before I go to the next speaker, I want to remind members that they are to address their questions and comments directly through the chair. We will go now to the honourable member for Fort McMurrayCold Lake, Mr. Yurdiga. Mr. David Yurdiga (Fort McMurrayCold Lake, CPC): Madam Chair, the Canada summer jobs program has many challenges. I've seen many indigenous communities in my riding rejected for funding even though they had received funding in previous years. Here are a few examples of communities that were rejected: Beaver Lake Cree Nation, Buffalo Lake Mtis Settlement and the Mtis Nation of Alberta, Region 1. The list goes on. Could the Prime Minister explain why so many indigenous communities have been denied funding from the Canada summer jobs program? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we recognize the important role that the Canada summer jobs program plays in supporting employers and young workers in our community across the country every year. We're working very hard to help employers adapt to the realities of the COVID-19 pandemic and are supporting young Canadians as they begin to look for summer employment. We are introducing increased flexibilities into the Canada summer jobs program to hire youth, while also providing more supports to employers that deliver essential services to Canadians. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, that didn't really answer my question. Why are so many indigenous communities left out of the Canada summer jobs program? This is very important to my community and to communities throughout the province. Will the government investigate why these communities were rejected? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that we, of course, value the important role that the Canada summer jobs program plays in all communities, including indigenous communities in Canada. I will certainly have an off-line conversation with the honourable member, if he so wishes, about a particular issue, but I can assure him that in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, we have had to assist employers to introduce flexibilities The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Yurdiga. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, in my riding, the City of Cold Lake has been in dispute with the federal government for many years over payment in lieu of taxes. My office has sent many letters over the years regarding the PILT dispute. Could the Minister of Public Services and Procurement give me a rough estimate of when I will receive a response from the minister's office to my first letter, from 2017, and my letters from 2018,2019 and 2020? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that I will go to the minister, and we will come back with an answer to his question. Mr. David Yurdiga: How much longer does the minister intend to perpetuate the ongoing PILT dispute, which is in excess of $11 million, with the City of Cold Lake? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, once again, I can assure the honourable member that I will speak with the minister and get an answer to his question. Mr. David Yurdiga: Well, do you know what? I've been writing letters to the department for many years. When you say you're going to get back to me, I really have a hard time believing that. Will the minister agree to follow the prior recommendations of the dispute advisory panel that were accepted by the minister? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that I will check with the minister and that she will return to the member in due course. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, the drug Trikafta has been proven to increase the quality of life for 90% of cystic fibrosis patients. Two weeks ago, my office sent a letter to the Minister of Health about the boy in my riding named Cael, who through the special access program is able to get Trikafta in Canada. I requested that the minister use her powers to fast-track Trikafta for commercial use, but I have yet to receive a response back. When will the minister make a decision on Trikafta? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, I'm glad to hear that Cael was able to access Trikafta through the special access program. In fact, that program is very helpful for people who are seeking access to medication that's not currently marketed in Canada. As the member opposite knows, Vertex has not applied to market Trikafta in Canada, but we look forward to their application, and I encourage him to write a letter to the manufacturer to also encourage them. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Vancouver Granville, Ms. Wilson-Raybould. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould (Vancouver Granville, Ind.): Thank you, Chair. I was very troubled to hear that a CBC radio host in the Yukon felt compelled to resign because, as an indigenous person, she could not speak her truth. While we know the Broadcasting Act states that the Canadian broadcasting system should reflect the linguistic duality and multicultural and multiracial nature of Canadian society and the special place of indigenous peoples, it would seem there are some challenges. Therefore, does the Minister of Heritage share the concern of some journalists that problems of systemic racism in Canada are still existing within the institution of the CBC, and will the government now acknowledge the need to recognize the jurisdiction of indigenous governments? Hon. Steven Guilbeault (Minister of Canadian Heritage): Thank you, Madame Chair; and I thank the member for this important question. As stated by the Prime Minister on numerous occasions, our government recognizes that systemic racism exists in Canada, and we have made a commitment to do everything we can to combat it in whichever organization of the Canadian government. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould: Thank you. When I was in the government, and as a minister, I learned the term red meat issues. I understand these issues to be ones that challenge societal norms, that are not politically expedient to address because they can lose you votes, even though addressing them is morally right and a smart thing to do. Mostly these are issues addressing inequality and the most marginalized in our society. In the justice system, examples include mandatory minimum penalties, defunding police, and even investing in restorative justice. Red-meat issues often become defining issues for society and for governments as the world changes. Surely now these issues are politically less of a consideration than the tragic reality of even more slain indigenous Canadians at the hands of police, or thousands of indigenous people still incarcerated or living in poverty. Will this government please finally commit to the necessary work originally promised in 2015 and repeal in the justice system the vast majority of mandatory minimum penalties, assuring the necessary discretion for judges, and meaningfully invest in restorative justice measures? Hon. David Lametti: Madame Chair, I thank the honourable member for her question, as well as for her work as Minister of Justice, and indeed my predecessor. This is an important time. This is a time when we recognize systemic racism. This is a time when we recognize systemic over-incarceration of indigenous peoples, of black peoples, in our criminal justice system. This is a time when we need to look at all potential options to reduce what is a shameful overrepresentation in our criminal justice system. Too often racialized peoples and indigenous peoples have experienced prejudice and systemic discrimination in our justice system, and that has to change. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould: I'll go on to another red meat issue. In British Columbia we are in the fifth year of the opioid overdose public health emergency crisis. Sadly, May marks the deadliest month of overdose-related deaths. We are halfway into the year and have currently passed 500 deaths caused by overdose. Many of the deaths are related to COVID-19 measures that have prevented people from accessing supervised consumption sites, so they are overdosing alone. While the provinces welcomed the federal backing of safe supply exemption back in March, it is to expire in September of 2020. Echoing the call of the chief coroner of B. C. and Dr. Henry, more is needed from the federal government, more action. Will the government provide the necessary supports to the province and help support safe supply initiatives in the provinces? Hon. Patty Hajdu: It's been a pleasure to work with the Province of British Columbia on innovative ways to work on the tragic situation of opioid overdose. I remain committed to working with the province and in fact any province that wants to work towards solutions that treat people who use substances with the dignity they deserve. Madam Chair, this is a complex issue. We're working closely with our partners to make sure that we can prevent more lives from being lost. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for South OkanaganWest Kootenay, Mr. Cannings. Mr. Richard Cannings (South OkanaganWest Kootenay, NDP): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with the member for SkeenaBulkley Valley. In my riding, Theo's in Penticton is a beloved restaurant. They've been serving great food for 40 years, but now they're struggling, because they don't qualify for the emergency wage subsidy. Why is that? The original owners retired last year and sold it to another operator. The new owner can't use a year-to-year comparison to apply for the wage subsidy because he didn't own the restaurant last spring. He is forced to use receipts from January and February, the darkest doldrums of the restaurant year, to compare with the results from May, traditionally one of their best months. Now he has to compete with other local restaurants that can access the subsidy. When will the government fix this inequity and let Theo's compete and survive? Hon. Mona Fortier: Madam Chair, the Canada emergency wage subsidy is supporting over 2. 5 million workers across the country. To help even more businesses support their workers and rehire people as they reopen, our government is extending the CEWS, and we will continue to extend the CEWS for an additional 12 weeks to August 29 to ensure that Canadian workers continue to have the support they need during these very difficult times. By extending eligibility, our government is ensuring that more Canadian workers in more sectors have the support they need. Mr. Richard Cannings: The owner just wants to be able to apply for the wage subsidy, and right now he cannot, and he will not be able to. Thousands of other businesses are hit that way as well. I'd like to move on to forestry. Canada's forest sector has been declared essential during this pandemic, but it's been hit hard after a very difficult 2019. Despite soft markets and thousands out of work, government support programs have left many Canadian forest product companies behind. In my riding, the pulp mill in Castlegar is closing for the month of July because local sawmills aren't producing enough wood chips. What is the government going to do to finally support Canadian forestry workers and communities? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The time is almost up, but I will allow for the answer from the honourable minister. Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Thank you, Madam Chair. We have supported and we will continue to support the forestry sector, including through regional development programs. In fact, in Quebec, partnering with Les Bois Francs DV Inc. , we have widened market access to our products and updated technology systems. In North Bay we've partnered with the Canadian Wood Council to promote the sector. In Vancouver we're working with FPInnovations to create the indigenous forest sector technical support program. We are supporting the forestry sector and its different needs region by region. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Now we go to the honourable member for SkeenaBulkley Valley, Mr. Bachrach. Mr. Taylor Bachrach (SkeenaBulkley Valley, NDP): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm going to pick up where my colleague left off, with B. C.'s forest industry. What we've seen in B. C. are multiple rounds of mill shutdowns and start-ups, and in some cases this has made it difficult for forestry workers to qualify for EI. My question to the minister is this: Will the minister work to make the EI program more flexible for forestry workers, similar to what this government has done for oil and gas workers? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, in the oil and gas sector we have focused on workers. That has been key in the inactive and orphan well program, which we are working on with the provincial governments of Saskatchewan, British Columbia and Alberta. The focus on workers has assured that success, and we will continue to focus on workers in all the industries, particularly our natural resource industry, as they go through this extraordinarily difficult time. Mr. Taylor Bachrach: Madam Chair, reforestation is a very important part of the forest industry in the riding I represent, and people were keenly interested to hear this government's plan to plant two billion trees in the next 10 years. That's a lot of trees. I'm wondering if the minister could tell us how many trees are going to be planted under this program by the end of this season. Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, this government is committed to two billion trees. We are working with forestry associations, the industry and with individual companies to ensure this tree-planting season will be one of the largest the country has ever seen. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The floor goes to the honourable member for Rivire-du-Nord. Mr. Rhal Fortin (Rivire-du-Nord, BQ): MadamChair, last week, the government introduced BillC-17 and the Minister of Justice sent us briefing notes in which he said that it was important to suspend a number of time limits and to extend others, and that the failure to do so could have important repercussions on Canadians, their families, their situations, their finances and their ability to exercise their rights. We in the Bloc Qubcois agree with that. When are we going to talk about it? Hon. David Lametti: MadamChair, the contents of BillC-17 are clearly very important. We have addressed the mandatory time limits in federal legislation as well as certain time limits that courts may not be able to handle. It is very important that we address this issue. That is why the law The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Fortin, you have the floor. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, we agree that it is important. I concur. The minister's briefing notes say that, among other things, when it comes to divorcewhich means children are involved people are waiting on custody rights, child support and visitation rights. The minister pointed out that the national security review would require consultations if no decision is made in the prescribed time frame. It could pose a national security risk. It is really a big deal. When are we going to debate it? Hon. David Lametti: MadamChair, I completely agree with my honourable colleague. The issue needs to be addressed. That is why it is in the bill. That is another reason to debate the bill. I beseech my colleagues opposite to debate it with us. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, what a coincidence, because I beseech my colleague opposite to debate it with us. That is what we are asking. Last week, the leader of the Bloc Qubcois asked the Liberal government to debate BillC-17 today. He did not get an answer. It does not seem to matter. Richard Wagner, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, who is hardly a dimwit or greenhorn, told us that the justice system needs to be modernized. As recently as this past Saturday in LaPresse, Justice Wagner said that it is essential that the Criminal Code be amended to address the backlog of court proceedings. When will the Liberal government opposite pull up its socks, do its job, govern the federation, sit down with the opposition and discuss the vital matters in BillC-17? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, if I were my colleague, I would be a little embarrassed, because the bill was sent to the Bloc Qubcois several days in advance. They received a technical note several days in advance. We were all available to take questions. When we asked for the support of the Bloc Qubcois and the other parties to debate itwe were not even asking them to vote in favour of the billthey refused. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, we never refused to debate it. Actually, we were the ones who asked to debate it. What exactly does debate it mean? We set some conditions. For example, we asked the Liberals to put the money back into the wage subsidy fund and to commit to dip into it no longer. Are we asking too much of our colleagues opposite? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Can my colleague explain to me what the emergency wage subsidy has to do with a bill about justice? This is an absolutely fundamental piece of legislation. We wanted to debate it, but they refused to do so. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, I would like nothing better than to explain it to him, but I must remind him that he is the leader of the party in power, the party that is supposed to govern the country. So I do not know why he is asking me that. My party proposed that we debate this today but we did not get an answer. Meanwhile, court time limits are running out and people are losing rights. I am thinking of families, child support, child custody, labour law disputes in Federal Court, marine transportation, interprovincial transportation, aviation, banks, and those with grievances waiting for a Federal Court ruling. The whole system, the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal, everything is on hold because nobody in the government wants to do their job. We want to discuss BillC-17. When can we talk about it? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, we have done our job. We have introduced the bill. We informed them in advance. We told them they could ask us any questions they wanted. We asked for a debate in the House. However, when we asked the Bloc Qubcois if they wanted to debate the bill, they said no, instead of doing what they usually do and saying yes. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for Essex, Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis (Essex, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. When the CERB runs out, many workers in my riding of Essex will not have sufficient hours to collect their EI benefits. In early July, the midnight shift at Chrysler will be eliminated. Because of the shutdown, a mom-to-be who had just returned to work in January, and several hundred of her fellow employees, may not have the 600 hours required for regular or EI parental benefits. Immediate action is needed. What is the government doing now to backstop these workers? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, the Canada emergency response benefit has been providing much-needed help to Canadian workers across the country who have stopped working due to COVID-19. We know that there is still a lot of uncertainty for many Canadian workers, and we know that many will be exhausting their benefits in the weeks to come. We will have more to share soon, as early as this week, on our continuing efforts to support Canadian workers and make sure that help is available during this The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Go ahead, Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Minister, for the answer. The EI system needs to be fixed. Even before the shutdown, the system was deeply flawed. Will this government commit to a complete review and overhaul of the EI system? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we have been there for Canadian workers. We will continue to make sure that we make the necessary investments in the EI delivery system and modernize it to continue to meet The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. Small businesses have been hit extremely hard by the COVID-19 shutdown. Many have already been forced into bankruptcy. Much uncertainty lies ahead. As the economy reopens, what is the government doing to help small businesses recover? Hon. Mary Ng: Madam Chair, today we are seeing small businesses that have been helped, whether it is getting access to the small business loan, which some are also using in the restart as they are safely restarting, or getting help with their payroll, helping them keep their employees The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. Employees are key to a small business's success. How will the government incentivize workers to return to their jobs when recalled? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister can give a brief answer. Hon. Mary Ng: The Canada emergency wage subsidy is an excellent program to help those employees stay employed and for those employers who are looking at rehiring them right now during this restart process. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair, many of my constituents are in a committed cross-border relationship and have not been able to see their partners in quite some time. The current restrictions are arbitrary. Denmark has found a fair resolution. Will Canada adopt the Danish model, and if not, why not? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, as we said from the outset, we've implemented restrictions at the U. S. border on non-essential travel with a single purpose in mind: to protect the health and safety of Canadians. As the member is aware, just last week we introduced new measures that allow people in family relationships to stay together as long as they commit to the necessary 14-day period of quarantine. We'll continue to work with families. Our intention is to keep people together, but mostly to keep people safe. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair, with regard to child care, as our economy continues to open, parents are facing a stark choice: Who will care for their children? What's the plan to provide access to child care so parents can confidently return to work? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we are of course committed to continuing to make the record investments that we've been making in child care. Since 2015 we've created over 40,000 affordable child care spaces. We're committed to creating an additional 250,000 before-school and after-school child care spaces. We will continue to invest in this sector because we understand that without investment The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. It sounds as though this government has a desire to force parents to choose between their job and care for their child. Can the government please respond to that quote? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, nothing could be further from the truth. We are committed to the child care sector. Our investments and our results prove the opposite of what the member is asserting. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I'm sorry. We're out of time. The committee now stands adjourned until tomorrow at noon.

The discussion about the questions of minister started with the issue of economic update, and then it turned to discuss the federal support for the provinces. The following topics were systemic racism. Hon. Chrystia Freeland emphasized that systemic racism had existed in all federal institutions in Canada.

tr-sq-1209

tr-sq-1209_0

What did Christine Normandin think about federal support for the provinces? The Chair (Hon. Anthony Rota (NipissingTimiskaming, Lib.) ): I call this meeting to order. Welcome to meeting number 22 of the House of Commons Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic. A reminder to all members that in order to avoid issues with sound, members participating in person should not also be connected to the video conference. For those joining via video conference, I would like to remind you that, when speaking, you should be on the same channel as the language you are speaking. As usual, please direct your remarks through the chair. I understand we don't have any ministerial announcements today, so we'll proceed to presenting petitions. I would like to remind members that any petition presented during a meeting of the special committee must have already been certified by the clerk of petitions. For members participating in person, we ask that they please come and drop the signed certificate off at the table once the petition is presented. The first petition will be presented by Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May (SaanichGulf Islands, GP): Mr. Chair, it's an honour to rise in meeting number 22 of the COVID-19 committee, otherwise known as something like the House of Commons. I'm here to present two petitions containing hundreds of signatures on the issue of the treatment of Falun Gong practitioners by the People's Republic of China, particularly the practice that's alleged of involuntary organ harvesting. The petitioners ask the Government of Canada to condemn this practice and to publicly call for an end to the persecution of Falun Gong in the People's Republic of China. The second petition is from residents throughout SaanichGulf Islands concerned about what was, at the time this petition was submitted, a future problem. It remains an issue, and I present it on behalf of petitioners who wish the Government of Canada not to put public funds into purchasing or maintaining the Trans Mountain pipeline or towards any expansion of the pipeline. The Chair: Next we'll go to Ms. Kwan. Ms. Jenny Kwan (Vancouver East, NDP): Mr. Chair, I rise to table two petitions. The first petition deals with the COVID-19 situation. The petitioners note the pandemic is having a devastating impact on many Canadians nationwide, especially those who have low to modest income, small business gig workers, freelancers, artists, film industry workers, non-salaried workers and individuals on fixed incomes such as seniors and those on disability. It further notes that rent, mortgage and utility payments are due at the end of each month, putting countless Canadians at risk of losing their housing. It is paramount there be safe self-isolation opportunities for all individuals in this country. To that end, the petitioners are calling for the government to immediately enact a nationwide rent freeze, eviction freeze, mortgage freeze and utility freeze, enforce mortgage deferrals for homeowners without penalty or interest charges from financial institutions and provide direct assistance in the form of a monthly, universal, direct payment of $2,000 per month for all, with an additional $250 per child immediately. The second petition deals with the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion. These petitioners join the hundreds of thousands of people who are opposed to the expansion. Trans Mountain, in building the pipeline, brings massive environmental and economic risk with no substantial benefit to British Columbia or to local residents. Approximately 40,000 barrels of oil have already leaked from existing Kinder Morgan pipelines, including two major spills in Burnaby since 2007. I might note, Mr. Chair, that just this past weekend there was yet another spill to the tune of 1,195 barrels here in British Columbia. There is no known scientific technology to clean up the bitumen when there is a spill, and the number of tankers would go from eight to 34 per month into the Burrard Inlet. It puts at risk many residential neighbourhoods and the traditional territories of at least 15 first nations. The Chair: May I interrupt for a moment, Ms. Kwan. I want to remind all members in the House that when presenting a petition, the idea is to be as concise as possible. Ms. Kwan, I'll let you wrap up, please. Ms. Jenny Kwan: Thank you, Mr. Chair. The petitioners are calling for the government to immediately act to prevent this new oil pipeline from proceeding through British Columbia. The Chair: Thank you. We'll now go to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood ParkFort Saskatchewan, CPC): Mr. Chair, I have four petitions to present today. The first petition reflects the outrage of my constituents at the ever-expanding order in council from the government banning more and more firearms. In particular, the petitioners highlight the failure of the government to act on the issue of illegal guns. The petitioners note that virtually all violent crimes committed in Canada, including the recent shooting in Nova Scotia, involve illegal firearms in the hands of those who are already not permitted to possess them. The petition has two asks. First of all, it asks that we reverse the order in council banning certain firearms, but also that we propose measures that will effectively address the illegal use of firearms by criminals while respecting the rights of law-abiding citizens. It also asks that we ensure that substantial changes to firearms laws in future actually be made by Parliament, not by the government acting in an unaccountable manner. The second petition deals with Bill C-8, which is the government's bill around conversion therapy. The petitioners support efforts to ban conversion therapy. They express concern about problems in the wording of the definition used in the legislation. They're asking the government to support amendments to fix the definition to address the issue of conversion therapy and ensure that the definition is correct and doesn't criminalize certain forms of counselling that individuals may voluntarily enter into. The third petition is regarding Bill S-204, a bill in the Senate that seeks to make it a criminal offence for a person to go abroad to receive an organ without consent, dealing especially with the horrific practice of forced organ harvesting and trafficking in China. The petitioners are supportive of Bill S-204 and want to see it move forward. The final petition is with respect to Bill C-7. There's been much discussion in this House about the need to do better in terms of long-term care. Rather than working to do better in long-term care, unfortunately we've seen the government removing vital safeguards in the area of euthanasia. I think our focus should be on assisting life rather than removing safeguards that are required in association with the euthanasia regime. The petitioners are particularly concerned about the government's plan to remove a 10-day reflection period that normally takes place. That period can already be waived under certain circumstances, but Bill C-7 proposes to remove it entirely as well as reduce the number of witnesses involved. The petitioners are quite concerned about what's going on in Bill C-7 and call for it to be stopped or amended. The Chair: Presenting petitions. We'll proceed to statements by members. We'll start off with Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly (NanaimoLadysmith, GP): Mr. Chair, we are in the midst of a global pandemic and an economic shock. Recent events have ripped open the wound of systemic racism in our country. Racialized and marginalized communities have been disproportionally affected by the pandemic. Thousands of seniors in long-term care facilities have died. It is clear that we need system change. In the past, governments have bailed out banks and corporations because they were too big to fail. It is time to bail out humanity and the planet. No one will be immune from the threat of climate change and mass extinction. Both are the result of the exploitation of the natural world in the name of the economy. Humans created the economy. We can choose to change it. We must protect our environment or perish. COVID-19 has demonstrated that together we can take courageous action for the common good. We need to do the same for the climate crisis, because humanity and our planet are too big to fail. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Spengemann. Mr. Sven Spengemann (MississaugaLakeshore, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, today marks World Elder Abuse Awareness Day. Underestimated and under-reported, elder abuse exists across the world. At risk of neglect and assault, many of the most vulnerable older persons reside in our long-term care facilities. They are the seniors who have built our country and shaped our communities, who have shown us resilience, courage and selflessness, who have made us stronger, and whose work and teachings continue to inspire us. They are parents and grandparents, brothers and sisters, friends and mentors. We have not been there for them in the same way they've been there for us throughout their lives. The Canadian Forces report, alongside the climbing disproportionate death toll in our long-term care facilities, has reconfirmed the ugly, indefensible reality of elder abuse and neglect in Canada. In my community, we mourn the deaths of 68 seniors from one long-term care facility alone, Camilla Care. We must make the same unwavering commitment to older persons as they have shown to us. We must protect and uphold their human rights. We must do better. The Chair: Before proceeding, I just want to bring up to the members in the background that we want to keep it as simple and as parliamentary as possible in keeping it neutral. We'll now move to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett (LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, CPC): During these trying times, the residents of LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes have risen to the challenge. They've made sacrifices and gone above and beyond to make the lives of their neighbours better and to keep our communities safe. It would be impossible to list everyone who has emerged as a community hero, but I'd like to highlight a few, like Lily, an eight-year-old from Elgin who raised funds for her local food bank by building and selling squirrel picnic tables, and Louise Boardman from Spencerville who's making masks for long-term care facilities and selling others in support of the Breast Cancer Action centre. The Knights of Columbus in Prescott raised funds and are distributing some $27,000 in support of charitable groups throughout the region. The Knights of Columbus in Kemptville are working overtime operating the local food bank. Who can forget our top-notch health care workers like Hannah and Mary at the Brockville COVID-19 testing centre? It is the people of LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes that make it so great. To everyone working to make a difference and to all of our essential workers, thank you. The Chair: Next is Mr. Anandasangaree. Mr. Gary Anandasangaree (ScarboroughRouge Park, Lib.): Mr. Chair, the Indian Act enshrined racism into Canadian law in 1876, and, through residential schools, the child welfare system, our legal system and our police, we criminalized and tore apart indigenous peoples. The deaths of Chantel Moore and Rodney Levi and the assault on Chief Allan Adam are recent examples of systemic racism within the RCMP. Sadly, the RCMP leadership has failed to acknowledge this reality and its root causes. These same systems negatively impact black Canadians. Anti-black racism has resulted in more young black men being jailed, children being streamed or excluded from schools and negative police interaction due to profiling. Black lives matter. No single Canadian is responsible for the prevalence of systemic racism; we all are. Collectively we build institutions that discriminate based on race. It is now time to reimagine and rework our institutions, starting with our police, to ensure that all Canadians can achieve their truest potential. The Chair: Ms. Larouche, you have the floor. Ms. Andranne Larouche (Shefford, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chair. June15 is World Elder Abuse Awareness Day. I want to remind members of the link between abuse and the problems of economic dependency among seniors. Improving their purchasing power means reducing the risk of them falling victim to abusive people. That's why the increase in the old age security benefit and the guaranteed income supplement must be extended beyond the pandemic. In three weeks, our seniors will receive their first cheque, when they should be receiving their second. A date must also be announced for the new horizons for seniors program, which helps several groups develop projects to break the isolation of seniors. In closing, I would like to mention the organization Justice alternative et mdiation that during the pandemic, along with other organizations in Shefford, has set up the project Une histoire pour la tienne, which also serves to mark this day. It's a virtual meeting between young people and seniors, allowing them to exchange some inspiring life experiences. Since age prejudice is very much present, I applaud this project, which aims to make us understand each other better and judge each other less. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Sangha. Mr. Ramesh Sangha (Brampton Centre, Lib.): Mr. Chair, in the time of this terrible crisis affecting all Canadians, when we are all thinking about how best to deal with it, let's all think about the people around us. Let's show our representation not only to those in the sector of sanctioned workers, but also to all those Canadians who day by day stand up and make a difference. Every day I am proud of the reactions of Canadians to this crisis. I want to acknowledge and celebrate all the contributions made by the people of Brampton Centre, all religious institutions, civil society and community organizations like Knights Table in my riding. We are all standing together to fight COVID-19. Let's continue working hard with that same spirit to get positive results out. Thank you very much. The Chair: I will proceed to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff (BruceGreyOwen Sound, CPC): Mr. Chair, whether graduating from elementary school, high school, Georgian College or graduating from colleges or universities across the country, I am proud of the accomplishments of all the graduates across BruceGreyOwen Sound. I would also like to congratulate and thank all the teachers and parents who have adapted to teaching online or from home and who have supported these graduates over the course of their academic careers. I'd like to extend special congratulations to Cameron Lovell, who just graduated from grade eight, as well as to Neebeesh and Neebin Elliott, originally from the Nawash unceded first nation on the Bruce Peninsula, who will be headed to Michigan State University, and to Jared Lumley from Owen Sound, who just graduated from my alma mater, the Royal Military College of Canada. The college motto of Truth, Duty, Valour is something all Canadians should aspire to live by. I wish all the best to these graduates on their next adventures. I and Canada cannot wait to see how their dreams and goals impact and change the world. I congratulate BruceGreyOwen Sound graduates. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Cormier. Mr. Serge Cormier (AcadieBathurst, Lib.): Today I pay tribute to RichardLosier, an entrepreneur, visionary and builder who died on June9,2020, surrounded by his family. Mr. Losier is a giant in the Acadian Peninsula business community. In1968, he co-founded St. Isidore Asphalte, a company that now has more than 200employees. He also launched many other businesses over the years. He was unifying and generous, a philanthropist who cared about young people and never missed an opportunity to improve their lives. I met Mr. Losier when I was 14years old, and I can say that he has been a positive influence in my life. Every time I met him, he gave me a lot of advice and encouragement, which I've never forgotten. Mr. Losier's legacy to his community is invaluable. His commitment remains an example for all of us to follow. Mr. Losier now joins his wife, Nolla. I offer my most sincere condolences to his children, Richard Jr. , Ronald, Nathalie, Caroline and Stphane, and to his family and friends. Rest in peace, Mr. Losier. You will be greatly missed. Thank you for everything you've done for our region. The Chair: We will now go to Ms. Dabrusin. Ms. Julie Dabrusin (TorontoDanforth, Lib.): Hello from my community in east end Toronto. People talk about how a city the size of Toronto can be cold, but that's far from the truth in my community. I want to give a shout-out to our teachers, like Mr. Wong of Earl Grey Senior Public School, who delivered home-baked cookies and handwritten notes to all of his students, or Monsieur Steve, who's offering online French classes, or the teachers of Riverdale Collegiate, who paraded through our streets to celebrate our graduates. Our local Michael Garron Hospital put out a call for community members to sew masks and received over 60,000 masks, including those made by Lisa Tancre of Chartwell Avondale Retirement Residence. Michelle Beaton organized a front window scavenger hunt to entertain children and their families. Restaurants, even while facing adversity, have been generously donating food, like the members of the Leslieville BIA or Mezes. There are so many more stories of generosity that I could share, but I'm out of time. I thank everyone who has stepped up. We all appreciate all of their hard work. The Chair: We will now go to Ms. Sahota. Ms. Jag Sahota (Calgary Skyview, CPC): Mr. Chair, on Saturday night, Calgarians, particularly those in the northeast, in my riding of Calgary Skyview, witnessed a devastating storm, the likes of which I have not seen in my lifetime. Homes, vehicles, community buildings and structures suffered significant damage due to large hail, floods and high winds. People acted quickly to seek shelter. I'm so grateful that there have been no reports of personal injury or loss of life. I went around the community yesterday to survey the damage. It is extensive. My heart aches for those who have been impacted by the storm in an already incredibly difficult time, but we are resilient. We know that in the coming weeks there will be a lot of cleanup required, both to personal property and in the community. I know my constituents, and we will help one another get through this together. I will work hard to do everything I can to help rebuild this community. The Chair: Mr. Serr, you have the floor. Mr. Marc Serr (Nickel Belt, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to express my sincere gratitude to the people of West Nippissing who organized Pride activities to celebrate the LGBTQ community in June. This week, we are also celebrating National Public Service Week. I thank the public servants for their dedication to the Nickel Belt community and the Valley East and Rayside-Balfour areas. The Chair: Next is Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya (MarkhamUnionville, CPC): Mr. Chair, when COVID-19 began spreading across Ontario, Markham, like many other communities, was unprepared. Our front-line health care workers did not have enough personal protective equipment to do their jobs safely. When Markham residents heard about these shortages, my office was flooded with calls from people who had PPE and wanted to donate. Since then my office has been able to deliver tens of thousands of PPE supplies to front-line health care workers and five masks to each family in need. This pandemic has shown that no matter what the challenge is, the Markham community will overcome it. Today, I would like to thank the front-line health care workers who are doing incredible work. I would also like to thank all those who have helped in Markham's hour of need. The Chair: I understand we had a bit of a glitch there. I'm sorry. With the pause, we thought that was the end of it. Mr. Serr, I would ask you to continue. I understand you started to switch languages. Please continue. You have 30seconds. Mr. Marc Serr: Thank you. I'm switching to English now. Thank you to our nurses, doctors, pharmacists, cashiers, janitors. Thank you to various retail workers and first responders dealing with COVID-19. You keep our communities safe and healthy, and you feed us. Your dedication and sacrifice are greatly appreciated. As we start to see local businesses reopen, it is important for all of us to remember to follow best practices outlined by local public health. Our front-line workers deserve our respect. It is important for all of us to respect social distancing, to protect all workers and their families. Together we can remain strong and united as we continue to face this challenge together. The Chair: Again, my apologies for skipping over there, but now we'll to to Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod (KamloopsThompsonCariboo, CPC): Mr. Chair, in commemoration of Italian Heritage Month, I would like to pay tribute to the Colombo Lodge and Italian Cultural Centre in Kamloops, British Columbia. The Colombo Lodge was founded in 1914 and is an integral part of our community. Recently they began Colombo Cares take-home dinners with proceeds distributed to different non-profit organizations throughout the region. Last month they very generously gave away hundreds of dinners to Royal Inland Hospital staff and paramedics for their tireless work throughout the pandemic. In their own words they say, Colombo Lodge is very proud of the Italians that have made Kamloops their home. Community members of Italian ancestrypast and presenthave helped and continue to help Kamloops prosper as a giving, welcoming and inclusive community. Personally, I want to thank all members for their friendship and generosity over the years. Our community is forever grateful for their kindness. The Chair: We'll now proceed to Mr. Harris. Mr. Jack Harris (St. John's East, NDP): Mr. Chair, many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are facing a serious financial crisis. Most people with disabilities are waiting to be included in the Liberals'promised program. Fish plant workers will need support to avoid a disastrous year. Many small businesses don't qualify for programs. Municipalities need emergency help to meet the crisis. People are worried about what will happen when the CERB runs out in two weeks'time, and the coming tourism season looks very grim. The province itself is in serious financial crisis due to the pandemic and the decline in oil prices. The federal government must overhaul and enhance the fiscal stabilization program to help Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and other oil-producing provinces through this crisis. Both the province and the oil and gas industry players have committed to net zero emissions by 2050. This is a challenge and an opportunity to transition to a sustainable energy future, but it will require significant investment and support by government to keep the industry strong and make this a just transition for workers. Much has been done. Much more needs to be done. The Chair: Ms. Gaudreau, you have the floor. Ms. Marie-Hlne Gaudreau (LaurentidesLabelle, BQ): Mr. Chair, all 44elected municipal officials in the riding of LaurentidesLabelle and I have sent a letter to the government asking that cellular and high-speed Internet networks be made available to all. The crisis has accelerated the demonstration of the need for these networks in daily life. The territorial complexity of the Laurentians means that there are areas where the signal is weak, unstable or non-existent. There is an urgent and essential need to change the infrastructure of the current networks. Also, because of the lockdown, Internet failures are being felt, and they prevent distance learning, telemedicine and teleworking, among other things. How can our municipalities develop economically if they can't provide their community with adequate communication tools? We are therefore calling on the government to put the interests of its people first by investing massively right now in the construction of high-speed Internet and cellular infrastructure. The Chair: Mr. Waugh. Mr. Kevin Waugh (SaskatoonGrasswood, CPC): I rise today to pay tribute to Sir Winston Churchill, the former prime minister of Great Britain and one of the greatest leaders history has ever known. In what can only be called a lifetime of service, Churchill's contributions to the Commonwealth and to the world are without equal. During the Second World War he led the allied forces in Europe against the tyranny and fascism of Adolph Hitler and his Nazi regime. When our world was in its darkest hour, Churchill's leadership was a beacon of hope and freedom. I am reminded of something he once said, All the greatest things are simple, and many can be expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honour, duty, mercy, hope. Sir Winston Churchill himself embodied all of these great things and will forever be a symbol of freedom, democracy and hope. The Chair: Mr. Gerretsen. Mr. Mark Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands, Lib.): Mr. Chair, I would like to add my voice to the recognition and celebration of Pride Month, which is celebrated annually during June. Pride Month is important for Canadians because we can be proud of who we are and celebrate our diversity. This June is different from previous years as we cannot celebrate in person all together. However, I know the ongoing pandemic will not stop us from showing our love and support for the LGBTQ+ community. To celebrate Pride Month this year, my office distributed 3,000 pride maple leaf pins across the country; whoever asked received one. Although the majority was sent to constituents in my riding, over 500 pins were sent to the neighbouring ridings of LanarkFrontenacKingston, LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, and HastingsLennox and Addington. It warms my heart to see so many Canadians showing their support. Happy Pride, everyone. The Chair: We will now proceed to the questioning of ministers. Please note that we will suspend the proceedings twice to allow employees who provide support for the sitting to substitute for each other safely. Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell (Louis-Saint-Laurent, CPC): Mr. Chair, I am very pleased to take part in today's meeting of this parliamentary committee. Canada has been dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic for three months now. The situation now seems to be improving, although we must remain vigilant. Economically, business people and the entire Canadian economy depend on government decisions. My question is very simple: when will the economic update take place? Hon. Chrystia Freeland (Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): Mr. Chair, I thank the hon. member for his question. I agree with him that Canada and Canadians are doing an excellent and difficult job in the fight against coronavirus. As for the economy, our government is there for Canadians, for workers and for businesses, and it will continue to be. Mr. Grard Deltell: Canadians, business people and businesses want to know where the government is headed. When will the economic update take place? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, Canadians know that the government is there to support them. Eight The Chair: We return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Canadians and Quebeckers also know that the Government of Quebec will table its economic update this week. Why isn't the federal government doing the same? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I'm pleased to explain to hon. members and to Canadians what the government is doing for the economy The Chair: We return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, it is a real pleasure for me to explain to the minister and everybody in the House of Commons that today the Saskatchewan government will table its economic update. Why can't Ottawa do that? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I'm delighted to have the opportunity to share with Canadians what our government is doing to support workers, businesses and the economy. Eight million Canadians have received the CERB, essential support for Canadian workers and their families. The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, 11 days ago the Newfoundland government tabled its own economic update. We see governments acting correctly for their people, except for the Liberal government, which cannot table an economic update. When will the Liberal government table an economic update, which Canadians would like to see? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I am delighted to share with the member opposite and with Canadians what we are doing practically that has meaning for Canadians. Let me talk about what we are doing for Canadian businesses. Nearly 670,000 Canadian businesses have received support The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: In Canada, the Quebec government will table its economic update this week. The Saskatchewan government tabled its economic update today. The Newfoundland government has tabled its economic update. Everybody is working hard in Canada, and the business community would like to know where the Liberal government is going. The question is crystal clear. When will the Liberal government table an economic update? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, Canadian workers and Canadian businesses want to know that our government is here to support them. I have shared with this House our support for Canadian workers through the CERB. I've spoken about the CEBA, and let me point out that more than $26 billion of support has been given through that essential program. Let me talk about the wage subsidy. More than 2. 6 million The Chair: We'll return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, this is starting to get interesting; the minister is revealing some of these expenses. Could the minister tell us how much the government has spent in the last three months? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I will continue in French by explaining what our government is doing for Canadians and workers The Chair: Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, this is a little bit concerning for all Canadians, because this government cannot say when they will table the economic update, cannot identify how much money they have spent in the last three months and cannot say what is the deficit of Canada. Is somebody in this government running this country correctly? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, absolutely we are running this country, and we are supporting our economy. In fact, we appreciate that Canada currently is experiencing its greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression. That is why we have devoted nearly 11% of GDP to support Canadian workers and Canadian businesses. I want to assure Canadians The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Normandin. Ms. Normandin, you have the floor. Ms. Christine Normandin (Saint-Jean, BQ): Mr. Chair, there are times when Quebec and the provinces are not just two solitudes, but they get along and speak as one, such as when the time comes to tell the government to mind its own business. On reading section91 of the Constitution Act, 1982, which sets out the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal government, nowhere do I find that the federal government must meddle by attaching conditions to health transfers. It is Quebec and the provinces that hire the medical personnel, doctors, nurses and caretakers. It is Quebec and the provinces that are responsible for purchasing the necessary equipment. It is Quebec and the provinces that know what is happening on the ground and what their needs are. Will the government do the only thing within its authority, which is to take the cheque, sign it and put it in the mail? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I thank the hon. member for her question. We fully understand the importance of federal support for the provinces, especially in our national fight against the coronavirus. I agree with the hon. member that we must give financial support to the provinces, including Quebec absolutely. I would also like to point out the importance of the support of the Canadian Armed Forces, who are doing an important and excellent job in Quebec and Ontario today, right now. Ms. Christine Normandin: Mr. Chair, I am glad to see that there is recognition of the importance of transferring this money. My question is whether it can be transferred unconditionally; that's what I'm asking. There's a state of emergency. In the past, we have seen that it takes a long time to negotiate conditions with the federal government. We saw it in the case of the Quebec City tramway, and we are still seeing it now in the case of transfers for housing in Quebec, for which there is no agreement and, therefore, no transfer of money. Will the federal government send the money free of conditions? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the hon. member said in her first question that the only thing the federal government had to do on health care was to sign the cheques. I can't agree because, today, at this time, at the request of the Premier of Quebec, the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces are in Quebec today; they're there to save the lives of seniors The Chair: We now return to Ms. Normandin. Ms. Christine Normandin: It was indeed at Quebec's request. What I'm saying is that, at present, the provinces are unanimously asking that there be no conditions. It's urgent that the money be transferred. The federal government's job here is to sign the cheque and send it to the provinces. The government's job is also to make Parliament work. This is where there should be negotiations so that we can work, among other things, to send money to people living with disabilities, to make sure we fight CERB fraud and to make sure that court time limits are effective in the current crisis. Can the government focus on the issue in order to respect the provinces and transfer money for health care? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: I thank the hon. member for her question, Mr. Chair. I agree with the hon. member that the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces are in Quebec today at the request of the Province of Quebec. That said, I hope that the hon. member will agree with me that being there for Quebec's seniors, that saving the lives of Quebec's seniors, is much more than simply signing cheques. I am very proud of the work the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces are doing. I think we all should thank these people who are working for Canada, for Quebec, and who are doing an important and excellent job. Ms. Christine Normandin: Mr. Chair, I think the Deputy Prime Minister misunderstood me when I was talking about the importance of acting quickly. Negotiations between the government and the provinces take an awfully long time because the federal government decides to place conditions where there shouldn't be any. Right now, the only important thing is to transfer the money quickly so that it can be used in our hospitals and our long-term care facilities, where the need is desperate. Quebec and the provinces know exactly what their needs are. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I would like to point out the extent to which the federal government is there to support the provinces, including Quebec. We have increased funding to the provinces and territories by $500million to help them prepare for COVID-19 outbreaks. This funding is in addition to the $40billion that we already provide annually to the provinces and territories. That's a lot of money. It is strong endorsement The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh (Burnaby South, NDP): Mr. Chair, systemic racism is killing people. It's killing black people and it's killing indigenous people. Recently, Rodney Levi was another victim of systemic racism. He was killed in New Brunswick by the RCMP. To deal with systemic racism, we need systemic change. Will the Liberal government commit to systemic change so that not another life is ever taken again? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I thank the member opposite for the extremely important question, and I'll take this opportunity to acknowledge the work that he has done for many years fighting racism in Canada. Our government absolutely acknowledges that systemic racism exists in Canada. It exists in all of our institutions, including the police and the RCMP. I agree with the member opposite that now is the moment to fight this The Chair: Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, I thank the Deputy Prime Minister very much for the response, but there are some specific actions we need to take. There are movements. Black Lives Matter, as a movement, is calling for the defunding of police. What they're saying is we need to make better choices with how money is being spent. When someone is in need of a wellness check or a mental health check, money, financing and support should go to mental health workers and health care workers, not the police. Is the government prepared to fund and prioritize health care workers over the police? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the member quite rightly began his questions by speaking about systemic racism against indigenous people in Canada, and I would like to speak about that for a moment. I spoke to Perry Bellegarde this morning, because it is such a crucial issue. We can describe it as the original sin of our country. I absolutely agree that we need root and branch reform, including in how policing is done in Canada. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, will the Liberal government commit to a review of the use of force as outlined for the RCMP? Will the Liberals commit to that change? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister and the Minister of Public Safety had many conversations last week with the RCMP. We all accept that The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, will the government commit to ensuring that de-escalation receives priority? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Let me continue, Mr. Chair. Systemic racism exists in all of our federal institutions, including the RCMP. It's time to put an end to it. Let me just say The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, I'm not getting an answer. Will the Prime Minister or the Liberal government commit to something simple and ensure that at the federal level, racial profiling, street checks and carding are expressly prohibited? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, sadly, I can't agree that rooting out systemic racism is going to be simple, but I can agree that racial profiling is absolutely inappropriate. It is not something that we should The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Well, I'm going to try to get another commitment from the government, because they don't seem able to commit to something as clear as ending racial profiling. We know that millions of Canadians in a couple of weeks are going to be faced with the reality of their CERB ending. These families are worried about how they're going to put food on the table, because they can't return to a job. Will the Liberal government commit today so that those families will have some concrete support, yes or no? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, let me be clear, as I was in my previous answer, that our government clearly is opposed to racial profiling. This is a wrong practice and we're very clear about our position there. Now when it comes to the CERB, I absolutely share the concern of the member opposite. The Canadian economy is in its direst state since the Great Depression. We know that all the jobs have not yet come back. We know that Canadian workers, Canadian families, continue to need The Chair: We'll now pause for a short time to allow staff to change within the safety parameters for the COVID-19 virus, and as we resume, we will go to Ms. Harder. Ms. Rachael Harder (Lethbridge, CPC): Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister has mandated his ministers, and I quote, to govern in a positive, open and collaborative way. Ironically, as it stands, Parliament is currently closed for business. Opposition parties have little opportunity to hold the ruling party to account, private members'bills cannot be tabled and legislation cannot be debated. Can the Prime Minister, Mr. Trudeau himself, help us understand how all of this fits into his definition of so-called open government? The Honourable Pablo Rodriguez (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons): Well, Mr. Chair, we're here, right? We're here, and the opposition is asking questions. They have the equivalent of eight question periods instead of five to ask questions. They have more time than before, so I don't know why they're not happy about it. Ms. Rachael Harder: That's like when I'm asking for a full meal and your handing me a few jellybeans and saying, Why aren't you happy with that? Mr. Chair, here's the thing. It's like switching a light on and off when it's convenient for the Prime Minister and for the Liberal Party. That's what they want to do here. That's not Parliament. That's not democracy. When will Mr. Trudeau do the right thing, turn the lights on and get back to work for Canadians? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I'm really sorry to hear that my colleague's not working. I can assure you, Mr. Chair, on this side of the House, we're all actually working very hard and we're answering the questions from the opposition. Why? It's because it's extremely important. I sat there for seven years asking questions. I understand important Ms. Rachael Harder: The member opposite knows very well that he is misleading the Canadian public. This is not true Parliament. This is simply a special committee. Here's the thing. On the Liberal Party website, under the platform commitment, it says that Parliament works best when its members are free to do what they have been elected to do, and that is be the voice for their communities and hold the government to account. This is a Liberal document. Did the Prime Minister forget that strengthening Parliament was part of his 2019 platform commitment? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague for quoting our excellent platform. That was a very very good document. The thing is, I think we've reached a balance whereby MPs can come from different places, mostly around Ottawa, and ask questions; but also we can have colleagues from across the country asking questions. Why does my colleague think it is better to have only 35 MPs participating instead of 338? Ms. Rachael Harder: Does the Prime Minister value democracy, or does he still look up to China's basic dictatorship? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, we're answering all the questions from the opposition, not only from the people in this room, but we're answering The Chair: It's back to Ms. Harder now. Ms. Rachael Harder: I'll ask the question again. Does the Prime Minister still value the basic dictatorship of China over Canada's democracy? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I don't know where the colleague wants to go from here, Mr. Chair. I'd like to know from her why it is not important to her that her colleagues participate directly. Ms. Rachael Harder: Mr. Trudeau wrote to his ministers and said to them that they continue to raise the bar on openness, effectiveness and transparency. He went on to explain that This means. . . government that is open by default. We now have a parliament that is currently shut down. Mr. Trudeau has shut it down and has prevented us from being able to do to the good work that Canadians expect us to do. Is this Mr. Trudeau's idea of open by default? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, do they want to talk about shutting down Parliament? How about the time they prorogued Parliament twicenot only once, but twice? The Conservative government shut down Parliament twice. I was here. I was sitting on the other side of the aisle. It's quite the opposite now. We're taking all the questions. This place is open, and we're answering questions. The Chair: One moment, please. I haven't acknowledged you yet, Ms. Harder. We've stopped the time there. I want to remind honourable members that questions and answers are being given, and we want to hear both sides. Please keep the heckling down. Ms. Harder, please proceed. Ms. Rachael Harder: In 2014, the leader of the Liberal Party developed a policy resolution entitled Restoring Trust in Canada's Democracy. That's ironic, because right now, again, Parliament is currently shut down. We are prevented from being able to do the good work that we are expected to do. At the time, the Prime Minister said, Canadians want their Members of Parliament to be effective voices for their communities in Ottawa, and not merely mouthpieces in their communities for an all-too-powerful Prime Minister. Sadly, Mr. Trudeau has become the all-too-powerful prime minister that he once believed should not exist. Why did he change his mind? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, I'd like to know why my colleague wants to shut down the voices of her colleagues who could not speak and could not participate in this room. Mr. Chair, how would we vote on private members'bills, for example? As you know, it is not a government vote or a party vote; it's per row. You want to come back? Are you going to acceptMr. Chair, through youthat we have electronic voting, yes or no? The Chair: We'll go on to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, we know that the Minister of Foreign Affairs has champagne tastes and London flats, but it's his champagne mortgages that Canadians are concerned about. Specifically, why did the minister only disclose the complete extent of his personal debt to the Chinese government on June 4 of this year? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, as you know, since the minister entered politics, his two mortgages and other liabilities and assets have been fully disclosed to the Ethics Commissioner and placed on the online public registry. It's public, Mr. Chair. It's public. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Now it's public and it's terrible. When will the foreign affairs minister be here to answer these questions himself? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, it's always been public. We're in the middle of a pandemic here, trying to help Canadians, and the best they can do is ask questions about The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: When the minister owes over a million dollars to the Chinese government, people have a right to ask him questions. When will the Minister of Foreign Affairs show up? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: The minister shows up every day, Mr. Chair. He shows up and works for Canadians. Once again, those are public documents. Everything the minister did is public. I still don't know why they ask The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, he doesn't even have to come to the House. All he has to do is appear on the screen. Where is the minister? Why is he hiding? Why won't he answer questions about his personal debt to the Chinese government? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, if he goes online he's going to get the information. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, the minister is hiding. Let's ask some specific questions about their China policy. What is the impact on the decision-making? Three-quarters of Canadians don't want Huawei involved in our 5G network. Will the minister put the interests of Canadians ahead of the interests of his creditors and say no to Huawei? Hon. Navdeep Bains (Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry): Mr. Chair, when it comes to 5G deployment, we are right now currently undergoing a comprehensive review. We have been absolutely clear with allies and with Canadians that we never have and never will compromise Canadians'national interests. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, that is not an answer, and it is completely out of step with what our allies have already recognized. Reports are emerging of multiple deadly viruses exported from Winnipeg's microbiology laboratory to the Wuhan Institute of Virology right before scientists were expelled for policy breaches. In spite of that, scientific co-operation between Canadian institutions and the military-affiliated Wuhan Institute of Virology is continuing. Why hasn't the government put in place new guidelines to prevent the export of sensitive pathogens and information to China? Hon. Patty Hajdu (Minister of Health): Mr. Chair, he's right that in 2019 the National Microbiology Laboratory shared lab samples with the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The National Microbiology Laboratory routinely shares samples with other labs to help advance the international community's understanding of viruses and the research that is ongoing around those viruses. There are strict protocols in place for these transfers, and these samples were transported according to Canadian laws and regulations. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, I think Canadians would be concerned to hear that it's routine to transport viruses to Chinese military-affiliated labs. When Champagne was the parliamentary secretary for finance, the government decided to give hundreds of millions of dollars to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, bankrolling Chinese state-controlled development projects in Asia with weak standards in labour, human rights and environment. Will the minister put Canadian taxpayers ahead of his personal creditors and support a pullout from the Communist Party-controlled development bank? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Once again, Mr. Chair, my colleague is trying to connect the dots, and I don't know exactly where he is going from here, but everything is public. There's a thing called Google. He can go on it and check the information. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, the public can listen to this. I'm sure this exchange will also be available on Google, and the public can draw their own conclusions. We have failures on 5G, failures when it comes to the transport of deadly viruses and failures when it comes to giving over $400 million to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. It's clear that the Bank of China's investment in Minister Champagne is paying off. It's time for the minister to settle his debt with the Communist government and not settle it on the backs of Canadians. When will the minister be here in the House and answer questions about this mortgage? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: My colleague should be cautious with what he is saying in the House, Mr. Chair. This is serious stuff. He should be careful about what he says. The minister is actually working extremely hard for all Canadians and is doing his job correctly, Mr. Chair. We're talking about public information. Once again, let him go to Google and google it. That's it. The Chair: Now we'll go to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett: Canada's ambassador to the United Nations sent a letter last week to all member states of the UN promising that Canada would consider providing more funding for UNRRA, the same UNRRA that is a front for Hamas, which allows weapons of terror to be stored in schools and provides textbooks that call for the destruction of Israel. Do these Liberals have no shame when it comes to their quest for a seat on the UN Security Council? Hon. Mary Ng (Minister of Small Business, Export Promotion and International Trade): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to thank the honourable member for that question. We know that at this time Canada must show leadership in the face of global challenges. More than ever, Canada is playing a positive role by being a champion in diversity and inclusion, supporting the global fight against COVID-19, addressing climate change, leading peace and security efforts and helping the most vulnerable. A seat on the Security Council will allow Canada to be a strong voice for a fairer, more inclusive and prosperous The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett: Mr. Chair, I received a letter from Bob Anderson this week, who's advocating for his neighbours like Jean Grevelding, who owns a cottage at Butternut Bay. Like many people, Jean is an American who owns a property on our side of the border. These people are taxpaying members of our communities. These folks have plans in place to follow all Canadian quarantine rules. They're concerned about leaving their properties uncared for over the summer. Will folks like Jean be allowed to cross the border to check on their properties this summer? Hon. Bill Blair (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Of course, our priority is and always has been and always must be the protection of the health and safety of Canadians. That's why we put in place these restrictions for non-essential travel and have required, through the Public Health Agency of Canada, a 14-day quarantine. I don't know the specifics of the person for whom you advocate, but we want to make sure that if they come into Canada, it is for an essential purpose and that they do it safely and respect the quarantine that has been put in place. Mr. Michael Barrett: With nine branches throughout my riding, the Royal Canadian Legion offers a great deal to veterans and rural communities alike. They have been experiencing hardship and a loss of revenue, to the point where they may be forced to shut their doors. The Zone G2 commander and local mayors such as Roger Haley have reached out to me expressing their dire need. Will the government offer support to Legions across the country so they can continue to carry out their vital work for our veterans? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (Minister of Veterans Affairs): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Yes, we have done a lot to help support groups like the Legions. There is a $350-million emergency community support fund. If they're supplying any help to people regarding COVID, this fund is there. Indeed, we're doing everything we can to make sure that we help the Legions and other groups that do so much to help veterans right across the country. Mr. Michael Barrett: On May 21, the minister stated that her team was working as quickly as it could to fill the gaps in CEBA. It has now been three weeks, and many business owners, such as mortgage broker Corinna Smith-Gatcke, are still left in the lurch amid the delays, which are pushing businesses closer to shutting their doors for good. Will these businesses have access to CEBA before it's too late for them? Hon. Mary Ng: Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I thank the honourable member for that really important question on our Canadian small businesses. Those businesses can absolutely have access to the loan at their financial institution this Friday, and I would encourage them to go and see their bank or credit union. I want businesses to know that nothing is more important for us than making sure they get the support they need during this difficult time. Mr. Michael Barrett: The County Road 43 expansion project is critical for my riding and the region as a whole. This project will widen the road, increasing safety for the 18,000 motorists who travel the road every day. It's been 334 days since the provincial and local governments announced funding, but there has been nothing from this Liberal government. It's been 181 days since Minister McKenna told me her staff were reviewing the project. Today, there is still nothing, and for the last month the minister's team has not even found the time to respond to my request for an update. Will Minister McKenna finally stop with the delays and commit to funding this project today? Hon. Catherine McKenna (Minister of Infrastructure and Communities): Mr. Chair, as the member opposite knows, we work with provinces and territories to advance our infrastructure investments. We're making investments across the country. They are making a real difference in people's lives. We're always happy to work with members of Parliament, but they must also work with provinces and territories so that projects are advanced by them to our office. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall (YorktonMelville, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Through you, has Mr. MacAulay read ombudsman Dalton's May 2020 report, Financial Compensation for Canadian Veterans: A comparative analysis of benefit regimes? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I apologize, but I'll have to ask my honourable colleague to repeat the question. The Chair: Mrs. Wagantall, we'll freeze the time so that there's no extra time taken. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Thank you, Chair. My question was whether Mr. MacAulay has read ombudsman Dalton's May 2020 report, Financial Compensation for Canadian Veterans: A comparative analysis of benefit regimes. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I appreciate my honourable colleague's question. Of course, I appreciate Mr. Dalton's input and all that he has done for veterans. We've discussed it many times. I've done everything and worked with him in order to make sure that we bring the proper compensation to veterans The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: As a result of that study, are the financial outcomes Canada seeks to provide for ill and injured veterans now clearly defined within the Department of Veterans Affairs? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, as the member would know, I am to bring a report to the veterans affairs committee, and there are a number of things done in order to make sure that report is The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Then I would suggest that we get our committee up and going as it should be. Where are these financial directions published? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Well, of course, lockdown, but just under $90 million that the government put in supplementary estimates to make sure we address the backlog for Veterans Affairs. It's a major help The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Minister, are Canadian Armed Forces members provided with a copy of this document? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, my honourable colleague would have to ask the Canadian Armed Forces that question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: There are three different providing lifetime benefits for ill and injured veterans. In Ombudsman Dalton's recent report, did any one of these three provide the best compensation in all nine scenarios that were studied? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Of course, as she knows, there's been a lot of work done in order to make sure that we provide the proper compensation to veterans. We're working very hard, with a lot of help from Mr. Dalton, to make sure that the appropriate The Chair: We'll now continue with Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: In the undisclosed settlement of Sean Bruyea's legal case against Seamus O'Regan and the Liberal government, a joint statement says. . . Canadians, especially all Veterans and their families, are encouraged to enter the public debate about policies and programs that affect our Veterans and their families. Does Mr. MacAulay agree with this statement? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I can assure you that anybody is welcome to enter any discussion on compensation of veterans. We're always open to what we can do in order to make sure that we provide appropriate compensation. I don't think the term would be appropriate, but it would provide some compensation to veterans who truly deserve it. They defend our democracy The Chair: We'll go back to Ms. Wagantall. Oh, I'm sorry Ms. Andranne Larouche: Mr. Chair, I have a point of order. The interpretation hasn't worked for a few interventions. It's difficult to follow the exchange between the hon. member and the minister. The Chair: We're having a problem with the interpretation. Minister and Ms. Wagantall, you are joining us virtually. I'm wondering if you have the right language on at the bottom of your screen. We'll start with that for troubleshooting. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: I have English. The Chair: Very good. Minister MacAulay, what do you have? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I have English, Mr. Chair. The Chair: Very good. Then we'll check on our side. Ms. Larouche, did I understand correctly that the interpretation didn't work for both speakers? Ms. Andranne Larouche: The sound didn't allow the interpreters to do their job. It seemed to be a problem with the sound. The Chair: In that case, I would ask both members to maybe put their mike a little bit close to their mouth. We'll see how that works. I'm looking at the screen, and I notice the mike is a little bit far. Could we bend it in a little bit more? I appreciate that. Thank you for your patience. We'll give it another try. Ms. Wagantall, please go ahead. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: On a point of order, quite often while I'm trying to speak, there are lots of other voices in the background. The Chair: I would ask everyone to please be on mute, as well as for anyone in the chamber to please refrain from speaking loudly. Just whisper among yourselves if you have something to say. We'll take this one from the top. We have a minute and 45 seconds left. Ms. Wagantall, please proceed with your next question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: You said next question, so we're not going backwards, Chair? The Chair: Did we have an answer from Minister MacAulay? No? We'll go to Minister MacAulay to finish up the answer. We'll start at 27 seconds, freeze the clock and hear his answer. Then, because of all of the confusion, we'll start at one minute and 45 seconds when we get going again. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Should I repeat the question, sir? The Chair: Please do. The clock is frozen. After we go through the question and the answer, we'll start the clock again. Mr. Wagantall, please repeat the question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Thank you, Chair. In the undisclosed settlement to Sean Bruyea's legal case against Seamus O'Regan and the Liberal government, a joint statement says, Canadians, especially all Veterans and their families, are encouraged to enter the public debate about policies and programs that affect our Veterans and their families. Does Mr. MacAulay agree with this statement? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I appreciate my honourable colleague's question and concern. Of course I agree. Anybody is quite open to indicate whatever they wish in order to make sure we provide as appropriate a compensation as possible. You can never totally compensate veterans truly for what they deserve, but we want to make sure we provide the best compensation possible. That's what we will do and want to do. The Chair: Ms. Wagantall, we will start the clock again. You have one minute and 45 seconds remaining. Please proceed. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: If that's the case, is Minister MacAulay aware of the practice of red-flagging veterans'files? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I'm not aware. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Since the deputy minister has indicated that he runs the department, will the minister ask him for the names of veterans and the dates and the reasons that they are, or have been, red-flagged by VAC? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I would certainly ask any veteran or anybody who has a concern to contact my office. I will do anything I can to make sure that the veterans The Chair: We'll go back to Ms. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Do the most ill and injured still receive from the pension up to $300,000 less for life? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, as you know and as the Prime Minister indicated when the pension for life was put in place, it was stated that if anybody receives lessthe Prime Minister himself indicated it quite clearlythat must be adjusted. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: For veterans in similar circumstances, should the date of their application for compensation be a factor in determining whether they're treated equitably? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Yes, of course, the date is when the compensation would start. Of course, it's very important and very appropriate. The Chair: Now we will proceed to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd (Sturgeon RiverParkland, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Retired Major Mark Campbell in my riding of Sturgeon RiverParkland lost both legs in the line of duty in Afghanistan. He is an avid sport shooter, but understandably, due to his disability, he is very limited in the kinds of firearms he can use, and all of these firearms have now been banned under the Liberal OIC. My question to the Minister of Public Safety is this: Did their department do a legal analysis and consider the section 15 charter rights of disabled Canadians not to be discriminated against when they passed their OIC? Hon. Bill Blair: Yes, there was a very thorough analysis done by the justice department to ensure that the prohibitions we put in place were, in fact, charter compliant. Let me also say, Mr. Chair, how important it was that we prohibited weapons that were not designed for sporting purposes at all. In fact, they were designed for soldiers to use in combat. They have no place in a civil society. We have prohibited them, and we believeand this has been echoed by many people across the countrythat this will make Canadians safer. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, is the minister aware that the AR-15 is the most popular sporting rifle in Canada, and is he aware that disabled veterans like Major Mark Campbell are unable to participate in the sport of sport shooting because of his OIC? Hon. Bill Blair: I can assure the member that what I am aware of is that the AR-15 and other weapons like them have been used in mass killings in Canada on many occasions, such as at cole Polytechnique, at Dawson College, again at the Quebec mosque and in Moncton. The AR-15s in particular were also used at the terrible tragedy in places like Sandy Hook, where a bunch of kids were killed, so there is no place for The Chair: We will go to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, it has been months since the Liberals shut down this Parliament and months since the Minister of Finance should have presented a budget or at least an economic update to Canadians. Since then we have seen billions spent with little oversight and no plan. The minister says that he needs certainty before he can table a budget. Well, that didn't stop Stephen Harper and the Conservatives from tabling a budget in the depth of the last great recession. When are these Liberals finally going to take their job seriously and table an economic update? Hon. Mona Fortier (Minister of Middle Class Prosperity and Associate Minister of Finance): Mr. Chair, we're taking this very seriously. We're working for Canadians and bringing forward supports to make sure that businesses, workers and Canadians can put food on the table and pay their rent. We will continue to support Canadians, and when we have a clear projection to present, we will do that. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, the results are in, and businesses aren't happy with the so-called support programs from these Liberals. In fact, the oil and gas industry has been shut out of many of these economic programs. When is the government going to recognize that their business support plans have been an absolute failure with only a fraction of the billions promised being accessible to businesses? Hon. Seamus O'Regan (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Chair, our government has taken swift and immediate action to support our sector throughout this challenging time. We had the BCAP, which is critically important to providing liquidity to support the SMEs that make up 85% of the jobs in our sector. It has taken an enormous team effort. People are working around the clock to get money where it needs to be. We are helping hard-working Canadians, small businesses and large businesses right across the country, but in particular in our energy sector. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, I'm pleased to see the Minister of Natural Resources online. He tweeted recently to praise the Alberta Carbon Trunk Line and the North West Redwater Partnership refinery in my riding. Can the minister tell us what, if any, support they have given to the innovative carbon capture and sequestration technology in this country? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Mr. Chair, we see carbon capture and sequestration as an integral part of lowering emissions, making emissions more competitive and making our oil and gas industry more competitive. We're seeing where the investment dollars are going. They are going to jurisdictions that are committed to lowering emissions. Obviously, this government is committing to net zero. Mr. Dane Lloyd: I note that the minister couldn't name a single example of government support for carbon capture, utilization and sequestration technology. We have spent a lot of time talking about the COVID-19 pandemic, but Canadians are living with another horrific reality, that being the intensifying opioid overdose epidemic. Reports indicate that in the past four years, 14,000 Canadians have died, and the numbers during COVID-19 have been skyrocketing, with British Columbia seeing a 39% increase this year alone. I know this because I've lost a family member to a fentanyl overdose. When is the government going to take this scourge seriously and take action to save the lives of Canadians? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Mr. Chair, I share the member's deep sadness about the number of lives we've lost to opioid overdose. Our government has been steadily making it easier for people who live with substance use to access medications to treat substance use, such as prescription Suboxone and methadone. We have made it easier to rapidly establish safe injection sites in communities and have supported community-based projects that work with people who are using substances. We need to understand that this is a complex issue, and we need to support people to get the help they need. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes (AlgomaManitoulinKapuskasing, NDP) ): The hon. member for Thrse-DeBlainville. Ms. Louise Chabot (Thrse-De Blainville, BQ): MadamChair, I will come back to the bill introduced last week. As parliamentarians, we felt like we were watching a very bad play, as I imagine the public did. I say that it was theatre, even though it shouldn't be in this place. The government decided to stage a play and act alone and, unfortunately, there were several acts missing. A very important part of this bill was about supporting people with disabilities in this time of crisis. However, the government did not see fit to negotiate with the opposition parties, even though it is in a minority position. Despite this arrogance, the Bloc Qubcois proposed solutions. One of the things we proposed was to split the bill so that we could give this support to people with disabilities, but the Conservatives did not want to do that. We came back and asked for time to negotiate and give support to people with disabilities, but the government defeated the motion. We asked that the House be recalled today so that we could pass this part of the bill concerning support for people with disabilities, but we are still in the dark. Why are we abandoning people with disabilities? Hon. Ahmed Hussen (Minister of Families, Children and Social Development): I thank the hon. member for her question. We know this pandemic has deeply affected the lives and health of all Canadians and has disproportionately affected Canadians with disabilities in particular. From the very beginning, we've taken a disability-inclusive approach to our emergency response to ensure that Canadians with disabilities get the support they need. That is why we announced a one-time payment of $600 for persons with disabilities to address these expenses. This will go a long way toward helping Canadians with disabilities. We encourage and urge all parties in the opposition to support this measure. We're confident that this measure, along with other investments, will benefit Canadians with disabilities, and we hope to get the support of the other parties very soon. Ms. Louise Chabot: MadamChair, I remind you that this measure wasn't passed because we weren't allowed to do so. A measure to help people with disabilities has been put in an omnibus bill. We've tried here, in the House, to provide the means to give that support, so I ask again, can the government be counted on to give a response to people with disabilities? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, it was absolutely not an omnibus bill. It contained assistance for the disabled, of course, but it also contained assistance for our seasonal workers, as well as a number of other measures that the Bloc Qubcois opposed. They refused to debate and, when the question of splitting the bill came up, the Conservatives refused to do that. That is why there is no bill at the moment, and that is very unfortunate. Ms. Louise Chabot: It was a Bloc Qubcois proposal to split the bill. The government had not thought of it, but they found that it was a good idea. Let me return to the attack. This bill proposed changes to the wage subsidy program, it was supposed to make the CERB more flexible, it proposed fines for fraudsters and, since there was a little section about a benefit for the disabled, the government took it for granted that we would support it without any negotiations with the parties. However, we set one very important condition: that the Liberal Party must get its hands out of taxpayers'pockets in terms of the wage subsidy. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, as we listen to the Bloc Qubcois members, we might think that they invented peanut butter and apple pie. This bill contained a number of measures that all Quebeckers and all Canadians needed, but the Bloc Qubcois refused to debate it. No, we did not follow the Bloc Qubcois'example in splitting the bill; we had thought of it a long time previously. We have not been able to do that because of the Conservatives. Because of them, we cannot help those living with disabilities. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Ms. Chabot, you have 45seconds left. Ms. Louise Chabot: We asked on a number of occasions for the House to be able to sit starting today to pass the part of the bill dealing with those with disabilities. What is the status of that, MadamChair? We have not heard about it since. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, my colleague knows very well that things are not as simple as that. There are procedural mechanisms unique to the House. I hope that, one day, we will be able to pass this bill and be able to provide assistance for those living with disabilities. I hope that the Conservatives will change their minds and give us their support. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Don Valley East, Ms. Ratansi. Ms. Yasmin Ratansi (Don Valley East, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be sharing my time with the member for Surrey Centre. Since 2015 our government has been focused on ensuring its policies mitigate the effects of climate change. Several measures have been implemented for phasing out coal, making polluters pay, providing climate incentives, investing in green technologies and much more, which all together have created a climate plan that is doing more to cut pollution than any other in Canada's history. In my riding of Don Valley East, many innovative businesses have benefited from these investments and initiatives. One area of particular interest is our government's work to protect 25% of Canada's land and 25% of its oceans by 2025. Our natural environment is something that Canadians and my constituents care about deeply. Could the minister update this House on the new conservation projects announced on June 5, World Environment Day, and on how our government is protecting our environment? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, protecting nature is an important part of how we will address climate change and the very real challenges it presents. That's why on June 5, World Environment Day, our government announced over 60 conservation projects under development across Canada. These projects are funded through the Canada Nature Fund's target 1 challenge initiative. They'll conserve Canadian nature and biodiversity and protect species at risk, enhance ecological integrity and connectivity, and enhance the size of Canada's vast network of protected areas. Nearly half of these projects are indigenous-led, with the aim of creating indigenous-protected conserved areas. Madam Chair, projects like these move us closer to our goal of protecting 25% of Canada's lands and oceans by 2025. By working together in partnership with the provinces, territories, municipalities, indigenous peoples and Canadians, together we can protect our natural environment for generations to come. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Ms. Ratansi, since you have 25 seconds left, we will go to the honourable member for Surrey Centre. Mr. Randeep Sarai (Surrey Centre, Lib.): Madam Chair, there are many small and medium-sized businesses in my riding of Surrey Centre. Many have been impacted by COVID-19. They saw a decrease in business or needed to close their doors completely in order to adhere to public safety measures to manage the spread of COVID-19. These measures helped keep our most vulnerable citizens safe and ensured that our hospital and health care providers did not become overwhelmed with a sharp spike in cases. Thanks to our government's COVID-19 emergency response, many of these businesses have been able to keep their employees and access important liquidity through the Canada emergency business account, which provides loans to small businesses and non-profits, and the Canada emergency wage subsidy, which is helping businesses to keep and rehire their employees while their revenues are down by providing up to 75% of wages for up to 24 weeks. As we begin to reopen the economy and Canadians across the country return to the job market, those benefits will be even more important to help businesses and industries rehire their staff and make important adjustments to align with public health guidelines to gradually increase their operations. Can the minister please update the committee on how many Canadian businesses have taken advantage of CEBA and CEWS since applications for each have been opened? Hon. Mary Ng: Madam Chair, I want to begin by thanking the member for Surrey Centre for all the work he does to support his constituents and small businesses. Canadians across the country need to know our government has been working tirelessly and will continue to work tirelessly on their behalf. This is why we put in place the important programs to help them get through this crisis during this difficult time, programs such as the wage subsidy program. We know that in so many businesses the employees are often like extended family members. The wage subsidy has helped these businesses keep their employees on the payroll and are now helping in their rehiring as they slowly and safely restart. There are 348,000 businesses being helped with the wage subsidy program, and this means that 2. 6 million workers are being helped. Businesses are also being helped through the interest-free $40,000 loan they can access through CEBA to help stay afloat and pay their expenses during this crisis. I'm pleased to inform this House that to date more than 669,000 The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for St. John's East. Mr. Jack Harris: Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with my colleague, the member for LondonFanshawe. Madam Chair, with so many recent reports and videos of police using force, sometimes deadly force, and violence against indigenous and black people in Canada, I've called for the public safety committee to reconvene. If the members agree, will the minister come to the committee and provide concrete answers as to how the government intends to address racism inherent in Canada's law enforcement, and in particular the RCMP? Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I thank my colleague for the question. It's perhaps the most important one facing Canada today. Madam Chair, indigenous people, black Canadians and other racialized people are far too often experiencing systemic racism and disparate outcomes within the entire criminal justice system. In order to respond appropriately, I think it's necessary to begin by acknowledging the lived experience of people who've known bias and discrimination at the hands of the police and our courts and within our prisons. We remain committed to working with all racialized people and all of the members of this House to ensure that we work toward social justice for all Canadians, and I look forward to discussing the member's motion further with him. Mr. Jack Harris: Will the minister and the government commit to facilitating such a meeting of this committee virtually? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, the decisions of the committee are the committee's, so I'm sure that this will be a discussion within the committee, but if called, I will certainly be pleased to come with my officials to provide the committee with whatever support and information it needs to contribute to this very important discussion. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Harris, you have 40 seconds. Mr. Jack Harris: In light of what we've seen with Chief Adam in Fort McMurray and the RCMP accepting that the actions were reasonable, will the minister commit to a full review of the use of force by the RCMP, in particular the philosophy, tactics and training that is given to RCMP officers in dealing with the public? Hon. Bill Blair: I thank the member and I want to assure him, first of all, that this is work that is ongoing, not just in the RCMP but throughout the police community. May I also take this opportunity, Madam Chair, to say that I think all police training has to begin with one very important principle, and that's the preservation of all life and the respect for all Canadians. We also know the importance of de-escalation training. We're committed to continuing to work with indigenous communities, racialized communities and with police services and all participants in the criminal justice system to make sure that it is fair for all Canadians. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for LondonFanshawe, Ms. Mathyssen. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen (LondonFanshawe, NDP): Madam Chair, we need more justice for black, indigenous and racialized people in Canada. They can't be asked to keep waiting. This government recognizes that systemic racism exists but refuses to collect race-based data that would allow us to quantify and truly address this injustice. We need data to protect Canadians. When will this government do the right thing and start collecting race-based data? Hon. Bardish Chagger (Minister of Diversity and Inclusion and Youth): Madam Chair, our government agrees that it's important that we collect data, and that's exactly why, in the anti-racism secretariat and the anti-racism strategy, there is a commitment to have money go to Statistics Canada to collect race-based data. We look forward to working with all members to ensure it happens. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen: Madam Chair, we know that Statistics Canada will start to collect job numbers based on race. This will allow us to identify systemic racism where it is and where we need to ensure a fair and more equal job market for black, indigenous and racialized people in Canada. Why is this government refusing to follow suit so we can tackle systemic racism everywhere, in every sector? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I'd like to thank my honourable colleague for her question. She's absolutely correct in her assessment that we need to collect more data, reliable data, data that will help us deal with some of the challenges we're seeing with systemic discrimination, but, more broadly, we want to make sure that we continue to engage with an anti-racism strategy that will allow us to collect that disaggregated data. That is why we allocated $6. 2 million to that initiative through Statistics Canada, but we know we must do more and we will do more. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen: We know that all people are susceptible to catching COVID-19, but health authorities are clear that parts of cities like Montreal and Toronto have been more impacted than others. For black and racialized people living in these cities, this data is a matter of life and death. Will the government collect and share disaggregated data so we can identify and erase systemic racism, yes or no? Hon. Bardish Chagger: Madam Chair, making decisions based on science and evidence is essential for our government. We took that practice from day one. It is exactly the step we will take moving forward and that's why we are making those investments to ensure that data exists. We are working across all departments. My mandate letter is public. I look forward to continuing to work not only with all ministers, departments and agencies, but all allies and all parties to get this work done. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Blaney, the honourable member for BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, has the floor. Hon. Steven Blaney (BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, CPC): Thank you, MadamChair. Last week, my plumber told me that, each time Justin Trudeau comes down the steps to make announcements totalling several billion dollars, he feels like someone is rifling through his pockets. My question is simple and goes to the Minister of Finance: where is this money coming from? Hon. Mona Fortier: MadamChair, I would like to thank my honourable colleague for his question. Currently, the health and safety of Canadians are our top priorities. We have implemented an emergency economic plan to support Canadians, workers and companies. We will continue to support them during this crisis. Hon. Steven Blaney: The answer I would have liked is simple: we are borrowing the money and we are going to have to pay it back one day. That is another Liberal craze: they borrow money, they make campaign promises, and off they go. Under the Conservative government, the Chantier Davie in Lvis had 1,700workers for the supply ship Asterix. In the election campaign, the Liberals promised icebreakers. When are the Liberals going to award the icebreaker contracts to the Chantier Davie? Hon. David Lametti (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada): MadamChair, we are very proud of the Chantier Davie and we completely understand its role in the system. We are currently assessing those requests. We are going to establish the process for the polar ice-breaker, which is essential for the work of the Coast Guard in northern communities, and we are going to make sure that The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Blaney has the floor. Hon. Steven Blaney: The workers do not need words; they need contracts and jobs. The same is true for young people who want to work. There is money in the Canada summer jobs program: in my constituency alone, $150,000has been approved. Companies want young people to work and want to hire them. What is the minister waiting for in order to confirm those positions? In my constituency, and everywhere else in the country, our young people want to work. What is the government waiting for in order to send some cash to the Canada summer jobs program? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we are proud of the Canada summer jobs program. We are introducing flexibilities into the system to enable employers to be able to hire summer students. We recognize the importance of this program to provide both financial resources and necessary experience for young people. We believe in continuing to invest in the Canada summer jobs program. Hon. Steven Blaney: The workers, the young people and the employers have been waiting for weeks. The money is available; where is the announcement? MadamChair, our young people are not the only ones who want to work. There are also the temporary foreign workers. Let me use Jessie Gito as an example; he has been working at Plate2000 in Saint-Anselme for years. When the time came to renew his work permit, he found out that he has to have some biometric tests. But he cannot get them because the offices are closed. Is the minister going to allow Jessie Gito and the thousands of other temporary foreign workers who want to work to be able to do so until the government biometric testing centres reopen? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, it is important for the honourable member to recognize that we are in the early recovery stage of the pandemic. Employers are slowly reopening businesses. We will ensure that we support both our students and our temporary foreign workers to make sure we get the recovery right. We will continue to invest in the Canada summer jobs program. We've introduced flexibilities into the program to ensure that employers are able to take advantage of the program and give opportunities to young people. Hon. Steven Blaney: It is very simple. Jessie Gito is a foreign worker, who is in a company that provides an essential service. He needs a decision that will let him go to work, rather than staying home and doing nothing. Then, when the government's biometric testing centres are open again, he will gladly go to one. Young people want to work in agriculture as well, and the minister has told us that the government wants young people working and that their files will be processed as quickly as possible. She wants to create 700positions and she knows that people can fill in an application on a first-come first-served basis. Of those 700positions, how many have been confirmed to date? The good weather has arrived, the corn is starting to grow, and this is the time when farmers need the young workers. Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food): MadamChair, the program for young workers in agriculture is open. I also encourage agricultural producers to register for it. This is a program that is not only intended to provide summer jobs, but also to interest young people in making a career in agriculture. As I have said before, the department is processing files as quickly as possible. Each employer will have an answer very shortly. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will now take a short break. Okay, we are ready to start again. We will go to the honourable member for BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte. Mr. Doug Shipley (BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Over the course of the pandemic, has the government been using all avenues possible to source much-needed PPE in Canada? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, we have been very clear that we have a made-in-Canada initiative that has engaged companies across the country. Over 700 companies have retooled and scaled up their operations for personal protective equipment to help front-line health care workers. Mr. Doug Shipley: Madam Chair, I need to ask very quickly which ministry and minister are responsible for the sourcing of PPE in Canada. Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, this is a collective effort. I work with the Minister of Health and the minister for procurement, and we coordinate with the provinces and territories to make sure there are appropriate levels of PPE to help front-line health care workers and essential workers across the country. Mr. Doug Shipley: Thank you for that clarification. That will make this question all the more pertinent. My riding of BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte is the home of Southmedic Inc. Southmedic is a renowned medical supply business. For over 37 years, it has provided front-line health care workers with an extensive line of PPE and other essential products required when dealing with respiratory illnesses. This company specializes in respiratory illness equipment. Southmedic currently employs over 700 people, and it has been recognized as one of Canada's best-managed companies by Deloitte on numerous occasions. Since the beginning of the pandemic, both I and the member for BarrieInnisfil have been attempting to obtain some assistance for Southmedic from the federal government. Calls and emails were falling on deaf ears. In early May, I wrote a letter to Minister Anand outlining the situation. I received a letter back from the minister dated May 27 indicating that this issue of Southmedic falls under the mandate of the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada. I have heard nothing more. When will the federal government reach out and help this great Canadian company and therefore ensure that all front-line workers will have the proper PPE they require? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I'd like to thank my honourable colleague for his question. He knows full well that this is a very challenging time. That is why we had a call to action to engage Canadians right across the country. Since then, we've seen over 6,000 companies step up to offer solutions and ideas, and over 700 companies have retooled their efforts. I acknowledge that some companies are still engaging with the government, and we'll continue to explore all possible options to make sure we continue to procure the necessary levels of personal protective equipment to protect Canadians and to protect front-line health care workers. That has always been our priority. I want to thank the outstanding Canadian companies that have come forward and have helped us in this endeavour. We continue to look forward to working with them. Mr. Doug Shipley: Thank you for that answer. Just to follow up, there's no retooling required at this company. They could have been up and going very quickly. They just needed a little assistance at the beginning. Moving on to a different issue, while walking to my office this morning, I stopped at my local small family-run coffee shop and was discussing the current economic situation with the two owners of the establishment. They indicated they are having a very tough time surviving this economic downturn. The only thing keeping them hopeful is that soon the public service will start returning to work, and therefore their business will begin to return. Could the government please give us some indication as to what the plans are for returning the civil service back to work safely, and when? Hon. Jean-Yves Duclos (President of the Treasury Board): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm delighted to answer this question. This is a very important topic, but I'd like to take the opportunity first to thank our public servants, who have worked very hard in the last few weeks, both personally and professionally. In fact, today is a wonderful day to say that, because today is the start of National Public Service Week. That's one more reason to thank them for their dedicated work. They are not going to go back to work. They've been at work for the last few monthsin different circumstances, but they have been working very hard to deliver the services and the support Canadians need and deserve. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Next we'll go to the honourable member for SelkirkInterlakeEastman, Mr. Bezan. Mr. James Bezan (SelkirkInterlakeEastman, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. My questions are for the Minister of National Defence. First of all, I want to thank the great men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces for the fantastic job they're doing in Operation LASER, serving on the front lines battling COVID-19. Can the Minister of National Defence give the House an update on exactly where we are at with the number of Canadian Armed Forces members who have been infected with COVID-19? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan (Minister of National Defence): Madam Chair, I want to echo the member opposite's comments in thanking our Canadian Armed Forces members. Currently, we have 13 active cases in the Canadian Armed Forces, but in the long-term care facilities we currently have 50 cases. No member has been currently hospitalized. We have also conducted very thorough reviews of our protection protocols as well. Mr. James Bezan: Through you, Chair, Minister Sajjan, does that number of active cases include the active cases that are in long-term care facilities right now in Operation LASER? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, as I stated, the 50 cases are strictly from the long-term care facilities. The 13 cases I mentioned are not in the long-term care facilities. Just to give the actual clarification, no member has been currently hospitalized. Mr. James Bezan: In those numbers, Madam Chair, can Mr. Sajjan say how many of those cases in long-term care facilities are active and how many are recovered? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, I don't have the exact number. What I can say to break it down further is that in Quebec we currently have 36 and in Ontario we have 14. As well, 36 of the members have been out of isolation. I'll get more details and pass them on directly to the member, Madam Chair. Mr. James Bezan: Thank you, Minister. Madam Chair, I have a quick question while we're still talking about Operation LASER. The President of the Treasury Board has said, The Canadian Armed Forces will be present as long as their presence is needed in Quebec. This contradicts what Prime Minister Trudeau is saying, which is that we have a hard deadline of June 26 for the withdrawal of our troops for Operation LASER. That means taking our troops out of our long-term care facilities. Minister, is June 26 the hard date for the winding down of Operation LASER? Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I'm delighted to have the opportunity to clarify for the House. We've been in very extensive discussions with the Province of Quebec, with my counterpart Minister Guilbault, and we are working very diligently to ensure we have a sustained, appropriate response to the request from Quebec for assistance. That response will result in a transition from the currently deployed Canadian Armed Forces to the deployment of paid volunteers, trained personnel who will take on the important role of providing services to those Canadians who need our help in Quebec. Mr. James Bezan: I'll go back to the Minister of National Defence. The Department of National Defence auditors have called out the Liberal government for mismanagement over the $553-billion investment in our Canadian military through the defence policy. Only three people have been assigned to oversee the rollout of this money. This is a $553-billion investment in our armed forces, and only three people are managing it. Could the minister tell us how that is even possible? Is this the reason that over 100 projects are currently behind schedule? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, first of all, I want to highlight the unprecedented investment that we're making in defence. We have conducted internal reviews of our procurement. The report the member opposite is talking about is from the previous year. This is the ongoing work we're doing to make sure that we make procurement better. When it comes to the management of this, it's conducted by me and the minister of procurement. We are working toward making our procurement even better. We have already streamlined some aspects of our procurement and we'll continue to do more as well. Mr. James Bezan: Minister Sajjan, you've had this report since November of 2019. You've been rolling out this plan since 2017. Only three people are overseeing an expenditure of $553 billion. This is taxpayers'money. Are we going to see more cuts because you have been unable to actually roll out these dollars? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, I can assure you we're not going to be cutting. We'll be investing in our defence. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Before I go to the next speaker, I want to remind members that they are to address their questions and comments directly through the chair. We will go now to the honourable member for Fort McMurrayCold Lake, Mr. Yurdiga. Mr. David Yurdiga (Fort McMurrayCold Lake, CPC): Madam Chair, the Canada summer jobs program has many challenges. I've seen many indigenous communities in my riding rejected for funding even though they had received funding in previous years. Here are a few examples of communities that were rejected: Beaver Lake Cree Nation, Buffalo Lake Mtis Settlement and the Mtis Nation of Alberta, Region 1. The list goes on. Could the Prime Minister explain why so many indigenous communities have been denied funding from the Canada summer jobs program? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we recognize the important role that the Canada summer jobs program plays in supporting employers and young workers in our community across the country every year. We're working very hard to help employers adapt to the realities of the COVID-19 pandemic and are supporting young Canadians as they begin to look for summer employment. We are introducing increased flexibilities into the Canada summer jobs program to hire youth, while also providing more supports to employers that deliver essential services to Canadians. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, that didn't really answer my question. Why are so many indigenous communities left out of the Canada summer jobs program? This is very important to my community and to communities throughout the province. Will the government investigate why these communities were rejected? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that we, of course, value the important role that the Canada summer jobs program plays in all communities, including indigenous communities in Canada. I will certainly have an off-line conversation with the honourable member, if he so wishes, about a particular issue, but I can assure him that in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, we have had to assist employers to introduce flexibilities The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Yurdiga. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, in my riding, the City of Cold Lake has been in dispute with the federal government for many years over payment in lieu of taxes. My office has sent many letters over the years regarding the PILT dispute. Could the Minister of Public Services and Procurement give me a rough estimate of when I will receive a response from the minister's office to my first letter, from 2017, and my letters from 2018,2019 and 2020? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that I will go to the minister, and we will come back with an answer to his question. Mr. David Yurdiga: How much longer does the minister intend to perpetuate the ongoing PILT dispute, which is in excess of $11 million, with the City of Cold Lake? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, once again, I can assure the honourable member that I will speak with the minister and get an answer to his question. Mr. David Yurdiga: Well, do you know what? I've been writing letters to the department for many years. When you say you're going to get back to me, I really have a hard time believing that. Will the minister agree to follow the prior recommendations of the dispute advisory panel that were accepted by the minister? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that I will check with the minister and that she will return to the member in due course. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, the drug Trikafta has been proven to increase the quality of life for 90% of cystic fibrosis patients. Two weeks ago, my office sent a letter to the Minister of Health about the boy in my riding named Cael, who through the special access program is able to get Trikafta in Canada. I requested that the minister use her powers to fast-track Trikafta for commercial use, but I have yet to receive a response back. When will the minister make a decision on Trikafta? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, I'm glad to hear that Cael was able to access Trikafta through the special access program. In fact, that program is very helpful for people who are seeking access to medication that's not currently marketed in Canada. As the member opposite knows, Vertex has not applied to market Trikafta in Canada, but we look forward to their application, and I encourage him to write a letter to the manufacturer to also encourage them. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Vancouver Granville, Ms. Wilson-Raybould. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould (Vancouver Granville, Ind.): Thank you, Chair. I was very troubled to hear that a CBC radio host in the Yukon felt compelled to resign because, as an indigenous person, she could not speak her truth. While we know the Broadcasting Act states that the Canadian broadcasting system should reflect the linguistic duality and multicultural and multiracial nature of Canadian society and the special place of indigenous peoples, it would seem there are some challenges. Therefore, does the Minister of Heritage share the concern of some journalists that problems of systemic racism in Canada are still existing within the institution of the CBC, and will the government now acknowledge the need to recognize the jurisdiction of indigenous governments? Hon. Steven Guilbeault (Minister of Canadian Heritage): Thank you, Madame Chair; and I thank the member for this important question. As stated by the Prime Minister on numerous occasions, our government recognizes that systemic racism exists in Canada, and we have made a commitment to do everything we can to combat it in whichever organization of the Canadian government. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould: Thank you. When I was in the government, and as a minister, I learned the term red meat issues. I understand these issues to be ones that challenge societal norms, that are not politically expedient to address because they can lose you votes, even though addressing them is morally right and a smart thing to do. Mostly these are issues addressing inequality and the most marginalized in our society. In the justice system, examples include mandatory minimum penalties, defunding police, and even investing in restorative justice. Red-meat issues often become defining issues for society and for governments as the world changes. Surely now these issues are politically less of a consideration than the tragic reality of even more slain indigenous Canadians at the hands of police, or thousands of indigenous people still incarcerated or living in poverty. Will this government please finally commit to the necessary work originally promised in 2015 and repeal in the justice system the vast majority of mandatory minimum penalties, assuring the necessary discretion for judges, and meaningfully invest in restorative justice measures? Hon. David Lametti: Madame Chair, I thank the honourable member for her question, as well as for her work as Minister of Justice, and indeed my predecessor. This is an important time. This is a time when we recognize systemic racism. This is a time when we recognize systemic over-incarceration of indigenous peoples, of black peoples, in our criminal justice system. This is a time when we need to look at all potential options to reduce what is a shameful overrepresentation in our criminal justice system. Too often racialized peoples and indigenous peoples have experienced prejudice and systemic discrimination in our justice system, and that has to change. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould: I'll go on to another red meat issue. In British Columbia we are in the fifth year of the opioid overdose public health emergency crisis. Sadly, May marks the deadliest month of overdose-related deaths. We are halfway into the year and have currently passed 500 deaths caused by overdose. Many of the deaths are related to COVID-19 measures that have prevented people from accessing supervised consumption sites, so they are overdosing alone. While the provinces welcomed the federal backing of safe supply exemption back in March, it is to expire in September of 2020. Echoing the call of the chief coroner of B. C. and Dr. Henry, more is needed from the federal government, more action. Will the government provide the necessary supports to the province and help support safe supply initiatives in the provinces? Hon. Patty Hajdu: It's been a pleasure to work with the Province of British Columbia on innovative ways to work on the tragic situation of opioid overdose. I remain committed to working with the province and in fact any province that wants to work towards solutions that treat people who use substances with the dignity they deserve. Madam Chair, this is a complex issue. We're working closely with our partners to make sure that we can prevent more lives from being lost. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for South OkanaganWest Kootenay, Mr. Cannings. Mr. Richard Cannings (South OkanaganWest Kootenay, NDP): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with the member for SkeenaBulkley Valley. In my riding, Theo's in Penticton is a beloved restaurant. They've been serving great food for 40 years, but now they're struggling, because they don't qualify for the emergency wage subsidy. Why is that? The original owners retired last year and sold it to another operator. The new owner can't use a year-to-year comparison to apply for the wage subsidy because he didn't own the restaurant last spring. He is forced to use receipts from January and February, the darkest doldrums of the restaurant year, to compare with the results from May, traditionally one of their best months. Now he has to compete with other local restaurants that can access the subsidy. When will the government fix this inequity and let Theo's compete and survive? Hon. Mona Fortier: Madam Chair, the Canada emergency wage subsidy is supporting over 2. 5 million workers across the country. To help even more businesses support their workers and rehire people as they reopen, our government is extending the CEWS, and we will continue to extend the CEWS for an additional 12 weeks to August 29 to ensure that Canadian workers continue to have the support they need during these very difficult times. By extending eligibility, our government is ensuring that more Canadian workers in more sectors have the support they need. Mr. Richard Cannings: The owner just wants to be able to apply for the wage subsidy, and right now he cannot, and he will not be able to. Thousands of other businesses are hit that way as well. I'd like to move on to forestry. Canada's forest sector has been declared essential during this pandemic, but it's been hit hard after a very difficult 2019. Despite soft markets and thousands out of work, government support programs have left many Canadian forest product companies behind. In my riding, the pulp mill in Castlegar is closing for the month of July because local sawmills aren't producing enough wood chips. What is the government going to do to finally support Canadian forestry workers and communities? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The time is almost up, but I will allow for the answer from the honourable minister. Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Thank you, Madam Chair. We have supported and we will continue to support the forestry sector, including through regional development programs. In fact, in Quebec, partnering with Les Bois Francs DV Inc. , we have widened market access to our products and updated technology systems. In North Bay we've partnered with the Canadian Wood Council to promote the sector. In Vancouver we're working with FPInnovations to create the indigenous forest sector technical support program. We are supporting the forestry sector and its different needs region by region. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Now we go to the honourable member for SkeenaBulkley Valley, Mr. Bachrach. Mr. Taylor Bachrach (SkeenaBulkley Valley, NDP): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm going to pick up where my colleague left off, with B. C.'s forest industry. What we've seen in B. C. are multiple rounds of mill shutdowns and start-ups, and in some cases this has made it difficult for forestry workers to qualify for EI. My question to the minister is this: Will the minister work to make the EI program more flexible for forestry workers, similar to what this government has done for oil and gas workers? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, in the oil and gas sector we have focused on workers. That has been key in the inactive and orphan well program, which we are working on with the provincial governments of Saskatchewan, British Columbia and Alberta. The focus on workers has assured that success, and we will continue to focus on workers in all the industries, particularly our natural resource industry, as they go through this extraordinarily difficult time. Mr. Taylor Bachrach: Madam Chair, reforestation is a very important part of the forest industry in the riding I represent, and people were keenly interested to hear this government's plan to plant two billion trees in the next 10 years. That's a lot of trees. I'm wondering if the minister could tell us how many trees are going to be planted under this program by the end of this season. Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, this government is committed to two billion trees. We are working with forestry associations, the industry and with individual companies to ensure this tree-planting season will be one of the largest the country has ever seen. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The floor goes to the honourable member for Rivire-du-Nord. Mr. Rhal Fortin (Rivire-du-Nord, BQ): MadamChair, last week, the government introduced BillC-17 and the Minister of Justice sent us briefing notes in which he said that it was important to suspend a number of time limits and to extend others, and that the failure to do so could have important repercussions on Canadians, their families, their situations, their finances and their ability to exercise their rights. We in the Bloc Qubcois agree with that. When are we going to talk about it? Hon. David Lametti: MadamChair, the contents of BillC-17 are clearly very important. We have addressed the mandatory time limits in federal legislation as well as certain time limits that courts may not be able to handle. It is very important that we address this issue. That is why the law The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Fortin, you have the floor. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, we agree that it is important. I concur. The minister's briefing notes say that, among other things, when it comes to divorcewhich means children are involved people are waiting on custody rights, child support and visitation rights. The minister pointed out that the national security review would require consultations if no decision is made in the prescribed time frame. It could pose a national security risk. It is really a big deal. When are we going to debate it? Hon. David Lametti: MadamChair, I completely agree with my honourable colleague. The issue needs to be addressed. That is why it is in the bill. That is another reason to debate the bill. I beseech my colleagues opposite to debate it with us. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, what a coincidence, because I beseech my colleague opposite to debate it with us. That is what we are asking. Last week, the leader of the Bloc Qubcois asked the Liberal government to debate BillC-17 today. He did not get an answer. It does not seem to matter. Richard Wagner, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, who is hardly a dimwit or greenhorn, told us that the justice system needs to be modernized. As recently as this past Saturday in LaPresse, Justice Wagner said that it is essential that the Criminal Code be amended to address the backlog of court proceedings. When will the Liberal government opposite pull up its socks, do its job, govern the federation, sit down with the opposition and discuss the vital matters in BillC-17? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, if I were my colleague, I would be a little embarrassed, because the bill was sent to the Bloc Qubcois several days in advance. They received a technical note several days in advance. We were all available to take questions. When we asked for the support of the Bloc Qubcois and the other parties to debate itwe were not even asking them to vote in favour of the billthey refused. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, we never refused to debate it. Actually, we were the ones who asked to debate it. What exactly does debate it mean? We set some conditions. For example, we asked the Liberals to put the money back into the wage subsidy fund and to commit to dip into it no longer. Are we asking too much of our colleagues opposite? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Can my colleague explain to me what the emergency wage subsidy has to do with a bill about justice? This is an absolutely fundamental piece of legislation. We wanted to debate it, but they refused to do so. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, I would like nothing better than to explain it to him, but I must remind him that he is the leader of the party in power, the party that is supposed to govern the country. So I do not know why he is asking me that. My party proposed that we debate this today but we did not get an answer. Meanwhile, court time limits are running out and people are losing rights. I am thinking of families, child support, child custody, labour law disputes in Federal Court, marine transportation, interprovincial transportation, aviation, banks, and those with grievances waiting for a Federal Court ruling. The whole system, the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal, everything is on hold because nobody in the government wants to do their job. We want to discuss BillC-17. When can we talk about it? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, we have done our job. We have introduced the bill. We informed them in advance. We told them they could ask us any questions they wanted. We asked for a debate in the House. However, when we asked the Bloc Qubcois if they wanted to debate the bill, they said no, instead of doing what they usually do and saying yes. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for Essex, Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis (Essex, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. When the CERB runs out, many workers in my riding of Essex will not have sufficient hours to collect their EI benefits. In early July, the midnight shift at Chrysler will be eliminated. Because of the shutdown, a mom-to-be who had just returned to work in January, and several hundred of her fellow employees, may not have the 600 hours required for regular or EI parental benefits. Immediate action is needed. What is the government doing now to backstop these workers? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, the Canada emergency response benefit has been providing much-needed help to Canadian workers across the country who have stopped working due to COVID-19. We know that there is still a lot of uncertainty for many Canadian workers, and we know that many will be exhausting their benefits in the weeks to come. We will have more to share soon, as early as this week, on our continuing efforts to support Canadian workers and make sure that help is available during this The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Go ahead, Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Minister, for the answer. The EI system needs to be fixed. Even before the shutdown, the system was deeply flawed. Will this government commit to a complete review and overhaul of the EI system? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we have been there for Canadian workers. We will continue to make sure that we make the necessary investments in the EI delivery system and modernize it to continue to meet The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. Small businesses have been hit extremely hard by the COVID-19 shutdown. Many have already been forced into bankruptcy. Much uncertainty lies ahead. As the economy reopens, what is the government doing to help small businesses recover? Hon. Mary Ng: Madam Chair, today we are seeing small businesses that have been helped, whether it is getting access to the small business loan, which some are also using in the restart as they are safely restarting, or getting help with their payroll, helping them keep their employees The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. Employees are key to a small business's success. How will the government incentivize workers to return to their jobs when recalled? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister can give a brief answer. Hon. Mary Ng: The Canada emergency wage subsidy is an excellent program to help those employees stay employed and for those employers who are looking at rehiring them right now during this restart process. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair, many of my constituents are in a committed cross-border relationship and have not been able to see their partners in quite some time. The current restrictions are arbitrary. Denmark has found a fair resolution. Will Canada adopt the Danish model, and if not, why not? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, as we said from the outset, we've implemented restrictions at the U. S. border on non-essential travel with a single purpose in mind: to protect the health and safety of Canadians. As the member is aware, just last week we introduced new measures that allow people in family relationships to stay together as long as they commit to the necessary 14-day period of quarantine. We'll continue to work with families. Our intention is to keep people together, but mostly to keep people safe. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair, with regard to child care, as our economy continues to open, parents are facing a stark choice: Who will care for their children? What's the plan to provide access to child care so parents can confidently return to work? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we are of course committed to continuing to make the record investments that we've been making in child care. Since 2015 we've created over 40,000 affordable child care spaces. We're committed to creating an additional 250,000 before-school and after-school child care spaces. We will continue to invest in this sector because we understand that without investment The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. It sounds as though this government has a desire to force parents to choose between their job and care for their child. Can the government please respond to that quote? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, nothing could be further from the truth. We are committed to the child care sector. Our investments and our results prove the opposite of what the member is asserting. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I'm sorry. We're out of time. The committee now stands adjourned until tomorrow at noon.

Christine Normandin mentioned that in the past it took a long time for the provinces to negotiate conditions with the federal government. Christine Normandin wanted to know the future situation: whether the federal government would send the money unconditionally.

tr-sq-1210

tr-sq-1210_0

What did Hon. Chrystia Freeland think about systemic racism? The Chair (Hon. Anthony Rota (NipissingTimiskaming, Lib.) ): I call this meeting to order. Welcome to meeting number 22 of the House of Commons Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic. A reminder to all members that in order to avoid issues with sound, members participating in person should not also be connected to the video conference. For those joining via video conference, I would like to remind you that, when speaking, you should be on the same channel as the language you are speaking. As usual, please direct your remarks through the chair. I understand we don't have any ministerial announcements today, so we'll proceed to presenting petitions. I would like to remind members that any petition presented during a meeting of the special committee must have already been certified by the clerk of petitions. For members participating in person, we ask that they please come and drop the signed certificate off at the table once the petition is presented. The first petition will be presented by Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May (SaanichGulf Islands, GP): Mr. Chair, it's an honour to rise in meeting number 22 of the COVID-19 committee, otherwise known as something like the House of Commons. I'm here to present two petitions containing hundreds of signatures on the issue of the treatment of Falun Gong practitioners by the People's Republic of China, particularly the practice that's alleged of involuntary organ harvesting. The petitioners ask the Government of Canada to condemn this practice and to publicly call for an end to the persecution of Falun Gong in the People's Republic of China. The second petition is from residents throughout SaanichGulf Islands concerned about what was, at the time this petition was submitted, a future problem. It remains an issue, and I present it on behalf of petitioners who wish the Government of Canada not to put public funds into purchasing or maintaining the Trans Mountain pipeline or towards any expansion of the pipeline. The Chair: Next we'll go to Ms. Kwan. Ms. Jenny Kwan (Vancouver East, NDP): Mr. Chair, I rise to table two petitions. The first petition deals with the COVID-19 situation. The petitioners note the pandemic is having a devastating impact on many Canadians nationwide, especially those who have low to modest income, small business gig workers, freelancers, artists, film industry workers, non-salaried workers and individuals on fixed incomes such as seniors and those on disability. It further notes that rent, mortgage and utility payments are due at the end of each month, putting countless Canadians at risk of losing their housing. It is paramount there be safe self-isolation opportunities for all individuals in this country. To that end, the petitioners are calling for the government to immediately enact a nationwide rent freeze, eviction freeze, mortgage freeze and utility freeze, enforce mortgage deferrals for homeowners without penalty or interest charges from financial institutions and provide direct assistance in the form of a monthly, universal, direct payment of $2,000 per month for all, with an additional $250 per child immediately. The second petition deals with the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion. These petitioners join the hundreds of thousands of people who are opposed to the expansion. Trans Mountain, in building the pipeline, brings massive environmental and economic risk with no substantial benefit to British Columbia or to local residents. Approximately 40,000 barrels of oil have already leaked from existing Kinder Morgan pipelines, including two major spills in Burnaby since 2007. I might note, Mr. Chair, that just this past weekend there was yet another spill to the tune of 1,195 barrels here in British Columbia. There is no known scientific technology to clean up the bitumen when there is a spill, and the number of tankers would go from eight to 34 per month into the Burrard Inlet. It puts at risk many residential neighbourhoods and the traditional territories of at least 15 first nations. The Chair: May I interrupt for a moment, Ms. Kwan. I want to remind all members in the House that when presenting a petition, the idea is to be as concise as possible. Ms. Kwan, I'll let you wrap up, please. Ms. Jenny Kwan: Thank you, Mr. Chair. The petitioners are calling for the government to immediately act to prevent this new oil pipeline from proceeding through British Columbia. The Chair: Thank you. We'll now go to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood ParkFort Saskatchewan, CPC): Mr. Chair, I have four petitions to present today. The first petition reflects the outrage of my constituents at the ever-expanding order in council from the government banning more and more firearms. In particular, the petitioners highlight the failure of the government to act on the issue of illegal guns. The petitioners note that virtually all violent crimes committed in Canada, including the recent shooting in Nova Scotia, involve illegal firearms in the hands of those who are already not permitted to possess them. The petition has two asks. First of all, it asks that we reverse the order in council banning certain firearms, but also that we propose measures that will effectively address the illegal use of firearms by criminals while respecting the rights of law-abiding citizens. It also asks that we ensure that substantial changes to firearms laws in future actually be made by Parliament, not by the government acting in an unaccountable manner. The second petition deals with Bill C-8, which is the government's bill around conversion therapy. The petitioners support efforts to ban conversion therapy. They express concern about problems in the wording of the definition used in the legislation. They're asking the government to support amendments to fix the definition to address the issue of conversion therapy and ensure that the definition is correct and doesn't criminalize certain forms of counselling that individuals may voluntarily enter into. The third petition is regarding Bill S-204, a bill in the Senate that seeks to make it a criminal offence for a person to go abroad to receive an organ without consent, dealing especially with the horrific practice of forced organ harvesting and trafficking in China. The petitioners are supportive of Bill S-204 and want to see it move forward. The final petition is with respect to Bill C-7. There's been much discussion in this House about the need to do better in terms of long-term care. Rather than working to do better in long-term care, unfortunately we've seen the government removing vital safeguards in the area of euthanasia. I think our focus should be on assisting life rather than removing safeguards that are required in association with the euthanasia regime. The petitioners are particularly concerned about the government's plan to remove a 10-day reflection period that normally takes place. That period can already be waived under certain circumstances, but Bill C-7 proposes to remove it entirely as well as reduce the number of witnesses involved. The petitioners are quite concerned about what's going on in Bill C-7 and call for it to be stopped or amended. The Chair: Presenting petitions. We'll proceed to statements by members. We'll start off with Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly (NanaimoLadysmith, GP): Mr. Chair, we are in the midst of a global pandemic and an economic shock. Recent events have ripped open the wound of systemic racism in our country. Racialized and marginalized communities have been disproportionally affected by the pandemic. Thousands of seniors in long-term care facilities have died. It is clear that we need system change. In the past, governments have bailed out banks and corporations because they were too big to fail. It is time to bail out humanity and the planet. No one will be immune from the threat of climate change and mass extinction. Both are the result of the exploitation of the natural world in the name of the economy. Humans created the economy. We can choose to change it. We must protect our environment or perish. COVID-19 has demonstrated that together we can take courageous action for the common good. We need to do the same for the climate crisis, because humanity and our planet are too big to fail. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Spengemann. Mr. Sven Spengemann (MississaugaLakeshore, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, today marks World Elder Abuse Awareness Day. Underestimated and under-reported, elder abuse exists across the world. At risk of neglect and assault, many of the most vulnerable older persons reside in our long-term care facilities. They are the seniors who have built our country and shaped our communities, who have shown us resilience, courage and selflessness, who have made us stronger, and whose work and teachings continue to inspire us. They are parents and grandparents, brothers and sisters, friends and mentors. We have not been there for them in the same way they've been there for us throughout their lives. The Canadian Forces report, alongside the climbing disproportionate death toll in our long-term care facilities, has reconfirmed the ugly, indefensible reality of elder abuse and neglect in Canada. In my community, we mourn the deaths of 68 seniors from one long-term care facility alone, Camilla Care. We must make the same unwavering commitment to older persons as they have shown to us. We must protect and uphold their human rights. We must do better. The Chair: Before proceeding, I just want to bring up to the members in the background that we want to keep it as simple and as parliamentary as possible in keeping it neutral. We'll now move to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett (LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, CPC): During these trying times, the residents of LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes have risen to the challenge. They've made sacrifices and gone above and beyond to make the lives of their neighbours better and to keep our communities safe. It would be impossible to list everyone who has emerged as a community hero, but I'd like to highlight a few, like Lily, an eight-year-old from Elgin who raised funds for her local food bank by building and selling squirrel picnic tables, and Louise Boardman from Spencerville who's making masks for long-term care facilities and selling others in support of the Breast Cancer Action centre. The Knights of Columbus in Prescott raised funds and are distributing some $27,000 in support of charitable groups throughout the region. The Knights of Columbus in Kemptville are working overtime operating the local food bank. Who can forget our top-notch health care workers like Hannah and Mary at the Brockville COVID-19 testing centre? It is the people of LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes that make it so great. To everyone working to make a difference and to all of our essential workers, thank you. The Chair: Next is Mr. Anandasangaree. Mr. Gary Anandasangaree (ScarboroughRouge Park, Lib.): Mr. Chair, the Indian Act enshrined racism into Canadian law in 1876, and, through residential schools, the child welfare system, our legal system and our police, we criminalized and tore apart indigenous peoples. The deaths of Chantel Moore and Rodney Levi and the assault on Chief Allan Adam are recent examples of systemic racism within the RCMP. Sadly, the RCMP leadership has failed to acknowledge this reality and its root causes. These same systems negatively impact black Canadians. Anti-black racism has resulted in more young black men being jailed, children being streamed or excluded from schools and negative police interaction due to profiling. Black lives matter. No single Canadian is responsible for the prevalence of systemic racism; we all are. Collectively we build institutions that discriminate based on race. It is now time to reimagine and rework our institutions, starting with our police, to ensure that all Canadians can achieve their truest potential. The Chair: Ms. Larouche, you have the floor. Ms. Andranne Larouche (Shefford, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chair. June15 is World Elder Abuse Awareness Day. I want to remind members of the link between abuse and the problems of economic dependency among seniors. Improving their purchasing power means reducing the risk of them falling victim to abusive people. That's why the increase in the old age security benefit and the guaranteed income supplement must be extended beyond the pandemic. In three weeks, our seniors will receive their first cheque, when they should be receiving their second. A date must also be announced for the new horizons for seniors program, which helps several groups develop projects to break the isolation of seniors. In closing, I would like to mention the organization Justice alternative et mdiation that during the pandemic, along with other organizations in Shefford, has set up the project Une histoire pour la tienne, which also serves to mark this day. It's a virtual meeting between young people and seniors, allowing them to exchange some inspiring life experiences. Since age prejudice is very much present, I applaud this project, which aims to make us understand each other better and judge each other less. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Sangha. Mr. Ramesh Sangha (Brampton Centre, Lib.): Mr. Chair, in the time of this terrible crisis affecting all Canadians, when we are all thinking about how best to deal with it, let's all think about the people around us. Let's show our representation not only to those in the sector of sanctioned workers, but also to all those Canadians who day by day stand up and make a difference. Every day I am proud of the reactions of Canadians to this crisis. I want to acknowledge and celebrate all the contributions made by the people of Brampton Centre, all religious institutions, civil society and community organizations like Knights Table in my riding. We are all standing together to fight COVID-19. Let's continue working hard with that same spirit to get positive results out. Thank you very much. The Chair: I will proceed to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff (BruceGreyOwen Sound, CPC): Mr. Chair, whether graduating from elementary school, high school, Georgian College or graduating from colleges or universities across the country, I am proud of the accomplishments of all the graduates across BruceGreyOwen Sound. I would also like to congratulate and thank all the teachers and parents who have adapted to teaching online or from home and who have supported these graduates over the course of their academic careers. I'd like to extend special congratulations to Cameron Lovell, who just graduated from grade eight, as well as to Neebeesh and Neebin Elliott, originally from the Nawash unceded first nation on the Bruce Peninsula, who will be headed to Michigan State University, and to Jared Lumley from Owen Sound, who just graduated from my alma mater, the Royal Military College of Canada. The college motto of Truth, Duty, Valour is something all Canadians should aspire to live by. I wish all the best to these graduates on their next adventures. I and Canada cannot wait to see how their dreams and goals impact and change the world. I congratulate BruceGreyOwen Sound graduates. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Cormier. Mr. Serge Cormier (AcadieBathurst, Lib.): Today I pay tribute to RichardLosier, an entrepreneur, visionary and builder who died on June9,2020, surrounded by his family. Mr. Losier is a giant in the Acadian Peninsula business community. In1968, he co-founded St. Isidore Asphalte, a company that now has more than 200employees. He also launched many other businesses over the years. He was unifying and generous, a philanthropist who cared about young people and never missed an opportunity to improve their lives. I met Mr. Losier when I was 14years old, and I can say that he has been a positive influence in my life. Every time I met him, he gave me a lot of advice and encouragement, which I've never forgotten. Mr. Losier's legacy to his community is invaluable. His commitment remains an example for all of us to follow. Mr. Losier now joins his wife, Nolla. I offer my most sincere condolences to his children, Richard Jr. , Ronald, Nathalie, Caroline and Stphane, and to his family and friends. Rest in peace, Mr. Losier. You will be greatly missed. Thank you for everything you've done for our region. The Chair: We will now go to Ms. Dabrusin. Ms. Julie Dabrusin (TorontoDanforth, Lib.): Hello from my community in east end Toronto. People talk about how a city the size of Toronto can be cold, but that's far from the truth in my community. I want to give a shout-out to our teachers, like Mr. Wong of Earl Grey Senior Public School, who delivered home-baked cookies and handwritten notes to all of his students, or Monsieur Steve, who's offering online French classes, or the teachers of Riverdale Collegiate, who paraded through our streets to celebrate our graduates. Our local Michael Garron Hospital put out a call for community members to sew masks and received over 60,000 masks, including those made by Lisa Tancre of Chartwell Avondale Retirement Residence. Michelle Beaton organized a front window scavenger hunt to entertain children and their families. Restaurants, even while facing adversity, have been generously donating food, like the members of the Leslieville BIA or Mezes. There are so many more stories of generosity that I could share, but I'm out of time. I thank everyone who has stepped up. We all appreciate all of their hard work. The Chair: We will now go to Ms. Sahota. Ms. Jag Sahota (Calgary Skyview, CPC): Mr. Chair, on Saturday night, Calgarians, particularly those in the northeast, in my riding of Calgary Skyview, witnessed a devastating storm, the likes of which I have not seen in my lifetime. Homes, vehicles, community buildings and structures suffered significant damage due to large hail, floods and high winds. People acted quickly to seek shelter. I'm so grateful that there have been no reports of personal injury or loss of life. I went around the community yesterday to survey the damage. It is extensive. My heart aches for those who have been impacted by the storm in an already incredibly difficult time, but we are resilient. We know that in the coming weeks there will be a lot of cleanup required, both to personal property and in the community. I know my constituents, and we will help one another get through this together. I will work hard to do everything I can to help rebuild this community. The Chair: Mr. Serr, you have the floor. Mr. Marc Serr (Nickel Belt, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to express my sincere gratitude to the people of West Nippissing who organized Pride activities to celebrate the LGBTQ community in June. This week, we are also celebrating National Public Service Week. I thank the public servants for their dedication to the Nickel Belt community and the Valley East and Rayside-Balfour areas. The Chair: Next is Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya (MarkhamUnionville, CPC): Mr. Chair, when COVID-19 began spreading across Ontario, Markham, like many other communities, was unprepared. Our front-line health care workers did not have enough personal protective equipment to do their jobs safely. When Markham residents heard about these shortages, my office was flooded with calls from people who had PPE and wanted to donate. Since then my office has been able to deliver tens of thousands of PPE supplies to front-line health care workers and five masks to each family in need. This pandemic has shown that no matter what the challenge is, the Markham community will overcome it. Today, I would like to thank the front-line health care workers who are doing incredible work. I would also like to thank all those who have helped in Markham's hour of need. The Chair: I understand we had a bit of a glitch there. I'm sorry. With the pause, we thought that was the end of it. Mr. Serr, I would ask you to continue. I understand you started to switch languages. Please continue. You have 30seconds. Mr. Marc Serr: Thank you. I'm switching to English now. Thank you to our nurses, doctors, pharmacists, cashiers, janitors. Thank you to various retail workers and first responders dealing with COVID-19. You keep our communities safe and healthy, and you feed us. Your dedication and sacrifice are greatly appreciated. As we start to see local businesses reopen, it is important for all of us to remember to follow best practices outlined by local public health. Our front-line workers deserve our respect. It is important for all of us to respect social distancing, to protect all workers and their families. Together we can remain strong and united as we continue to face this challenge together. The Chair: Again, my apologies for skipping over there, but now we'll to to Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod (KamloopsThompsonCariboo, CPC): Mr. Chair, in commemoration of Italian Heritage Month, I would like to pay tribute to the Colombo Lodge and Italian Cultural Centre in Kamloops, British Columbia. The Colombo Lodge was founded in 1914 and is an integral part of our community. Recently they began Colombo Cares take-home dinners with proceeds distributed to different non-profit organizations throughout the region. Last month they very generously gave away hundreds of dinners to Royal Inland Hospital staff and paramedics for their tireless work throughout the pandemic. In their own words they say, Colombo Lodge is very proud of the Italians that have made Kamloops their home. Community members of Italian ancestrypast and presenthave helped and continue to help Kamloops prosper as a giving, welcoming and inclusive community. Personally, I want to thank all members for their friendship and generosity over the years. Our community is forever grateful for their kindness. The Chair: We'll now proceed to Mr. Harris. Mr. Jack Harris (St. John's East, NDP): Mr. Chair, many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are facing a serious financial crisis. Most people with disabilities are waiting to be included in the Liberals'promised program. Fish plant workers will need support to avoid a disastrous year. Many small businesses don't qualify for programs. Municipalities need emergency help to meet the crisis. People are worried about what will happen when the CERB runs out in two weeks'time, and the coming tourism season looks very grim. The province itself is in serious financial crisis due to the pandemic and the decline in oil prices. The federal government must overhaul and enhance the fiscal stabilization program to help Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and other oil-producing provinces through this crisis. Both the province and the oil and gas industry players have committed to net zero emissions by 2050. This is a challenge and an opportunity to transition to a sustainable energy future, but it will require significant investment and support by government to keep the industry strong and make this a just transition for workers. Much has been done. Much more needs to be done. The Chair: Ms. Gaudreau, you have the floor. Ms. Marie-Hlne Gaudreau (LaurentidesLabelle, BQ): Mr. Chair, all 44elected municipal officials in the riding of LaurentidesLabelle and I have sent a letter to the government asking that cellular and high-speed Internet networks be made available to all. The crisis has accelerated the demonstration of the need for these networks in daily life. The territorial complexity of the Laurentians means that there are areas where the signal is weak, unstable or non-existent. There is an urgent and essential need to change the infrastructure of the current networks. Also, because of the lockdown, Internet failures are being felt, and they prevent distance learning, telemedicine and teleworking, among other things. How can our municipalities develop economically if they can't provide their community with adequate communication tools? We are therefore calling on the government to put the interests of its people first by investing massively right now in the construction of high-speed Internet and cellular infrastructure. The Chair: Mr. Waugh. Mr. Kevin Waugh (SaskatoonGrasswood, CPC): I rise today to pay tribute to Sir Winston Churchill, the former prime minister of Great Britain and one of the greatest leaders history has ever known. In what can only be called a lifetime of service, Churchill's contributions to the Commonwealth and to the world are without equal. During the Second World War he led the allied forces in Europe against the tyranny and fascism of Adolph Hitler and his Nazi regime. When our world was in its darkest hour, Churchill's leadership was a beacon of hope and freedom. I am reminded of something he once said, All the greatest things are simple, and many can be expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honour, duty, mercy, hope. Sir Winston Churchill himself embodied all of these great things and will forever be a symbol of freedom, democracy and hope. The Chair: Mr. Gerretsen. Mr. Mark Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands, Lib.): Mr. Chair, I would like to add my voice to the recognition and celebration of Pride Month, which is celebrated annually during June. Pride Month is important for Canadians because we can be proud of who we are and celebrate our diversity. This June is different from previous years as we cannot celebrate in person all together. However, I know the ongoing pandemic will not stop us from showing our love and support for the LGBTQ+ community. To celebrate Pride Month this year, my office distributed 3,000 pride maple leaf pins across the country; whoever asked received one. Although the majority was sent to constituents in my riding, over 500 pins were sent to the neighbouring ridings of LanarkFrontenacKingston, LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, and HastingsLennox and Addington. It warms my heart to see so many Canadians showing their support. Happy Pride, everyone. The Chair: We will now proceed to the questioning of ministers. Please note that we will suspend the proceedings twice to allow employees who provide support for the sitting to substitute for each other safely. Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell (Louis-Saint-Laurent, CPC): Mr. Chair, I am very pleased to take part in today's meeting of this parliamentary committee. Canada has been dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic for three months now. The situation now seems to be improving, although we must remain vigilant. Economically, business people and the entire Canadian economy depend on government decisions. My question is very simple: when will the economic update take place? Hon. Chrystia Freeland (Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): Mr. Chair, I thank the hon. member for his question. I agree with him that Canada and Canadians are doing an excellent and difficult job in the fight against coronavirus. As for the economy, our government is there for Canadians, for workers and for businesses, and it will continue to be. Mr. Grard Deltell: Canadians, business people and businesses want to know where the government is headed. When will the economic update take place? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, Canadians know that the government is there to support them. Eight The Chair: We return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Canadians and Quebeckers also know that the Government of Quebec will table its economic update this week. Why isn't the federal government doing the same? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I'm pleased to explain to hon. members and to Canadians what the government is doing for the economy The Chair: We return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, it is a real pleasure for me to explain to the minister and everybody in the House of Commons that today the Saskatchewan government will table its economic update. Why can't Ottawa do that? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I'm delighted to have the opportunity to share with Canadians what our government is doing to support workers, businesses and the economy. Eight million Canadians have received the CERB, essential support for Canadian workers and their families. The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, 11 days ago the Newfoundland government tabled its own economic update. We see governments acting correctly for their people, except for the Liberal government, which cannot table an economic update. When will the Liberal government table an economic update, which Canadians would like to see? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I am delighted to share with the member opposite and with Canadians what we are doing practically that has meaning for Canadians. Let me talk about what we are doing for Canadian businesses. Nearly 670,000 Canadian businesses have received support The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: In Canada, the Quebec government will table its economic update this week. The Saskatchewan government tabled its economic update today. The Newfoundland government has tabled its economic update. Everybody is working hard in Canada, and the business community would like to know where the Liberal government is going. The question is crystal clear. When will the Liberal government table an economic update? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, Canadian workers and Canadian businesses want to know that our government is here to support them. I have shared with this House our support for Canadian workers through the CERB. I've spoken about the CEBA, and let me point out that more than $26 billion of support has been given through that essential program. Let me talk about the wage subsidy. More than 2. 6 million The Chair: We'll return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, this is starting to get interesting; the minister is revealing some of these expenses. Could the minister tell us how much the government has spent in the last three months? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I will continue in French by explaining what our government is doing for Canadians and workers The Chair: Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, this is a little bit concerning for all Canadians, because this government cannot say when they will table the economic update, cannot identify how much money they have spent in the last three months and cannot say what is the deficit of Canada. Is somebody in this government running this country correctly? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, absolutely we are running this country, and we are supporting our economy. In fact, we appreciate that Canada currently is experiencing its greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression. That is why we have devoted nearly 11% of GDP to support Canadian workers and Canadian businesses. I want to assure Canadians The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Normandin. Ms. Normandin, you have the floor. Ms. Christine Normandin (Saint-Jean, BQ): Mr. Chair, there are times when Quebec and the provinces are not just two solitudes, but they get along and speak as one, such as when the time comes to tell the government to mind its own business. On reading section91 of the Constitution Act, 1982, which sets out the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal government, nowhere do I find that the federal government must meddle by attaching conditions to health transfers. It is Quebec and the provinces that hire the medical personnel, doctors, nurses and caretakers. It is Quebec and the provinces that are responsible for purchasing the necessary equipment. It is Quebec and the provinces that know what is happening on the ground and what their needs are. Will the government do the only thing within its authority, which is to take the cheque, sign it and put it in the mail? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I thank the hon. member for her question. We fully understand the importance of federal support for the provinces, especially in our national fight against the coronavirus. I agree with the hon. member that we must give financial support to the provinces, including Quebec absolutely. I would also like to point out the importance of the support of the Canadian Armed Forces, who are doing an important and excellent job in Quebec and Ontario today, right now. Ms. Christine Normandin: Mr. Chair, I am glad to see that there is recognition of the importance of transferring this money. My question is whether it can be transferred unconditionally; that's what I'm asking. There's a state of emergency. In the past, we have seen that it takes a long time to negotiate conditions with the federal government. We saw it in the case of the Quebec City tramway, and we are still seeing it now in the case of transfers for housing in Quebec, for which there is no agreement and, therefore, no transfer of money. Will the federal government send the money free of conditions? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the hon. member said in her first question that the only thing the federal government had to do on health care was to sign the cheques. I can't agree because, today, at this time, at the request of the Premier of Quebec, the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces are in Quebec today; they're there to save the lives of seniors The Chair: We now return to Ms. Normandin. Ms. Christine Normandin: It was indeed at Quebec's request. What I'm saying is that, at present, the provinces are unanimously asking that there be no conditions. It's urgent that the money be transferred. The federal government's job here is to sign the cheque and send it to the provinces. The government's job is also to make Parliament work. This is where there should be negotiations so that we can work, among other things, to send money to people living with disabilities, to make sure we fight CERB fraud and to make sure that court time limits are effective in the current crisis. Can the government focus on the issue in order to respect the provinces and transfer money for health care? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: I thank the hon. member for her question, Mr. Chair. I agree with the hon. member that the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces are in Quebec today at the request of the Province of Quebec. That said, I hope that the hon. member will agree with me that being there for Quebec's seniors, that saving the lives of Quebec's seniors, is much more than simply signing cheques. I am very proud of the work the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces are doing. I think we all should thank these people who are working for Canada, for Quebec, and who are doing an important and excellent job. Ms. Christine Normandin: Mr. Chair, I think the Deputy Prime Minister misunderstood me when I was talking about the importance of acting quickly. Negotiations between the government and the provinces take an awfully long time because the federal government decides to place conditions where there shouldn't be any. Right now, the only important thing is to transfer the money quickly so that it can be used in our hospitals and our long-term care facilities, where the need is desperate. Quebec and the provinces know exactly what their needs are. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I would like to point out the extent to which the federal government is there to support the provinces, including Quebec. We have increased funding to the provinces and territories by $500million to help them prepare for COVID-19 outbreaks. This funding is in addition to the $40billion that we already provide annually to the provinces and territories. That's a lot of money. It is strong endorsement The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh (Burnaby South, NDP): Mr. Chair, systemic racism is killing people. It's killing black people and it's killing indigenous people. Recently, Rodney Levi was another victim of systemic racism. He was killed in New Brunswick by the RCMP. To deal with systemic racism, we need systemic change. Will the Liberal government commit to systemic change so that not another life is ever taken again? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I thank the member opposite for the extremely important question, and I'll take this opportunity to acknowledge the work that he has done for many years fighting racism in Canada. Our government absolutely acknowledges that systemic racism exists in Canada. It exists in all of our institutions, including the police and the RCMP. I agree with the member opposite that now is the moment to fight this The Chair: Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, I thank the Deputy Prime Minister very much for the response, but there are some specific actions we need to take. There are movements. Black Lives Matter, as a movement, is calling for the defunding of police. What they're saying is we need to make better choices with how money is being spent. When someone is in need of a wellness check or a mental health check, money, financing and support should go to mental health workers and health care workers, not the police. Is the government prepared to fund and prioritize health care workers over the police? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the member quite rightly began his questions by speaking about systemic racism against indigenous people in Canada, and I would like to speak about that for a moment. I spoke to Perry Bellegarde this morning, because it is such a crucial issue. We can describe it as the original sin of our country. I absolutely agree that we need root and branch reform, including in how policing is done in Canada. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, will the Liberal government commit to a review of the use of force as outlined for the RCMP? Will the Liberals commit to that change? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister and the Minister of Public Safety had many conversations last week with the RCMP. We all accept that The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, will the government commit to ensuring that de-escalation receives priority? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Let me continue, Mr. Chair. Systemic racism exists in all of our federal institutions, including the RCMP. It's time to put an end to it. Let me just say The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, I'm not getting an answer. Will the Prime Minister or the Liberal government commit to something simple and ensure that at the federal level, racial profiling, street checks and carding are expressly prohibited? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, sadly, I can't agree that rooting out systemic racism is going to be simple, but I can agree that racial profiling is absolutely inappropriate. It is not something that we should The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Well, I'm going to try to get another commitment from the government, because they don't seem able to commit to something as clear as ending racial profiling. We know that millions of Canadians in a couple of weeks are going to be faced with the reality of their CERB ending. These families are worried about how they're going to put food on the table, because they can't return to a job. Will the Liberal government commit today so that those families will have some concrete support, yes or no? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, let me be clear, as I was in my previous answer, that our government clearly is opposed to racial profiling. This is a wrong practice and we're very clear about our position there. Now when it comes to the CERB, I absolutely share the concern of the member opposite. The Canadian economy is in its direst state since the Great Depression. We know that all the jobs have not yet come back. We know that Canadian workers, Canadian families, continue to need The Chair: We'll now pause for a short time to allow staff to change within the safety parameters for the COVID-19 virus, and as we resume, we will go to Ms. Harder. Ms. Rachael Harder (Lethbridge, CPC): Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister has mandated his ministers, and I quote, to govern in a positive, open and collaborative way. Ironically, as it stands, Parliament is currently closed for business. Opposition parties have little opportunity to hold the ruling party to account, private members'bills cannot be tabled and legislation cannot be debated. Can the Prime Minister, Mr. Trudeau himself, help us understand how all of this fits into his definition of so-called open government? The Honourable Pablo Rodriguez (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons): Well, Mr. Chair, we're here, right? We're here, and the opposition is asking questions. They have the equivalent of eight question periods instead of five to ask questions. They have more time than before, so I don't know why they're not happy about it. Ms. Rachael Harder: That's like when I'm asking for a full meal and your handing me a few jellybeans and saying, Why aren't you happy with that? Mr. Chair, here's the thing. It's like switching a light on and off when it's convenient for the Prime Minister and for the Liberal Party. That's what they want to do here. That's not Parliament. That's not democracy. When will Mr. Trudeau do the right thing, turn the lights on and get back to work for Canadians? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I'm really sorry to hear that my colleague's not working. I can assure you, Mr. Chair, on this side of the House, we're all actually working very hard and we're answering the questions from the opposition. Why? It's because it's extremely important. I sat there for seven years asking questions. I understand important Ms. Rachael Harder: The member opposite knows very well that he is misleading the Canadian public. This is not true Parliament. This is simply a special committee. Here's the thing. On the Liberal Party website, under the platform commitment, it says that Parliament works best when its members are free to do what they have been elected to do, and that is be the voice for their communities and hold the government to account. This is a Liberal document. Did the Prime Minister forget that strengthening Parliament was part of his 2019 platform commitment? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague for quoting our excellent platform. That was a very very good document. The thing is, I think we've reached a balance whereby MPs can come from different places, mostly around Ottawa, and ask questions; but also we can have colleagues from across the country asking questions. Why does my colleague think it is better to have only 35 MPs participating instead of 338? Ms. Rachael Harder: Does the Prime Minister value democracy, or does he still look up to China's basic dictatorship? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, we're answering all the questions from the opposition, not only from the people in this room, but we're answering The Chair: It's back to Ms. Harder now. Ms. Rachael Harder: I'll ask the question again. Does the Prime Minister still value the basic dictatorship of China over Canada's democracy? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I don't know where the colleague wants to go from here, Mr. Chair. I'd like to know from her why it is not important to her that her colleagues participate directly. Ms. Rachael Harder: Mr. Trudeau wrote to his ministers and said to them that they continue to raise the bar on openness, effectiveness and transparency. He went on to explain that This means. . . government that is open by default. We now have a parliament that is currently shut down. Mr. Trudeau has shut it down and has prevented us from being able to do to the good work that Canadians expect us to do. Is this Mr. Trudeau's idea of open by default? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, do they want to talk about shutting down Parliament? How about the time they prorogued Parliament twicenot only once, but twice? The Conservative government shut down Parliament twice. I was here. I was sitting on the other side of the aisle. It's quite the opposite now. We're taking all the questions. This place is open, and we're answering questions. The Chair: One moment, please. I haven't acknowledged you yet, Ms. Harder. We've stopped the time there. I want to remind honourable members that questions and answers are being given, and we want to hear both sides. Please keep the heckling down. Ms. Harder, please proceed. Ms. Rachael Harder: In 2014, the leader of the Liberal Party developed a policy resolution entitled Restoring Trust in Canada's Democracy. That's ironic, because right now, again, Parliament is currently shut down. We are prevented from being able to do the good work that we are expected to do. At the time, the Prime Minister said, Canadians want their Members of Parliament to be effective voices for their communities in Ottawa, and not merely mouthpieces in their communities for an all-too-powerful Prime Minister. Sadly, Mr. Trudeau has become the all-too-powerful prime minister that he once believed should not exist. Why did he change his mind? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, I'd like to know why my colleague wants to shut down the voices of her colleagues who could not speak and could not participate in this room. Mr. Chair, how would we vote on private members'bills, for example? As you know, it is not a government vote or a party vote; it's per row. You want to come back? Are you going to acceptMr. Chair, through youthat we have electronic voting, yes or no? The Chair: We'll go on to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, we know that the Minister of Foreign Affairs has champagne tastes and London flats, but it's his champagne mortgages that Canadians are concerned about. Specifically, why did the minister only disclose the complete extent of his personal debt to the Chinese government on June 4 of this year? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, as you know, since the minister entered politics, his two mortgages and other liabilities and assets have been fully disclosed to the Ethics Commissioner and placed on the online public registry. It's public, Mr. Chair. It's public. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Now it's public and it's terrible. When will the foreign affairs minister be here to answer these questions himself? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, it's always been public. We're in the middle of a pandemic here, trying to help Canadians, and the best they can do is ask questions about The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: When the minister owes over a million dollars to the Chinese government, people have a right to ask him questions. When will the Minister of Foreign Affairs show up? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: The minister shows up every day, Mr. Chair. He shows up and works for Canadians. Once again, those are public documents. Everything the minister did is public. I still don't know why they ask The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, he doesn't even have to come to the House. All he has to do is appear on the screen. Where is the minister? Why is he hiding? Why won't he answer questions about his personal debt to the Chinese government? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, if he goes online he's going to get the information. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, the minister is hiding. Let's ask some specific questions about their China policy. What is the impact on the decision-making? Three-quarters of Canadians don't want Huawei involved in our 5G network. Will the minister put the interests of Canadians ahead of the interests of his creditors and say no to Huawei? Hon. Navdeep Bains (Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry): Mr. Chair, when it comes to 5G deployment, we are right now currently undergoing a comprehensive review. We have been absolutely clear with allies and with Canadians that we never have and never will compromise Canadians'national interests. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, that is not an answer, and it is completely out of step with what our allies have already recognized. Reports are emerging of multiple deadly viruses exported from Winnipeg's microbiology laboratory to the Wuhan Institute of Virology right before scientists were expelled for policy breaches. In spite of that, scientific co-operation between Canadian institutions and the military-affiliated Wuhan Institute of Virology is continuing. Why hasn't the government put in place new guidelines to prevent the export of sensitive pathogens and information to China? Hon. Patty Hajdu (Minister of Health): Mr. Chair, he's right that in 2019 the National Microbiology Laboratory shared lab samples with the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The National Microbiology Laboratory routinely shares samples with other labs to help advance the international community's understanding of viruses and the research that is ongoing around those viruses. There are strict protocols in place for these transfers, and these samples were transported according to Canadian laws and regulations. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, I think Canadians would be concerned to hear that it's routine to transport viruses to Chinese military-affiliated labs. When Champagne was the parliamentary secretary for finance, the government decided to give hundreds of millions of dollars to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, bankrolling Chinese state-controlled development projects in Asia with weak standards in labour, human rights and environment. Will the minister put Canadian taxpayers ahead of his personal creditors and support a pullout from the Communist Party-controlled development bank? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Once again, Mr. Chair, my colleague is trying to connect the dots, and I don't know exactly where he is going from here, but everything is public. There's a thing called Google. He can go on it and check the information. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, the public can listen to this. I'm sure this exchange will also be available on Google, and the public can draw their own conclusions. We have failures on 5G, failures when it comes to the transport of deadly viruses and failures when it comes to giving over $400 million to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. It's clear that the Bank of China's investment in Minister Champagne is paying off. It's time for the minister to settle his debt with the Communist government and not settle it on the backs of Canadians. When will the minister be here in the House and answer questions about this mortgage? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: My colleague should be cautious with what he is saying in the House, Mr. Chair. This is serious stuff. He should be careful about what he says. The minister is actually working extremely hard for all Canadians and is doing his job correctly, Mr. Chair. We're talking about public information. Once again, let him go to Google and google it. That's it. The Chair: Now we'll go to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett: Canada's ambassador to the United Nations sent a letter last week to all member states of the UN promising that Canada would consider providing more funding for UNRRA, the same UNRRA that is a front for Hamas, which allows weapons of terror to be stored in schools and provides textbooks that call for the destruction of Israel. Do these Liberals have no shame when it comes to their quest for a seat on the UN Security Council? Hon. Mary Ng (Minister of Small Business, Export Promotion and International Trade): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to thank the honourable member for that question. We know that at this time Canada must show leadership in the face of global challenges. More than ever, Canada is playing a positive role by being a champion in diversity and inclusion, supporting the global fight against COVID-19, addressing climate change, leading peace and security efforts and helping the most vulnerable. A seat on the Security Council will allow Canada to be a strong voice for a fairer, more inclusive and prosperous The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett: Mr. Chair, I received a letter from Bob Anderson this week, who's advocating for his neighbours like Jean Grevelding, who owns a cottage at Butternut Bay. Like many people, Jean is an American who owns a property on our side of the border. These people are taxpaying members of our communities. These folks have plans in place to follow all Canadian quarantine rules. They're concerned about leaving their properties uncared for over the summer. Will folks like Jean be allowed to cross the border to check on their properties this summer? Hon. Bill Blair (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Of course, our priority is and always has been and always must be the protection of the health and safety of Canadians. That's why we put in place these restrictions for non-essential travel and have required, through the Public Health Agency of Canada, a 14-day quarantine. I don't know the specifics of the person for whom you advocate, but we want to make sure that if they come into Canada, it is for an essential purpose and that they do it safely and respect the quarantine that has been put in place. Mr. Michael Barrett: With nine branches throughout my riding, the Royal Canadian Legion offers a great deal to veterans and rural communities alike. They have been experiencing hardship and a loss of revenue, to the point where they may be forced to shut their doors. The Zone G2 commander and local mayors such as Roger Haley have reached out to me expressing their dire need. Will the government offer support to Legions across the country so they can continue to carry out their vital work for our veterans? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (Minister of Veterans Affairs): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Yes, we have done a lot to help support groups like the Legions. There is a $350-million emergency community support fund. If they're supplying any help to people regarding COVID, this fund is there. Indeed, we're doing everything we can to make sure that we help the Legions and other groups that do so much to help veterans right across the country. Mr. Michael Barrett: On May 21, the minister stated that her team was working as quickly as it could to fill the gaps in CEBA. It has now been three weeks, and many business owners, such as mortgage broker Corinna Smith-Gatcke, are still left in the lurch amid the delays, which are pushing businesses closer to shutting their doors for good. Will these businesses have access to CEBA before it's too late for them? Hon. Mary Ng: Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I thank the honourable member for that really important question on our Canadian small businesses. Those businesses can absolutely have access to the loan at their financial institution this Friday, and I would encourage them to go and see their bank or credit union. I want businesses to know that nothing is more important for us than making sure they get the support they need during this difficult time. Mr. Michael Barrett: The County Road 43 expansion project is critical for my riding and the region as a whole. This project will widen the road, increasing safety for the 18,000 motorists who travel the road every day. It's been 334 days since the provincial and local governments announced funding, but there has been nothing from this Liberal government. It's been 181 days since Minister McKenna told me her staff were reviewing the project. Today, there is still nothing, and for the last month the minister's team has not even found the time to respond to my request for an update. Will Minister McKenna finally stop with the delays and commit to funding this project today? Hon. Catherine McKenna (Minister of Infrastructure and Communities): Mr. Chair, as the member opposite knows, we work with provinces and territories to advance our infrastructure investments. We're making investments across the country. They are making a real difference in people's lives. We're always happy to work with members of Parliament, but they must also work with provinces and territories so that projects are advanced by them to our office. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall (YorktonMelville, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Through you, has Mr. MacAulay read ombudsman Dalton's May 2020 report, Financial Compensation for Canadian Veterans: A comparative analysis of benefit regimes? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I apologize, but I'll have to ask my honourable colleague to repeat the question. The Chair: Mrs. Wagantall, we'll freeze the time so that there's no extra time taken. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Thank you, Chair. My question was whether Mr. MacAulay has read ombudsman Dalton's May 2020 report, Financial Compensation for Canadian Veterans: A comparative analysis of benefit regimes. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I appreciate my honourable colleague's question. Of course, I appreciate Mr. Dalton's input and all that he has done for veterans. We've discussed it many times. I've done everything and worked with him in order to make sure that we bring the proper compensation to veterans The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: As a result of that study, are the financial outcomes Canada seeks to provide for ill and injured veterans now clearly defined within the Department of Veterans Affairs? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, as the member would know, I am to bring a report to the veterans affairs committee, and there are a number of things done in order to make sure that report is The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Then I would suggest that we get our committee up and going as it should be. Where are these financial directions published? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Well, of course, lockdown, but just under $90 million that the government put in supplementary estimates to make sure we address the backlog for Veterans Affairs. It's a major help The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Minister, are Canadian Armed Forces members provided with a copy of this document? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, my honourable colleague would have to ask the Canadian Armed Forces that question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: There are three different providing lifetime benefits for ill and injured veterans. In Ombudsman Dalton's recent report, did any one of these three provide the best compensation in all nine scenarios that were studied? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Of course, as she knows, there's been a lot of work done in order to make sure that we provide the proper compensation to veterans. We're working very hard, with a lot of help from Mr. Dalton, to make sure that the appropriate The Chair: We'll now continue with Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: In the undisclosed settlement of Sean Bruyea's legal case against Seamus O'Regan and the Liberal government, a joint statement says. . . Canadians, especially all Veterans and their families, are encouraged to enter the public debate about policies and programs that affect our Veterans and their families. Does Mr. MacAulay agree with this statement? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I can assure you that anybody is welcome to enter any discussion on compensation of veterans. We're always open to what we can do in order to make sure that we provide appropriate compensation. I don't think the term would be appropriate, but it would provide some compensation to veterans who truly deserve it. They defend our democracy The Chair: We'll go back to Ms. Wagantall. Oh, I'm sorry Ms. Andranne Larouche: Mr. Chair, I have a point of order. The interpretation hasn't worked for a few interventions. It's difficult to follow the exchange between the hon. member and the minister. The Chair: We're having a problem with the interpretation. Minister and Ms. Wagantall, you are joining us virtually. I'm wondering if you have the right language on at the bottom of your screen. We'll start with that for troubleshooting. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: I have English. The Chair: Very good. Minister MacAulay, what do you have? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I have English, Mr. Chair. The Chair: Very good. Then we'll check on our side. Ms. Larouche, did I understand correctly that the interpretation didn't work for both speakers? Ms. Andranne Larouche: The sound didn't allow the interpreters to do their job. It seemed to be a problem with the sound. The Chair: In that case, I would ask both members to maybe put their mike a little bit close to their mouth. We'll see how that works. I'm looking at the screen, and I notice the mike is a little bit far. Could we bend it in a little bit more? I appreciate that. Thank you for your patience. We'll give it another try. Ms. Wagantall, please go ahead. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: On a point of order, quite often while I'm trying to speak, there are lots of other voices in the background. The Chair: I would ask everyone to please be on mute, as well as for anyone in the chamber to please refrain from speaking loudly. Just whisper among yourselves if you have something to say. We'll take this one from the top. We have a minute and 45 seconds left. Ms. Wagantall, please proceed with your next question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: You said next question, so we're not going backwards, Chair? The Chair: Did we have an answer from Minister MacAulay? No? We'll go to Minister MacAulay to finish up the answer. We'll start at 27 seconds, freeze the clock and hear his answer. Then, because of all of the confusion, we'll start at one minute and 45 seconds when we get going again. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Should I repeat the question, sir? The Chair: Please do. The clock is frozen. After we go through the question and the answer, we'll start the clock again. Mr. Wagantall, please repeat the question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Thank you, Chair. In the undisclosed settlement to Sean Bruyea's legal case against Seamus O'Regan and the Liberal government, a joint statement says, Canadians, especially all Veterans and their families, are encouraged to enter the public debate about policies and programs that affect our Veterans and their families. Does Mr. MacAulay agree with this statement? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I appreciate my honourable colleague's question and concern. Of course I agree. Anybody is quite open to indicate whatever they wish in order to make sure we provide as appropriate a compensation as possible. You can never totally compensate veterans truly for what they deserve, but we want to make sure we provide the best compensation possible. That's what we will do and want to do. The Chair: Ms. Wagantall, we will start the clock again. You have one minute and 45 seconds remaining. Please proceed. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: If that's the case, is Minister MacAulay aware of the practice of red-flagging veterans'files? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I'm not aware. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Since the deputy minister has indicated that he runs the department, will the minister ask him for the names of veterans and the dates and the reasons that they are, or have been, red-flagged by VAC? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I would certainly ask any veteran or anybody who has a concern to contact my office. I will do anything I can to make sure that the veterans The Chair: We'll go back to Ms. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Do the most ill and injured still receive from the pension up to $300,000 less for life? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, as you know and as the Prime Minister indicated when the pension for life was put in place, it was stated that if anybody receives lessthe Prime Minister himself indicated it quite clearlythat must be adjusted. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: For veterans in similar circumstances, should the date of their application for compensation be a factor in determining whether they're treated equitably? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Yes, of course, the date is when the compensation would start. Of course, it's very important and very appropriate. The Chair: Now we will proceed to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd (Sturgeon RiverParkland, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Retired Major Mark Campbell in my riding of Sturgeon RiverParkland lost both legs in the line of duty in Afghanistan. He is an avid sport shooter, but understandably, due to his disability, he is very limited in the kinds of firearms he can use, and all of these firearms have now been banned under the Liberal OIC. My question to the Minister of Public Safety is this: Did their department do a legal analysis and consider the section 15 charter rights of disabled Canadians not to be discriminated against when they passed their OIC? Hon. Bill Blair: Yes, there was a very thorough analysis done by the justice department to ensure that the prohibitions we put in place were, in fact, charter compliant. Let me also say, Mr. Chair, how important it was that we prohibited weapons that were not designed for sporting purposes at all. In fact, they were designed for soldiers to use in combat. They have no place in a civil society. We have prohibited them, and we believeand this has been echoed by many people across the countrythat this will make Canadians safer. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, is the minister aware that the AR-15 is the most popular sporting rifle in Canada, and is he aware that disabled veterans like Major Mark Campbell are unable to participate in the sport of sport shooting because of his OIC? Hon. Bill Blair: I can assure the member that what I am aware of is that the AR-15 and other weapons like them have been used in mass killings in Canada on many occasions, such as at cole Polytechnique, at Dawson College, again at the Quebec mosque and in Moncton. The AR-15s in particular were also used at the terrible tragedy in places like Sandy Hook, where a bunch of kids were killed, so there is no place for The Chair: We will go to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, it has been months since the Liberals shut down this Parliament and months since the Minister of Finance should have presented a budget or at least an economic update to Canadians. Since then we have seen billions spent with little oversight and no plan. The minister says that he needs certainty before he can table a budget. Well, that didn't stop Stephen Harper and the Conservatives from tabling a budget in the depth of the last great recession. When are these Liberals finally going to take their job seriously and table an economic update? Hon. Mona Fortier (Minister of Middle Class Prosperity and Associate Minister of Finance): Mr. Chair, we're taking this very seriously. We're working for Canadians and bringing forward supports to make sure that businesses, workers and Canadians can put food on the table and pay their rent. We will continue to support Canadians, and when we have a clear projection to present, we will do that. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, the results are in, and businesses aren't happy with the so-called support programs from these Liberals. In fact, the oil and gas industry has been shut out of many of these economic programs. When is the government going to recognize that their business support plans have been an absolute failure with only a fraction of the billions promised being accessible to businesses? Hon. Seamus O'Regan (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Chair, our government has taken swift and immediate action to support our sector throughout this challenging time. We had the BCAP, which is critically important to providing liquidity to support the SMEs that make up 85% of the jobs in our sector. It has taken an enormous team effort. People are working around the clock to get money where it needs to be. We are helping hard-working Canadians, small businesses and large businesses right across the country, but in particular in our energy sector. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, I'm pleased to see the Minister of Natural Resources online. He tweeted recently to praise the Alberta Carbon Trunk Line and the North West Redwater Partnership refinery in my riding. Can the minister tell us what, if any, support they have given to the innovative carbon capture and sequestration technology in this country? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Mr. Chair, we see carbon capture and sequestration as an integral part of lowering emissions, making emissions more competitive and making our oil and gas industry more competitive. We're seeing where the investment dollars are going. They are going to jurisdictions that are committed to lowering emissions. Obviously, this government is committing to net zero. Mr. Dane Lloyd: I note that the minister couldn't name a single example of government support for carbon capture, utilization and sequestration technology. We have spent a lot of time talking about the COVID-19 pandemic, but Canadians are living with another horrific reality, that being the intensifying opioid overdose epidemic. Reports indicate that in the past four years, 14,000 Canadians have died, and the numbers during COVID-19 have been skyrocketing, with British Columbia seeing a 39% increase this year alone. I know this because I've lost a family member to a fentanyl overdose. When is the government going to take this scourge seriously and take action to save the lives of Canadians? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Mr. Chair, I share the member's deep sadness about the number of lives we've lost to opioid overdose. Our government has been steadily making it easier for people who live with substance use to access medications to treat substance use, such as prescription Suboxone and methadone. We have made it easier to rapidly establish safe injection sites in communities and have supported community-based projects that work with people who are using substances. We need to understand that this is a complex issue, and we need to support people to get the help they need. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes (AlgomaManitoulinKapuskasing, NDP) ): The hon. member for Thrse-DeBlainville. Ms. Louise Chabot (Thrse-De Blainville, BQ): MadamChair, I will come back to the bill introduced last week. As parliamentarians, we felt like we were watching a very bad play, as I imagine the public did. I say that it was theatre, even though it shouldn't be in this place. The government decided to stage a play and act alone and, unfortunately, there were several acts missing. A very important part of this bill was about supporting people with disabilities in this time of crisis. However, the government did not see fit to negotiate with the opposition parties, even though it is in a minority position. Despite this arrogance, the Bloc Qubcois proposed solutions. One of the things we proposed was to split the bill so that we could give this support to people with disabilities, but the Conservatives did not want to do that. We came back and asked for time to negotiate and give support to people with disabilities, but the government defeated the motion. We asked that the House be recalled today so that we could pass this part of the bill concerning support for people with disabilities, but we are still in the dark. Why are we abandoning people with disabilities? Hon. Ahmed Hussen (Minister of Families, Children and Social Development): I thank the hon. member for her question. We know this pandemic has deeply affected the lives and health of all Canadians and has disproportionately affected Canadians with disabilities in particular. From the very beginning, we've taken a disability-inclusive approach to our emergency response to ensure that Canadians with disabilities get the support they need. That is why we announced a one-time payment of $600 for persons with disabilities to address these expenses. This will go a long way toward helping Canadians with disabilities. We encourage and urge all parties in the opposition to support this measure. We're confident that this measure, along with other investments, will benefit Canadians with disabilities, and we hope to get the support of the other parties very soon. Ms. Louise Chabot: MadamChair, I remind you that this measure wasn't passed because we weren't allowed to do so. A measure to help people with disabilities has been put in an omnibus bill. We've tried here, in the House, to provide the means to give that support, so I ask again, can the government be counted on to give a response to people with disabilities? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, it was absolutely not an omnibus bill. It contained assistance for the disabled, of course, but it also contained assistance for our seasonal workers, as well as a number of other measures that the Bloc Qubcois opposed. They refused to debate and, when the question of splitting the bill came up, the Conservatives refused to do that. That is why there is no bill at the moment, and that is very unfortunate. Ms. Louise Chabot: It was a Bloc Qubcois proposal to split the bill. The government had not thought of it, but they found that it was a good idea. Let me return to the attack. This bill proposed changes to the wage subsidy program, it was supposed to make the CERB more flexible, it proposed fines for fraudsters and, since there was a little section about a benefit for the disabled, the government took it for granted that we would support it without any negotiations with the parties. However, we set one very important condition: that the Liberal Party must get its hands out of taxpayers'pockets in terms of the wage subsidy. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, as we listen to the Bloc Qubcois members, we might think that they invented peanut butter and apple pie. This bill contained a number of measures that all Quebeckers and all Canadians needed, but the Bloc Qubcois refused to debate it. No, we did not follow the Bloc Qubcois'example in splitting the bill; we had thought of it a long time previously. We have not been able to do that because of the Conservatives. Because of them, we cannot help those living with disabilities. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Ms. Chabot, you have 45seconds left. Ms. Louise Chabot: We asked on a number of occasions for the House to be able to sit starting today to pass the part of the bill dealing with those with disabilities. What is the status of that, MadamChair? We have not heard about it since. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, my colleague knows very well that things are not as simple as that. There are procedural mechanisms unique to the House. I hope that, one day, we will be able to pass this bill and be able to provide assistance for those living with disabilities. I hope that the Conservatives will change their minds and give us their support. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Don Valley East, Ms. Ratansi. Ms. Yasmin Ratansi (Don Valley East, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be sharing my time with the member for Surrey Centre. Since 2015 our government has been focused on ensuring its policies mitigate the effects of climate change. Several measures have been implemented for phasing out coal, making polluters pay, providing climate incentives, investing in green technologies and much more, which all together have created a climate plan that is doing more to cut pollution than any other in Canada's history. In my riding of Don Valley East, many innovative businesses have benefited from these investments and initiatives. One area of particular interest is our government's work to protect 25% of Canada's land and 25% of its oceans by 2025. Our natural environment is something that Canadians and my constituents care about deeply. Could the minister update this House on the new conservation projects announced on June 5, World Environment Day, and on how our government is protecting our environment? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, protecting nature is an important part of how we will address climate change and the very real challenges it presents. That's why on June 5, World Environment Day, our government announced over 60 conservation projects under development across Canada. These projects are funded through the Canada Nature Fund's target 1 challenge initiative. They'll conserve Canadian nature and biodiversity and protect species at risk, enhance ecological integrity and connectivity, and enhance the size of Canada's vast network of protected areas. Nearly half of these projects are indigenous-led, with the aim of creating indigenous-protected conserved areas. Madam Chair, projects like these move us closer to our goal of protecting 25% of Canada's lands and oceans by 2025. By working together in partnership with the provinces, territories, municipalities, indigenous peoples and Canadians, together we can protect our natural environment for generations to come. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Ms. Ratansi, since you have 25 seconds left, we will go to the honourable member for Surrey Centre. Mr. Randeep Sarai (Surrey Centre, Lib.): Madam Chair, there are many small and medium-sized businesses in my riding of Surrey Centre. Many have been impacted by COVID-19. They saw a decrease in business or needed to close their doors completely in order to adhere to public safety measures to manage the spread of COVID-19. These measures helped keep our most vulnerable citizens safe and ensured that our hospital and health care providers did not become overwhelmed with a sharp spike in cases. Thanks to our government's COVID-19 emergency response, many of these businesses have been able to keep their employees and access important liquidity through the Canada emergency business account, which provides loans to small businesses and non-profits, and the Canada emergency wage subsidy, which is helping businesses to keep and rehire their employees while their revenues are down by providing up to 75% of wages for up to 24 weeks. As we begin to reopen the economy and Canadians across the country return to the job market, those benefits will be even more important to help businesses and industries rehire their staff and make important adjustments to align with public health guidelines to gradually increase their operations. Can the minister please update the committee on how many Canadian businesses have taken advantage of CEBA and CEWS since applications for each have been opened? Hon. Mary Ng: Madam Chair, I want to begin by thanking the member for Surrey Centre for all the work he does to support his constituents and small businesses. Canadians across the country need to know our government has been working tirelessly and will continue to work tirelessly on their behalf. This is why we put in place the important programs to help them get through this crisis during this difficult time, programs such as the wage subsidy program. We know that in so many businesses the employees are often like extended family members. The wage subsidy has helped these businesses keep their employees on the payroll and are now helping in their rehiring as they slowly and safely restart. There are 348,000 businesses being helped with the wage subsidy program, and this means that 2. 6 million workers are being helped. Businesses are also being helped through the interest-free $40,000 loan they can access through CEBA to help stay afloat and pay their expenses during this crisis. I'm pleased to inform this House that to date more than 669,000 The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for St. John's East. Mr. Jack Harris: Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with my colleague, the member for LondonFanshawe. Madam Chair, with so many recent reports and videos of police using force, sometimes deadly force, and violence against indigenous and black people in Canada, I've called for the public safety committee to reconvene. If the members agree, will the minister come to the committee and provide concrete answers as to how the government intends to address racism inherent in Canada's law enforcement, and in particular the RCMP? Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I thank my colleague for the question. It's perhaps the most important one facing Canada today. Madam Chair, indigenous people, black Canadians and other racialized people are far too often experiencing systemic racism and disparate outcomes within the entire criminal justice system. In order to respond appropriately, I think it's necessary to begin by acknowledging the lived experience of people who've known bias and discrimination at the hands of the police and our courts and within our prisons. We remain committed to working with all racialized people and all of the members of this House to ensure that we work toward social justice for all Canadians, and I look forward to discussing the member's motion further with him. Mr. Jack Harris: Will the minister and the government commit to facilitating such a meeting of this committee virtually? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, the decisions of the committee are the committee's, so I'm sure that this will be a discussion within the committee, but if called, I will certainly be pleased to come with my officials to provide the committee with whatever support and information it needs to contribute to this very important discussion. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Harris, you have 40 seconds. Mr. Jack Harris: In light of what we've seen with Chief Adam in Fort McMurray and the RCMP accepting that the actions were reasonable, will the minister commit to a full review of the use of force by the RCMP, in particular the philosophy, tactics and training that is given to RCMP officers in dealing with the public? Hon. Bill Blair: I thank the member and I want to assure him, first of all, that this is work that is ongoing, not just in the RCMP but throughout the police community. May I also take this opportunity, Madam Chair, to say that I think all police training has to begin with one very important principle, and that's the preservation of all life and the respect for all Canadians. We also know the importance of de-escalation training. We're committed to continuing to work with indigenous communities, racialized communities and with police services and all participants in the criminal justice system to make sure that it is fair for all Canadians. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for LondonFanshawe, Ms. Mathyssen. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen (LondonFanshawe, NDP): Madam Chair, we need more justice for black, indigenous and racialized people in Canada. They can't be asked to keep waiting. This government recognizes that systemic racism exists but refuses to collect race-based data that would allow us to quantify and truly address this injustice. We need data to protect Canadians. When will this government do the right thing and start collecting race-based data? Hon. Bardish Chagger (Minister of Diversity and Inclusion and Youth): Madam Chair, our government agrees that it's important that we collect data, and that's exactly why, in the anti-racism secretariat and the anti-racism strategy, there is a commitment to have money go to Statistics Canada to collect race-based data. We look forward to working with all members to ensure it happens. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen: Madam Chair, we know that Statistics Canada will start to collect job numbers based on race. This will allow us to identify systemic racism where it is and where we need to ensure a fair and more equal job market for black, indigenous and racialized people in Canada. Why is this government refusing to follow suit so we can tackle systemic racism everywhere, in every sector? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I'd like to thank my honourable colleague for her question. She's absolutely correct in her assessment that we need to collect more data, reliable data, data that will help us deal with some of the challenges we're seeing with systemic discrimination, but, more broadly, we want to make sure that we continue to engage with an anti-racism strategy that will allow us to collect that disaggregated data. That is why we allocated $6. 2 million to that initiative through Statistics Canada, but we know we must do more and we will do more. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen: We know that all people are susceptible to catching COVID-19, but health authorities are clear that parts of cities like Montreal and Toronto have been more impacted than others. For black and racialized people living in these cities, this data is a matter of life and death. Will the government collect and share disaggregated data so we can identify and erase systemic racism, yes or no? Hon. Bardish Chagger: Madam Chair, making decisions based on science and evidence is essential for our government. We took that practice from day one. It is exactly the step we will take moving forward and that's why we are making those investments to ensure that data exists. We are working across all departments. My mandate letter is public. I look forward to continuing to work not only with all ministers, departments and agencies, but all allies and all parties to get this work done. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Blaney, the honourable member for BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, has the floor. Hon. Steven Blaney (BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, CPC): Thank you, MadamChair. Last week, my plumber told me that, each time Justin Trudeau comes down the steps to make announcements totalling several billion dollars, he feels like someone is rifling through his pockets. My question is simple and goes to the Minister of Finance: where is this money coming from? Hon. Mona Fortier: MadamChair, I would like to thank my honourable colleague for his question. Currently, the health and safety of Canadians are our top priorities. We have implemented an emergency economic plan to support Canadians, workers and companies. We will continue to support them during this crisis. Hon. Steven Blaney: The answer I would have liked is simple: we are borrowing the money and we are going to have to pay it back one day. That is another Liberal craze: they borrow money, they make campaign promises, and off they go. Under the Conservative government, the Chantier Davie in Lvis had 1,700workers for the supply ship Asterix. In the election campaign, the Liberals promised icebreakers. When are the Liberals going to award the icebreaker contracts to the Chantier Davie? Hon. David Lametti (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada): MadamChair, we are very proud of the Chantier Davie and we completely understand its role in the system. We are currently assessing those requests. We are going to establish the process for the polar ice-breaker, which is essential for the work of the Coast Guard in northern communities, and we are going to make sure that The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Blaney has the floor. Hon. Steven Blaney: The workers do not need words; they need contracts and jobs. The same is true for young people who want to work. There is money in the Canada summer jobs program: in my constituency alone, $150,000has been approved. Companies want young people to work and want to hire them. What is the minister waiting for in order to confirm those positions? In my constituency, and everywhere else in the country, our young people want to work. What is the government waiting for in order to send some cash to the Canada summer jobs program? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we are proud of the Canada summer jobs program. We are introducing flexibilities into the system to enable employers to be able to hire summer students. We recognize the importance of this program to provide both financial resources and necessary experience for young people. We believe in continuing to invest in the Canada summer jobs program. Hon. Steven Blaney: The workers, the young people and the employers have been waiting for weeks. The money is available; where is the announcement? MadamChair, our young people are not the only ones who want to work. There are also the temporary foreign workers. Let me use Jessie Gito as an example; he has been working at Plate2000 in Saint-Anselme for years. When the time came to renew his work permit, he found out that he has to have some biometric tests. But he cannot get them because the offices are closed. Is the minister going to allow Jessie Gito and the thousands of other temporary foreign workers who want to work to be able to do so until the government biometric testing centres reopen? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, it is important for the honourable member to recognize that we are in the early recovery stage of the pandemic. Employers are slowly reopening businesses. We will ensure that we support both our students and our temporary foreign workers to make sure we get the recovery right. We will continue to invest in the Canada summer jobs program. We've introduced flexibilities into the program to ensure that employers are able to take advantage of the program and give opportunities to young people. Hon. Steven Blaney: It is very simple. Jessie Gito is a foreign worker, who is in a company that provides an essential service. He needs a decision that will let him go to work, rather than staying home and doing nothing. Then, when the government's biometric testing centres are open again, he will gladly go to one. Young people want to work in agriculture as well, and the minister has told us that the government wants young people working and that their files will be processed as quickly as possible. She wants to create 700positions and she knows that people can fill in an application on a first-come first-served basis. Of those 700positions, how many have been confirmed to date? The good weather has arrived, the corn is starting to grow, and this is the time when farmers need the young workers. Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food): MadamChair, the program for young workers in agriculture is open. I also encourage agricultural producers to register for it. This is a program that is not only intended to provide summer jobs, but also to interest young people in making a career in agriculture. As I have said before, the department is processing files as quickly as possible. Each employer will have an answer very shortly. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will now take a short break. Okay, we are ready to start again. We will go to the honourable member for BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte. Mr. Doug Shipley (BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Over the course of the pandemic, has the government been using all avenues possible to source much-needed PPE in Canada? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, we have been very clear that we have a made-in-Canada initiative that has engaged companies across the country. Over 700 companies have retooled and scaled up their operations for personal protective equipment to help front-line health care workers. Mr. Doug Shipley: Madam Chair, I need to ask very quickly which ministry and minister are responsible for the sourcing of PPE in Canada. Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, this is a collective effort. I work with the Minister of Health and the minister for procurement, and we coordinate with the provinces and territories to make sure there are appropriate levels of PPE to help front-line health care workers and essential workers across the country. Mr. Doug Shipley: Thank you for that clarification. That will make this question all the more pertinent. My riding of BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte is the home of Southmedic Inc. Southmedic is a renowned medical supply business. For over 37 years, it has provided front-line health care workers with an extensive line of PPE and other essential products required when dealing with respiratory illnesses. This company specializes in respiratory illness equipment. Southmedic currently employs over 700 people, and it has been recognized as one of Canada's best-managed companies by Deloitte on numerous occasions. Since the beginning of the pandemic, both I and the member for BarrieInnisfil have been attempting to obtain some assistance for Southmedic from the federal government. Calls and emails were falling on deaf ears. In early May, I wrote a letter to Minister Anand outlining the situation. I received a letter back from the minister dated May 27 indicating that this issue of Southmedic falls under the mandate of the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada. I have heard nothing more. When will the federal government reach out and help this great Canadian company and therefore ensure that all front-line workers will have the proper PPE they require? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I'd like to thank my honourable colleague for his question. He knows full well that this is a very challenging time. That is why we had a call to action to engage Canadians right across the country. Since then, we've seen over 6,000 companies step up to offer solutions and ideas, and over 700 companies have retooled their efforts. I acknowledge that some companies are still engaging with the government, and we'll continue to explore all possible options to make sure we continue to procure the necessary levels of personal protective equipment to protect Canadians and to protect front-line health care workers. That has always been our priority. I want to thank the outstanding Canadian companies that have come forward and have helped us in this endeavour. We continue to look forward to working with them. Mr. Doug Shipley: Thank you for that answer. Just to follow up, there's no retooling required at this company. They could have been up and going very quickly. They just needed a little assistance at the beginning. Moving on to a different issue, while walking to my office this morning, I stopped at my local small family-run coffee shop and was discussing the current economic situation with the two owners of the establishment. They indicated they are having a very tough time surviving this economic downturn. The only thing keeping them hopeful is that soon the public service will start returning to work, and therefore their business will begin to return. Could the government please give us some indication as to what the plans are for returning the civil service back to work safely, and when? Hon. Jean-Yves Duclos (President of the Treasury Board): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm delighted to answer this question. This is a very important topic, but I'd like to take the opportunity first to thank our public servants, who have worked very hard in the last few weeks, both personally and professionally. In fact, today is a wonderful day to say that, because today is the start of National Public Service Week. That's one more reason to thank them for their dedicated work. They are not going to go back to work. They've been at work for the last few monthsin different circumstances, but they have been working very hard to deliver the services and the support Canadians need and deserve. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Next we'll go to the honourable member for SelkirkInterlakeEastman, Mr. Bezan. Mr. James Bezan (SelkirkInterlakeEastman, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. My questions are for the Minister of National Defence. First of all, I want to thank the great men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces for the fantastic job they're doing in Operation LASER, serving on the front lines battling COVID-19. Can the Minister of National Defence give the House an update on exactly where we are at with the number of Canadian Armed Forces members who have been infected with COVID-19? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan (Minister of National Defence): Madam Chair, I want to echo the member opposite's comments in thanking our Canadian Armed Forces members. Currently, we have 13 active cases in the Canadian Armed Forces, but in the long-term care facilities we currently have 50 cases. No member has been currently hospitalized. We have also conducted very thorough reviews of our protection protocols as well. Mr. James Bezan: Through you, Chair, Minister Sajjan, does that number of active cases include the active cases that are in long-term care facilities right now in Operation LASER? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, as I stated, the 50 cases are strictly from the long-term care facilities. The 13 cases I mentioned are not in the long-term care facilities. Just to give the actual clarification, no member has been currently hospitalized. Mr. James Bezan: In those numbers, Madam Chair, can Mr. Sajjan say how many of those cases in long-term care facilities are active and how many are recovered? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, I don't have the exact number. What I can say to break it down further is that in Quebec we currently have 36 and in Ontario we have 14. As well, 36 of the members have been out of isolation. I'll get more details and pass them on directly to the member, Madam Chair. Mr. James Bezan: Thank you, Minister. Madam Chair, I have a quick question while we're still talking about Operation LASER. The President of the Treasury Board has said, The Canadian Armed Forces will be present as long as their presence is needed in Quebec. This contradicts what Prime Minister Trudeau is saying, which is that we have a hard deadline of June 26 for the withdrawal of our troops for Operation LASER. That means taking our troops out of our long-term care facilities. Minister, is June 26 the hard date for the winding down of Operation LASER? Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I'm delighted to have the opportunity to clarify for the House. We've been in very extensive discussions with the Province of Quebec, with my counterpart Minister Guilbault, and we are working very diligently to ensure we have a sustained, appropriate response to the request from Quebec for assistance. That response will result in a transition from the currently deployed Canadian Armed Forces to the deployment of paid volunteers, trained personnel who will take on the important role of providing services to those Canadians who need our help in Quebec. Mr. James Bezan: I'll go back to the Minister of National Defence. The Department of National Defence auditors have called out the Liberal government for mismanagement over the $553-billion investment in our Canadian military through the defence policy. Only three people have been assigned to oversee the rollout of this money. This is a $553-billion investment in our armed forces, and only three people are managing it. Could the minister tell us how that is even possible? Is this the reason that over 100 projects are currently behind schedule? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, first of all, I want to highlight the unprecedented investment that we're making in defence. We have conducted internal reviews of our procurement. The report the member opposite is talking about is from the previous year. This is the ongoing work we're doing to make sure that we make procurement better. When it comes to the management of this, it's conducted by me and the minister of procurement. We are working toward making our procurement even better. We have already streamlined some aspects of our procurement and we'll continue to do more as well. Mr. James Bezan: Minister Sajjan, you've had this report since November of 2019. You've been rolling out this plan since 2017. Only three people are overseeing an expenditure of $553 billion. This is taxpayers'money. Are we going to see more cuts because you have been unable to actually roll out these dollars? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, I can assure you we're not going to be cutting. We'll be investing in our defence. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Before I go to the next speaker, I want to remind members that they are to address their questions and comments directly through the chair. We will go now to the honourable member for Fort McMurrayCold Lake, Mr. Yurdiga. Mr. David Yurdiga (Fort McMurrayCold Lake, CPC): Madam Chair, the Canada summer jobs program has many challenges. I've seen many indigenous communities in my riding rejected for funding even though they had received funding in previous years. Here are a few examples of communities that were rejected: Beaver Lake Cree Nation, Buffalo Lake Mtis Settlement and the Mtis Nation of Alberta, Region 1. The list goes on. Could the Prime Minister explain why so many indigenous communities have been denied funding from the Canada summer jobs program? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we recognize the important role that the Canada summer jobs program plays in supporting employers and young workers in our community across the country every year. We're working very hard to help employers adapt to the realities of the COVID-19 pandemic and are supporting young Canadians as they begin to look for summer employment. We are introducing increased flexibilities into the Canada summer jobs program to hire youth, while also providing more supports to employers that deliver essential services to Canadians. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, that didn't really answer my question. Why are so many indigenous communities left out of the Canada summer jobs program? This is very important to my community and to communities throughout the province. Will the government investigate why these communities were rejected? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that we, of course, value the important role that the Canada summer jobs program plays in all communities, including indigenous communities in Canada. I will certainly have an off-line conversation with the honourable member, if he so wishes, about a particular issue, but I can assure him that in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, we have had to assist employers to introduce flexibilities The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Yurdiga. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, in my riding, the City of Cold Lake has been in dispute with the federal government for many years over payment in lieu of taxes. My office has sent many letters over the years regarding the PILT dispute. Could the Minister of Public Services and Procurement give me a rough estimate of when I will receive a response from the minister's office to my first letter, from 2017, and my letters from 2018,2019 and 2020? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that I will go to the minister, and we will come back with an answer to his question. Mr. David Yurdiga: How much longer does the minister intend to perpetuate the ongoing PILT dispute, which is in excess of $11 million, with the City of Cold Lake? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, once again, I can assure the honourable member that I will speak with the minister and get an answer to his question. Mr. David Yurdiga: Well, do you know what? I've been writing letters to the department for many years. When you say you're going to get back to me, I really have a hard time believing that. Will the minister agree to follow the prior recommendations of the dispute advisory panel that were accepted by the minister? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that I will check with the minister and that she will return to the member in due course. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, the drug Trikafta has been proven to increase the quality of life for 90% of cystic fibrosis patients. Two weeks ago, my office sent a letter to the Minister of Health about the boy in my riding named Cael, who through the special access program is able to get Trikafta in Canada. I requested that the minister use her powers to fast-track Trikafta for commercial use, but I have yet to receive a response back. When will the minister make a decision on Trikafta? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, I'm glad to hear that Cael was able to access Trikafta through the special access program. In fact, that program is very helpful for people who are seeking access to medication that's not currently marketed in Canada. As the member opposite knows, Vertex has not applied to market Trikafta in Canada, but we look forward to their application, and I encourage him to write a letter to the manufacturer to also encourage them. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Vancouver Granville, Ms. Wilson-Raybould. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould (Vancouver Granville, Ind.): Thank you, Chair. I was very troubled to hear that a CBC radio host in the Yukon felt compelled to resign because, as an indigenous person, she could not speak her truth. While we know the Broadcasting Act states that the Canadian broadcasting system should reflect the linguistic duality and multicultural and multiracial nature of Canadian society and the special place of indigenous peoples, it would seem there are some challenges. Therefore, does the Minister of Heritage share the concern of some journalists that problems of systemic racism in Canada are still existing within the institution of the CBC, and will the government now acknowledge the need to recognize the jurisdiction of indigenous governments? Hon. Steven Guilbeault (Minister of Canadian Heritage): Thank you, Madame Chair; and I thank the member for this important question. As stated by the Prime Minister on numerous occasions, our government recognizes that systemic racism exists in Canada, and we have made a commitment to do everything we can to combat it in whichever organization of the Canadian government. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould: Thank you. When I was in the government, and as a minister, I learned the term red meat issues. I understand these issues to be ones that challenge societal norms, that are not politically expedient to address because they can lose you votes, even though addressing them is morally right and a smart thing to do. Mostly these are issues addressing inequality and the most marginalized in our society. In the justice system, examples include mandatory minimum penalties, defunding police, and even investing in restorative justice. Red-meat issues often become defining issues for society and for governments as the world changes. Surely now these issues are politically less of a consideration than the tragic reality of even more slain indigenous Canadians at the hands of police, or thousands of indigenous people still incarcerated or living in poverty. Will this government please finally commit to the necessary work originally promised in 2015 and repeal in the justice system the vast majority of mandatory minimum penalties, assuring the necessary discretion for judges, and meaningfully invest in restorative justice measures? Hon. David Lametti: Madame Chair, I thank the honourable member for her question, as well as for her work as Minister of Justice, and indeed my predecessor. This is an important time. This is a time when we recognize systemic racism. This is a time when we recognize systemic over-incarceration of indigenous peoples, of black peoples, in our criminal justice system. This is a time when we need to look at all potential options to reduce what is a shameful overrepresentation in our criminal justice system. Too often racialized peoples and indigenous peoples have experienced prejudice and systemic discrimination in our justice system, and that has to change. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould: I'll go on to another red meat issue. In British Columbia we are in the fifth year of the opioid overdose public health emergency crisis. Sadly, May marks the deadliest month of overdose-related deaths. We are halfway into the year and have currently passed 500 deaths caused by overdose. Many of the deaths are related to COVID-19 measures that have prevented people from accessing supervised consumption sites, so they are overdosing alone. While the provinces welcomed the federal backing of safe supply exemption back in March, it is to expire in September of 2020. Echoing the call of the chief coroner of B. C. and Dr. Henry, more is needed from the federal government, more action. Will the government provide the necessary supports to the province and help support safe supply initiatives in the provinces? Hon. Patty Hajdu: It's been a pleasure to work with the Province of British Columbia on innovative ways to work on the tragic situation of opioid overdose. I remain committed to working with the province and in fact any province that wants to work towards solutions that treat people who use substances with the dignity they deserve. Madam Chair, this is a complex issue. We're working closely with our partners to make sure that we can prevent more lives from being lost. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for South OkanaganWest Kootenay, Mr. Cannings. Mr. Richard Cannings (South OkanaganWest Kootenay, NDP): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with the member for SkeenaBulkley Valley. In my riding, Theo's in Penticton is a beloved restaurant. They've been serving great food for 40 years, but now they're struggling, because they don't qualify for the emergency wage subsidy. Why is that? The original owners retired last year and sold it to another operator. The new owner can't use a year-to-year comparison to apply for the wage subsidy because he didn't own the restaurant last spring. He is forced to use receipts from January and February, the darkest doldrums of the restaurant year, to compare with the results from May, traditionally one of their best months. Now he has to compete with other local restaurants that can access the subsidy. When will the government fix this inequity and let Theo's compete and survive? Hon. Mona Fortier: Madam Chair, the Canada emergency wage subsidy is supporting over 2. 5 million workers across the country. To help even more businesses support their workers and rehire people as they reopen, our government is extending the CEWS, and we will continue to extend the CEWS for an additional 12 weeks to August 29 to ensure that Canadian workers continue to have the support they need during these very difficult times. By extending eligibility, our government is ensuring that more Canadian workers in more sectors have the support they need. Mr. Richard Cannings: The owner just wants to be able to apply for the wage subsidy, and right now he cannot, and he will not be able to. Thousands of other businesses are hit that way as well. I'd like to move on to forestry. Canada's forest sector has been declared essential during this pandemic, but it's been hit hard after a very difficult 2019. Despite soft markets and thousands out of work, government support programs have left many Canadian forest product companies behind. In my riding, the pulp mill in Castlegar is closing for the month of July because local sawmills aren't producing enough wood chips. What is the government going to do to finally support Canadian forestry workers and communities? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The time is almost up, but I will allow for the answer from the honourable minister. Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Thank you, Madam Chair. We have supported and we will continue to support the forestry sector, including through regional development programs. In fact, in Quebec, partnering with Les Bois Francs DV Inc. , we have widened market access to our products and updated technology systems. In North Bay we've partnered with the Canadian Wood Council to promote the sector. In Vancouver we're working with FPInnovations to create the indigenous forest sector technical support program. We are supporting the forestry sector and its different needs region by region. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Now we go to the honourable member for SkeenaBulkley Valley, Mr. Bachrach. Mr. Taylor Bachrach (SkeenaBulkley Valley, NDP): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm going to pick up where my colleague left off, with B. C.'s forest industry. What we've seen in B. C. are multiple rounds of mill shutdowns and start-ups, and in some cases this has made it difficult for forestry workers to qualify for EI. My question to the minister is this: Will the minister work to make the EI program more flexible for forestry workers, similar to what this government has done for oil and gas workers? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, in the oil and gas sector we have focused on workers. That has been key in the inactive and orphan well program, which we are working on with the provincial governments of Saskatchewan, British Columbia and Alberta. The focus on workers has assured that success, and we will continue to focus on workers in all the industries, particularly our natural resource industry, as they go through this extraordinarily difficult time. Mr. Taylor Bachrach: Madam Chair, reforestation is a very important part of the forest industry in the riding I represent, and people were keenly interested to hear this government's plan to plant two billion trees in the next 10 years. That's a lot of trees. I'm wondering if the minister could tell us how many trees are going to be planted under this program by the end of this season. Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, this government is committed to two billion trees. We are working with forestry associations, the industry and with individual companies to ensure this tree-planting season will be one of the largest the country has ever seen. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The floor goes to the honourable member for Rivire-du-Nord. Mr. Rhal Fortin (Rivire-du-Nord, BQ): MadamChair, last week, the government introduced BillC-17 and the Minister of Justice sent us briefing notes in which he said that it was important to suspend a number of time limits and to extend others, and that the failure to do so could have important repercussions on Canadians, their families, their situations, their finances and their ability to exercise their rights. We in the Bloc Qubcois agree with that. When are we going to talk about it? Hon. David Lametti: MadamChair, the contents of BillC-17 are clearly very important. We have addressed the mandatory time limits in federal legislation as well as certain time limits that courts may not be able to handle. It is very important that we address this issue. That is why the law The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Fortin, you have the floor. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, we agree that it is important. I concur. The minister's briefing notes say that, among other things, when it comes to divorcewhich means children are involved people are waiting on custody rights, child support and visitation rights. The minister pointed out that the national security review would require consultations if no decision is made in the prescribed time frame. It could pose a national security risk. It is really a big deal. When are we going to debate it? Hon. David Lametti: MadamChair, I completely agree with my honourable colleague. The issue needs to be addressed. That is why it is in the bill. That is another reason to debate the bill. I beseech my colleagues opposite to debate it with us. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, what a coincidence, because I beseech my colleague opposite to debate it with us. That is what we are asking. Last week, the leader of the Bloc Qubcois asked the Liberal government to debate BillC-17 today. He did not get an answer. It does not seem to matter. Richard Wagner, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, who is hardly a dimwit or greenhorn, told us that the justice system needs to be modernized. As recently as this past Saturday in LaPresse, Justice Wagner said that it is essential that the Criminal Code be amended to address the backlog of court proceedings. When will the Liberal government opposite pull up its socks, do its job, govern the federation, sit down with the opposition and discuss the vital matters in BillC-17? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, if I were my colleague, I would be a little embarrassed, because the bill was sent to the Bloc Qubcois several days in advance. They received a technical note several days in advance. We were all available to take questions. When we asked for the support of the Bloc Qubcois and the other parties to debate itwe were not even asking them to vote in favour of the billthey refused. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, we never refused to debate it. Actually, we were the ones who asked to debate it. What exactly does debate it mean? We set some conditions. For example, we asked the Liberals to put the money back into the wage subsidy fund and to commit to dip into it no longer. Are we asking too much of our colleagues opposite? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Can my colleague explain to me what the emergency wage subsidy has to do with a bill about justice? This is an absolutely fundamental piece of legislation. We wanted to debate it, but they refused to do so. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, I would like nothing better than to explain it to him, but I must remind him that he is the leader of the party in power, the party that is supposed to govern the country. So I do not know why he is asking me that. My party proposed that we debate this today but we did not get an answer. Meanwhile, court time limits are running out and people are losing rights. I am thinking of families, child support, child custody, labour law disputes in Federal Court, marine transportation, interprovincial transportation, aviation, banks, and those with grievances waiting for a Federal Court ruling. The whole system, the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal, everything is on hold because nobody in the government wants to do their job. We want to discuss BillC-17. When can we talk about it? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, we have done our job. We have introduced the bill. We informed them in advance. We told them they could ask us any questions they wanted. We asked for a debate in the House. However, when we asked the Bloc Qubcois if they wanted to debate the bill, they said no, instead of doing what they usually do and saying yes. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for Essex, Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis (Essex, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. When the CERB runs out, many workers in my riding of Essex will not have sufficient hours to collect their EI benefits. In early July, the midnight shift at Chrysler will be eliminated. Because of the shutdown, a mom-to-be who had just returned to work in January, and several hundred of her fellow employees, may not have the 600 hours required for regular or EI parental benefits. Immediate action is needed. What is the government doing now to backstop these workers? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, the Canada emergency response benefit has been providing much-needed help to Canadian workers across the country who have stopped working due to COVID-19. We know that there is still a lot of uncertainty for many Canadian workers, and we know that many will be exhausting their benefits in the weeks to come. We will have more to share soon, as early as this week, on our continuing efforts to support Canadian workers and make sure that help is available during this The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Go ahead, Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Minister, for the answer. The EI system needs to be fixed. Even before the shutdown, the system was deeply flawed. Will this government commit to a complete review and overhaul of the EI system? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we have been there for Canadian workers. We will continue to make sure that we make the necessary investments in the EI delivery system and modernize it to continue to meet The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. Small businesses have been hit extremely hard by the COVID-19 shutdown. Many have already been forced into bankruptcy. Much uncertainty lies ahead. As the economy reopens, what is the government doing to help small businesses recover? Hon. Mary Ng: Madam Chair, today we are seeing small businesses that have been helped, whether it is getting access to the small business loan, which some are also using in the restart as they are safely restarting, or getting help with their payroll, helping them keep their employees The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. Employees are key to a small business's success. How will the government incentivize workers to return to their jobs when recalled? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister can give a brief answer. Hon. Mary Ng: The Canada emergency wage subsidy is an excellent program to help those employees stay employed and for those employers who are looking at rehiring them right now during this restart process. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair, many of my constituents are in a committed cross-border relationship and have not been able to see their partners in quite some time. The current restrictions are arbitrary. Denmark has found a fair resolution. Will Canada adopt the Danish model, and if not, why not? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, as we said from the outset, we've implemented restrictions at the U. S. border on non-essential travel with a single purpose in mind: to protect the health and safety of Canadians. As the member is aware, just last week we introduced new measures that allow people in family relationships to stay together as long as they commit to the necessary 14-day period of quarantine. We'll continue to work with families. Our intention is to keep people together, but mostly to keep people safe. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair, with regard to child care, as our economy continues to open, parents are facing a stark choice: Who will care for their children? What's the plan to provide access to child care so parents can confidently return to work? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we are of course committed to continuing to make the record investments that we've been making in child care. Since 2015 we've created over 40,000 affordable child care spaces. We're committed to creating an additional 250,000 before-school and after-school child care spaces. We will continue to invest in this sector because we understand that without investment The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. It sounds as though this government has a desire to force parents to choose between their job and care for their child. Can the government please respond to that quote? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, nothing could be further from the truth. We are committed to the child care sector. Our investments and our results prove the opposite of what the member is asserting. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I'm sorry. We're out of time. The committee now stands adjourned until tomorrow at noon.

Hon. Chrystia Freeland stated that there had existed racism in Canada. Systemic racism had existed in all federal institutions, including the RCMP.

tr-sq-1211

tr-sq-1211_0

Summarize the discussion about finance and veterans. The Chair (Hon. Anthony Rota (NipissingTimiskaming, Lib.) ): I call this meeting to order. Welcome to meeting number 22 of the House of Commons Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic. A reminder to all members that in order to avoid issues with sound, members participating in person should not also be connected to the video conference. For those joining via video conference, I would like to remind you that, when speaking, you should be on the same channel as the language you are speaking. As usual, please direct your remarks through the chair. I understand we don't have any ministerial announcements today, so we'll proceed to presenting petitions. I would like to remind members that any petition presented during a meeting of the special committee must have already been certified by the clerk of petitions. For members participating in person, we ask that they please come and drop the signed certificate off at the table once the petition is presented. The first petition will be presented by Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May (SaanichGulf Islands, GP): Mr. Chair, it's an honour to rise in meeting number 22 of the COVID-19 committee, otherwise known as something like the House of Commons. I'm here to present two petitions containing hundreds of signatures on the issue of the treatment of Falun Gong practitioners by the People's Republic of China, particularly the practice that's alleged of involuntary organ harvesting. The petitioners ask the Government of Canada to condemn this practice and to publicly call for an end to the persecution of Falun Gong in the People's Republic of China. The second petition is from residents throughout SaanichGulf Islands concerned about what was, at the time this petition was submitted, a future problem. It remains an issue, and I present it on behalf of petitioners who wish the Government of Canada not to put public funds into purchasing or maintaining the Trans Mountain pipeline or towards any expansion of the pipeline. The Chair: Next we'll go to Ms. Kwan. Ms. Jenny Kwan (Vancouver East, NDP): Mr. Chair, I rise to table two petitions. The first petition deals with the COVID-19 situation. The petitioners note the pandemic is having a devastating impact on many Canadians nationwide, especially those who have low to modest income, small business gig workers, freelancers, artists, film industry workers, non-salaried workers and individuals on fixed incomes such as seniors and those on disability. It further notes that rent, mortgage and utility payments are due at the end of each month, putting countless Canadians at risk of losing their housing. It is paramount there be safe self-isolation opportunities for all individuals in this country. To that end, the petitioners are calling for the government to immediately enact a nationwide rent freeze, eviction freeze, mortgage freeze and utility freeze, enforce mortgage deferrals for homeowners without penalty or interest charges from financial institutions and provide direct assistance in the form of a monthly, universal, direct payment of $2,000 per month for all, with an additional $250 per child immediately. The second petition deals with the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion. These petitioners join the hundreds of thousands of people who are opposed to the expansion. Trans Mountain, in building the pipeline, brings massive environmental and economic risk with no substantial benefit to British Columbia or to local residents. Approximately 40,000 barrels of oil have already leaked from existing Kinder Morgan pipelines, including two major spills in Burnaby since 2007. I might note, Mr. Chair, that just this past weekend there was yet another spill to the tune of 1,195 barrels here in British Columbia. There is no known scientific technology to clean up the bitumen when there is a spill, and the number of tankers would go from eight to 34 per month into the Burrard Inlet. It puts at risk many residential neighbourhoods and the traditional territories of at least 15 first nations. The Chair: May I interrupt for a moment, Ms. Kwan. I want to remind all members in the House that when presenting a petition, the idea is to be as concise as possible. Ms. Kwan, I'll let you wrap up, please. Ms. Jenny Kwan: Thank you, Mr. Chair. The petitioners are calling for the government to immediately act to prevent this new oil pipeline from proceeding through British Columbia. The Chair: Thank you. We'll now go to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood ParkFort Saskatchewan, CPC): Mr. Chair, I have four petitions to present today. The first petition reflects the outrage of my constituents at the ever-expanding order in council from the government banning more and more firearms. In particular, the petitioners highlight the failure of the government to act on the issue of illegal guns. The petitioners note that virtually all violent crimes committed in Canada, including the recent shooting in Nova Scotia, involve illegal firearms in the hands of those who are already not permitted to possess them. The petition has two asks. First of all, it asks that we reverse the order in council banning certain firearms, but also that we propose measures that will effectively address the illegal use of firearms by criminals while respecting the rights of law-abiding citizens. It also asks that we ensure that substantial changes to firearms laws in future actually be made by Parliament, not by the government acting in an unaccountable manner. The second petition deals with Bill C-8, which is the government's bill around conversion therapy. The petitioners support efforts to ban conversion therapy. They express concern about problems in the wording of the definition used in the legislation. They're asking the government to support amendments to fix the definition to address the issue of conversion therapy and ensure that the definition is correct and doesn't criminalize certain forms of counselling that individuals may voluntarily enter into. The third petition is regarding Bill S-204, a bill in the Senate that seeks to make it a criminal offence for a person to go abroad to receive an organ without consent, dealing especially with the horrific practice of forced organ harvesting and trafficking in China. The petitioners are supportive of Bill S-204 and want to see it move forward. The final petition is with respect to Bill C-7. There's been much discussion in this House about the need to do better in terms of long-term care. Rather than working to do better in long-term care, unfortunately we've seen the government removing vital safeguards in the area of euthanasia. I think our focus should be on assisting life rather than removing safeguards that are required in association with the euthanasia regime. The petitioners are particularly concerned about the government's plan to remove a 10-day reflection period that normally takes place. That period can already be waived under certain circumstances, but Bill C-7 proposes to remove it entirely as well as reduce the number of witnesses involved. The petitioners are quite concerned about what's going on in Bill C-7 and call for it to be stopped or amended. The Chair: Presenting petitions. We'll proceed to statements by members. We'll start off with Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly (NanaimoLadysmith, GP): Mr. Chair, we are in the midst of a global pandemic and an economic shock. Recent events have ripped open the wound of systemic racism in our country. Racialized and marginalized communities have been disproportionally affected by the pandemic. Thousands of seniors in long-term care facilities have died. It is clear that we need system change. In the past, governments have bailed out banks and corporations because they were too big to fail. It is time to bail out humanity and the planet. No one will be immune from the threat of climate change and mass extinction. Both are the result of the exploitation of the natural world in the name of the economy. Humans created the economy. We can choose to change it. We must protect our environment or perish. COVID-19 has demonstrated that together we can take courageous action for the common good. We need to do the same for the climate crisis, because humanity and our planet are too big to fail. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Spengemann. Mr. Sven Spengemann (MississaugaLakeshore, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, today marks World Elder Abuse Awareness Day. Underestimated and under-reported, elder abuse exists across the world. At risk of neglect and assault, many of the most vulnerable older persons reside in our long-term care facilities. They are the seniors who have built our country and shaped our communities, who have shown us resilience, courage and selflessness, who have made us stronger, and whose work and teachings continue to inspire us. They are parents and grandparents, brothers and sisters, friends and mentors. We have not been there for them in the same way they've been there for us throughout their lives. The Canadian Forces report, alongside the climbing disproportionate death toll in our long-term care facilities, has reconfirmed the ugly, indefensible reality of elder abuse and neglect in Canada. In my community, we mourn the deaths of 68 seniors from one long-term care facility alone, Camilla Care. We must make the same unwavering commitment to older persons as they have shown to us. We must protect and uphold their human rights. We must do better. The Chair: Before proceeding, I just want to bring up to the members in the background that we want to keep it as simple and as parliamentary as possible in keeping it neutral. We'll now move to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett (LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, CPC): During these trying times, the residents of LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes have risen to the challenge. They've made sacrifices and gone above and beyond to make the lives of their neighbours better and to keep our communities safe. It would be impossible to list everyone who has emerged as a community hero, but I'd like to highlight a few, like Lily, an eight-year-old from Elgin who raised funds for her local food bank by building and selling squirrel picnic tables, and Louise Boardman from Spencerville who's making masks for long-term care facilities and selling others in support of the Breast Cancer Action centre. The Knights of Columbus in Prescott raised funds and are distributing some $27,000 in support of charitable groups throughout the region. The Knights of Columbus in Kemptville are working overtime operating the local food bank. Who can forget our top-notch health care workers like Hannah and Mary at the Brockville COVID-19 testing centre? It is the people of LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes that make it so great. To everyone working to make a difference and to all of our essential workers, thank you. The Chair: Next is Mr. Anandasangaree. Mr. Gary Anandasangaree (ScarboroughRouge Park, Lib.): Mr. Chair, the Indian Act enshrined racism into Canadian law in 1876, and, through residential schools, the child welfare system, our legal system and our police, we criminalized and tore apart indigenous peoples. The deaths of Chantel Moore and Rodney Levi and the assault on Chief Allan Adam are recent examples of systemic racism within the RCMP. Sadly, the RCMP leadership has failed to acknowledge this reality and its root causes. These same systems negatively impact black Canadians. Anti-black racism has resulted in more young black men being jailed, children being streamed or excluded from schools and negative police interaction due to profiling. Black lives matter. No single Canadian is responsible for the prevalence of systemic racism; we all are. Collectively we build institutions that discriminate based on race. It is now time to reimagine and rework our institutions, starting with our police, to ensure that all Canadians can achieve their truest potential. The Chair: Ms. Larouche, you have the floor. Ms. Andranne Larouche (Shefford, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chair. June15 is World Elder Abuse Awareness Day. I want to remind members of the link between abuse and the problems of economic dependency among seniors. Improving their purchasing power means reducing the risk of them falling victim to abusive people. That's why the increase in the old age security benefit and the guaranteed income supplement must be extended beyond the pandemic. In three weeks, our seniors will receive their first cheque, when they should be receiving their second. A date must also be announced for the new horizons for seniors program, which helps several groups develop projects to break the isolation of seniors. In closing, I would like to mention the organization Justice alternative et mdiation that during the pandemic, along with other organizations in Shefford, has set up the project Une histoire pour la tienne, which also serves to mark this day. It's a virtual meeting between young people and seniors, allowing them to exchange some inspiring life experiences. Since age prejudice is very much present, I applaud this project, which aims to make us understand each other better and judge each other less. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Sangha. Mr. Ramesh Sangha (Brampton Centre, Lib.): Mr. Chair, in the time of this terrible crisis affecting all Canadians, when we are all thinking about how best to deal with it, let's all think about the people around us. Let's show our representation not only to those in the sector of sanctioned workers, but also to all those Canadians who day by day stand up and make a difference. Every day I am proud of the reactions of Canadians to this crisis. I want to acknowledge and celebrate all the contributions made by the people of Brampton Centre, all religious institutions, civil society and community organizations like Knights Table in my riding. We are all standing together to fight COVID-19. Let's continue working hard with that same spirit to get positive results out. Thank you very much. The Chair: I will proceed to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff (BruceGreyOwen Sound, CPC): Mr. Chair, whether graduating from elementary school, high school, Georgian College or graduating from colleges or universities across the country, I am proud of the accomplishments of all the graduates across BruceGreyOwen Sound. I would also like to congratulate and thank all the teachers and parents who have adapted to teaching online or from home and who have supported these graduates over the course of their academic careers. I'd like to extend special congratulations to Cameron Lovell, who just graduated from grade eight, as well as to Neebeesh and Neebin Elliott, originally from the Nawash unceded first nation on the Bruce Peninsula, who will be headed to Michigan State University, and to Jared Lumley from Owen Sound, who just graduated from my alma mater, the Royal Military College of Canada. The college motto of Truth, Duty, Valour is something all Canadians should aspire to live by. I wish all the best to these graduates on their next adventures. I and Canada cannot wait to see how their dreams and goals impact and change the world. I congratulate BruceGreyOwen Sound graduates. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Cormier. Mr. Serge Cormier (AcadieBathurst, Lib.): Today I pay tribute to RichardLosier, an entrepreneur, visionary and builder who died on June9,2020, surrounded by his family. Mr. Losier is a giant in the Acadian Peninsula business community. In1968, he co-founded St. Isidore Asphalte, a company that now has more than 200employees. He also launched many other businesses over the years. He was unifying and generous, a philanthropist who cared about young people and never missed an opportunity to improve their lives. I met Mr. Losier when I was 14years old, and I can say that he has been a positive influence in my life. Every time I met him, he gave me a lot of advice and encouragement, which I've never forgotten. Mr. Losier's legacy to his community is invaluable. His commitment remains an example for all of us to follow. Mr. Losier now joins his wife, Nolla. I offer my most sincere condolences to his children, Richard Jr. , Ronald, Nathalie, Caroline and Stphane, and to his family and friends. Rest in peace, Mr. Losier. You will be greatly missed. Thank you for everything you've done for our region. The Chair: We will now go to Ms. Dabrusin. Ms. Julie Dabrusin (TorontoDanforth, Lib.): Hello from my community in east end Toronto. People talk about how a city the size of Toronto can be cold, but that's far from the truth in my community. I want to give a shout-out to our teachers, like Mr. Wong of Earl Grey Senior Public School, who delivered home-baked cookies and handwritten notes to all of his students, or Monsieur Steve, who's offering online French classes, or the teachers of Riverdale Collegiate, who paraded through our streets to celebrate our graduates. Our local Michael Garron Hospital put out a call for community members to sew masks and received over 60,000 masks, including those made by Lisa Tancre of Chartwell Avondale Retirement Residence. Michelle Beaton organized a front window scavenger hunt to entertain children and their families. Restaurants, even while facing adversity, have been generously donating food, like the members of the Leslieville BIA or Mezes. There are so many more stories of generosity that I could share, but I'm out of time. I thank everyone who has stepped up. We all appreciate all of their hard work. The Chair: We will now go to Ms. Sahota. Ms. Jag Sahota (Calgary Skyview, CPC): Mr. Chair, on Saturday night, Calgarians, particularly those in the northeast, in my riding of Calgary Skyview, witnessed a devastating storm, the likes of which I have not seen in my lifetime. Homes, vehicles, community buildings and structures suffered significant damage due to large hail, floods and high winds. People acted quickly to seek shelter. I'm so grateful that there have been no reports of personal injury or loss of life. I went around the community yesterday to survey the damage. It is extensive. My heart aches for those who have been impacted by the storm in an already incredibly difficult time, but we are resilient. We know that in the coming weeks there will be a lot of cleanup required, both to personal property and in the community. I know my constituents, and we will help one another get through this together. I will work hard to do everything I can to help rebuild this community. The Chair: Mr. Serr, you have the floor. Mr. Marc Serr (Nickel Belt, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to express my sincere gratitude to the people of West Nippissing who organized Pride activities to celebrate the LGBTQ community in June. This week, we are also celebrating National Public Service Week. I thank the public servants for their dedication to the Nickel Belt community and the Valley East and Rayside-Balfour areas. The Chair: Next is Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya (MarkhamUnionville, CPC): Mr. Chair, when COVID-19 began spreading across Ontario, Markham, like many other communities, was unprepared. Our front-line health care workers did not have enough personal protective equipment to do their jobs safely. When Markham residents heard about these shortages, my office was flooded with calls from people who had PPE and wanted to donate. Since then my office has been able to deliver tens of thousands of PPE supplies to front-line health care workers and five masks to each family in need. This pandemic has shown that no matter what the challenge is, the Markham community will overcome it. Today, I would like to thank the front-line health care workers who are doing incredible work. I would also like to thank all those who have helped in Markham's hour of need. The Chair: I understand we had a bit of a glitch there. I'm sorry. With the pause, we thought that was the end of it. Mr. Serr, I would ask you to continue. I understand you started to switch languages. Please continue. You have 30seconds. Mr. Marc Serr: Thank you. I'm switching to English now. Thank you to our nurses, doctors, pharmacists, cashiers, janitors. Thank you to various retail workers and first responders dealing with COVID-19. You keep our communities safe and healthy, and you feed us. Your dedication and sacrifice are greatly appreciated. As we start to see local businesses reopen, it is important for all of us to remember to follow best practices outlined by local public health. Our front-line workers deserve our respect. It is important for all of us to respect social distancing, to protect all workers and their families. Together we can remain strong and united as we continue to face this challenge together. The Chair: Again, my apologies for skipping over there, but now we'll to to Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod (KamloopsThompsonCariboo, CPC): Mr. Chair, in commemoration of Italian Heritage Month, I would like to pay tribute to the Colombo Lodge and Italian Cultural Centre in Kamloops, British Columbia. The Colombo Lodge was founded in 1914 and is an integral part of our community. Recently they began Colombo Cares take-home dinners with proceeds distributed to different non-profit organizations throughout the region. Last month they very generously gave away hundreds of dinners to Royal Inland Hospital staff and paramedics for their tireless work throughout the pandemic. In their own words they say, Colombo Lodge is very proud of the Italians that have made Kamloops their home. Community members of Italian ancestrypast and presenthave helped and continue to help Kamloops prosper as a giving, welcoming and inclusive community. Personally, I want to thank all members for their friendship and generosity over the years. Our community is forever grateful for their kindness. The Chair: We'll now proceed to Mr. Harris. Mr. Jack Harris (St. John's East, NDP): Mr. Chair, many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are facing a serious financial crisis. Most people with disabilities are waiting to be included in the Liberals'promised program. Fish plant workers will need support to avoid a disastrous year. Many small businesses don't qualify for programs. Municipalities need emergency help to meet the crisis. People are worried about what will happen when the CERB runs out in two weeks'time, and the coming tourism season looks very grim. The province itself is in serious financial crisis due to the pandemic and the decline in oil prices. The federal government must overhaul and enhance the fiscal stabilization program to help Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and other oil-producing provinces through this crisis. Both the province and the oil and gas industry players have committed to net zero emissions by 2050. This is a challenge and an opportunity to transition to a sustainable energy future, but it will require significant investment and support by government to keep the industry strong and make this a just transition for workers. Much has been done. Much more needs to be done. The Chair: Ms. Gaudreau, you have the floor. Ms. Marie-Hlne Gaudreau (LaurentidesLabelle, BQ): Mr. Chair, all 44elected municipal officials in the riding of LaurentidesLabelle and I have sent a letter to the government asking that cellular and high-speed Internet networks be made available to all. The crisis has accelerated the demonstration of the need for these networks in daily life. The territorial complexity of the Laurentians means that there are areas where the signal is weak, unstable or non-existent. There is an urgent and essential need to change the infrastructure of the current networks. Also, because of the lockdown, Internet failures are being felt, and they prevent distance learning, telemedicine and teleworking, among other things. How can our municipalities develop economically if they can't provide their community with adequate communication tools? We are therefore calling on the government to put the interests of its people first by investing massively right now in the construction of high-speed Internet and cellular infrastructure. The Chair: Mr. Waugh. Mr. Kevin Waugh (SaskatoonGrasswood, CPC): I rise today to pay tribute to Sir Winston Churchill, the former prime minister of Great Britain and one of the greatest leaders history has ever known. In what can only be called a lifetime of service, Churchill's contributions to the Commonwealth and to the world are without equal. During the Second World War he led the allied forces in Europe against the tyranny and fascism of Adolph Hitler and his Nazi regime. When our world was in its darkest hour, Churchill's leadership was a beacon of hope and freedom. I am reminded of something he once said, All the greatest things are simple, and many can be expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honour, duty, mercy, hope. Sir Winston Churchill himself embodied all of these great things and will forever be a symbol of freedom, democracy and hope. The Chair: Mr. Gerretsen. Mr. Mark Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands, Lib.): Mr. Chair, I would like to add my voice to the recognition and celebration of Pride Month, which is celebrated annually during June. Pride Month is important for Canadians because we can be proud of who we are and celebrate our diversity. This June is different from previous years as we cannot celebrate in person all together. However, I know the ongoing pandemic will not stop us from showing our love and support for the LGBTQ+ community. To celebrate Pride Month this year, my office distributed 3,000 pride maple leaf pins across the country; whoever asked received one. Although the majority was sent to constituents in my riding, over 500 pins were sent to the neighbouring ridings of LanarkFrontenacKingston, LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, and HastingsLennox and Addington. It warms my heart to see so many Canadians showing their support. Happy Pride, everyone. The Chair: We will now proceed to the questioning of ministers. Please note that we will suspend the proceedings twice to allow employees who provide support for the sitting to substitute for each other safely. Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell (Louis-Saint-Laurent, CPC): Mr. Chair, I am very pleased to take part in today's meeting of this parliamentary committee. Canada has been dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic for three months now. The situation now seems to be improving, although we must remain vigilant. Economically, business people and the entire Canadian economy depend on government decisions. My question is very simple: when will the economic update take place? Hon. Chrystia Freeland (Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): Mr. Chair, I thank the hon. member for his question. I agree with him that Canada and Canadians are doing an excellent and difficult job in the fight against coronavirus. As for the economy, our government is there for Canadians, for workers and for businesses, and it will continue to be. Mr. Grard Deltell: Canadians, business people and businesses want to know where the government is headed. When will the economic update take place? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, Canadians know that the government is there to support them. Eight The Chair: We return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Canadians and Quebeckers also know that the Government of Quebec will table its economic update this week. Why isn't the federal government doing the same? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I'm pleased to explain to hon. members and to Canadians what the government is doing for the economy The Chair: We return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, it is a real pleasure for me to explain to the minister and everybody in the House of Commons that today the Saskatchewan government will table its economic update. Why can't Ottawa do that? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I'm delighted to have the opportunity to share with Canadians what our government is doing to support workers, businesses and the economy. Eight million Canadians have received the CERB, essential support for Canadian workers and their families. The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, 11 days ago the Newfoundland government tabled its own economic update. We see governments acting correctly for their people, except for the Liberal government, which cannot table an economic update. When will the Liberal government table an economic update, which Canadians would like to see? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I am delighted to share with the member opposite and with Canadians what we are doing practically that has meaning for Canadians. Let me talk about what we are doing for Canadian businesses. Nearly 670,000 Canadian businesses have received support The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: In Canada, the Quebec government will table its economic update this week. The Saskatchewan government tabled its economic update today. The Newfoundland government has tabled its economic update. Everybody is working hard in Canada, and the business community would like to know where the Liberal government is going. The question is crystal clear. When will the Liberal government table an economic update? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, Canadian workers and Canadian businesses want to know that our government is here to support them. I have shared with this House our support for Canadian workers through the CERB. I've spoken about the CEBA, and let me point out that more than $26 billion of support has been given through that essential program. Let me talk about the wage subsidy. More than 2. 6 million The Chair: We'll return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, this is starting to get interesting; the minister is revealing some of these expenses. Could the minister tell us how much the government has spent in the last three months? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I will continue in French by explaining what our government is doing for Canadians and workers The Chair: Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, this is a little bit concerning for all Canadians, because this government cannot say when they will table the economic update, cannot identify how much money they have spent in the last three months and cannot say what is the deficit of Canada. Is somebody in this government running this country correctly? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, absolutely we are running this country, and we are supporting our economy. In fact, we appreciate that Canada currently is experiencing its greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression. That is why we have devoted nearly 11% of GDP to support Canadian workers and Canadian businesses. I want to assure Canadians The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Normandin. Ms. Normandin, you have the floor. Ms. Christine Normandin (Saint-Jean, BQ): Mr. Chair, there are times when Quebec and the provinces are not just two solitudes, but they get along and speak as one, such as when the time comes to tell the government to mind its own business. On reading section91 of the Constitution Act, 1982, which sets out the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal government, nowhere do I find that the federal government must meddle by attaching conditions to health transfers. It is Quebec and the provinces that hire the medical personnel, doctors, nurses and caretakers. It is Quebec and the provinces that are responsible for purchasing the necessary equipment. It is Quebec and the provinces that know what is happening on the ground and what their needs are. Will the government do the only thing within its authority, which is to take the cheque, sign it and put it in the mail? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I thank the hon. member for her question. We fully understand the importance of federal support for the provinces, especially in our national fight against the coronavirus. I agree with the hon. member that we must give financial support to the provinces, including Quebec absolutely. I would also like to point out the importance of the support of the Canadian Armed Forces, who are doing an important and excellent job in Quebec and Ontario today, right now. Ms. Christine Normandin: Mr. Chair, I am glad to see that there is recognition of the importance of transferring this money. My question is whether it can be transferred unconditionally; that's what I'm asking. There's a state of emergency. In the past, we have seen that it takes a long time to negotiate conditions with the federal government. We saw it in the case of the Quebec City tramway, and we are still seeing it now in the case of transfers for housing in Quebec, for which there is no agreement and, therefore, no transfer of money. Will the federal government send the money free of conditions? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the hon. member said in her first question that the only thing the federal government had to do on health care was to sign the cheques. I can't agree because, today, at this time, at the request of the Premier of Quebec, the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces are in Quebec today; they're there to save the lives of seniors The Chair: We now return to Ms. Normandin. Ms. Christine Normandin: It was indeed at Quebec's request. What I'm saying is that, at present, the provinces are unanimously asking that there be no conditions. It's urgent that the money be transferred. The federal government's job here is to sign the cheque and send it to the provinces. The government's job is also to make Parliament work. This is where there should be negotiations so that we can work, among other things, to send money to people living with disabilities, to make sure we fight CERB fraud and to make sure that court time limits are effective in the current crisis. Can the government focus on the issue in order to respect the provinces and transfer money for health care? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: I thank the hon. member for her question, Mr. Chair. I agree with the hon. member that the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces are in Quebec today at the request of the Province of Quebec. That said, I hope that the hon. member will agree with me that being there for Quebec's seniors, that saving the lives of Quebec's seniors, is much more than simply signing cheques. I am very proud of the work the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces are doing. I think we all should thank these people who are working for Canada, for Quebec, and who are doing an important and excellent job. Ms. Christine Normandin: Mr. Chair, I think the Deputy Prime Minister misunderstood me when I was talking about the importance of acting quickly. Negotiations between the government and the provinces take an awfully long time because the federal government decides to place conditions where there shouldn't be any. Right now, the only important thing is to transfer the money quickly so that it can be used in our hospitals and our long-term care facilities, where the need is desperate. Quebec and the provinces know exactly what their needs are. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I would like to point out the extent to which the federal government is there to support the provinces, including Quebec. We have increased funding to the provinces and territories by $500million to help them prepare for COVID-19 outbreaks. This funding is in addition to the $40billion that we already provide annually to the provinces and territories. That's a lot of money. It is strong endorsement The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh (Burnaby South, NDP): Mr. Chair, systemic racism is killing people. It's killing black people and it's killing indigenous people. Recently, Rodney Levi was another victim of systemic racism. He was killed in New Brunswick by the RCMP. To deal with systemic racism, we need systemic change. Will the Liberal government commit to systemic change so that not another life is ever taken again? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I thank the member opposite for the extremely important question, and I'll take this opportunity to acknowledge the work that he has done for many years fighting racism in Canada. Our government absolutely acknowledges that systemic racism exists in Canada. It exists in all of our institutions, including the police and the RCMP. I agree with the member opposite that now is the moment to fight this The Chair: Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, I thank the Deputy Prime Minister very much for the response, but there are some specific actions we need to take. There are movements. Black Lives Matter, as a movement, is calling for the defunding of police. What they're saying is we need to make better choices with how money is being spent. When someone is in need of a wellness check or a mental health check, money, financing and support should go to mental health workers and health care workers, not the police. Is the government prepared to fund and prioritize health care workers over the police? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the member quite rightly began his questions by speaking about systemic racism against indigenous people in Canada, and I would like to speak about that for a moment. I spoke to Perry Bellegarde this morning, because it is such a crucial issue. We can describe it as the original sin of our country. I absolutely agree that we need root and branch reform, including in how policing is done in Canada. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, will the Liberal government commit to a review of the use of force as outlined for the RCMP? Will the Liberals commit to that change? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister and the Minister of Public Safety had many conversations last week with the RCMP. We all accept that The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, will the government commit to ensuring that de-escalation receives priority? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Let me continue, Mr. Chair. Systemic racism exists in all of our federal institutions, including the RCMP. It's time to put an end to it. Let me just say The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, I'm not getting an answer. Will the Prime Minister or the Liberal government commit to something simple and ensure that at the federal level, racial profiling, street checks and carding are expressly prohibited? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, sadly, I can't agree that rooting out systemic racism is going to be simple, but I can agree that racial profiling is absolutely inappropriate. It is not something that we should The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Well, I'm going to try to get another commitment from the government, because they don't seem able to commit to something as clear as ending racial profiling. We know that millions of Canadians in a couple of weeks are going to be faced with the reality of their CERB ending. These families are worried about how they're going to put food on the table, because they can't return to a job. Will the Liberal government commit today so that those families will have some concrete support, yes or no? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, let me be clear, as I was in my previous answer, that our government clearly is opposed to racial profiling. This is a wrong practice and we're very clear about our position there. Now when it comes to the CERB, I absolutely share the concern of the member opposite. The Canadian economy is in its direst state since the Great Depression. We know that all the jobs have not yet come back. We know that Canadian workers, Canadian families, continue to need The Chair: We'll now pause for a short time to allow staff to change within the safety parameters for the COVID-19 virus, and as we resume, we will go to Ms. Harder. Ms. Rachael Harder (Lethbridge, CPC): Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister has mandated his ministers, and I quote, to govern in a positive, open and collaborative way. Ironically, as it stands, Parliament is currently closed for business. Opposition parties have little opportunity to hold the ruling party to account, private members'bills cannot be tabled and legislation cannot be debated. Can the Prime Minister, Mr. Trudeau himself, help us understand how all of this fits into his definition of so-called open government? The Honourable Pablo Rodriguez (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons): Well, Mr. Chair, we're here, right? We're here, and the opposition is asking questions. They have the equivalent of eight question periods instead of five to ask questions. They have more time than before, so I don't know why they're not happy about it. Ms. Rachael Harder: That's like when I'm asking for a full meal and your handing me a few jellybeans and saying, Why aren't you happy with that? Mr. Chair, here's the thing. It's like switching a light on and off when it's convenient for the Prime Minister and for the Liberal Party. That's what they want to do here. That's not Parliament. That's not democracy. When will Mr. Trudeau do the right thing, turn the lights on and get back to work for Canadians? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I'm really sorry to hear that my colleague's not working. I can assure you, Mr. Chair, on this side of the House, we're all actually working very hard and we're answering the questions from the opposition. Why? It's because it's extremely important. I sat there for seven years asking questions. I understand important Ms. Rachael Harder: The member opposite knows very well that he is misleading the Canadian public. This is not true Parliament. This is simply a special committee. Here's the thing. On the Liberal Party website, under the platform commitment, it says that Parliament works best when its members are free to do what they have been elected to do, and that is be the voice for their communities and hold the government to account. This is a Liberal document. Did the Prime Minister forget that strengthening Parliament was part of his 2019 platform commitment? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague for quoting our excellent platform. That was a very very good document. The thing is, I think we've reached a balance whereby MPs can come from different places, mostly around Ottawa, and ask questions; but also we can have colleagues from across the country asking questions. Why does my colleague think it is better to have only 35 MPs participating instead of 338? Ms. Rachael Harder: Does the Prime Minister value democracy, or does he still look up to China's basic dictatorship? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, we're answering all the questions from the opposition, not only from the people in this room, but we're answering The Chair: It's back to Ms. Harder now. Ms. Rachael Harder: I'll ask the question again. Does the Prime Minister still value the basic dictatorship of China over Canada's democracy? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I don't know where the colleague wants to go from here, Mr. Chair. I'd like to know from her why it is not important to her that her colleagues participate directly. Ms. Rachael Harder: Mr. Trudeau wrote to his ministers and said to them that they continue to raise the bar on openness, effectiveness and transparency. He went on to explain that This means. . . government that is open by default. We now have a parliament that is currently shut down. Mr. Trudeau has shut it down and has prevented us from being able to do to the good work that Canadians expect us to do. Is this Mr. Trudeau's idea of open by default? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, do they want to talk about shutting down Parliament? How about the time they prorogued Parliament twicenot only once, but twice? The Conservative government shut down Parliament twice. I was here. I was sitting on the other side of the aisle. It's quite the opposite now. We're taking all the questions. This place is open, and we're answering questions. The Chair: One moment, please. I haven't acknowledged you yet, Ms. Harder. We've stopped the time there. I want to remind honourable members that questions and answers are being given, and we want to hear both sides. Please keep the heckling down. Ms. Harder, please proceed. Ms. Rachael Harder: In 2014, the leader of the Liberal Party developed a policy resolution entitled Restoring Trust in Canada's Democracy. That's ironic, because right now, again, Parliament is currently shut down. We are prevented from being able to do the good work that we are expected to do. At the time, the Prime Minister said, Canadians want their Members of Parliament to be effective voices for their communities in Ottawa, and not merely mouthpieces in their communities for an all-too-powerful Prime Minister. Sadly, Mr. Trudeau has become the all-too-powerful prime minister that he once believed should not exist. Why did he change his mind? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, I'd like to know why my colleague wants to shut down the voices of her colleagues who could not speak and could not participate in this room. Mr. Chair, how would we vote on private members'bills, for example? As you know, it is not a government vote or a party vote; it's per row. You want to come back? Are you going to acceptMr. Chair, through youthat we have electronic voting, yes or no? The Chair: We'll go on to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, we know that the Minister of Foreign Affairs has champagne tastes and London flats, but it's his champagne mortgages that Canadians are concerned about. Specifically, why did the minister only disclose the complete extent of his personal debt to the Chinese government on June 4 of this year? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, as you know, since the minister entered politics, his two mortgages and other liabilities and assets have been fully disclosed to the Ethics Commissioner and placed on the online public registry. It's public, Mr. Chair. It's public. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Now it's public and it's terrible. When will the foreign affairs minister be here to answer these questions himself? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, it's always been public. We're in the middle of a pandemic here, trying to help Canadians, and the best they can do is ask questions about The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: When the minister owes over a million dollars to the Chinese government, people have a right to ask him questions. When will the Minister of Foreign Affairs show up? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: The minister shows up every day, Mr. Chair. He shows up and works for Canadians. Once again, those are public documents. Everything the minister did is public. I still don't know why they ask The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, he doesn't even have to come to the House. All he has to do is appear on the screen. Where is the minister? Why is he hiding? Why won't he answer questions about his personal debt to the Chinese government? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, if he goes online he's going to get the information. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, the minister is hiding. Let's ask some specific questions about their China policy. What is the impact on the decision-making? Three-quarters of Canadians don't want Huawei involved in our 5G network. Will the minister put the interests of Canadians ahead of the interests of his creditors and say no to Huawei? Hon. Navdeep Bains (Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry): Mr. Chair, when it comes to 5G deployment, we are right now currently undergoing a comprehensive review. We have been absolutely clear with allies and with Canadians that we never have and never will compromise Canadians'national interests. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, that is not an answer, and it is completely out of step with what our allies have already recognized. Reports are emerging of multiple deadly viruses exported from Winnipeg's microbiology laboratory to the Wuhan Institute of Virology right before scientists were expelled for policy breaches. In spite of that, scientific co-operation between Canadian institutions and the military-affiliated Wuhan Institute of Virology is continuing. Why hasn't the government put in place new guidelines to prevent the export of sensitive pathogens and information to China? Hon. Patty Hajdu (Minister of Health): Mr. Chair, he's right that in 2019 the National Microbiology Laboratory shared lab samples with the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The National Microbiology Laboratory routinely shares samples with other labs to help advance the international community's understanding of viruses and the research that is ongoing around those viruses. There are strict protocols in place for these transfers, and these samples were transported according to Canadian laws and regulations. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, I think Canadians would be concerned to hear that it's routine to transport viruses to Chinese military-affiliated labs. When Champagne was the parliamentary secretary for finance, the government decided to give hundreds of millions of dollars to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, bankrolling Chinese state-controlled development projects in Asia with weak standards in labour, human rights and environment. Will the minister put Canadian taxpayers ahead of his personal creditors and support a pullout from the Communist Party-controlled development bank? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Once again, Mr. Chair, my colleague is trying to connect the dots, and I don't know exactly where he is going from here, but everything is public. There's a thing called Google. He can go on it and check the information. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, the public can listen to this. I'm sure this exchange will also be available on Google, and the public can draw their own conclusions. We have failures on 5G, failures when it comes to the transport of deadly viruses and failures when it comes to giving over $400 million to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. It's clear that the Bank of China's investment in Minister Champagne is paying off. It's time for the minister to settle his debt with the Communist government and not settle it on the backs of Canadians. When will the minister be here in the House and answer questions about this mortgage? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: My colleague should be cautious with what he is saying in the House, Mr. Chair. This is serious stuff. He should be careful about what he says. The minister is actually working extremely hard for all Canadians and is doing his job correctly, Mr. Chair. We're talking about public information. Once again, let him go to Google and google it. That's it. The Chair: Now we'll go to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett: Canada's ambassador to the United Nations sent a letter last week to all member states of the UN promising that Canada would consider providing more funding for UNRRA, the same UNRRA that is a front for Hamas, which allows weapons of terror to be stored in schools and provides textbooks that call for the destruction of Israel. Do these Liberals have no shame when it comes to their quest for a seat on the UN Security Council? Hon. Mary Ng (Minister of Small Business, Export Promotion and International Trade): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to thank the honourable member for that question. We know that at this time Canada must show leadership in the face of global challenges. More than ever, Canada is playing a positive role by being a champion in diversity and inclusion, supporting the global fight against COVID-19, addressing climate change, leading peace and security efforts and helping the most vulnerable. A seat on the Security Council will allow Canada to be a strong voice for a fairer, more inclusive and prosperous The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett: Mr. Chair, I received a letter from Bob Anderson this week, who's advocating for his neighbours like Jean Grevelding, who owns a cottage at Butternut Bay. Like many people, Jean is an American who owns a property on our side of the border. These people are taxpaying members of our communities. These folks have plans in place to follow all Canadian quarantine rules. They're concerned about leaving their properties uncared for over the summer. Will folks like Jean be allowed to cross the border to check on their properties this summer? Hon. Bill Blair (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Of course, our priority is and always has been and always must be the protection of the health and safety of Canadians. That's why we put in place these restrictions for non-essential travel and have required, through the Public Health Agency of Canada, a 14-day quarantine. I don't know the specifics of the person for whom you advocate, but we want to make sure that if they come into Canada, it is for an essential purpose and that they do it safely and respect the quarantine that has been put in place. Mr. Michael Barrett: With nine branches throughout my riding, the Royal Canadian Legion offers a great deal to veterans and rural communities alike. They have been experiencing hardship and a loss of revenue, to the point where they may be forced to shut their doors. The Zone G2 commander and local mayors such as Roger Haley have reached out to me expressing their dire need. Will the government offer support to Legions across the country so they can continue to carry out their vital work for our veterans? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (Minister of Veterans Affairs): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Yes, we have done a lot to help support groups like the Legions. There is a $350-million emergency community support fund. If they're supplying any help to people regarding COVID, this fund is there. Indeed, we're doing everything we can to make sure that we help the Legions and other groups that do so much to help veterans right across the country. Mr. Michael Barrett: On May 21, the minister stated that her team was working as quickly as it could to fill the gaps in CEBA. It has now been three weeks, and many business owners, such as mortgage broker Corinna Smith-Gatcke, are still left in the lurch amid the delays, which are pushing businesses closer to shutting their doors for good. Will these businesses have access to CEBA before it's too late for them? Hon. Mary Ng: Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I thank the honourable member for that really important question on our Canadian small businesses. Those businesses can absolutely have access to the loan at their financial institution this Friday, and I would encourage them to go and see their bank or credit union. I want businesses to know that nothing is more important for us than making sure they get the support they need during this difficult time. Mr. Michael Barrett: The County Road 43 expansion project is critical for my riding and the region as a whole. This project will widen the road, increasing safety for the 18,000 motorists who travel the road every day. It's been 334 days since the provincial and local governments announced funding, but there has been nothing from this Liberal government. It's been 181 days since Minister McKenna told me her staff were reviewing the project. Today, there is still nothing, and for the last month the minister's team has not even found the time to respond to my request for an update. Will Minister McKenna finally stop with the delays and commit to funding this project today? Hon. Catherine McKenna (Minister of Infrastructure and Communities): Mr. Chair, as the member opposite knows, we work with provinces and territories to advance our infrastructure investments. We're making investments across the country. They are making a real difference in people's lives. We're always happy to work with members of Parliament, but they must also work with provinces and territories so that projects are advanced by them to our office. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall (YorktonMelville, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Through you, has Mr. MacAulay read ombudsman Dalton's May 2020 report, Financial Compensation for Canadian Veterans: A comparative analysis of benefit regimes? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I apologize, but I'll have to ask my honourable colleague to repeat the question. The Chair: Mrs. Wagantall, we'll freeze the time so that there's no extra time taken. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Thank you, Chair. My question was whether Mr. MacAulay has read ombudsman Dalton's May 2020 report, Financial Compensation for Canadian Veterans: A comparative analysis of benefit regimes. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I appreciate my honourable colleague's question. Of course, I appreciate Mr. Dalton's input and all that he has done for veterans. We've discussed it many times. I've done everything and worked with him in order to make sure that we bring the proper compensation to veterans The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: As a result of that study, are the financial outcomes Canada seeks to provide for ill and injured veterans now clearly defined within the Department of Veterans Affairs? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, as the member would know, I am to bring a report to the veterans affairs committee, and there are a number of things done in order to make sure that report is The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Then I would suggest that we get our committee up and going as it should be. Where are these financial directions published? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Well, of course, lockdown, but just under $90 million that the government put in supplementary estimates to make sure we address the backlog for Veterans Affairs. It's a major help The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Minister, are Canadian Armed Forces members provided with a copy of this document? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, my honourable colleague would have to ask the Canadian Armed Forces that question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: There are three different providing lifetime benefits for ill and injured veterans. In Ombudsman Dalton's recent report, did any one of these three provide the best compensation in all nine scenarios that were studied? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Of course, as she knows, there's been a lot of work done in order to make sure that we provide the proper compensation to veterans. We're working very hard, with a lot of help from Mr. Dalton, to make sure that the appropriate The Chair: We'll now continue with Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: In the undisclosed settlement of Sean Bruyea's legal case against Seamus O'Regan and the Liberal government, a joint statement says. . . Canadians, especially all Veterans and their families, are encouraged to enter the public debate about policies and programs that affect our Veterans and their families. Does Mr. MacAulay agree with this statement? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I can assure you that anybody is welcome to enter any discussion on compensation of veterans. We're always open to what we can do in order to make sure that we provide appropriate compensation. I don't think the term would be appropriate, but it would provide some compensation to veterans who truly deserve it. They defend our democracy The Chair: We'll go back to Ms. Wagantall. Oh, I'm sorry Ms. Andranne Larouche: Mr. Chair, I have a point of order. The interpretation hasn't worked for a few interventions. It's difficult to follow the exchange between the hon. member and the minister. The Chair: We're having a problem with the interpretation. Minister and Ms. Wagantall, you are joining us virtually. I'm wondering if you have the right language on at the bottom of your screen. We'll start with that for troubleshooting. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: I have English. The Chair: Very good. Minister MacAulay, what do you have? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I have English, Mr. Chair. The Chair: Very good. Then we'll check on our side. Ms. Larouche, did I understand correctly that the interpretation didn't work for both speakers? Ms. Andranne Larouche: The sound didn't allow the interpreters to do their job. It seemed to be a problem with the sound. The Chair: In that case, I would ask both members to maybe put their mike a little bit close to their mouth. We'll see how that works. I'm looking at the screen, and I notice the mike is a little bit far. Could we bend it in a little bit more? I appreciate that. Thank you for your patience. We'll give it another try. Ms. Wagantall, please go ahead. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: On a point of order, quite often while I'm trying to speak, there are lots of other voices in the background. The Chair: I would ask everyone to please be on mute, as well as for anyone in the chamber to please refrain from speaking loudly. Just whisper among yourselves if you have something to say. We'll take this one from the top. We have a minute and 45 seconds left. Ms. Wagantall, please proceed with your next question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: You said next question, so we're not going backwards, Chair? The Chair: Did we have an answer from Minister MacAulay? No? We'll go to Minister MacAulay to finish up the answer. We'll start at 27 seconds, freeze the clock and hear his answer. Then, because of all of the confusion, we'll start at one minute and 45 seconds when we get going again. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Should I repeat the question, sir? The Chair: Please do. The clock is frozen. After we go through the question and the answer, we'll start the clock again. Mr. Wagantall, please repeat the question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Thank you, Chair. In the undisclosed settlement to Sean Bruyea's legal case against Seamus O'Regan and the Liberal government, a joint statement says, Canadians, especially all Veterans and their families, are encouraged to enter the public debate about policies and programs that affect our Veterans and their families. Does Mr. MacAulay agree with this statement? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I appreciate my honourable colleague's question and concern. Of course I agree. Anybody is quite open to indicate whatever they wish in order to make sure we provide as appropriate a compensation as possible. You can never totally compensate veterans truly for what they deserve, but we want to make sure we provide the best compensation possible. That's what we will do and want to do. The Chair: Ms. Wagantall, we will start the clock again. You have one minute and 45 seconds remaining. Please proceed. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: If that's the case, is Minister MacAulay aware of the practice of red-flagging veterans'files? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I'm not aware. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Since the deputy minister has indicated that he runs the department, will the minister ask him for the names of veterans and the dates and the reasons that they are, or have been, red-flagged by VAC? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I would certainly ask any veteran or anybody who has a concern to contact my office. I will do anything I can to make sure that the veterans The Chair: We'll go back to Ms. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Do the most ill and injured still receive from the pension up to $300,000 less for life? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, as you know and as the Prime Minister indicated when the pension for life was put in place, it was stated that if anybody receives lessthe Prime Minister himself indicated it quite clearlythat must be adjusted. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: For veterans in similar circumstances, should the date of their application for compensation be a factor in determining whether they're treated equitably? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Yes, of course, the date is when the compensation would start. Of course, it's very important and very appropriate. The Chair: Now we will proceed to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd (Sturgeon RiverParkland, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Retired Major Mark Campbell in my riding of Sturgeon RiverParkland lost both legs in the line of duty in Afghanistan. He is an avid sport shooter, but understandably, due to his disability, he is very limited in the kinds of firearms he can use, and all of these firearms have now been banned under the Liberal OIC. My question to the Minister of Public Safety is this: Did their department do a legal analysis and consider the section 15 charter rights of disabled Canadians not to be discriminated against when they passed their OIC? Hon. Bill Blair: Yes, there was a very thorough analysis done by the justice department to ensure that the prohibitions we put in place were, in fact, charter compliant. Let me also say, Mr. Chair, how important it was that we prohibited weapons that were not designed for sporting purposes at all. In fact, they were designed for soldiers to use in combat. They have no place in a civil society. We have prohibited them, and we believeand this has been echoed by many people across the countrythat this will make Canadians safer. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, is the minister aware that the AR-15 is the most popular sporting rifle in Canada, and is he aware that disabled veterans like Major Mark Campbell are unable to participate in the sport of sport shooting because of his OIC? Hon. Bill Blair: I can assure the member that what I am aware of is that the AR-15 and other weapons like them have been used in mass killings in Canada on many occasions, such as at cole Polytechnique, at Dawson College, again at the Quebec mosque and in Moncton. The AR-15s in particular were also used at the terrible tragedy in places like Sandy Hook, where a bunch of kids were killed, so there is no place for The Chair: We will go to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, it has been months since the Liberals shut down this Parliament and months since the Minister of Finance should have presented a budget or at least an economic update to Canadians. Since then we have seen billions spent with little oversight and no plan. The minister says that he needs certainty before he can table a budget. Well, that didn't stop Stephen Harper and the Conservatives from tabling a budget in the depth of the last great recession. When are these Liberals finally going to take their job seriously and table an economic update? Hon. Mona Fortier (Minister of Middle Class Prosperity and Associate Minister of Finance): Mr. Chair, we're taking this very seriously. We're working for Canadians and bringing forward supports to make sure that businesses, workers and Canadians can put food on the table and pay their rent. We will continue to support Canadians, and when we have a clear projection to present, we will do that. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, the results are in, and businesses aren't happy with the so-called support programs from these Liberals. In fact, the oil and gas industry has been shut out of many of these economic programs. When is the government going to recognize that their business support plans have been an absolute failure with only a fraction of the billions promised being accessible to businesses? Hon. Seamus O'Regan (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Chair, our government has taken swift and immediate action to support our sector throughout this challenging time. We had the BCAP, which is critically important to providing liquidity to support the SMEs that make up 85% of the jobs in our sector. It has taken an enormous team effort. People are working around the clock to get money where it needs to be. We are helping hard-working Canadians, small businesses and large businesses right across the country, but in particular in our energy sector. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, I'm pleased to see the Minister of Natural Resources online. He tweeted recently to praise the Alberta Carbon Trunk Line and the North West Redwater Partnership refinery in my riding. Can the minister tell us what, if any, support they have given to the innovative carbon capture and sequestration technology in this country? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Mr. Chair, we see carbon capture and sequestration as an integral part of lowering emissions, making emissions more competitive and making our oil and gas industry more competitive. We're seeing where the investment dollars are going. They are going to jurisdictions that are committed to lowering emissions. Obviously, this government is committing to net zero. Mr. Dane Lloyd: I note that the minister couldn't name a single example of government support for carbon capture, utilization and sequestration technology. We have spent a lot of time talking about the COVID-19 pandemic, but Canadians are living with another horrific reality, that being the intensifying opioid overdose epidemic. Reports indicate that in the past four years, 14,000 Canadians have died, and the numbers during COVID-19 have been skyrocketing, with British Columbia seeing a 39% increase this year alone. I know this because I've lost a family member to a fentanyl overdose. When is the government going to take this scourge seriously and take action to save the lives of Canadians? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Mr. Chair, I share the member's deep sadness about the number of lives we've lost to opioid overdose. Our government has been steadily making it easier for people who live with substance use to access medications to treat substance use, such as prescription Suboxone and methadone. We have made it easier to rapidly establish safe injection sites in communities and have supported community-based projects that work with people who are using substances. We need to understand that this is a complex issue, and we need to support people to get the help they need. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes (AlgomaManitoulinKapuskasing, NDP) ): The hon. member for Thrse-DeBlainville. Ms. Louise Chabot (Thrse-De Blainville, BQ): MadamChair, I will come back to the bill introduced last week. As parliamentarians, we felt like we were watching a very bad play, as I imagine the public did. I say that it was theatre, even though it shouldn't be in this place. The government decided to stage a play and act alone and, unfortunately, there were several acts missing. A very important part of this bill was about supporting people with disabilities in this time of crisis. However, the government did not see fit to negotiate with the opposition parties, even though it is in a minority position. Despite this arrogance, the Bloc Qubcois proposed solutions. One of the things we proposed was to split the bill so that we could give this support to people with disabilities, but the Conservatives did not want to do that. We came back and asked for time to negotiate and give support to people with disabilities, but the government defeated the motion. We asked that the House be recalled today so that we could pass this part of the bill concerning support for people with disabilities, but we are still in the dark. Why are we abandoning people with disabilities? Hon. Ahmed Hussen (Minister of Families, Children and Social Development): I thank the hon. member for her question. We know this pandemic has deeply affected the lives and health of all Canadians and has disproportionately affected Canadians with disabilities in particular. From the very beginning, we've taken a disability-inclusive approach to our emergency response to ensure that Canadians with disabilities get the support they need. That is why we announced a one-time payment of $600 for persons with disabilities to address these expenses. This will go a long way toward helping Canadians with disabilities. We encourage and urge all parties in the opposition to support this measure. We're confident that this measure, along with other investments, will benefit Canadians with disabilities, and we hope to get the support of the other parties very soon. Ms. Louise Chabot: MadamChair, I remind you that this measure wasn't passed because we weren't allowed to do so. A measure to help people with disabilities has been put in an omnibus bill. We've tried here, in the House, to provide the means to give that support, so I ask again, can the government be counted on to give a response to people with disabilities? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, it was absolutely not an omnibus bill. It contained assistance for the disabled, of course, but it also contained assistance for our seasonal workers, as well as a number of other measures that the Bloc Qubcois opposed. They refused to debate and, when the question of splitting the bill came up, the Conservatives refused to do that. That is why there is no bill at the moment, and that is very unfortunate. Ms. Louise Chabot: It was a Bloc Qubcois proposal to split the bill. The government had not thought of it, but they found that it was a good idea. Let me return to the attack. This bill proposed changes to the wage subsidy program, it was supposed to make the CERB more flexible, it proposed fines for fraudsters and, since there was a little section about a benefit for the disabled, the government took it for granted that we would support it without any negotiations with the parties. However, we set one very important condition: that the Liberal Party must get its hands out of taxpayers'pockets in terms of the wage subsidy. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, as we listen to the Bloc Qubcois members, we might think that they invented peanut butter and apple pie. This bill contained a number of measures that all Quebeckers and all Canadians needed, but the Bloc Qubcois refused to debate it. No, we did not follow the Bloc Qubcois'example in splitting the bill; we had thought of it a long time previously. We have not been able to do that because of the Conservatives. Because of them, we cannot help those living with disabilities. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Ms. Chabot, you have 45seconds left. Ms. Louise Chabot: We asked on a number of occasions for the House to be able to sit starting today to pass the part of the bill dealing with those with disabilities. What is the status of that, MadamChair? We have not heard about it since. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, my colleague knows very well that things are not as simple as that. There are procedural mechanisms unique to the House. I hope that, one day, we will be able to pass this bill and be able to provide assistance for those living with disabilities. I hope that the Conservatives will change their minds and give us their support. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Don Valley East, Ms. Ratansi. Ms. Yasmin Ratansi (Don Valley East, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be sharing my time with the member for Surrey Centre. Since 2015 our government has been focused on ensuring its policies mitigate the effects of climate change. Several measures have been implemented for phasing out coal, making polluters pay, providing climate incentives, investing in green technologies and much more, which all together have created a climate plan that is doing more to cut pollution than any other in Canada's history. In my riding of Don Valley East, many innovative businesses have benefited from these investments and initiatives. One area of particular interest is our government's work to protect 25% of Canada's land and 25% of its oceans by 2025. Our natural environment is something that Canadians and my constituents care about deeply. Could the minister update this House on the new conservation projects announced on June 5, World Environment Day, and on how our government is protecting our environment? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, protecting nature is an important part of how we will address climate change and the very real challenges it presents. That's why on June 5, World Environment Day, our government announced over 60 conservation projects under development across Canada. These projects are funded through the Canada Nature Fund's target 1 challenge initiative. They'll conserve Canadian nature and biodiversity and protect species at risk, enhance ecological integrity and connectivity, and enhance the size of Canada's vast network of protected areas. Nearly half of these projects are indigenous-led, with the aim of creating indigenous-protected conserved areas. Madam Chair, projects like these move us closer to our goal of protecting 25% of Canada's lands and oceans by 2025. By working together in partnership with the provinces, territories, municipalities, indigenous peoples and Canadians, together we can protect our natural environment for generations to come. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Ms. Ratansi, since you have 25 seconds left, we will go to the honourable member for Surrey Centre. Mr. Randeep Sarai (Surrey Centre, Lib.): Madam Chair, there are many small and medium-sized businesses in my riding of Surrey Centre. Many have been impacted by COVID-19. They saw a decrease in business or needed to close their doors completely in order to adhere to public safety measures to manage the spread of COVID-19. These measures helped keep our most vulnerable citizens safe and ensured that our hospital and health care providers did not become overwhelmed with a sharp spike in cases. Thanks to our government's COVID-19 emergency response, many of these businesses have been able to keep their employees and access important liquidity through the Canada emergency business account, which provides loans to small businesses and non-profits, and the Canada emergency wage subsidy, which is helping businesses to keep and rehire their employees while their revenues are down by providing up to 75% of wages for up to 24 weeks. As we begin to reopen the economy and Canadians across the country return to the job market, those benefits will be even more important to help businesses and industries rehire their staff and make important adjustments to align with public health guidelines to gradually increase their operations. Can the minister please update the committee on how many Canadian businesses have taken advantage of CEBA and CEWS since applications for each have been opened? Hon. Mary Ng: Madam Chair, I want to begin by thanking the member for Surrey Centre for all the work he does to support his constituents and small businesses. Canadians across the country need to know our government has been working tirelessly and will continue to work tirelessly on their behalf. This is why we put in place the important programs to help them get through this crisis during this difficult time, programs such as the wage subsidy program. We know that in so many businesses the employees are often like extended family members. The wage subsidy has helped these businesses keep their employees on the payroll and are now helping in their rehiring as they slowly and safely restart. There are 348,000 businesses being helped with the wage subsidy program, and this means that 2. 6 million workers are being helped. Businesses are also being helped through the interest-free $40,000 loan they can access through CEBA to help stay afloat and pay their expenses during this crisis. I'm pleased to inform this House that to date more than 669,000 The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for St. John's East. Mr. Jack Harris: Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with my colleague, the member for LondonFanshawe. Madam Chair, with so many recent reports and videos of police using force, sometimes deadly force, and violence against indigenous and black people in Canada, I've called for the public safety committee to reconvene. If the members agree, will the minister come to the committee and provide concrete answers as to how the government intends to address racism inherent in Canada's law enforcement, and in particular the RCMP? Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I thank my colleague for the question. It's perhaps the most important one facing Canada today. Madam Chair, indigenous people, black Canadians and other racialized people are far too often experiencing systemic racism and disparate outcomes within the entire criminal justice system. In order to respond appropriately, I think it's necessary to begin by acknowledging the lived experience of people who've known bias and discrimination at the hands of the police and our courts and within our prisons. We remain committed to working with all racialized people and all of the members of this House to ensure that we work toward social justice for all Canadians, and I look forward to discussing the member's motion further with him. Mr. Jack Harris: Will the minister and the government commit to facilitating such a meeting of this committee virtually? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, the decisions of the committee are the committee's, so I'm sure that this will be a discussion within the committee, but if called, I will certainly be pleased to come with my officials to provide the committee with whatever support and information it needs to contribute to this very important discussion. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Harris, you have 40 seconds. Mr. Jack Harris: In light of what we've seen with Chief Adam in Fort McMurray and the RCMP accepting that the actions were reasonable, will the minister commit to a full review of the use of force by the RCMP, in particular the philosophy, tactics and training that is given to RCMP officers in dealing with the public? Hon. Bill Blair: I thank the member and I want to assure him, first of all, that this is work that is ongoing, not just in the RCMP but throughout the police community. May I also take this opportunity, Madam Chair, to say that I think all police training has to begin with one very important principle, and that's the preservation of all life and the respect for all Canadians. We also know the importance of de-escalation training. We're committed to continuing to work with indigenous communities, racialized communities and with police services and all participants in the criminal justice system to make sure that it is fair for all Canadians. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for LondonFanshawe, Ms. Mathyssen. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen (LondonFanshawe, NDP): Madam Chair, we need more justice for black, indigenous and racialized people in Canada. They can't be asked to keep waiting. This government recognizes that systemic racism exists but refuses to collect race-based data that would allow us to quantify and truly address this injustice. We need data to protect Canadians. When will this government do the right thing and start collecting race-based data? Hon. Bardish Chagger (Minister of Diversity and Inclusion and Youth): Madam Chair, our government agrees that it's important that we collect data, and that's exactly why, in the anti-racism secretariat and the anti-racism strategy, there is a commitment to have money go to Statistics Canada to collect race-based data. We look forward to working with all members to ensure it happens. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen: Madam Chair, we know that Statistics Canada will start to collect job numbers based on race. This will allow us to identify systemic racism where it is and where we need to ensure a fair and more equal job market for black, indigenous and racialized people in Canada. Why is this government refusing to follow suit so we can tackle systemic racism everywhere, in every sector? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I'd like to thank my honourable colleague for her question. She's absolutely correct in her assessment that we need to collect more data, reliable data, data that will help us deal with some of the challenges we're seeing with systemic discrimination, but, more broadly, we want to make sure that we continue to engage with an anti-racism strategy that will allow us to collect that disaggregated data. That is why we allocated $6. 2 million to that initiative through Statistics Canada, but we know we must do more and we will do more. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen: We know that all people are susceptible to catching COVID-19, but health authorities are clear that parts of cities like Montreal and Toronto have been more impacted than others. For black and racialized people living in these cities, this data is a matter of life and death. Will the government collect and share disaggregated data so we can identify and erase systemic racism, yes or no? Hon. Bardish Chagger: Madam Chair, making decisions based on science and evidence is essential for our government. We took that practice from day one. It is exactly the step we will take moving forward and that's why we are making those investments to ensure that data exists. We are working across all departments. My mandate letter is public. I look forward to continuing to work not only with all ministers, departments and agencies, but all allies and all parties to get this work done. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Blaney, the honourable member for BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, has the floor. Hon. Steven Blaney (BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, CPC): Thank you, MadamChair. Last week, my plumber told me that, each time Justin Trudeau comes down the steps to make announcements totalling several billion dollars, he feels like someone is rifling through his pockets. My question is simple and goes to the Minister of Finance: where is this money coming from? Hon. Mona Fortier: MadamChair, I would like to thank my honourable colleague for his question. Currently, the health and safety of Canadians are our top priorities. We have implemented an emergency economic plan to support Canadians, workers and companies. We will continue to support them during this crisis. Hon. Steven Blaney: The answer I would have liked is simple: we are borrowing the money and we are going to have to pay it back one day. That is another Liberal craze: they borrow money, they make campaign promises, and off they go. Under the Conservative government, the Chantier Davie in Lvis had 1,700workers for the supply ship Asterix. In the election campaign, the Liberals promised icebreakers. When are the Liberals going to award the icebreaker contracts to the Chantier Davie? Hon. David Lametti (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada): MadamChair, we are very proud of the Chantier Davie and we completely understand its role in the system. We are currently assessing those requests. We are going to establish the process for the polar ice-breaker, which is essential for the work of the Coast Guard in northern communities, and we are going to make sure that The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Blaney has the floor. Hon. Steven Blaney: The workers do not need words; they need contracts and jobs. The same is true for young people who want to work. There is money in the Canada summer jobs program: in my constituency alone, $150,000has been approved. Companies want young people to work and want to hire them. What is the minister waiting for in order to confirm those positions? In my constituency, and everywhere else in the country, our young people want to work. What is the government waiting for in order to send some cash to the Canada summer jobs program? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we are proud of the Canada summer jobs program. We are introducing flexibilities into the system to enable employers to be able to hire summer students. We recognize the importance of this program to provide both financial resources and necessary experience for young people. We believe in continuing to invest in the Canada summer jobs program. Hon. Steven Blaney: The workers, the young people and the employers have been waiting for weeks. The money is available; where is the announcement? MadamChair, our young people are not the only ones who want to work. There are also the temporary foreign workers. Let me use Jessie Gito as an example; he has been working at Plate2000 in Saint-Anselme for years. When the time came to renew his work permit, he found out that he has to have some biometric tests. But he cannot get them because the offices are closed. Is the minister going to allow Jessie Gito and the thousands of other temporary foreign workers who want to work to be able to do so until the government biometric testing centres reopen? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, it is important for the honourable member to recognize that we are in the early recovery stage of the pandemic. Employers are slowly reopening businesses. We will ensure that we support both our students and our temporary foreign workers to make sure we get the recovery right. We will continue to invest in the Canada summer jobs program. We've introduced flexibilities into the program to ensure that employers are able to take advantage of the program and give opportunities to young people. Hon. Steven Blaney: It is very simple. Jessie Gito is a foreign worker, who is in a company that provides an essential service. He needs a decision that will let him go to work, rather than staying home and doing nothing. Then, when the government's biometric testing centres are open again, he will gladly go to one. Young people want to work in agriculture as well, and the minister has told us that the government wants young people working and that their files will be processed as quickly as possible. She wants to create 700positions and she knows that people can fill in an application on a first-come first-served basis. Of those 700positions, how many have been confirmed to date? The good weather has arrived, the corn is starting to grow, and this is the time when farmers need the young workers. Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food): MadamChair, the program for young workers in agriculture is open. I also encourage agricultural producers to register for it. This is a program that is not only intended to provide summer jobs, but also to interest young people in making a career in agriculture. As I have said before, the department is processing files as quickly as possible. Each employer will have an answer very shortly. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will now take a short break. Okay, we are ready to start again. We will go to the honourable member for BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte. Mr. Doug Shipley (BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Over the course of the pandemic, has the government been using all avenues possible to source much-needed PPE in Canada? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, we have been very clear that we have a made-in-Canada initiative that has engaged companies across the country. Over 700 companies have retooled and scaled up their operations for personal protective equipment to help front-line health care workers. Mr. Doug Shipley: Madam Chair, I need to ask very quickly which ministry and minister are responsible for the sourcing of PPE in Canada. Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, this is a collective effort. I work with the Minister of Health and the minister for procurement, and we coordinate with the provinces and territories to make sure there are appropriate levels of PPE to help front-line health care workers and essential workers across the country. Mr. Doug Shipley: Thank you for that clarification. That will make this question all the more pertinent. My riding of BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte is the home of Southmedic Inc. Southmedic is a renowned medical supply business. For over 37 years, it has provided front-line health care workers with an extensive line of PPE and other essential products required when dealing with respiratory illnesses. This company specializes in respiratory illness equipment. Southmedic currently employs over 700 people, and it has been recognized as one of Canada's best-managed companies by Deloitte on numerous occasions. Since the beginning of the pandemic, both I and the member for BarrieInnisfil have been attempting to obtain some assistance for Southmedic from the federal government. Calls and emails were falling on deaf ears. In early May, I wrote a letter to Minister Anand outlining the situation. I received a letter back from the minister dated May 27 indicating that this issue of Southmedic falls under the mandate of the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada. I have heard nothing more. When will the federal government reach out and help this great Canadian company and therefore ensure that all front-line workers will have the proper PPE they require? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I'd like to thank my honourable colleague for his question. He knows full well that this is a very challenging time. That is why we had a call to action to engage Canadians right across the country. Since then, we've seen over 6,000 companies step up to offer solutions and ideas, and over 700 companies have retooled their efforts. I acknowledge that some companies are still engaging with the government, and we'll continue to explore all possible options to make sure we continue to procure the necessary levels of personal protective equipment to protect Canadians and to protect front-line health care workers. That has always been our priority. I want to thank the outstanding Canadian companies that have come forward and have helped us in this endeavour. We continue to look forward to working with them. Mr. Doug Shipley: Thank you for that answer. Just to follow up, there's no retooling required at this company. They could have been up and going very quickly. They just needed a little assistance at the beginning. Moving on to a different issue, while walking to my office this morning, I stopped at my local small family-run coffee shop and was discussing the current economic situation with the two owners of the establishment. They indicated they are having a very tough time surviving this economic downturn. The only thing keeping them hopeful is that soon the public service will start returning to work, and therefore their business will begin to return. Could the government please give us some indication as to what the plans are for returning the civil service back to work safely, and when? Hon. Jean-Yves Duclos (President of the Treasury Board): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm delighted to answer this question. This is a very important topic, but I'd like to take the opportunity first to thank our public servants, who have worked very hard in the last few weeks, both personally and professionally. In fact, today is a wonderful day to say that, because today is the start of National Public Service Week. That's one more reason to thank them for their dedicated work. They are not going to go back to work. They've been at work for the last few monthsin different circumstances, but they have been working very hard to deliver the services and the support Canadians need and deserve. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Next we'll go to the honourable member for SelkirkInterlakeEastman, Mr. Bezan. Mr. James Bezan (SelkirkInterlakeEastman, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. My questions are for the Minister of National Defence. First of all, I want to thank the great men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces for the fantastic job they're doing in Operation LASER, serving on the front lines battling COVID-19. Can the Minister of National Defence give the House an update on exactly where we are at with the number of Canadian Armed Forces members who have been infected with COVID-19? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan (Minister of National Defence): Madam Chair, I want to echo the member opposite's comments in thanking our Canadian Armed Forces members. Currently, we have 13 active cases in the Canadian Armed Forces, but in the long-term care facilities we currently have 50 cases. No member has been currently hospitalized. We have also conducted very thorough reviews of our protection protocols as well. Mr. James Bezan: Through you, Chair, Minister Sajjan, does that number of active cases include the active cases that are in long-term care facilities right now in Operation LASER? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, as I stated, the 50 cases are strictly from the long-term care facilities. The 13 cases I mentioned are not in the long-term care facilities. Just to give the actual clarification, no member has been currently hospitalized. Mr. James Bezan: In those numbers, Madam Chair, can Mr. Sajjan say how many of those cases in long-term care facilities are active and how many are recovered? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, I don't have the exact number. What I can say to break it down further is that in Quebec we currently have 36 and in Ontario we have 14. As well, 36 of the members have been out of isolation. I'll get more details and pass them on directly to the member, Madam Chair. Mr. James Bezan: Thank you, Minister. Madam Chair, I have a quick question while we're still talking about Operation LASER. The President of the Treasury Board has said, The Canadian Armed Forces will be present as long as their presence is needed in Quebec. This contradicts what Prime Minister Trudeau is saying, which is that we have a hard deadline of June 26 for the withdrawal of our troops for Operation LASER. That means taking our troops out of our long-term care facilities. Minister, is June 26 the hard date for the winding down of Operation LASER? Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I'm delighted to have the opportunity to clarify for the House. We've been in very extensive discussions with the Province of Quebec, with my counterpart Minister Guilbault, and we are working very diligently to ensure we have a sustained, appropriate response to the request from Quebec for assistance. That response will result in a transition from the currently deployed Canadian Armed Forces to the deployment of paid volunteers, trained personnel who will take on the important role of providing services to those Canadians who need our help in Quebec. Mr. James Bezan: I'll go back to the Minister of National Defence. The Department of National Defence auditors have called out the Liberal government for mismanagement over the $553-billion investment in our Canadian military through the defence policy. Only three people have been assigned to oversee the rollout of this money. This is a $553-billion investment in our armed forces, and only three people are managing it. Could the minister tell us how that is even possible? Is this the reason that over 100 projects are currently behind schedule? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, first of all, I want to highlight the unprecedented investment that we're making in defence. We have conducted internal reviews of our procurement. The report the member opposite is talking about is from the previous year. This is the ongoing work we're doing to make sure that we make procurement better. When it comes to the management of this, it's conducted by me and the minister of procurement. We are working toward making our procurement even better. We have already streamlined some aspects of our procurement and we'll continue to do more as well. Mr. James Bezan: Minister Sajjan, you've had this report since November of 2019. You've been rolling out this plan since 2017. Only three people are overseeing an expenditure of $553 billion. This is taxpayers'money. Are we going to see more cuts because you have been unable to actually roll out these dollars? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, I can assure you we're not going to be cutting. We'll be investing in our defence. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Before I go to the next speaker, I want to remind members that they are to address their questions and comments directly through the chair. We will go now to the honourable member for Fort McMurrayCold Lake, Mr. Yurdiga. Mr. David Yurdiga (Fort McMurrayCold Lake, CPC): Madam Chair, the Canada summer jobs program has many challenges. I've seen many indigenous communities in my riding rejected for funding even though they had received funding in previous years. Here are a few examples of communities that were rejected: Beaver Lake Cree Nation, Buffalo Lake Mtis Settlement and the Mtis Nation of Alberta, Region 1. The list goes on. Could the Prime Minister explain why so many indigenous communities have been denied funding from the Canada summer jobs program? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we recognize the important role that the Canada summer jobs program plays in supporting employers and young workers in our community across the country every year. We're working very hard to help employers adapt to the realities of the COVID-19 pandemic and are supporting young Canadians as they begin to look for summer employment. We are introducing increased flexibilities into the Canada summer jobs program to hire youth, while also providing more supports to employers that deliver essential services to Canadians. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, that didn't really answer my question. Why are so many indigenous communities left out of the Canada summer jobs program? This is very important to my community and to communities throughout the province. Will the government investigate why these communities were rejected? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that we, of course, value the important role that the Canada summer jobs program plays in all communities, including indigenous communities in Canada. I will certainly have an off-line conversation with the honourable member, if he so wishes, about a particular issue, but I can assure him that in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, we have had to assist employers to introduce flexibilities The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Yurdiga. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, in my riding, the City of Cold Lake has been in dispute with the federal government for many years over payment in lieu of taxes. My office has sent many letters over the years regarding the PILT dispute. Could the Minister of Public Services and Procurement give me a rough estimate of when I will receive a response from the minister's office to my first letter, from 2017, and my letters from 2018,2019 and 2020? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that I will go to the minister, and we will come back with an answer to his question. Mr. David Yurdiga: How much longer does the minister intend to perpetuate the ongoing PILT dispute, which is in excess of $11 million, with the City of Cold Lake? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, once again, I can assure the honourable member that I will speak with the minister and get an answer to his question. Mr. David Yurdiga: Well, do you know what? I've been writing letters to the department for many years. When you say you're going to get back to me, I really have a hard time believing that. Will the minister agree to follow the prior recommendations of the dispute advisory panel that were accepted by the minister? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that I will check with the minister and that she will return to the member in due course. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, the drug Trikafta has been proven to increase the quality of life for 90% of cystic fibrosis patients. Two weeks ago, my office sent a letter to the Minister of Health about the boy in my riding named Cael, who through the special access program is able to get Trikafta in Canada. I requested that the minister use her powers to fast-track Trikafta for commercial use, but I have yet to receive a response back. When will the minister make a decision on Trikafta? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, I'm glad to hear that Cael was able to access Trikafta through the special access program. In fact, that program is very helpful for people who are seeking access to medication that's not currently marketed in Canada. As the member opposite knows, Vertex has not applied to market Trikafta in Canada, but we look forward to their application, and I encourage him to write a letter to the manufacturer to also encourage them. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Vancouver Granville, Ms. Wilson-Raybould. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould (Vancouver Granville, Ind.): Thank you, Chair. I was very troubled to hear that a CBC radio host in the Yukon felt compelled to resign because, as an indigenous person, she could not speak her truth. While we know the Broadcasting Act states that the Canadian broadcasting system should reflect the linguistic duality and multicultural and multiracial nature of Canadian society and the special place of indigenous peoples, it would seem there are some challenges. Therefore, does the Minister of Heritage share the concern of some journalists that problems of systemic racism in Canada are still existing within the institution of the CBC, and will the government now acknowledge the need to recognize the jurisdiction of indigenous governments? Hon. Steven Guilbeault (Minister of Canadian Heritage): Thank you, Madame Chair; and I thank the member for this important question. As stated by the Prime Minister on numerous occasions, our government recognizes that systemic racism exists in Canada, and we have made a commitment to do everything we can to combat it in whichever organization of the Canadian government. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould: Thank you. When I was in the government, and as a minister, I learned the term red meat issues. I understand these issues to be ones that challenge societal norms, that are not politically expedient to address because they can lose you votes, even though addressing them is morally right and a smart thing to do. Mostly these are issues addressing inequality and the most marginalized in our society. In the justice system, examples include mandatory minimum penalties, defunding police, and even investing in restorative justice. Red-meat issues often become defining issues for society and for governments as the world changes. Surely now these issues are politically less of a consideration than the tragic reality of even more slain indigenous Canadians at the hands of police, or thousands of indigenous people still incarcerated or living in poverty. Will this government please finally commit to the necessary work originally promised in 2015 and repeal in the justice system the vast majority of mandatory minimum penalties, assuring the necessary discretion for judges, and meaningfully invest in restorative justice measures? Hon. David Lametti: Madame Chair, I thank the honourable member for her question, as well as for her work as Minister of Justice, and indeed my predecessor. This is an important time. This is a time when we recognize systemic racism. This is a time when we recognize systemic over-incarceration of indigenous peoples, of black peoples, in our criminal justice system. This is a time when we need to look at all potential options to reduce what is a shameful overrepresentation in our criminal justice system. Too often racialized peoples and indigenous peoples have experienced prejudice and systemic discrimination in our justice system, and that has to change. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould: I'll go on to another red meat issue. In British Columbia we are in the fifth year of the opioid overdose public health emergency crisis. Sadly, May marks the deadliest month of overdose-related deaths. We are halfway into the year and have currently passed 500 deaths caused by overdose. Many of the deaths are related to COVID-19 measures that have prevented people from accessing supervised consumption sites, so they are overdosing alone. While the provinces welcomed the federal backing of safe supply exemption back in March, it is to expire in September of 2020. Echoing the call of the chief coroner of B. C. and Dr. Henry, more is needed from the federal government, more action. Will the government provide the necessary supports to the province and help support safe supply initiatives in the provinces? Hon. Patty Hajdu: It's been a pleasure to work with the Province of British Columbia on innovative ways to work on the tragic situation of opioid overdose. I remain committed to working with the province and in fact any province that wants to work towards solutions that treat people who use substances with the dignity they deserve. Madam Chair, this is a complex issue. We're working closely with our partners to make sure that we can prevent more lives from being lost. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for South OkanaganWest Kootenay, Mr. Cannings. Mr. Richard Cannings (South OkanaganWest Kootenay, NDP): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with the member for SkeenaBulkley Valley. In my riding, Theo's in Penticton is a beloved restaurant. They've been serving great food for 40 years, but now they're struggling, because they don't qualify for the emergency wage subsidy. Why is that? The original owners retired last year and sold it to another operator. The new owner can't use a year-to-year comparison to apply for the wage subsidy because he didn't own the restaurant last spring. He is forced to use receipts from January and February, the darkest doldrums of the restaurant year, to compare with the results from May, traditionally one of their best months. Now he has to compete with other local restaurants that can access the subsidy. When will the government fix this inequity and let Theo's compete and survive? Hon. Mona Fortier: Madam Chair, the Canada emergency wage subsidy is supporting over 2. 5 million workers across the country. To help even more businesses support their workers and rehire people as they reopen, our government is extending the CEWS, and we will continue to extend the CEWS for an additional 12 weeks to August 29 to ensure that Canadian workers continue to have the support they need during these very difficult times. By extending eligibility, our government is ensuring that more Canadian workers in more sectors have the support they need. Mr. Richard Cannings: The owner just wants to be able to apply for the wage subsidy, and right now he cannot, and he will not be able to. Thousands of other businesses are hit that way as well. I'd like to move on to forestry. Canada's forest sector has been declared essential during this pandemic, but it's been hit hard after a very difficult 2019. Despite soft markets and thousands out of work, government support programs have left many Canadian forest product companies behind. In my riding, the pulp mill in Castlegar is closing for the month of July because local sawmills aren't producing enough wood chips. What is the government going to do to finally support Canadian forestry workers and communities? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The time is almost up, but I will allow for the answer from the honourable minister. Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Thank you, Madam Chair. We have supported and we will continue to support the forestry sector, including through regional development programs. In fact, in Quebec, partnering with Les Bois Francs DV Inc. , we have widened market access to our products and updated technology systems. In North Bay we've partnered with the Canadian Wood Council to promote the sector. In Vancouver we're working with FPInnovations to create the indigenous forest sector technical support program. We are supporting the forestry sector and its different needs region by region. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Now we go to the honourable member for SkeenaBulkley Valley, Mr. Bachrach. Mr. Taylor Bachrach (SkeenaBulkley Valley, NDP): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm going to pick up where my colleague left off, with B. C.'s forest industry. What we've seen in B. C. are multiple rounds of mill shutdowns and start-ups, and in some cases this has made it difficult for forestry workers to qualify for EI. My question to the minister is this: Will the minister work to make the EI program more flexible for forestry workers, similar to what this government has done for oil and gas workers? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, in the oil and gas sector we have focused on workers. That has been key in the inactive and orphan well program, which we are working on with the provincial governments of Saskatchewan, British Columbia and Alberta. The focus on workers has assured that success, and we will continue to focus on workers in all the industries, particularly our natural resource industry, as they go through this extraordinarily difficult time. Mr. Taylor Bachrach: Madam Chair, reforestation is a very important part of the forest industry in the riding I represent, and people were keenly interested to hear this government's plan to plant two billion trees in the next 10 years. That's a lot of trees. I'm wondering if the minister could tell us how many trees are going to be planted under this program by the end of this season. Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, this government is committed to two billion trees. We are working with forestry associations, the industry and with individual companies to ensure this tree-planting season will be one of the largest the country has ever seen. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The floor goes to the honourable member for Rivire-du-Nord. Mr. Rhal Fortin (Rivire-du-Nord, BQ): MadamChair, last week, the government introduced BillC-17 and the Minister of Justice sent us briefing notes in which he said that it was important to suspend a number of time limits and to extend others, and that the failure to do so could have important repercussions on Canadians, their families, their situations, their finances and their ability to exercise their rights. We in the Bloc Qubcois agree with that. When are we going to talk about it? Hon. David Lametti: MadamChair, the contents of BillC-17 are clearly very important. We have addressed the mandatory time limits in federal legislation as well as certain time limits that courts may not be able to handle. It is very important that we address this issue. That is why the law The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Fortin, you have the floor. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, we agree that it is important. I concur. The minister's briefing notes say that, among other things, when it comes to divorcewhich means children are involved people are waiting on custody rights, child support and visitation rights. The minister pointed out that the national security review would require consultations if no decision is made in the prescribed time frame. It could pose a national security risk. It is really a big deal. When are we going to debate it? Hon. David Lametti: MadamChair, I completely agree with my honourable colleague. The issue needs to be addressed. That is why it is in the bill. That is another reason to debate the bill. I beseech my colleagues opposite to debate it with us. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, what a coincidence, because I beseech my colleague opposite to debate it with us. That is what we are asking. Last week, the leader of the Bloc Qubcois asked the Liberal government to debate BillC-17 today. He did not get an answer. It does not seem to matter. Richard Wagner, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, who is hardly a dimwit or greenhorn, told us that the justice system needs to be modernized. As recently as this past Saturday in LaPresse, Justice Wagner said that it is essential that the Criminal Code be amended to address the backlog of court proceedings. When will the Liberal government opposite pull up its socks, do its job, govern the federation, sit down with the opposition and discuss the vital matters in BillC-17? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, if I were my colleague, I would be a little embarrassed, because the bill was sent to the Bloc Qubcois several days in advance. They received a technical note several days in advance. We were all available to take questions. When we asked for the support of the Bloc Qubcois and the other parties to debate itwe were not even asking them to vote in favour of the billthey refused. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, we never refused to debate it. Actually, we were the ones who asked to debate it. What exactly does debate it mean? We set some conditions. For example, we asked the Liberals to put the money back into the wage subsidy fund and to commit to dip into it no longer. Are we asking too much of our colleagues opposite? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Can my colleague explain to me what the emergency wage subsidy has to do with a bill about justice? This is an absolutely fundamental piece of legislation. We wanted to debate it, but they refused to do so. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, I would like nothing better than to explain it to him, but I must remind him that he is the leader of the party in power, the party that is supposed to govern the country. So I do not know why he is asking me that. My party proposed that we debate this today but we did not get an answer. Meanwhile, court time limits are running out and people are losing rights. I am thinking of families, child support, child custody, labour law disputes in Federal Court, marine transportation, interprovincial transportation, aviation, banks, and those with grievances waiting for a Federal Court ruling. The whole system, the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal, everything is on hold because nobody in the government wants to do their job. We want to discuss BillC-17. When can we talk about it? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, we have done our job. We have introduced the bill. We informed them in advance. We told them they could ask us any questions they wanted. We asked for a debate in the House. However, when we asked the Bloc Qubcois if they wanted to debate the bill, they said no, instead of doing what they usually do and saying yes. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for Essex, Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis (Essex, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. When the CERB runs out, many workers in my riding of Essex will not have sufficient hours to collect their EI benefits. In early July, the midnight shift at Chrysler will be eliminated. Because of the shutdown, a mom-to-be who had just returned to work in January, and several hundred of her fellow employees, may not have the 600 hours required for regular or EI parental benefits. Immediate action is needed. What is the government doing now to backstop these workers? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, the Canada emergency response benefit has been providing much-needed help to Canadian workers across the country who have stopped working due to COVID-19. We know that there is still a lot of uncertainty for many Canadian workers, and we know that many will be exhausting their benefits in the weeks to come. We will have more to share soon, as early as this week, on our continuing efforts to support Canadian workers and make sure that help is available during this The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Go ahead, Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Minister, for the answer. The EI system needs to be fixed. Even before the shutdown, the system was deeply flawed. Will this government commit to a complete review and overhaul of the EI system? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we have been there for Canadian workers. We will continue to make sure that we make the necessary investments in the EI delivery system and modernize it to continue to meet The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. Small businesses have been hit extremely hard by the COVID-19 shutdown. Many have already been forced into bankruptcy. Much uncertainty lies ahead. As the economy reopens, what is the government doing to help small businesses recover? Hon. Mary Ng: Madam Chair, today we are seeing small businesses that have been helped, whether it is getting access to the small business loan, which some are also using in the restart as they are safely restarting, or getting help with their payroll, helping them keep their employees The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. Employees are key to a small business's success. How will the government incentivize workers to return to their jobs when recalled? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister can give a brief answer. Hon. Mary Ng: The Canada emergency wage subsidy is an excellent program to help those employees stay employed and for those employers who are looking at rehiring them right now during this restart process. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair, many of my constituents are in a committed cross-border relationship and have not been able to see their partners in quite some time. The current restrictions are arbitrary. Denmark has found a fair resolution. Will Canada adopt the Danish model, and if not, why not? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, as we said from the outset, we've implemented restrictions at the U. S. border on non-essential travel with a single purpose in mind: to protect the health and safety of Canadians. As the member is aware, just last week we introduced new measures that allow people in family relationships to stay together as long as they commit to the necessary 14-day period of quarantine. We'll continue to work with families. Our intention is to keep people together, but mostly to keep people safe. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair, with regard to child care, as our economy continues to open, parents are facing a stark choice: Who will care for their children? What's the plan to provide access to child care so parents can confidently return to work? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we are of course committed to continuing to make the record investments that we've been making in child care. Since 2015 we've created over 40,000 affordable child care spaces. We're committed to creating an additional 250,000 before-school and after-school child care spaces. We will continue to invest in this sector because we understand that without investment The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. It sounds as though this government has a desire to force parents to choose between their job and care for their child. Can the government please respond to that quote? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, nothing could be further from the truth. We are committed to the child care sector. Our investments and our results prove the opposite of what the member is asserting. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I'm sorry. We're out of time. The committee now stands adjourned until tomorrow at noon.

This part mainly discussed a number of financial questions happening during the pandemic. Those involved the foreign businessmen, veterans, and rural communities, project to widen the road. There followed a series of detailed questions and answers about veterans'compensation and pension.

tr-sq-1212

tr-sq-1212_0

What did the minister think about foreign businessmen in Canada when talking about finance and security? The Chair (Hon. Anthony Rota (NipissingTimiskaming, Lib.) ): I call this meeting to order. Welcome to meeting number 22 of the House of Commons Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic. A reminder to all members that in order to avoid issues with sound, members participating in person should not also be connected to the video conference. For those joining via video conference, I would like to remind you that, when speaking, you should be on the same channel as the language you are speaking. As usual, please direct your remarks through the chair. I understand we don't have any ministerial announcements today, so we'll proceed to presenting petitions. I would like to remind members that any petition presented during a meeting of the special committee must have already been certified by the clerk of petitions. For members participating in person, we ask that they please come and drop the signed certificate off at the table once the petition is presented. The first petition will be presented by Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May (SaanichGulf Islands, GP): Mr. Chair, it's an honour to rise in meeting number 22 of the COVID-19 committee, otherwise known as something like the House of Commons. I'm here to present two petitions containing hundreds of signatures on the issue of the treatment of Falun Gong practitioners by the People's Republic of China, particularly the practice that's alleged of involuntary organ harvesting. The petitioners ask the Government of Canada to condemn this practice and to publicly call for an end to the persecution of Falun Gong in the People's Republic of China. The second petition is from residents throughout SaanichGulf Islands concerned about what was, at the time this petition was submitted, a future problem. It remains an issue, and I present it on behalf of petitioners who wish the Government of Canada not to put public funds into purchasing or maintaining the Trans Mountain pipeline or towards any expansion of the pipeline. The Chair: Next we'll go to Ms. Kwan. Ms. Jenny Kwan (Vancouver East, NDP): Mr. Chair, I rise to table two petitions. The first petition deals with the COVID-19 situation. The petitioners note the pandemic is having a devastating impact on many Canadians nationwide, especially those who have low to modest income, small business gig workers, freelancers, artists, film industry workers, non-salaried workers and individuals on fixed incomes such as seniors and those on disability. It further notes that rent, mortgage and utility payments are due at the end of each month, putting countless Canadians at risk of losing their housing. It is paramount there be safe self-isolation opportunities for all individuals in this country. To that end, the petitioners are calling for the government to immediately enact a nationwide rent freeze, eviction freeze, mortgage freeze and utility freeze, enforce mortgage deferrals for homeowners without penalty or interest charges from financial institutions and provide direct assistance in the form of a monthly, universal, direct payment of $2,000 per month for all, with an additional $250 per child immediately. The second petition deals with the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion. These petitioners join the hundreds of thousands of people who are opposed to the expansion. Trans Mountain, in building the pipeline, brings massive environmental and economic risk with no substantial benefit to British Columbia or to local residents. Approximately 40,000 barrels of oil have already leaked from existing Kinder Morgan pipelines, including two major spills in Burnaby since 2007. I might note, Mr. Chair, that just this past weekend there was yet another spill to the tune of 1,195 barrels here in British Columbia. There is no known scientific technology to clean up the bitumen when there is a spill, and the number of tankers would go from eight to 34 per month into the Burrard Inlet. It puts at risk many residential neighbourhoods and the traditional territories of at least 15 first nations. The Chair: May I interrupt for a moment, Ms. Kwan. I want to remind all members in the House that when presenting a petition, the idea is to be as concise as possible. Ms. Kwan, I'll let you wrap up, please. Ms. Jenny Kwan: Thank you, Mr. Chair. The petitioners are calling for the government to immediately act to prevent this new oil pipeline from proceeding through British Columbia. The Chair: Thank you. We'll now go to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood ParkFort Saskatchewan, CPC): Mr. Chair, I have four petitions to present today. The first petition reflects the outrage of my constituents at the ever-expanding order in council from the government banning more and more firearms. In particular, the petitioners highlight the failure of the government to act on the issue of illegal guns. The petitioners note that virtually all violent crimes committed in Canada, including the recent shooting in Nova Scotia, involve illegal firearms in the hands of those who are already not permitted to possess them. The petition has two asks. First of all, it asks that we reverse the order in council banning certain firearms, but also that we propose measures that will effectively address the illegal use of firearms by criminals while respecting the rights of law-abiding citizens. It also asks that we ensure that substantial changes to firearms laws in future actually be made by Parliament, not by the government acting in an unaccountable manner. The second petition deals with Bill C-8, which is the government's bill around conversion therapy. The petitioners support efforts to ban conversion therapy. They express concern about problems in the wording of the definition used in the legislation. They're asking the government to support amendments to fix the definition to address the issue of conversion therapy and ensure that the definition is correct and doesn't criminalize certain forms of counselling that individuals may voluntarily enter into. The third petition is regarding Bill S-204, a bill in the Senate that seeks to make it a criminal offence for a person to go abroad to receive an organ without consent, dealing especially with the horrific practice of forced organ harvesting and trafficking in China. The petitioners are supportive of Bill S-204 and want to see it move forward. The final petition is with respect to Bill C-7. There's been much discussion in this House about the need to do better in terms of long-term care. Rather than working to do better in long-term care, unfortunately we've seen the government removing vital safeguards in the area of euthanasia. I think our focus should be on assisting life rather than removing safeguards that are required in association with the euthanasia regime. The petitioners are particularly concerned about the government's plan to remove a 10-day reflection period that normally takes place. That period can already be waived under certain circumstances, but Bill C-7 proposes to remove it entirely as well as reduce the number of witnesses involved. The petitioners are quite concerned about what's going on in Bill C-7 and call for it to be stopped or amended. The Chair: Presenting petitions. We'll proceed to statements by members. We'll start off with Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly (NanaimoLadysmith, GP): Mr. Chair, we are in the midst of a global pandemic and an economic shock. Recent events have ripped open the wound of systemic racism in our country. Racialized and marginalized communities have been disproportionally affected by the pandemic. Thousands of seniors in long-term care facilities have died. It is clear that we need system change. In the past, governments have bailed out banks and corporations because they were too big to fail. It is time to bail out humanity and the planet. No one will be immune from the threat of climate change and mass extinction. Both are the result of the exploitation of the natural world in the name of the economy. Humans created the economy. We can choose to change it. We must protect our environment or perish. COVID-19 has demonstrated that together we can take courageous action for the common good. We need to do the same for the climate crisis, because humanity and our planet are too big to fail. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Spengemann. Mr. Sven Spengemann (MississaugaLakeshore, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, today marks World Elder Abuse Awareness Day. Underestimated and under-reported, elder abuse exists across the world. At risk of neglect and assault, many of the most vulnerable older persons reside in our long-term care facilities. They are the seniors who have built our country and shaped our communities, who have shown us resilience, courage and selflessness, who have made us stronger, and whose work and teachings continue to inspire us. They are parents and grandparents, brothers and sisters, friends and mentors. We have not been there for them in the same way they've been there for us throughout their lives. The Canadian Forces report, alongside the climbing disproportionate death toll in our long-term care facilities, has reconfirmed the ugly, indefensible reality of elder abuse and neglect in Canada. In my community, we mourn the deaths of 68 seniors from one long-term care facility alone, Camilla Care. We must make the same unwavering commitment to older persons as they have shown to us. We must protect and uphold their human rights. We must do better. The Chair: Before proceeding, I just want to bring up to the members in the background that we want to keep it as simple and as parliamentary as possible in keeping it neutral. We'll now move to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett (LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, CPC): During these trying times, the residents of LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes have risen to the challenge. They've made sacrifices and gone above and beyond to make the lives of their neighbours better and to keep our communities safe. It would be impossible to list everyone who has emerged as a community hero, but I'd like to highlight a few, like Lily, an eight-year-old from Elgin who raised funds for her local food bank by building and selling squirrel picnic tables, and Louise Boardman from Spencerville who's making masks for long-term care facilities and selling others in support of the Breast Cancer Action centre. The Knights of Columbus in Prescott raised funds and are distributing some $27,000 in support of charitable groups throughout the region. The Knights of Columbus in Kemptville are working overtime operating the local food bank. Who can forget our top-notch health care workers like Hannah and Mary at the Brockville COVID-19 testing centre? It is the people of LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes that make it so great. To everyone working to make a difference and to all of our essential workers, thank you. The Chair: Next is Mr. Anandasangaree. Mr. Gary Anandasangaree (ScarboroughRouge Park, Lib.): Mr. Chair, the Indian Act enshrined racism into Canadian law in 1876, and, through residential schools, the child welfare system, our legal system and our police, we criminalized and tore apart indigenous peoples. The deaths of Chantel Moore and Rodney Levi and the assault on Chief Allan Adam are recent examples of systemic racism within the RCMP. Sadly, the RCMP leadership has failed to acknowledge this reality and its root causes. These same systems negatively impact black Canadians. Anti-black racism has resulted in more young black men being jailed, children being streamed or excluded from schools and negative police interaction due to profiling. Black lives matter. No single Canadian is responsible for the prevalence of systemic racism; we all are. Collectively we build institutions that discriminate based on race. It is now time to reimagine and rework our institutions, starting with our police, to ensure that all Canadians can achieve their truest potential. The Chair: Ms. Larouche, you have the floor. Ms. Andranne Larouche (Shefford, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chair. June15 is World Elder Abuse Awareness Day. I want to remind members of the link between abuse and the problems of economic dependency among seniors. Improving their purchasing power means reducing the risk of them falling victim to abusive people. That's why the increase in the old age security benefit and the guaranteed income supplement must be extended beyond the pandemic. In three weeks, our seniors will receive their first cheque, when they should be receiving their second. A date must also be announced for the new horizons for seniors program, which helps several groups develop projects to break the isolation of seniors. In closing, I would like to mention the organization Justice alternative et mdiation that during the pandemic, along with other organizations in Shefford, has set up the project Une histoire pour la tienne, which also serves to mark this day. It's a virtual meeting between young people and seniors, allowing them to exchange some inspiring life experiences. Since age prejudice is very much present, I applaud this project, which aims to make us understand each other better and judge each other less. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Sangha. Mr. Ramesh Sangha (Brampton Centre, Lib.): Mr. Chair, in the time of this terrible crisis affecting all Canadians, when we are all thinking about how best to deal with it, let's all think about the people around us. Let's show our representation not only to those in the sector of sanctioned workers, but also to all those Canadians who day by day stand up and make a difference. Every day I am proud of the reactions of Canadians to this crisis. I want to acknowledge and celebrate all the contributions made by the people of Brampton Centre, all religious institutions, civil society and community organizations like Knights Table in my riding. We are all standing together to fight COVID-19. Let's continue working hard with that same spirit to get positive results out. Thank you very much. The Chair: I will proceed to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff (BruceGreyOwen Sound, CPC): Mr. Chair, whether graduating from elementary school, high school, Georgian College or graduating from colleges or universities across the country, I am proud of the accomplishments of all the graduates across BruceGreyOwen Sound. I would also like to congratulate and thank all the teachers and parents who have adapted to teaching online or from home and who have supported these graduates over the course of their academic careers. I'd like to extend special congratulations to Cameron Lovell, who just graduated from grade eight, as well as to Neebeesh and Neebin Elliott, originally from the Nawash unceded first nation on the Bruce Peninsula, who will be headed to Michigan State University, and to Jared Lumley from Owen Sound, who just graduated from my alma mater, the Royal Military College of Canada. The college motto of Truth, Duty, Valour is something all Canadians should aspire to live by. I wish all the best to these graduates on their next adventures. I and Canada cannot wait to see how their dreams and goals impact and change the world. I congratulate BruceGreyOwen Sound graduates. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Cormier. Mr. Serge Cormier (AcadieBathurst, Lib.): Today I pay tribute to RichardLosier, an entrepreneur, visionary and builder who died on June9,2020, surrounded by his family. Mr. Losier is a giant in the Acadian Peninsula business community. In1968, he co-founded St. Isidore Asphalte, a company that now has more than 200employees. He also launched many other businesses over the years. He was unifying and generous, a philanthropist who cared about young people and never missed an opportunity to improve their lives. I met Mr. Losier when I was 14years old, and I can say that he has been a positive influence in my life. Every time I met him, he gave me a lot of advice and encouragement, which I've never forgotten. Mr. Losier's legacy to his community is invaluable. His commitment remains an example for all of us to follow. Mr. Losier now joins his wife, Nolla. I offer my most sincere condolences to his children, Richard Jr. , Ronald, Nathalie, Caroline and Stphane, and to his family and friends. Rest in peace, Mr. Losier. You will be greatly missed. Thank you for everything you've done for our region. The Chair: We will now go to Ms. Dabrusin. Ms. Julie Dabrusin (TorontoDanforth, Lib.): Hello from my community in east end Toronto. People talk about how a city the size of Toronto can be cold, but that's far from the truth in my community. I want to give a shout-out to our teachers, like Mr. Wong of Earl Grey Senior Public School, who delivered home-baked cookies and handwritten notes to all of his students, or Monsieur Steve, who's offering online French classes, or the teachers of Riverdale Collegiate, who paraded through our streets to celebrate our graduates. Our local Michael Garron Hospital put out a call for community members to sew masks and received over 60,000 masks, including those made by Lisa Tancre of Chartwell Avondale Retirement Residence. Michelle Beaton organized a front window scavenger hunt to entertain children and their families. Restaurants, even while facing adversity, have been generously donating food, like the members of the Leslieville BIA or Mezes. There are so many more stories of generosity that I could share, but I'm out of time. I thank everyone who has stepped up. We all appreciate all of their hard work. The Chair: We will now go to Ms. Sahota. Ms. Jag Sahota (Calgary Skyview, CPC): Mr. Chair, on Saturday night, Calgarians, particularly those in the northeast, in my riding of Calgary Skyview, witnessed a devastating storm, the likes of which I have not seen in my lifetime. Homes, vehicles, community buildings and structures suffered significant damage due to large hail, floods and high winds. People acted quickly to seek shelter. I'm so grateful that there have been no reports of personal injury or loss of life. I went around the community yesterday to survey the damage. It is extensive. My heart aches for those who have been impacted by the storm in an already incredibly difficult time, but we are resilient. We know that in the coming weeks there will be a lot of cleanup required, both to personal property and in the community. I know my constituents, and we will help one another get through this together. I will work hard to do everything I can to help rebuild this community. The Chair: Mr. Serr, you have the floor. Mr. Marc Serr (Nickel Belt, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to express my sincere gratitude to the people of West Nippissing who organized Pride activities to celebrate the LGBTQ community in June. This week, we are also celebrating National Public Service Week. I thank the public servants for their dedication to the Nickel Belt community and the Valley East and Rayside-Balfour areas. The Chair: Next is Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya (MarkhamUnionville, CPC): Mr. Chair, when COVID-19 began spreading across Ontario, Markham, like many other communities, was unprepared. Our front-line health care workers did not have enough personal protective equipment to do their jobs safely. When Markham residents heard about these shortages, my office was flooded with calls from people who had PPE and wanted to donate. Since then my office has been able to deliver tens of thousands of PPE supplies to front-line health care workers and five masks to each family in need. This pandemic has shown that no matter what the challenge is, the Markham community will overcome it. Today, I would like to thank the front-line health care workers who are doing incredible work. I would also like to thank all those who have helped in Markham's hour of need. The Chair: I understand we had a bit of a glitch there. I'm sorry. With the pause, we thought that was the end of it. Mr. Serr, I would ask you to continue. I understand you started to switch languages. Please continue. You have 30seconds. Mr. Marc Serr: Thank you. I'm switching to English now. Thank you to our nurses, doctors, pharmacists, cashiers, janitors. Thank you to various retail workers and first responders dealing with COVID-19. You keep our communities safe and healthy, and you feed us. Your dedication and sacrifice are greatly appreciated. As we start to see local businesses reopen, it is important for all of us to remember to follow best practices outlined by local public health. Our front-line workers deserve our respect. It is important for all of us to respect social distancing, to protect all workers and their families. Together we can remain strong and united as we continue to face this challenge together. The Chair: Again, my apologies for skipping over there, but now we'll to to Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod (KamloopsThompsonCariboo, CPC): Mr. Chair, in commemoration of Italian Heritage Month, I would like to pay tribute to the Colombo Lodge and Italian Cultural Centre in Kamloops, British Columbia. The Colombo Lodge was founded in 1914 and is an integral part of our community. Recently they began Colombo Cares take-home dinners with proceeds distributed to different non-profit organizations throughout the region. Last month they very generously gave away hundreds of dinners to Royal Inland Hospital staff and paramedics for their tireless work throughout the pandemic. In their own words they say, Colombo Lodge is very proud of the Italians that have made Kamloops their home. Community members of Italian ancestrypast and presenthave helped and continue to help Kamloops prosper as a giving, welcoming and inclusive community. Personally, I want to thank all members for their friendship and generosity over the years. Our community is forever grateful for their kindness. The Chair: We'll now proceed to Mr. Harris. Mr. Jack Harris (St. John's East, NDP): Mr. Chair, many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are facing a serious financial crisis. Most people with disabilities are waiting to be included in the Liberals'promised program. Fish plant workers will need support to avoid a disastrous year. Many small businesses don't qualify for programs. Municipalities need emergency help to meet the crisis. People are worried about what will happen when the CERB runs out in two weeks'time, and the coming tourism season looks very grim. The province itself is in serious financial crisis due to the pandemic and the decline in oil prices. The federal government must overhaul and enhance the fiscal stabilization program to help Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and other oil-producing provinces through this crisis. Both the province and the oil and gas industry players have committed to net zero emissions by 2050. This is a challenge and an opportunity to transition to a sustainable energy future, but it will require significant investment and support by government to keep the industry strong and make this a just transition for workers. Much has been done. Much more needs to be done. The Chair: Ms. Gaudreau, you have the floor. Ms. Marie-Hlne Gaudreau (LaurentidesLabelle, BQ): Mr. Chair, all 44elected municipal officials in the riding of LaurentidesLabelle and I have sent a letter to the government asking that cellular and high-speed Internet networks be made available to all. The crisis has accelerated the demonstration of the need for these networks in daily life. The territorial complexity of the Laurentians means that there are areas where the signal is weak, unstable or non-existent. There is an urgent and essential need to change the infrastructure of the current networks. Also, because of the lockdown, Internet failures are being felt, and they prevent distance learning, telemedicine and teleworking, among other things. How can our municipalities develop economically if they can't provide their community with adequate communication tools? We are therefore calling on the government to put the interests of its people first by investing massively right now in the construction of high-speed Internet and cellular infrastructure. The Chair: Mr. Waugh. Mr. Kevin Waugh (SaskatoonGrasswood, CPC): I rise today to pay tribute to Sir Winston Churchill, the former prime minister of Great Britain and one of the greatest leaders history has ever known. In what can only be called a lifetime of service, Churchill's contributions to the Commonwealth and to the world are without equal. During the Second World War he led the allied forces in Europe against the tyranny and fascism of Adolph Hitler and his Nazi regime. When our world was in its darkest hour, Churchill's leadership was a beacon of hope and freedom. I am reminded of something he once said, All the greatest things are simple, and many can be expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honour, duty, mercy, hope. Sir Winston Churchill himself embodied all of these great things and will forever be a symbol of freedom, democracy and hope. The Chair: Mr. Gerretsen. Mr. Mark Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands, Lib.): Mr. Chair, I would like to add my voice to the recognition and celebration of Pride Month, which is celebrated annually during June. Pride Month is important for Canadians because we can be proud of who we are and celebrate our diversity. This June is different from previous years as we cannot celebrate in person all together. However, I know the ongoing pandemic will not stop us from showing our love and support for the LGBTQ+ community. To celebrate Pride Month this year, my office distributed 3,000 pride maple leaf pins across the country; whoever asked received one. Although the majority was sent to constituents in my riding, over 500 pins were sent to the neighbouring ridings of LanarkFrontenacKingston, LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, and HastingsLennox and Addington. It warms my heart to see so many Canadians showing their support. Happy Pride, everyone. The Chair: We will now proceed to the questioning of ministers. Please note that we will suspend the proceedings twice to allow employees who provide support for the sitting to substitute for each other safely. Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell (Louis-Saint-Laurent, CPC): Mr. Chair, I am very pleased to take part in today's meeting of this parliamentary committee. Canada has been dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic for three months now. The situation now seems to be improving, although we must remain vigilant. Economically, business people and the entire Canadian economy depend on government decisions. My question is very simple: when will the economic update take place? Hon. Chrystia Freeland (Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): Mr. Chair, I thank the hon. member for his question. I agree with him that Canada and Canadians are doing an excellent and difficult job in the fight against coronavirus. As for the economy, our government is there for Canadians, for workers and for businesses, and it will continue to be. Mr. Grard Deltell: Canadians, business people and businesses want to know where the government is headed. When will the economic update take place? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, Canadians know that the government is there to support them. Eight The Chair: We return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Canadians and Quebeckers also know that the Government of Quebec will table its economic update this week. Why isn't the federal government doing the same? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I'm pleased to explain to hon. members and to Canadians what the government is doing for the economy The Chair: We return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, it is a real pleasure for me to explain to the minister and everybody in the House of Commons that today the Saskatchewan government will table its economic update. Why can't Ottawa do that? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I'm delighted to have the opportunity to share with Canadians what our government is doing to support workers, businesses and the economy. Eight million Canadians have received the CERB, essential support for Canadian workers and their families. The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, 11 days ago the Newfoundland government tabled its own economic update. We see governments acting correctly for their people, except for the Liberal government, which cannot table an economic update. When will the Liberal government table an economic update, which Canadians would like to see? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I am delighted to share with the member opposite and with Canadians what we are doing practically that has meaning for Canadians. Let me talk about what we are doing for Canadian businesses. Nearly 670,000 Canadian businesses have received support The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: In Canada, the Quebec government will table its economic update this week. The Saskatchewan government tabled its economic update today. The Newfoundland government has tabled its economic update. Everybody is working hard in Canada, and the business community would like to know where the Liberal government is going. The question is crystal clear. When will the Liberal government table an economic update? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, Canadian workers and Canadian businesses want to know that our government is here to support them. I have shared with this House our support for Canadian workers through the CERB. I've spoken about the CEBA, and let me point out that more than $26 billion of support has been given through that essential program. Let me talk about the wage subsidy. More than 2. 6 million The Chair: We'll return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, this is starting to get interesting; the minister is revealing some of these expenses. Could the minister tell us how much the government has spent in the last three months? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I will continue in French by explaining what our government is doing for Canadians and workers The Chair: Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, this is a little bit concerning for all Canadians, because this government cannot say when they will table the economic update, cannot identify how much money they have spent in the last three months and cannot say what is the deficit of Canada. Is somebody in this government running this country correctly? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, absolutely we are running this country, and we are supporting our economy. In fact, we appreciate that Canada currently is experiencing its greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression. That is why we have devoted nearly 11% of GDP to support Canadian workers and Canadian businesses. I want to assure Canadians The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Normandin. Ms. Normandin, you have the floor. Ms. Christine Normandin (Saint-Jean, BQ): Mr. Chair, there are times when Quebec and the provinces are not just two solitudes, but they get along and speak as one, such as when the time comes to tell the government to mind its own business. On reading section91 of the Constitution Act, 1982, which sets out the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal government, nowhere do I find that the federal government must meddle by attaching conditions to health transfers. It is Quebec and the provinces that hire the medical personnel, doctors, nurses and caretakers. It is Quebec and the provinces that are responsible for purchasing the necessary equipment. It is Quebec and the provinces that know what is happening on the ground and what their needs are. Will the government do the only thing within its authority, which is to take the cheque, sign it and put it in the mail? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I thank the hon. member for her question. We fully understand the importance of federal support for the provinces, especially in our national fight against the coronavirus. I agree with the hon. member that we must give financial support to the provinces, including Quebec absolutely. I would also like to point out the importance of the support of the Canadian Armed Forces, who are doing an important and excellent job in Quebec and Ontario today, right now. Ms. Christine Normandin: Mr. Chair, I am glad to see that there is recognition of the importance of transferring this money. My question is whether it can be transferred unconditionally; that's what I'm asking. There's a state of emergency. In the past, we have seen that it takes a long time to negotiate conditions with the federal government. We saw it in the case of the Quebec City tramway, and we are still seeing it now in the case of transfers for housing in Quebec, for which there is no agreement and, therefore, no transfer of money. Will the federal government send the money free of conditions? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the hon. member said in her first question that the only thing the federal government had to do on health care was to sign the cheques. I can't agree because, today, at this time, at the request of the Premier of Quebec, the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces are in Quebec today; they're there to save the lives of seniors The Chair: We now return to Ms. Normandin. Ms. Christine Normandin: It was indeed at Quebec's request. What I'm saying is that, at present, the provinces are unanimously asking that there be no conditions. It's urgent that the money be transferred. The federal government's job here is to sign the cheque and send it to the provinces. The government's job is also to make Parliament work. This is where there should be negotiations so that we can work, among other things, to send money to people living with disabilities, to make sure we fight CERB fraud and to make sure that court time limits are effective in the current crisis. Can the government focus on the issue in order to respect the provinces and transfer money for health care? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: I thank the hon. member for her question, Mr. Chair. I agree with the hon. member that the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces are in Quebec today at the request of the Province of Quebec. That said, I hope that the hon. member will agree with me that being there for Quebec's seniors, that saving the lives of Quebec's seniors, is much more than simply signing cheques. I am very proud of the work the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces are doing. I think we all should thank these people who are working for Canada, for Quebec, and who are doing an important and excellent job. Ms. Christine Normandin: Mr. Chair, I think the Deputy Prime Minister misunderstood me when I was talking about the importance of acting quickly. Negotiations between the government and the provinces take an awfully long time because the federal government decides to place conditions where there shouldn't be any. Right now, the only important thing is to transfer the money quickly so that it can be used in our hospitals and our long-term care facilities, where the need is desperate. Quebec and the provinces know exactly what their needs are. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I would like to point out the extent to which the federal government is there to support the provinces, including Quebec. We have increased funding to the provinces and territories by $500million to help them prepare for COVID-19 outbreaks. This funding is in addition to the $40billion that we already provide annually to the provinces and territories. That's a lot of money. It is strong endorsement The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh (Burnaby South, NDP): Mr. Chair, systemic racism is killing people. It's killing black people and it's killing indigenous people. Recently, Rodney Levi was another victim of systemic racism. He was killed in New Brunswick by the RCMP. To deal with systemic racism, we need systemic change. Will the Liberal government commit to systemic change so that not another life is ever taken again? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I thank the member opposite for the extremely important question, and I'll take this opportunity to acknowledge the work that he has done for many years fighting racism in Canada. Our government absolutely acknowledges that systemic racism exists in Canada. It exists in all of our institutions, including the police and the RCMP. I agree with the member opposite that now is the moment to fight this The Chair: Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, I thank the Deputy Prime Minister very much for the response, but there are some specific actions we need to take. There are movements. Black Lives Matter, as a movement, is calling for the defunding of police. What they're saying is we need to make better choices with how money is being spent. When someone is in need of a wellness check or a mental health check, money, financing and support should go to mental health workers and health care workers, not the police. Is the government prepared to fund and prioritize health care workers over the police? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the member quite rightly began his questions by speaking about systemic racism against indigenous people in Canada, and I would like to speak about that for a moment. I spoke to Perry Bellegarde this morning, because it is such a crucial issue. We can describe it as the original sin of our country. I absolutely agree that we need root and branch reform, including in how policing is done in Canada. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, will the Liberal government commit to a review of the use of force as outlined for the RCMP? Will the Liberals commit to that change? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister and the Minister of Public Safety had many conversations last week with the RCMP. We all accept that The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, will the government commit to ensuring that de-escalation receives priority? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Let me continue, Mr. Chair. Systemic racism exists in all of our federal institutions, including the RCMP. It's time to put an end to it. Let me just say The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, I'm not getting an answer. Will the Prime Minister or the Liberal government commit to something simple and ensure that at the federal level, racial profiling, street checks and carding are expressly prohibited? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, sadly, I can't agree that rooting out systemic racism is going to be simple, but I can agree that racial profiling is absolutely inappropriate. It is not something that we should The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Well, I'm going to try to get another commitment from the government, because they don't seem able to commit to something as clear as ending racial profiling. We know that millions of Canadians in a couple of weeks are going to be faced with the reality of their CERB ending. These families are worried about how they're going to put food on the table, because they can't return to a job. Will the Liberal government commit today so that those families will have some concrete support, yes or no? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, let me be clear, as I was in my previous answer, that our government clearly is opposed to racial profiling. This is a wrong practice and we're very clear about our position there. Now when it comes to the CERB, I absolutely share the concern of the member opposite. The Canadian economy is in its direst state since the Great Depression. We know that all the jobs have not yet come back. We know that Canadian workers, Canadian families, continue to need The Chair: We'll now pause for a short time to allow staff to change within the safety parameters for the COVID-19 virus, and as we resume, we will go to Ms. Harder. Ms. Rachael Harder (Lethbridge, CPC): Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister has mandated his ministers, and I quote, to govern in a positive, open and collaborative way. Ironically, as it stands, Parliament is currently closed for business. Opposition parties have little opportunity to hold the ruling party to account, private members'bills cannot be tabled and legislation cannot be debated. Can the Prime Minister, Mr. Trudeau himself, help us understand how all of this fits into his definition of so-called open government? The Honourable Pablo Rodriguez (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons): Well, Mr. Chair, we're here, right? We're here, and the opposition is asking questions. They have the equivalent of eight question periods instead of five to ask questions. They have more time than before, so I don't know why they're not happy about it. Ms. Rachael Harder: That's like when I'm asking for a full meal and your handing me a few jellybeans and saying, Why aren't you happy with that? Mr. Chair, here's the thing. It's like switching a light on and off when it's convenient for the Prime Minister and for the Liberal Party. That's what they want to do here. That's not Parliament. That's not democracy. When will Mr. Trudeau do the right thing, turn the lights on and get back to work for Canadians? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I'm really sorry to hear that my colleague's not working. I can assure you, Mr. Chair, on this side of the House, we're all actually working very hard and we're answering the questions from the opposition. Why? It's because it's extremely important. I sat there for seven years asking questions. I understand important Ms. Rachael Harder: The member opposite knows very well that he is misleading the Canadian public. This is not true Parliament. This is simply a special committee. Here's the thing. On the Liberal Party website, under the platform commitment, it says that Parliament works best when its members are free to do what they have been elected to do, and that is be the voice for their communities and hold the government to account. This is a Liberal document. Did the Prime Minister forget that strengthening Parliament was part of his 2019 platform commitment? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague for quoting our excellent platform. That was a very very good document. The thing is, I think we've reached a balance whereby MPs can come from different places, mostly around Ottawa, and ask questions; but also we can have colleagues from across the country asking questions. Why does my colleague think it is better to have only 35 MPs participating instead of 338? Ms. Rachael Harder: Does the Prime Minister value democracy, or does he still look up to China's basic dictatorship? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, we're answering all the questions from the opposition, not only from the people in this room, but we're answering The Chair: It's back to Ms. Harder now. Ms. Rachael Harder: I'll ask the question again. Does the Prime Minister still value the basic dictatorship of China over Canada's democracy? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I don't know where the colleague wants to go from here, Mr. Chair. I'd like to know from her why it is not important to her that her colleagues participate directly. Ms. Rachael Harder: Mr. Trudeau wrote to his ministers and said to them that they continue to raise the bar on openness, effectiveness and transparency. He went on to explain that This means. . . government that is open by default. We now have a parliament that is currently shut down. Mr. Trudeau has shut it down and has prevented us from being able to do to the good work that Canadians expect us to do. Is this Mr. Trudeau's idea of open by default? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, do they want to talk about shutting down Parliament? How about the time they prorogued Parliament twicenot only once, but twice? The Conservative government shut down Parliament twice. I was here. I was sitting on the other side of the aisle. It's quite the opposite now. We're taking all the questions. This place is open, and we're answering questions. The Chair: One moment, please. I haven't acknowledged you yet, Ms. Harder. We've stopped the time there. I want to remind honourable members that questions and answers are being given, and we want to hear both sides. Please keep the heckling down. Ms. Harder, please proceed. Ms. Rachael Harder: In 2014, the leader of the Liberal Party developed a policy resolution entitled Restoring Trust in Canada's Democracy. That's ironic, because right now, again, Parliament is currently shut down. We are prevented from being able to do the good work that we are expected to do. At the time, the Prime Minister said, Canadians want their Members of Parliament to be effective voices for their communities in Ottawa, and not merely mouthpieces in their communities for an all-too-powerful Prime Minister. Sadly, Mr. Trudeau has become the all-too-powerful prime minister that he once believed should not exist. Why did he change his mind? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, I'd like to know why my colleague wants to shut down the voices of her colleagues who could not speak and could not participate in this room. Mr. Chair, how would we vote on private members'bills, for example? As you know, it is not a government vote or a party vote; it's per row. You want to come back? Are you going to acceptMr. Chair, through youthat we have electronic voting, yes or no? The Chair: We'll go on to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, we know that the Minister of Foreign Affairs has champagne tastes and London flats, but it's his champagne mortgages that Canadians are concerned about. Specifically, why did the minister only disclose the complete extent of his personal debt to the Chinese government on June 4 of this year? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, as you know, since the minister entered politics, his two mortgages and other liabilities and assets have been fully disclosed to the Ethics Commissioner and placed on the online public registry. It's public, Mr. Chair. It's public. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Now it's public and it's terrible. When will the foreign affairs minister be here to answer these questions himself? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, it's always been public. We're in the middle of a pandemic here, trying to help Canadians, and the best they can do is ask questions about The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: When the minister owes over a million dollars to the Chinese government, people have a right to ask him questions. When will the Minister of Foreign Affairs show up? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: The minister shows up every day, Mr. Chair. He shows up and works for Canadians. Once again, those are public documents. Everything the minister did is public. I still don't know why they ask The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, he doesn't even have to come to the House. All he has to do is appear on the screen. Where is the minister? Why is he hiding? Why won't he answer questions about his personal debt to the Chinese government? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, if he goes online he's going to get the information. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, the minister is hiding. Let's ask some specific questions about their China policy. What is the impact on the decision-making? Three-quarters of Canadians don't want Huawei involved in our 5G network. Will the minister put the interests of Canadians ahead of the interests of his creditors and say no to Huawei? Hon. Navdeep Bains (Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry): Mr. Chair, when it comes to 5G deployment, we are right now currently undergoing a comprehensive review. We have been absolutely clear with allies and with Canadians that we never have and never will compromise Canadians'national interests. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, that is not an answer, and it is completely out of step with what our allies have already recognized. Reports are emerging of multiple deadly viruses exported from Winnipeg's microbiology laboratory to the Wuhan Institute of Virology right before scientists were expelled for policy breaches. In spite of that, scientific co-operation between Canadian institutions and the military-affiliated Wuhan Institute of Virology is continuing. Why hasn't the government put in place new guidelines to prevent the export of sensitive pathogens and information to China? Hon. Patty Hajdu (Minister of Health): Mr. Chair, he's right that in 2019 the National Microbiology Laboratory shared lab samples with the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The National Microbiology Laboratory routinely shares samples with other labs to help advance the international community's understanding of viruses and the research that is ongoing around those viruses. There are strict protocols in place for these transfers, and these samples were transported according to Canadian laws and regulations. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, I think Canadians would be concerned to hear that it's routine to transport viruses to Chinese military-affiliated labs. When Champagne was the parliamentary secretary for finance, the government decided to give hundreds of millions of dollars to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, bankrolling Chinese state-controlled development projects in Asia with weak standards in labour, human rights and environment. Will the minister put Canadian taxpayers ahead of his personal creditors and support a pullout from the Communist Party-controlled development bank? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Once again, Mr. Chair, my colleague is trying to connect the dots, and I don't know exactly where he is going from here, but everything is public. There's a thing called Google. He can go on it and check the information. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, the public can listen to this. I'm sure this exchange will also be available on Google, and the public can draw their own conclusions. We have failures on 5G, failures when it comes to the transport of deadly viruses and failures when it comes to giving over $400 million to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. It's clear that the Bank of China's investment in Minister Champagne is paying off. It's time for the minister to settle his debt with the Communist government and not settle it on the backs of Canadians. When will the minister be here in the House and answer questions about this mortgage? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: My colleague should be cautious with what he is saying in the House, Mr. Chair. This is serious stuff. He should be careful about what he says. The minister is actually working extremely hard for all Canadians and is doing his job correctly, Mr. Chair. We're talking about public information. Once again, let him go to Google and google it. That's it. The Chair: Now we'll go to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett: Canada's ambassador to the United Nations sent a letter last week to all member states of the UN promising that Canada would consider providing more funding for UNRRA, the same UNRRA that is a front for Hamas, which allows weapons of terror to be stored in schools and provides textbooks that call for the destruction of Israel. Do these Liberals have no shame when it comes to their quest for a seat on the UN Security Council? Hon. Mary Ng (Minister of Small Business, Export Promotion and International Trade): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to thank the honourable member for that question. We know that at this time Canada must show leadership in the face of global challenges. More than ever, Canada is playing a positive role by being a champion in diversity and inclusion, supporting the global fight against COVID-19, addressing climate change, leading peace and security efforts and helping the most vulnerable. A seat on the Security Council will allow Canada to be a strong voice for a fairer, more inclusive and prosperous The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett: Mr. Chair, I received a letter from Bob Anderson this week, who's advocating for his neighbours like Jean Grevelding, who owns a cottage at Butternut Bay. Like many people, Jean is an American who owns a property on our side of the border. These people are taxpaying members of our communities. These folks have plans in place to follow all Canadian quarantine rules. They're concerned about leaving their properties uncared for over the summer. Will folks like Jean be allowed to cross the border to check on their properties this summer? Hon. Bill Blair (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Of course, our priority is and always has been and always must be the protection of the health and safety of Canadians. That's why we put in place these restrictions for non-essential travel and have required, through the Public Health Agency of Canada, a 14-day quarantine. I don't know the specifics of the person for whom you advocate, but we want to make sure that if they come into Canada, it is for an essential purpose and that they do it safely and respect the quarantine that has been put in place. Mr. Michael Barrett: With nine branches throughout my riding, the Royal Canadian Legion offers a great deal to veterans and rural communities alike. They have been experiencing hardship and a loss of revenue, to the point where they may be forced to shut their doors. The Zone G2 commander and local mayors such as Roger Haley have reached out to me expressing their dire need. Will the government offer support to Legions across the country so they can continue to carry out their vital work for our veterans? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (Minister of Veterans Affairs): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Yes, we have done a lot to help support groups like the Legions. There is a $350-million emergency community support fund. If they're supplying any help to people regarding COVID, this fund is there. Indeed, we're doing everything we can to make sure that we help the Legions and other groups that do so much to help veterans right across the country. Mr. Michael Barrett: On May 21, the minister stated that her team was working as quickly as it could to fill the gaps in CEBA. It has now been three weeks, and many business owners, such as mortgage broker Corinna Smith-Gatcke, are still left in the lurch amid the delays, which are pushing businesses closer to shutting their doors for good. Will these businesses have access to CEBA before it's too late for them? Hon. Mary Ng: Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I thank the honourable member for that really important question on our Canadian small businesses. Those businesses can absolutely have access to the loan at their financial institution this Friday, and I would encourage them to go and see their bank or credit union. I want businesses to know that nothing is more important for us than making sure they get the support they need during this difficult time. Mr. Michael Barrett: The County Road 43 expansion project is critical for my riding and the region as a whole. This project will widen the road, increasing safety for the 18,000 motorists who travel the road every day. It's been 334 days since the provincial and local governments announced funding, but there has been nothing from this Liberal government. It's been 181 days since Minister McKenna told me her staff were reviewing the project. Today, there is still nothing, and for the last month the minister's team has not even found the time to respond to my request for an update. Will Minister McKenna finally stop with the delays and commit to funding this project today? Hon. Catherine McKenna (Minister of Infrastructure and Communities): Mr. Chair, as the member opposite knows, we work with provinces and territories to advance our infrastructure investments. We're making investments across the country. They are making a real difference in people's lives. We're always happy to work with members of Parliament, but they must also work with provinces and territories so that projects are advanced by them to our office. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall (YorktonMelville, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Through you, has Mr. MacAulay read ombudsman Dalton's May 2020 report, Financial Compensation for Canadian Veterans: A comparative analysis of benefit regimes? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I apologize, but I'll have to ask my honourable colleague to repeat the question. The Chair: Mrs. Wagantall, we'll freeze the time so that there's no extra time taken. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Thank you, Chair. My question was whether Mr. MacAulay has read ombudsman Dalton's May 2020 report, Financial Compensation for Canadian Veterans: A comparative analysis of benefit regimes. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I appreciate my honourable colleague's question. Of course, I appreciate Mr. Dalton's input and all that he has done for veterans. We've discussed it many times. I've done everything and worked with him in order to make sure that we bring the proper compensation to veterans The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: As a result of that study, are the financial outcomes Canada seeks to provide for ill and injured veterans now clearly defined within the Department of Veterans Affairs? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, as the member would know, I am to bring a report to the veterans affairs committee, and there are a number of things done in order to make sure that report is The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Then I would suggest that we get our committee up and going as it should be. Where are these financial directions published? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Well, of course, lockdown, but just under $90 million that the government put in supplementary estimates to make sure we address the backlog for Veterans Affairs. It's a major help The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Minister, are Canadian Armed Forces members provided with a copy of this document? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, my honourable colleague would have to ask the Canadian Armed Forces that question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: There are three different providing lifetime benefits for ill and injured veterans. In Ombudsman Dalton's recent report, did any one of these three provide the best compensation in all nine scenarios that were studied? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Of course, as she knows, there's been a lot of work done in order to make sure that we provide the proper compensation to veterans. We're working very hard, with a lot of help from Mr. Dalton, to make sure that the appropriate The Chair: We'll now continue with Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: In the undisclosed settlement of Sean Bruyea's legal case against Seamus O'Regan and the Liberal government, a joint statement says. . . Canadians, especially all Veterans and their families, are encouraged to enter the public debate about policies and programs that affect our Veterans and their families. Does Mr. MacAulay agree with this statement? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I can assure you that anybody is welcome to enter any discussion on compensation of veterans. We're always open to what we can do in order to make sure that we provide appropriate compensation. I don't think the term would be appropriate, but it would provide some compensation to veterans who truly deserve it. They defend our democracy The Chair: We'll go back to Ms. Wagantall. Oh, I'm sorry Ms. Andranne Larouche: Mr. Chair, I have a point of order. The interpretation hasn't worked for a few interventions. It's difficult to follow the exchange between the hon. member and the minister. The Chair: We're having a problem with the interpretation. Minister and Ms. Wagantall, you are joining us virtually. I'm wondering if you have the right language on at the bottom of your screen. We'll start with that for troubleshooting. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: I have English. The Chair: Very good. Minister MacAulay, what do you have? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I have English, Mr. Chair. The Chair: Very good. Then we'll check on our side. Ms. Larouche, did I understand correctly that the interpretation didn't work for both speakers? Ms. Andranne Larouche: The sound didn't allow the interpreters to do their job. It seemed to be a problem with the sound. The Chair: In that case, I would ask both members to maybe put their mike a little bit close to their mouth. We'll see how that works. I'm looking at the screen, and I notice the mike is a little bit far. Could we bend it in a little bit more? I appreciate that. Thank you for your patience. We'll give it another try. Ms. Wagantall, please go ahead. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: On a point of order, quite often while I'm trying to speak, there are lots of other voices in the background. The Chair: I would ask everyone to please be on mute, as well as for anyone in the chamber to please refrain from speaking loudly. Just whisper among yourselves if you have something to say. We'll take this one from the top. We have a minute and 45 seconds left. Ms. Wagantall, please proceed with your next question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: You said next question, so we're not going backwards, Chair? The Chair: Did we have an answer from Minister MacAulay? No? We'll go to Minister MacAulay to finish up the answer. We'll start at 27 seconds, freeze the clock and hear his answer. Then, because of all of the confusion, we'll start at one minute and 45 seconds when we get going again. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Should I repeat the question, sir? The Chair: Please do. The clock is frozen. After we go through the question and the answer, we'll start the clock again. Mr. Wagantall, please repeat the question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Thank you, Chair. In the undisclosed settlement to Sean Bruyea's legal case against Seamus O'Regan and the Liberal government, a joint statement says, Canadians, especially all Veterans and their families, are encouraged to enter the public debate about policies and programs that affect our Veterans and their families. Does Mr. MacAulay agree with this statement? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I appreciate my honourable colleague's question and concern. Of course I agree. Anybody is quite open to indicate whatever they wish in order to make sure we provide as appropriate a compensation as possible. You can never totally compensate veterans truly for what they deserve, but we want to make sure we provide the best compensation possible. That's what we will do and want to do. The Chair: Ms. Wagantall, we will start the clock again. You have one minute and 45 seconds remaining. Please proceed. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: If that's the case, is Minister MacAulay aware of the practice of red-flagging veterans'files? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I'm not aware. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Since the deputy minister has indicated that he runs the department, will the minister ask him for the names of veterans and the dates and the reasons that they are, or have been, red-flagged by VAC? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I would certainly ask any veteran or anybody who has a concern to contact my office. I will do anything I can to make sure that the veterans The Chair: We'll go back to Ms. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Do the most ill and injured still receive from the pension up to $300,000 less for life? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, as you know and as the Prime Minister indicated when the pension for life was put in place, it was stated that if anybody receives lessthe Prime Minister himself indicated it quite clearlythat must be adjusted. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: For veterans in similar circumstances, should the date of their application for compensation be a factor in determining whether they're treated equitably? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Yes, of course, the date is when the compensation would start. Of course, it's very important and very appropriate. The Chair: Now we will proceed to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd (Sturgeon RiverParkland, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Retired Major Mark Campbell in my riding of Sturgeon RiverParkland lost both legs in the line of duty in Afghanistan. He is an avid sport shooter, but understandably, due to his disability, he is very limited in the kinds of firearms he can use, and all of these firearms have now been banned under the Liberal OIC. My question to the Minister of Public Safety is this: Did their department do a legal analysis and consider the section 15 charter rights of disabled Canadians not to be discriminated against when they passed their OIC? Hon. Bill Blair: Yes, there was a very thorough analysis done by the justice department to ensure that the prohibitions we put in place were, in fact, charter compliant. Let me also say, Mr. Chair, how important it was that we prohibited weapons that were not designed for sporting purposes at all. In fact, they were designed for soldiers to use in combat. They have no place in a civil society. We have prohibited them, and we believeand this has been echoed by many people across the countrythat this will make Canadians safer. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, is the minister aware that the AR-15 is the most popular sporting rifle in Canada, and is he aware that disabled veterans like Major Mark Campbell are unable to participate in the sport of sport shooting because of his OIC? Hon. Bill Blair: I can assure the member that what I am aware of is that the AR-15 and other weapons like them have been used in mass killings in Canada on many occasions, such as at cole Polytechnique, at Dawson College, again at the Quebec mosque and in Moncton. The AR-15s in particular were also used at the terrible tragedy in places like Sandy Hook, where a bunch of kids were killed, so there is no place for The Chair: We will go to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, it has been months since the Liberals shut down this Parliament and months since the Minister of Finance should have presented a budget or at least an economic update to Canadians. Since then we have seen billions spent with little oversight and no plan. The minister says that he needs certainty before he can table a budget. Well, that didn't stop Stephen Harper and the Conservatives from tabling a budget in the depth of the last great recession. When are these Liberals finally going to take their job seriously and table an economic update? Hon. Mona Fortier (Minister of Middle Class Prosperity and Associate Minister of Finance): Mr. Chair, we're taking this very seriously. We're working for Canadians and bringing forward supports to make sure that businesses, workers and Canadians can put food on the table and pay their rent. We will continue to support Canadians, and when we have a clear projection to present, we will do that. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, the results are in, and businesses aren't happy with the so-called support programs from these Liberals. In fact, the oil and gas industry has been shut out of many of these economic programs. When is the government going to recognize that their business support plans have been an absolute failure with only a fraction of the billions promised being accessible to businesses? Hon. Seamus O'Regan (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Chair, our government has taken swift and immediate action to support our sector throughout this challenging time. We had the BCAP, which is critically important to providing liquidity to support the SMEs that make up 85% of the jobs in our sector. It has taken an enormous team effort. People are working around the clock to get money where it needs to be. We are helping hard-working Canadians, small businesses and large businesses right across the country, but in particular in our energy sector. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, I'm pleased to see the Minister of Natural Resources online. He tweeted recently to praise the Alberta Carbon Trunk Line and the North West Redwater Partnership refinery in my riding. Can the minister tell us what, if any, support they have given to the innovative carbon capture and sequestration technology in this country? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Mr. Chair, we see carbon capture and sequestration as an integral part of lowering emissions, making emissions more competitive and making our oil and gas industry more competitive. We're seeing where the investment dollars are going. They are going to jurisdictions that are committed to lowering emissions. Obviously, this government is committing to net zero. Mr. Dane Lloyd: I note that the minister couldn't name a single example of government support for carbon capture, utilization and sequestration technology. We have spent a lot of time talking about the COVID-19 pandemic, but Canadians are living with another horrific reality, that being the intensifying opioid overdose epidemic. Reports indicate that in the past four years, 14,000 Canadians have died, and the numbers during COVID-19 have been skyrocketing, with British Columbia seeing a 39% increase this year alone. I know this because I've lost a family member to a fentanyl overdose. When is the government going to take this scourge seriously and take action to save the lives of Canadians? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Mr. Chair, I share the member's deep sadness about the number of lives we've lost to opioid overdose. Our government has been steadily making it easier for people who live with substance use to access medications to treat substance use, such as prescription Suboxone and methadone. We have made it easier to rapidly establish safe injection sites in communities and have supported community-based projects that work with people who are using substances. We need to understand that this is a complex issue, and we need to support people to get the help they need. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes (AlgomaManitoulinKapuskasing, NDP) ): The hon. member for Thrse-DeBlainville. Ms. Louise Chabot (Thrse-De Blainville, BQ): MadamChair, I will come back to the bill introduced last week. As parliamentarians, we felt like we were watching a very bad play, as I imagine the public did. I say that it was theatre, even though it shouldn't be in this place. The government decided to stage a play and act alone and, unfortunately, there were several acts missing. A very important part of this bill was about supporting people with disabilities in this time of crisis. However, the government did not see fit to negotiate with the opposition parties, even though it is in a minority position. Despite this arrogance, the Bloc Qubcois proposed solutions. One of the things we proposed was to split the bill so that we could give this support to people with disabilities, but the Conservatives did not want to do that. We came back and asked for time to negotiate and give support to people with disabilities, but the government defeated the motion. We asked that the House be recalled today so that we could pass this part of the bill concerning support for people with disabilities, but we are still in the dark. Why are we abandoning people with disabilities? Hon. Ahmed Hussen (Minister of Families, Children and Social Development): I thank the hon. member for her question. We know this pandemic has deeply affected the lives and health of all Canadians and has disproportionately affected Canadians with disabilities in particular. From the very beginning, we've taken a disability-inclusive approach to our emergency response to ensure that Canadians with disabilities get the support they need. That is why we announced a one-time payment of $600 for persons with disabilities to address these expenses. This will go a long way toward helping Canadians with disabilities. We encourage and urge all parties in the opposition to support this measure. We're confident that this measure, along with other investments, will benefit Canadians with disabilities, and we hope to get the support of the other parties very soon. Ms. Louise Chabot: MadamChair, I remind you that this measure wasn't passed because we weren't allowed to do so. A measure to help people with disabilities has been put in an omnibus bill. We've tried here, in the House, to provide the means to give that support, so I ask again, can the government be counted on to give a response to people with disabilities? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, it was absolutely not an omnibus bill. It contained assistance for the disabled, of course, but it also contained assistance for our seasonal workers, as well as a number of other measures that the Bloc Qubcois opposed. They refused to debate and, when the question of splitting the bill came up, the Conservatives refused to do that. That is why there is no bill at the moment, and that is very unfortunate. Ms. Louise Chabot: It was a Bloc Qubcois proposal to split the bill. The government had not thought of it, but they found that it was a good idea. Let me return to the attack. This bill proposed changes to the wage subsidy program, it was supposed to make the CERB more flexible, it proposed fines for fraudsters and, since there was a little section about a benefit for the disabled, the government took it for granted that we would support it without any negotiations with the parties. However, we set one very important condition: that the Liberal Party must get its hands out of taxpayers'pockets in terms of the wage subsidy. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, as we listen to the Bloc Qubcois members, we might think that they invented peanut butter and apple pie. This bill contained a number of measures that all Quebeckers and all Canadians needed, but the Bloc Qubcois refused to debate it. No, we did not follow the Bloc Qubcois'example in splitting the bill; we had thought of it a long time previously. We have not been able to do that because of the Conservatives. Because of them, we cannot help those living with disabilities. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Ms. Chabot, you have 45seconds left. Ms. Louise Chabot: We asked on a number of occasions for the House to be able to sit starting today to pass the part of the bill dealing with those with disabilities. What is the status of that, MadamChair? We have not heard about it since. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, my colleague knows very well that things are not as simple as that. There are procedural mechanisms unique to the House. I hope that, one day, we will be able to pass this bill and be able to provide assistance for those living with disabilities. I hope that the Conservatives will change their minds and give us their support. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Don Valley East, Ms. Ratansi. Ms. Yasmin Ratansi (Don Valley East, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be sharing my time with the member for Surrey Centre. Since 2015 our government has been focused on ensuring its policies mitigate the effects of climate change. Several measures have been implemented for phasing out coal, making polluters pay, providing climate incentives, investing in green technologies and much more, which all together have created a climate plan that is doing more to cut pollution than any other in Canada's history. In my riding of Don Valley East, many innovative businesses have benefited from these investments and initiatives. One area of particular interest is our government's work to protect 25% of Canada's land and 25% of its oceans by 2025. Our natural environment is something that Canadians and my constituents care about deeply. Could the minister update this House on the new conservation projects announced on June 5, World Environment Day, and on how our government is protecting our environment? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, protecting nature is an important part of how we will address climate change and the very real challenges it presents. That's why on June 5, World Environment Day, our government announced over 60 conservation projects under development across Canada. These projects are funded through the Canada Nature Fund's target 1 challenge initiative. They'll conserve Canadian nature and biodiversity and protect species at risk, enhance ecological integrity and connectivity, and enhance the size of Canada's vast network of protected areas. Nearly half of these projects are indigenous-led, with the aim of creating indigenous-protected conserved areas. Madam Chair, projects like these move us closer to our goal of protecting 25% of Canada's lands and oceans by 2025. By working together in partnership with the provinces, territories, municipalities, indigenous peoples and Canadians, together we can protect our natural environment for generations to come. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Ms. Ratansi, since you have 25 seconds left, we will go to the honourable member for Surrey Centre. Mr. Randeep Sarai (Surrey Centre, Lib.): Madam Chair, there are many small and medium-sized businesses in my riding of Surrey Centre. Many have been impacted by COVID-19. They saw a decrease in business or needed to close their doors completely in order to adhere to public safety measures to manage the spread of COVID-19. These measures helped keep our most vulnerable citizens safe and ensured that our hospital and health care providers did not become overwhelmed with a sharp spike in cases. Thanks to our government's COVID-19 emergency response, many of these businesses have been able to keep their employees and access important liquidity through the Canada emergency business account, which provides loans to small businesses and non-profits, and the Canada emergency wage subsidy, which is helping businesses to keep and rehire their employees while their revenues are down by providing up to 75% of wages for up to 24 weeks. As we begin to reopen the economy and Canadians across the country return to the job market, those benefits will be even more important to help businesses and industries rehire their staff and make important adjustments to align with public health guidelines to gradually increase their operations. Can the minister please update the committee on how many Canadian businesses have taken advantage of CEBA and CEWS since applications for each have been opened? Hon. Mary Ng: Madam Chair, I want to begin by thanking the member for Surrey Centre for all the work he does to support his constituents and small businesses. Canadians across the country need to know our government has been working tirelessly and will continue to work tirelessly on their behalf. This is why we put in place the important programs to help them get through this crisis during this difficult time, programs such as the wage subsidy program. We know that in so many businesses the employees are often like extended family members. The wage subsidy has helped these businesses keep their employees on the payroll and are now helping in their rehiring as they slowly and safely restart. There are 348,000 businesses being helped with the wage subsidy program, and this means that 2. 6 million workers are being helped. Businesses are also being helped through the interest-free $40,000 loan they can access through CEBA to help stay afloat and pay their expenses during this crisis. I'm pleased to inform this House that to date more than 669,000 The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for St. John's East. Mr. Jack Harris: Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with my colleague, the member for LondonFanshawe. Madam Chair, with so many recent reports and videos of police using force, sometimes deadly force, and violence against indigenous and black people in Canada, I've called for the public safety committee to reconvene. If the members agree, will the minister come to the committee and provide concrete answers as to how the government intends to address racism inherent in Canada's law enforcement, and in particular the RCMP? Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I thank my colleague for the question. It's perhaps the most important one facing Canada today. Madam Chair, indigenous people, black Canadians and other racialized people are far too often experiencing systemic racism and disparate outcomes within the entire criminal justice system. In order to respond appropriately, I think it's necessary to begin by acknowledging the lived experience of people who've known bias and discrimination at the hands of the police and our courts and within our prisons. We remain committed to working with all racialized people and all of the members of this House to ensure that we work toward social justice for all Canadians, and I look forward to discussing the member's motion further with him. Mr. Jack Harris: Will the minister and the government commit to facilitating such a meeting of this committee virtually? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, the decisions of the committee are the committee's, so I'm sure that this will be a discussion within the committee, but if called, I will certainly be pleased to come with my officials to provide the committee with whatever support and information it needs to contribute to this very important discussion. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Harris, you have 40 seconds. Mr. Jack Harris: In light of what we've seen with Chief Adam in Fort McMurray and the RCMP accepting that the actions were reasonable, will the minister commit to a full review of the use of force by the RCMP, in particular the philosophy, tactics and training that is given to RCMP officers in dealing with the public? Hon. Bill Blair: I thank the member and I want to assure him, first of all, that this is work that is ongoing, not just in the RCMP but throughout the police community. May I also take this opportunity, Madam Chair, to say that I think all police training has to begin with one very important principle, and that's the preservation of all life and the respect for all Canadians. We also know the importance of de-escalation training. We're committed to continuing to work with indigenous communities, racialized communities and with police services and all participants in the criminal justice system to make sure that it is fair for all Canadians. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for LondonFanshawe, Ms. Mathyssen. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen (LondonFanshawe, NDP): Madam Chair, we need more justice for black, indigenous and racialized people in Canada. They can't be asked to keep waiting. This government recognizes that systemic racism exists but refuses to collect race-based data that would allow us to quantify and truly address this injustice. We need data to protect Canadians. When will this government do the right thing and start collecting race-based data? Hon. Bardish Chagger (Minister of Diversity and Inclusion and Youth): Madam Chair, our government agrees that it's important that we collect data, and that's exactly why, in the anti-racism secretariat and the anti-racism strategy, there is a commitment to have money go to Statistics Canada to collect race-based data. We look forward to working with all members to ensure it happens. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen: Madam Chair, we know that Statistics Canada will start to collect job numbers based on race. This will allow us to identify systemic racism where it is and where we need to ensure a fair and more equal job market for black, indigenous and racialized people in Canada. Why is this government refusing to follow suit so we can tackle systemic racism everywhere, in every sector? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I'd like to thank my honourable colleague for her question. She's absolutely correct in her assessment that we need to collect more data, reliable data, data that will help us deal with some of the challenges we're seeing with systemic discrimination, but, more broadly, we want to make sure that we continue to engage with an anti-racism strategy that will allow us to collect that disaggregated data. That is why we allocated $6. 2 million to that initiative through Statistics Canada, but we know we must do more and we will do more. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen: We know that all people are susceptible to catching COVID-19, but health authorities are clear that parts of cities like Montreal and Toronto have been more impacted than others. For black and racialized people living in these cities, this data is a matter of life and death. Will the government collect and share disaggregated data so we can identify and erase systemic racism, yes or no? Hon. Bardish Chagger: Madam Chair, making decisions based on science and evidence is essential for our government. We took that practice from day one. It is exactly the step we will take moving forward and that's why we are making those investments to ensure that data exists. We are working across all departments. My mandate letter is public. I look forward to continuing to work not only with all ministers, departments and agencies, but all allies and all parties to get this work done. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Blaney, the honourable member for BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, has the floor. Hon. Steven Blaney (BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, CPC): Thank you, MadamChair. Last week, my plumber told me that, each time Justin Trudeau comes down the steps to make announcements totalling several billion dollars, he feels like someone is rifling through his pockets. My question is simple and goes to the Minister of Finance: where is this money coming from? Hon. Mona Fortier: MadamChair, I would like to thank my honourable colleague for his question. Currently, the health and safety of Canadians are our top priorities. We have implemented an emergency economic plan to support Canadians, workers and companies. We will continue to support them during this crisis. Hon. Steven Blaney: The answer I would have liked is simple: we are borrowing the money and we are going to have to pay it back one day. That is another Liberal craze: they borrow money, they make campaign promises, and off they go. Under the Conservative government, the Chantier Davie in Lvis had 1,700workers for the supply ship Asterix. In the election campaign, the Liberals promised icebreakers. When are the Liberals going to award the icebreaker contracts to the Chantier Davie? Hon. David Lametti (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada): MadamChair, we are very proud of the Chantier Davie and we completely understand its role in the system. We are currently assessing those requests. We are going to establish the process for the polar ice-breaker, which is essential for the work of the Coast Guard in northern communities, and we are going to make sure that The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Blaney has the floor. Hon. Steven Blaney: The workers do not need words; they need contracts and jobs. The same is true for young people who want to work. There is money in the Canada summer jobs program: in my constituency alone, $150,000has been approved. Companies want young people to work and want to hire them. What is the minister waiting for in order to confirm those positions? In my constituency, and everywhere else in the country, our young people want to work. What is the government waiting for in order to send some cash to the Canada summer jobs program? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we are proud of the Canada summer jobs program. We are introducing flexibilities into the system to enable employers to be able to hire summer students. We recognize the importance of this program to provide both financial resources and necessary experience for young people. We believe in continuing to invest in the Canada summer jobs program. Hon. Steven Blaney: The workers, the young people and the employers have been waiting for weeks. The money is available; where is the announcement? MadamChair, our young people are not the only ones who want to work. There are also the temporary foreign workers. Let me use Jessie Gito as an example; he has been working at Plate2000 in Saint-Anselme for years. When the time came to renew his work permit, he found out that he has to have some biometric tests. But he cannot get them because the offices are closed. Is the minister going to allow Jessie Gito and the thousands of other temporary foreign workers who want to work to be able to do so until the government biometric testing centres reopen? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, it is important for the honourable member to recognize that we are in the early recovery stage of the pandemic. Employers are slowly reopening businesses. We will ensure that we support both our students and our temporary foreign workers to make sure we get the recovery right. We will continue to invest in the Canada summer jobs program. We've introduced flexibilities into the program to ensure that employers are able to take advantage of the program and give opportunities to young people. Hon. Steven Blaney: It is very simple. Jessie Gito is a foreign worker, who is in a company that provides an essential service. He needs a decision that will let him go to work, rather than staying home and doing nothing. Then, when the government's biometric testing centres are open again, he will gladly go to one. Young people want to work in agriculture as well, and the minister has told us that the government wants young people working and that their files will be processed as quickly as possible. She wants to create 700positions and she knows that people can fill in an application on a first-come first-served basis. Of those 700positions, how many have been confirmed to date? The good weather has arrived, the corn is starting to grow, and this is the time when farmers need the young workers. Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food): MadamChair, the program for young workers in agriculture is open. I also encourage agricultural producers to register for it. This is a program that is not only intended to provide summer jobs, but also to interest young people in making a career in agriculture. As I have said before, the department is processing files as quickly as possible. Each employer will have an answer very shortly. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will now take a short break. Okay, we are ready to start again. We will go to the honourable member for BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte. Mr. Doug Shipley (BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Over the course of the pandemic, has the government been using all avenues possible to source much-needed PPE in Canada? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, we have been very clear that we have a made-in-Canada initiative that has engaged companies across the country. Over 700 companies have retooled and scaled up their operations for personal protective equipment to help front-line health care workers. Mr. Doug Shipley: Madam Chair, I need to ask very quickly which ministry and minister are responsible for the sourcing of PPE in Canada. Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, this is a collective effort. I work with the Minister of Health and the minister for procurement, and we coordinate with the provinces and territories to make sure there are appropriate levels of PPE to help front-line health care workers and essential workers across the country. Mr. Doug Shipley: Thank you for that clarification. That will make this question all the more pertinent. My riding of BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte is the home of Southmedic Inc. Southmedic is a renowned medical supply business. For over 37 years, it has provided front-line health care workers with an extensive line of PPE and other essential products required when dealing with respiratory illnesses. This company specializes in respiratory illness equipment. Southmedic currently employs over 700 people, and it has been recognized as one of Canada's best-managed companies by Deloitte on numerous occasions. Since the beginning of the pandemic, both I and the member for BarrieInnisfil have been attempting to obtain some assistance for Southmedic from the federal government. Calls and emails were falling on deaf ears. In early May, I wrote a letter to Minister Anand outlining the situation. I received a letter back from the minister dated May 27 indicating that this issue of Southmedic falls under the mandate of the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada. I have heard nothing more. When will the federal government reach out and help this great Canadian company and therefore ensure that all front-line workers will have the proper PPE they require? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I'd like to thank my honourable colleague for his question. He knows full well that this is a very challenging time. That is why we had a call to action to engage Canadians right across the country. Since then, we've seen over 6,000 companies step up to offer solutions and ideas, and over 700 companies have retooled their efforts. I acknowledge that some companies are still engaging with the government, and we'll continue to explore all possible options to make sure we continue to procure the necessary levels of personal protective equipment to protect Canadians and to protect front-line health care workers. That has always been our priority. I want to thank the outstanding Canadian companies that have come forward and have helped us in this endeavour. We continue to look forward to working with them. Mr. Doug Shipley: Thank you for that answer. Just to follow up, there's no retooling required at this company. They could have been up and going very quickly. They just needed a little assistance at the beginning. Moving on to a different issue, while walking to my office this morning, I stopped at my local small family-run coffee shop and was discussing the current economic situation with the two owners of the establishment. They indicated they are having a very tough time surviving this economic downturn. The only thing keeping them hopeful is that soon the public service will start returning to work, and therefore their business will begin to return. Could the government please give us some indication as to what the plans are for returning the civil service back to work safely, and when? Hon. Jean-Yves Duclos (President of the Treasury Board): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm delighted to answer this question. This is a very important topic, but I'd like to take the opportunity first to thank our public servants, who have worked very hard in the last few weeks, both personally and professionally. In fact, today is a wonderful day to say that, because today is the start of National Public Service Week. That's one more reason to thank them for their dedicated work. They are not going to go back to work. They've been at work for the last few monthsin different circumstances, but they have been working very hard to deliver the services and the support Canadians need and deserve. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Next we'll go to the honourable member for SelkirkInterlakeEastman, Mr. Bezan. Mr. James Bezan (SelkirkInterlakeEastman, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. My questions are for the Minister of National Defence. First of all, I want to thank the great men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces for the fantastic job they're doing in Operation LASER, serving on the front lines battling COVID-19. Can the Minister of National Defence give the House an update on exactly where we are at with the number of Canadian Armed Forces members who have been infected with COVID-19? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan (Minister of National Defence): Madam Chair, I want to echo the member opposite's comments in thanking our Canadian Armed Forces members. Currently, we have 13 active cases in the Canadian Armed Forces, but in the long-term care facilities we currently have 50 cases. No member has been currently hospitalized. We have also conducted very thorough reviews of our protection protocols as well. Mr. James Bezan: Through you, Chair, Minister Sajjan, does that number of active cases include the active cases that are in long-term care facilities right now in Operation LASER? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, as I stated, the 50 cases are strictly from the long-term care facilities. The 13 cases I mentioned are not in the long-term care facilities. Just to give the actual clarification, no member has been currently hospitalized. Mr. James Bezan: In those numbers, Madam Chair, can Mr. Sajjan say how many of those cases in long-term care facilities are active and how many are recovered? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, I don't have the exact number. What I can say to break it down further is that in Quebec we currently have 36 and in Ontario we have 14. As well, 36 of the members have been out of isolation. I'll get more details and pass them on directly to the member, Madam Chair. Mr. James Bezan: Thank you, Minister. Madam Chair, I have a quick question while we're still talking about Operation LASER. The President of the Treasury Board has said, The Canadian Armed Forces will be present as long as their presence is needed in Quebec. This contradicts what Prime Minister Trudeau is saying, which is that we have a hard deadline of June 26 for the withdrawal of our troops for Operation LASER. That means taking our troops out of our long-term care facilities. Minister, is June 26 the hard date for the winding down of Operation LASER? Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I'm delighted to have the opportunity to clarify for the House. We've been in very extensive discussions with the Province of Quebec, with my counterpart Minister Guilbault, and we are working very diligently to ensure we have a sustained, appropriate response to the request from Quebec for assistance. That response will result in a transition from the currently deployed Canadian Armed Forces to the deployment of paid volunteers, trained personnel who will take on the important role of providing services to those Canadians who need our help in Quebec. Mr. James Bezan: I'll go back to the Minister of National Defence. The Department of National Defence auditors have called out the Liberal government for mismanagement over the $553-billion investment in our Canadian military through the defence policy. Only three people have been assigned to oversee the rollout of this money. This is a $553-billion investment in our armed forces, and only three people are managing it. Could the minister tell us how that is even possible? Is this the reason that over 100 projects are currently behind schedule? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, first of all, I want to highlight the unprecedented investment that we're making in defence. We have conducted internal reviews of our procurement. The report the member opposite is talking about is from the previous year. This is the ongoing work we're doing to make sure that we make procurement better. When it comes to the management of this, it's conducted by me and the minister of procurement. We are working toward making our procurement even better. We have already streamlined some aspects of our procurement and we'll continue to do more as well. Mr. James Bezan: Minister Sajjan, you've had this report since November of 2019. You've been rolling out this plan since 2017. Only three people are overseeing an expenditure of $553 billion. This is taxpayers'money. Are we going to see more cuts because you have been unable to actually roll out these dollars? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, I can assure you we're not going to be cutting. We'll be investing in our defence. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Before I go to the next speaker, I want to remind members that they are to address their questions and comments directly through the chair. We will go now to the honourable member for Fort McMurrayCold Lake, Mr. Yurdiga. Mr. David Yurdiga (Fort McMurrayCold Lake, CPC): Madam Chair, the Canada summer jobs program has many challenges. I've seen many indigenous communities in my riding rejected for funding even though they had received funding in previous years. Here are a few examples of communities that were rejected: Beaver Lake Cree Nation, Buffalo Lake Mtis Settlement and the Mtis Nation of Alberta, Region 1. The list goes on. Could the Prime Minister explain why so many indigenous communities have been denied funding from the Canada summer jobs program? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we recognize the important role that the Canada summer jobs program plays in supporting employers and young workers in our community across the country every year. We're working very hard to help employers adapt to the realities of the COVID-19 pandemic and are supporting young Canadians as they begin to look for summer employment. We are introducing increased flexibilities into the Canada summer jobs program to hire youth, while also providing more supports to employers that deliver essential services to Canadians. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, that didn't really answer my question. Why are so many indigenous communities left out of the Canada summer jobs program? This is very important to my community and to communities throughout the province. Will the government investigate why these communities were rejected? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that we, of course, value the important role that the Canada summer jobs program plays in all communities, including indigenous communities in Canada. I will certainly have an off-line conversation with the honourable member, if he so wishes, about a particular issue, but I can assure him that in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, we have had to assist employers to introduce flexibilities The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Yurdiga. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, in my riding, the City of Cold Lake has been in dispute with the federal government for many years over payment in lieu of taxes. My office has sent many letters over the years regarding the PILT dispute. Could the Minister of Public Services and Procurement give me a rough estimate of when I will receive a response from the minister's office to my first letter, from 2017, and my letters from 2018,2019 and 2020? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that I will go to the minister, and we will come back with an answer to his question. Mr. David Yurdiga: How much longer does the minister intend to perpetuate the ongoing PILT dispute, which is in excess of $11 million, with the City of Cold Lake? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, once again, I can assure the honourable member that I will speak with the minister and get an answer to his question. Mr. David Yurdiga: Well, do you know what? I've been writing letters to the department for many years. When you say you're going to get back to me, I really have a hard time believing that. Will the minister agree to follow the prior recommendations of the dispute advisory panel that were accepted by the minister? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that I will check with the minister and that she will return to the member in due course. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, the drug Trikafta has been proven to increase the quality of life for 90% of cystic fibrosis patients. Two weeks ago, my office sent a letter to the Minister of Health about the boy in my riding named Cael, who through the special access program is able to get Trikafta in Canada. I requested that the minister use her powers to fast-track Trikafta for commercial use, but I have yet to receive a response back. When will the minister make a decision on Trikafta? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, I'm glad to hear that Cael was able to access Trikafta through the special access program. In fact, that program is very helpful for people who are seeking access to medication that's not currently marketed in Canada. As the member opposite knows, Vertex has not applied to market Trikafta in Canada, but we look forward to their application, and I encourage him to write a letter to the manufacturer to also encourage them. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Vancouver Granville, Ms. Wilson-Raybould. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould (Vancouver Granville, Ind.): Thank you, Chair. I was very troubled to hear that a CBC radio host in the Yukon felt compelled to resign because, as an indigenous person, she could not speak her truth. While we know the Broadcasting Act states that the Canadian broadcasting system should reflect the linguistic duality and multicultural and multiracial nature of Canadian society and the special place of indigenous peoples, it would seem there are some challenges. Therefore, does the Minister of Heritage share the concern of some journalists that problems of systemic racism in Canada are still existing within the institution of the CBC, and will the government now acknowledge the need to recognize the jurisdiction of indigenous governments? Hon. Steven Guilbeault (Minister of Canadian Heritage): Thank you, Madame Chair; and I thank the member for this important question. As stated by the Prime Minister on numerous occasions, our government recognizes that systemic racism exists in Canada, and we have made a commitment to do everything we can to combat it in whichever organization of the Canadian government. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould: Thank you. When I was in the government, and as a minister, I learned the term red meat issues. I understand these issues to be ones that challenge societal norms, that are not politically expedient to address because they can lose you votes, even though addressing them is morally right and a smart thing to do. Mostly these are issues addressing inequality and the most marginalized in our society. In the justice system, examples include mandatory minimum penalties, defunding police, and even investing in restorative justice. Red-meat issues often become defining issues for society and for governments as the world changes. Surely now these issues are politically less of a consideration than the tragic reality of even more slain indigenous Canadians at the hands of police, or thousands of indigenous people still incarcerated or living in poverty. Will this government please finally commit to the necessary work originally promised in 2015 and repeal in the justice system the vast majority of mandatory minimum penalties, assuring the necessary discretion for judges, and meaningfully invest in restorative justice measures? Hon. David Lametti: Madame Chair, I thank the honourable member for her question, as well as for her work as Minister of Justice, and indeed my predecessor. This is an important time. This is a time when we recognize systemic racism. This is a time when we recognize systemic over-incarceration of indigenous peoples, of black peoples, in our criminal justice system. This is a time when we need to look at all potential options to reduce what is a shameful overrepresentation in our criminal justice system. Too often racialized peoples and indigenous peoples have experienced prejudice and systemic discrimination in our justice system, and that has to change. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould: I'll go on to another red meat issue. In British Columbia we are in the fifth year of the opioid overdose public health emergency crisis. Sadly, May marks the deadliest month of overdose-related deaths. We are halfway into the year and have currently passed 500 deaths caused by overdose. Many of the deaths are related to COVID-19 measures that have prevented people from accessing supervised consumption sites, so they are overdosing alone. While the provinces welcomed the federal backing of safe supply exemption back in March, it is to expire in September of 2020. Echoing the call of the chief coroner of B. C. and Dr. Henry, more is needed from the federal government, more action. Will the government provide the necessary supports to the province and help support safe supply initiatives in the provinces? Hon. Patty Hajdu: It's been a pleasure to work with the Province of British Columbia on innovative ways to work on the tragic situation of opioid overdose. I remain committed to working with the province and in fact any province that wants to work towards solutions that treat people who use substances with the dignity they deserve. Madam Chair, this is a complex issue. We're working closely with our partners to make sure that we can prevent more lives from being lost. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for South OkanaganWest Kootenay, Mr. Cannings. Mr. Richard Cannings (South OkanaganWest Kootenay, NDP): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with the member for SkeenaBulkley Valley. In my riding, Theo's in Penticton is a beloved restaurant. They've been serving great food for 40 years, but now they're struggling, because they don't qualify for the emergency wage subsidy. Why is that? The original owners retired last year and sold it to another operator. The new owner can't use a year-to-year comparison to apply for the wage subsidy because he didn't own the restaurant last spring. He is forced to use receipts from January and February, the darkest doldrums of the restaurant year, to compare with the results from May, traditionally one of their best months. Now he has to compete with other local restaurants that can access the subsidy. When will the government fix this inequity and let Theo's compete and survive? Hon. Mona Fortier: Madam Chair, the Canada emergency wage subsidy is supporting over 2. 5 million workers across the country. To help even more businesses support their workers and rehire people as they reopen, our government is extending the CEWS, and we will continue to extend the CEWS for an additional 12 weeks to August 29 to ensure that Canadian workers continue to have the support they need during these very difficult times. By extending eligibility, our government is ensuring that more Canadian workers in more sectors have the support they need. Mr. Richard Cannings: The owner just wants to be able to apply for the wage subsidy, and right now he cannot, and he will not be able to. Thousands of other businesses are hit that way as well. I'd like to move on to forestry. Canada's forest sector has been declared essential during this pandemic, but it's been hit hard after a very difficult 2019. Despite soft markets and thousands out of work, government support programs have left many Canadian forest product companies behind. In my riding, the pulp mill in Castlegar is closing for the month of July because local sawmills aren't producing enough wood chips. What is the government going to do to finally support Canadian forestry workers and communities? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The time is almost up, but I will allow for the answer from the honourable minister. Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Thank you, Madam Chair. We have supported and we will continue to support the forestry sector, including through regional development programs. In fact, in Quebec, partnering with Les Bois Francs DV Inc. , we have widened market access to our products and updated technology systems. In North Bay we've partnered with the Canadian Wood Council to promote the sector. In Vancouver we're working with FPInnovations to create the indigenous forest sector technical support program. We are supporting the forestry sector and its different needs region by region. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Now we go to the honourable member for SkeenaBulkley Valley, Mr. Bachrach. Mr. Taylor Bachrach (SkeenaBulkley Valley, NDP): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm going to pick up where my colleague left off, with B. C.'s forest industry. What we've seen in B. C. are multiple rounds of mill shutdowns and start-ups, and in some cases this has made it difficult for forestry workers to qualify for EI. My question to the minister is this: Will the minister work to make the EI program more flexible for forestry workers, similar to what this government has done for oil and gas workers? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, in the oil and gas sector we have focused on workers. That has been key in the inactive and orphan well program, which we are working on with the provincial governments of Saskatchewan, British Columbia and Alberta. The focus on workers has assured that success, and we will continue to focus on workers in all the industries, particularly our natural resource industry, as they go through this extraordinarily difficult time. Mr. Taylor Bachrach: Madam Chair, reforestation is a very important part of the forest industry in the riding I represent, and people were keenly interested to hear this government's plan to plant two billion trees in the next 10 years. That's a lot of trees. I'm wondering if the minister could tell us how many trees are going to be planted under this program by the end of this season. Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, this government is committed to two billion trees. We are working with forestry associations, the industry and with individual companies to ensure this tree-planting season will be one of the largest the country has ever seen. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The floor goes to the honourable member for Rivire-du-Nord. Mr. Rhal Fortin (Rivire-du-Nord, BQ): MadamChair, last week, the government introduced BillC-17 and the Minister of Justice sent us briefing notes in which he said that it was important to suspend a number of time limits and to extend others, and that the failure to do so could have important repercussions on Canadians, their families, their situations, their finances and their ability to exercise their rights. We in the Bloc Qubcois agree with that. When are we going to talk about it? Hon. David Lametti: MadamChair, the contents of BillC-17 are clearly very important. We have addressed the mandatory time limits in federal legislation as well as certain time limits that courts may not be able to handle. It is very important that we address this issue. That is why the law The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Fortin, you have the floor. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, we agree that it is important. I concur. The minister's briefing notes say that, among other things, when it comes to divorcewhich means children are involved people are waiting on custody rights, child support and visitation rights. The minister pointed out that the national security review would require consultations if no decision is made in the prescribed time frame. It could pose a national security risk. It is really a big deal. When are we going to debate it? Hon. David Lametti: MadamChair, I completely agree with my honourable colleague. The issue needs to be addressed. That is why it is in the bill. That is another reason to debate the bill. I beseech my colleagues opposite to debate it with us. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, what a coincidence, because I beseech my colleague opposite to debate it with us. That is what we are asking. Last week, the leader of the Bloc Qubcois asked the Liberal government to debate BillC-17 today. He did not get an answer. It does not seem to matter. Richard Wagner, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, who is hardly a dimwit or greenhorn, told us that the justice system needs to be modernized. As recently as this past Saturday in LaPresse, Justice Wagner said that it is essential that the Criminal Code be amended to address the backlog of court proceedings. When will the Liberal government opposite pull up its socks, do its job, govern the federation, sit down with the opposition and discuss the vital matters in BillC-17? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, if I were my colleague, I would be a little embarrassed, because the bill was sent to the Bloc Qubcois several days in advance. They received a technical note several days in advance. We were all available to take questions. When we asked for the support of the Bloc Qubcois and the other parties to debate itwe were not even asking them to vote in favour of the billthey refused. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, we never refused to debate it. Actually, we were the ones who asked to debate it. What exactly does debate it mean? We set some conditions. For example, we asked the Liberals to put the money back into the wage subsidy fund and to commit to dip into it no longer. Are we asking too much of our colleagues opposite? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Can my colleague explain to me what the emergency wage subsidy has to do with a bill about justice? This is an absolutely fundamental piece of legislation. We wanted to debate it, but they refused to do so. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, I would like nothing better than to explain it to him, but I must remind him that he is the leader of the party in power, the party that is supposed to govern the country. So I do not know why he is asking me that. My party proposed that we debate this today but we did not get an answer. Meanwhile, court time limits are running out and people are losing rights. I am thinking of families, child support, child custody, labour law disputes in Federal Court, marine transportation, interprovincial transportation, aviation, banks, and those with grievances waiting for a Federal Court ruling. The whole system, the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal, everything is on hold because nobody in the government wants to do their job. We want to discuss BillC-17. When can we talk about it? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, we have done our job. We have introduced the bill. We informed them in advance. We told them they could ask us any questions they wanted. We asked for a debate in the House. However, when we asked the Bloc Qubcois if they wanted to debate the bill, they said no, instead of doing what they usually do and saying yes. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for Essex, Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis (Essex, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. When the CERB runs out, many workers in my riding of Essex will not have sufficient hours to collect their EI benefits. In early July, the midnight shift at Chrysler will be eliminated. Because of the shutdown, a mom-to-be who had just returned to work in January, and several hundred of her fellow employees, may not have the 600 hours required for regular or EI parental benefits. Immediate action is needed. What is the government doing now to backstop these workers? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, the Canada emergency response benefit has been providing much-needed help to Canadian workers across the country who have stopped working due to COVID-19. We know that there is still a lot of uncertainty for many Canadian workers, and we know that many will be exhausting their benefits in the weeks to come. We will have more to share soon, as early as this week, on our continuing efforts to support Canadian workers and make sure that help is available during this The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Go ahead, Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Minister, for the answer. The EI system needs to be fixed. Even before the shutdown, the system was deeply flawed. Will this government commit to a complete review and overhaul of the EI system? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we have been there for Canadian workers. We will continue to make sure that we make the necessary investments in the EI delivery system and modernize it to continue to meet The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. Small businesses have been hit extremely hard by the COVID-19 shutdown. Many have already been forced into bankruptcy. Much uncertainty lies ahead. As the economy reopens, what is the government doing to help small businesses recover? Hon. Mary Ng: Madam Chair, today we are seeing small businesses that have been helped, whether it is getting access to the small business loan, which some are also using in the restart as they are safely restarting, or getting help with their payroll, helping them keep their employees The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. Employees are key to a small business's success. How will the government incentivize workers to return to their jobs when recalled? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister can give a brief answer. Hon. Mary Ng: The Canada emergency wage subsidy is an excellent program to help those employees stay employed and for those employers who are looking at rehiring them right now during this restart process. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair, many of my constituents are in a committed cross-border relationship and have not been able to see their partners in quite some time. The current restrictions are arbitrary. Denmark has found a fair resolution. Will Canada adopt the Danish model, and if not, why not? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, as we said from the outset, we've implemented restrictions at the U. S. border on non-essential travel with a single purpose in mind: to protect the health and safety of Canadians. As the member is aware, just last week we introduced new measures that allow people in family relationships to stay together as long as they commit to the necessary 14-day period of quarantine. We'll continue to work with families. Our intention is to keep people together, but mostly to keep people safe. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair, with regard to child care, as our economy continues to open, parents are facing a stark choice: Who will care for their children? What's the plan to provide access to child care so parents can confidently return to work? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we are of course committed to continuing to make the record investments that we've been making in child care. Since 2015 we've created over 40,000 affordable child care spaces. We're committed to creating an additional 250,000 before-school and after-school child care spaces. We will continue to invest in this sector because we understand that without investment The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. It sounds as though this government has a desire to force parents to choose between their job and care for their child. Can the government please respond to that quote? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, nothing could be further from the truth. We are committed to the child care sector. Our investments and our results prove the opposite of what the member is asserting. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I'm sorry. We're out of time. The committee now stands adjourned until tomorrow at noon.

Hon. Bill Blair, Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, stated that the priority must be the protection of the health and safety of Canadians, and restrictions for non-essential travel, and a 14-day quarantine was required for those who had an essential purpose.

tr-sq-1213

tr-sq-1213_0

What did Hon. Lawrence MacAulay think about the public debate about policies and programs that affect veterans and their families? The Chair (Hon. Anthony Rota (NipissingTimiskaming, Lib.) ): I call this meeting to order. Welcome to meeting number 22 of the House of Commons Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic. A reminder to all members that in order to avoid issues with sound, members participating in person should not also be connected to the video conference. For those joining via video conference, I would like to remind you that, when speaking, you should be on the same channel as the language you are speaking. As usual, please direct your remarks through the chair. I understand we don't have any ministerial announcements today, so we'll proceed to presenting petitions. I would like to remind members that any petition presented during a meeting of the special committee must have already been certified by the clerk of petitions. For members participating in person, we ask that they please come and drop the signed certificate off at the table once the petition is presented. The first petition will be presented by Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May (SaanichGulf Islands, GP): Mr. Chair, it's an honour to rise in meeting number 22 of the COVID-19 committee, otherwise known as something like the House of Commons. I'm here to present two petitions containing hundreds of signatures on the issue of the treatment of Falun Gong practitioners by the People's Republic of China, particularly the practice that's alleged of involuntary organ harvesting. The petitioners ask the Government of Canada to condemn this practice and to publicly call for an end to the persecution of Falun Gong in the People's Republic of China. The second petition is from residents throughout SaanichGulf Islands concerned about what was, at the time this petition was submitted, a future problem. It remains an issue, and I present it on behalf of petitioners who wish the Government of Canada not to put public funds into purchasing or maintaining the Trans Mountain pipeline or towards any expansion of the pipeline. The Chair: Next we'll go to Ms. Kwan. Ms. Jenny Kwan (Vancouver East, NDP): Mr. Chair, I rise to table two petitions. The first petition deals with the COVID-19 situation. The petitioners note the pandemic is having a devastating impact on many Canadians nationwide, especially those who have low to modest income, small business gig workers, freelancers, artists, film industry workers, non-salaried workers and individuals on fixed incomes such as seniors and those on disability. It further notes that rent, mortgage and utility payments are due at the end of each month, putting countless Canadians at risk of losing their housing. It is paramount there be safe self-isolation opportunities for all individuals in this country. To that end, the petitioners are calling for the government to immediately enact a nationwide rent freeze, eviction freeze, mortgage freeze and utility freeze, enforce mortgage deferrals for homeowners without penalty or interest charges from financial institutions and provide direct assistance in the form of a monthly, universal, direct payment of $2,000 per month for all, with an additional $250 per child immediately. The second petition deals with the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion. These petitioners join the hundreds of thousands of people who are opposed to the expansion. Trans Mountain, in building the pipeline, brings massive environmental and economic risk with no substantial benefit to British Columbia or to local residents. Approximately 40,000 barrels of oil have already leaked from existing Kinder Morgan pipelines, including two major spills in Burnaby since 2007. I might note, Mr. Chair, that just this past weekend there was yet another spill to the tune of 1,195 barrels here in British Columbia. There is no known scientific technology to clean up the bitumen when there is a spill, and the number of tankers would go from eight to 34 per month into the Burrard Inlet. It puts at risk many residential neighbourhoods and the traditional territories of at least 15 first nations. The Chair: May I interrupt for a moment, Ms. Kwan. I want to remind all members in the House that when presenting a petition, the idea is to be as concise as possible. Ms. Kwan, I'll let you wrap up, please. Ms. Jenny Kwan: Thank you, Mr. Chair. The petitioners are calling for the government to immediately act to prevent this new oil pipeline from proceeding through British Columbia. The Chair: Thank you. We'll now go to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood ParkFort Saskatchewan, CPC): Mr. Chair, I have four petitions to present today. The first petition reflects the outrage of my constituents at the ever-expanding order in council from the government banning more and more firearms. In particular, the petitioners highlight the failure of the government to act on the issue of illegal guns. The petitioners note that virtually all violent crimes committed in Canada, including the recent shooting in Nova Scotia, involve illegal firearms in the hands of those who are already not permitted to possess them. The petition has two asks. First of all, it asks that we reverse the order in council banning certain firearms, but also that we propose measures that will effectively address the illegal use of firearms by criminals while respecting the rights of law-abiding citizens. It also asks that we ensure that substantial changes to firearms laws in future actually be made by Parliament, not by the government acting in an unaccountable manner. The second petition deals with Bill C-8, which is the government's bill around conversion therapy. The petitioners support efforts to ban conversion therapy. They express concern about problems in the wording of the definition used in the legislation. They're asking the government to support amendments to fix the definition to address the issue of conversion therapy and ensure that the definition is correct and doesn't criminalize certain forms of counselling that individuals may voluntarily enter into. The third petition is regarding Bill S-204, a bill in the Senate that seeks to make it a criminal offence for a person to go abroad to receive an organ without consent, dealing especially with the horrific practice of forced organ harvesting and trafficking in China. The petitioners are supportive of Bill S-204 and want to see it move forward. The final petition is with respect to Bill C-7. There's been much discussion in this House about the need to do better in terms of long-term care. Rather than working to do better in long-term care, unfortunately we've seen the government removing vital safeguards in the area of euthanasia. I think our focus should be on assisting life rather than removing safeguards that are required in association with the euthanasia regime. The petitioners are particularly concerned about the government's plan to remove a 10-day reflection period that normally takes place. That period can already be waived under certain circumstances, but Bill C-7 proposes to remove it entirely as well as reduce the number of witnesses involved. The petitioners are quite concerned about what's going on in Bill C-7 and call for it to be stopped or amended. The Chair: Presenting petitions. We'll proceed to statements by members. We'll start off with Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly (NanaimoLadysmith, GP): Mr. Chair, we are in the midst of a global pandemic and an economic shock. Recent events have ripped open the wound of systemic racism in our country. Racialized and marginalized communities have been disproportionally affected by the pandemic. Thousands of seniors in long-term care facilities have died. It is clear that we need system change. In the past, governments have bailed out banks and corporations because they were too big to fail. It is time to bail out humanity and the planet. No one will be immune from the threat of climate change and mass extinction. Both are the result of the exploitation of the natural world in the name of the economy. Humans created the economy. We can choose to change it. We must protect our environment or perish. COVID-19 has demonstrated that together we can take courageous action for the common good. We need to do the same for the climate crisis, because humanity and our planet are too big to fail. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Spengemann. Mr. Sven Spengemann (MississaugaLakeshore, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, today marks World Elder Abuse Awareness Day. Underestimated and under-reported, elder abuse exists across the world. At risk of neglect and assault, many of the most vulnerable older persons reside in our long-term care facilities. They are the seniors who have built our country and shaped our communities, who have shown us resilience, courage and selflessness, who have made us stronger, and whose work and teachings continue to inspire us. They are parents and grandparents, brothers and sisters, friends and mentors. We have not been there for them in the same way they've been there for us throughout their lives. The Canadian Forces report, alongside the climbing disproportionate death toll in our long-term care facilities, has reconfirmed the ugly, indefensible reality of elder abuse and neglect in Canada. In my community, we mourn the deaths of 68 seniors from one long-term care facility alone, Camilla Care. We must make the same unwavering commitment to older persons as they have shown to us. We must protect and uphold their human rights. We must do better. The Chair: Before proceeding, I just want to bring up to the members in the background that we want to keep it as simple and as parliamentary as possible in keeping it neutral. We'll now move to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett (LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, CPC): During these trying times, the residents of LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes have risen to the challenge. They've made sacrifices and gone above and beyond to make the lives of their neighbours better and to keep our communities safe. It would be impossible to list everyone who has emerged as a community hero, but I'd like to highlight a few, like Lily, an eight-year-old from Elgin who raised funds for her local food bank by building and selling squirrel picnic tables, and Louise Boardman from Spencerville who's making masks for long-term care facilities and selling others in support of the Breast Cancer Action centre. The Knights of Columbus in Prescott raised funds and are distributing some $27,000 in support of charitable groups throughout the region. The Knights of Columbus in Kemptville are working overtime operating the local food bank. Who can forget our top-notch health care workers like Hannah and Mary at the Brockville COVID-19 testing centre? It is the people of LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes that make it so great. To everyone working to make a difference and to all of our essential workers, thank you. The Chair: Next is Mr. Anandasangaree. Mr. Gary Anandasangaree (ScarboroughRouge Park, Lib.): Mr. Chair, the Indian Act enshrined racism into Canadian law in 1876, and, through residential schools, the child welfare system, our legal system and our police, we criminalized and tore apart indigenous peoples. The deaths of Chantel Moore and Rodney Levi and the assault on Chief Allan Adam are recent examples of systemic racism within the RCMP. Sadly, the RCMP leadership has failed to acknowledge this reality and its root causes. These same systems negatively impact black Canadians. Anti-black racism has resulted in more young black men being jailed, children being streamed or excluded from schools and negative police interaction due to profiling. Black lives matter. No single Canadian is responsible for the prevalence of systemic racism; we all are. Collectively we build institutions that discriminate based on race. It is now time to reimagine and rework our institutions, starting with our police, to ensure that all Canadians can achieve their truest potential. The Chair: Ms. Larouche, you have the floor. Ms. Andranne Larouche (Shefford, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chair. June15 is World Elder Abuse Awareness Day. I want to remind members of the link between abuse and the problems of economic dependency among seniors. Improving their purchasing power means reducing the risk of them falling victim to abusive people. That's why the increase in the old age security benefit and the guaranteed income supplement must be extended beyond the pandemic. In three weeks, our seniors will receive their first cheque, when they should be receiving their second. A date must also be announced for the new horizons for seniors program, which helps several groups develop projects to break the isolation of seniors. In closing, I would like to mention the organization Justice alternative et mdiation that during the pandemic, along with other organizations in Shefford, has set up the project Une histoire pour la tienne, which also serves to mark this day. It's a virtual meeting between young people and seniors, allowing them to exchange some inspiring life experiences. Since age prejudice is very much present, I applaud this project, which aims to make us understand each other better and judge each other less. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Sangha. Mr. Ramesh Sangha (Brampton Centre, Lib.): Mr. Chair, in the time of this terrible crisis affecting all Canadians, when we are all thinking about how best to deal with it, let's all think about the people around us. Let's show our representation not only to those in the sector of sanctioned workers, but also to all those Canadians who day by day stand up and make a difference. Every day I am proud of the reactions of Canadians to this crisis. I want to acknowledge and celebrate all the contributions made by the people of Brampton Centre, all religious institutions, civil society and community organizations like Knights Table in my riding. We are all standing together to fight COVID-19. Let's continue working hard with that same spirit to get positive results out. Thank you very much. The Chair: I will proceed to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff (BruceGreyOwen Sound, CPC): Mr. Chair, whether graduating from elementary school, high school, Georgian College or graduating from colleges or universities across the country, I am proud of the accomplishments of all the graduates across BruceGreyOwen Sound. I would also like to congratulate and thank all the teachers and parents who have adapted to teaching online or from home and who have supported these graduates over the course of their academic careers. I'd like to extend special congratulations to Cameron Lovell, who just graduated from grade eight, as well as to Neebeesh and Neebin Elliott, originally from the Nawash unceded first nation on the Bruce Peninsula, who will be headed to Michigan State University, and to Jared Lumley from Owen Sound, who just graduated from my alma mater, the Royal Military College of Canada. The college motto of Truth, Duty, Valour is something all Canadians should aspire to live by. I wish all the best to these graduates on their next adventures. I and Canada cannot wait to see how their dreams and goals impact and change the world. I congratulate BruceGreyOwen Sound graduates. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Cormier. Mr. Serge Cormier (AcadieBathurst, Lib.): Today I pay tribute to RichardLosier, an entrepreneur, visionary and builder who died on June9,2020, surrounded by his family. Mr. Losier is a giant in the Acadian Peninsula business community. In1968, he co-founded St. Isidore Asphalte, a company that now has more than 200employees. He also launched many other businesses over the years. He was unifying and generous, a philanthropist who cared about young people and never missed an opportunity to improve their lives. I met Mr. Losier when I was 14years old, and I can say that he has been a positive influence in my life. Every time I met him, he gave me a lot of advice and encouragement, which I've never forgotten. Mr. Losier's legacy to his community is invaluable. His commitment remains an example for all of us to follow. Mr. Losier now joins his wife, Nolla. I offer my most sincere condolences to his children, Richard Jr. , Ronald, Nathalie, Caroline and Stphane, and to his family and friends. Rest in peace, Mr. Losier. You will be greatly missed. Thank you for everything you've done for our region. The Chair: We will now go to Ms. Dabrusin. Ms. Julie Dabrusin (TorontoDanforth, Lib.): Hello from my community in east end Toronto. People talk about how a city the size of Toronto can be cold, but that's far from the truth in my community. I want to give a shout-out to our teachers, like Mr. Wong of Earl Grey Senior Public School, who delivered home-baked cookies and handwritten notes to all of his students, or Monsieur Steve, who's offering online French classes, or the teachers of Riverdale Collegiate, who paraded through our streets to celebrate our graduates. Our local Michael Garron Hospital put out a call for community members to sew masks and received over 60,000 masks, including those made by Lisa Tancre of Chartwell Avondale Retirement Residence. Michelle Beaton organized a front window scavenger hunt to entertain children and their families. Restaurants, even while facing adversity, have been generously donating food, like the members of the Leslieville BIA or Mezes. There are so many more stories of generosity that I could share, but I'm out of time. I thank everyone who has stepped up. We all appreciate all of their hard work. The Chair: We will now go to Ms. Sahota. Ms. Jag Sahota (Calgary Skyview, CPC): Mr. Chair, on Saturday night, Calgarians, particularly those in the northeast, in my riding of Calgary Skyview, witnessed a devastating storm, the likes of which I have not seen in my lifetime. Homes, vehicles, community buildings and structures suffered significant damage due to large hail, floods and high winds. People acted quickly to seek shelter. I'm so grateful that there have been no reports of personal injury or loss of life. I went around the community yesterday to survey the damage. It is extensive. My heart aches for those who have been impacted by the storm in an already incredibly difficult time, but we are resilient. We know that in the coming weeks there will be a lot of cleanup required, both to personal property and in the community. I know my constituents, and we will help one another get through this together. I will work hard to do everything I can to help rebuild this community. The Chair: Mr. Serr, you have the floor. Mr. Marc Serr (Nickel Belt, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to express my sincere gratitude to the people of West Nippissing who organized Pride activities to celebrate the LGBTQ community in June. This week, we are also celebrating National Public Service Week. I thank the public servants for their dedication to the Nickel Belt community and the Valley East and Rayside-Balfour areas. The Chair: Next is Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya (MarkhamUnionville, CPC): Mr. Chair, when COVID-19 began spreading across Ontario, Markham, like many other communities, was unprepared. Our front-line health care workers did not have enough personal protective equipment to do their jobs safely. When Markham residents heard about these shortages, my office was flooded with calls from people who had PPE and wanted to donate. Since then my office has been able to deliver tens of thousands of PPE supplies to front-line health care workers and five masks to each family in need. This pandemic has shown that no matter what the challenge is, the Markham community will overcome it. Today, I would like to thank the front-line health care workers who are doing incredible work. I would also like to thank all those who have helped in Markham's hour of need. The Chair: I understand we had a bit of a glitch there. I'm sorry. With the pause, we thought that was the end of it. Mr. Serr, I would ask you to continue. I understand you started to switch languages. Please continue. You have 30seconds. Mr. Marc Serr: Thank you. I'm switching to English now. Thank you to our nurses, doctors, pharmacists, cashiers, janitors. Thank you to various retail workers and first responders dealing with COVID-19. You keep our communities safe and healthy, and you feed us. Your dedication and sacrifice are greatly appreciated. As we start to see local businesses reopen, it is important for all of us to remember to follow best practices outlined by local public health. Our front-line workers deserve our respect. It is important for all of us to respect social distancing, to protect all workers and their families. Together we can remain strong and united as we continue to face this challenge together. The Chair: Again, my apologies for skipping over there, but now we'll to to Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod (KamloopsThompsonCariboo, CPC): Mr. Chair, in commemoration of Italian Heritage Month, I would like to pay tribute to the Colombo Lodge and Italian Cultural Centre in Kamloops, British Columbia. The Colombo Lodge was founded in 1914 and is an integral part of our community. Recently they began Colombo Cares take-home dinners with proceeds distributed to different non-profit organizations throughout the region. Last month they very generously gave away hundreds of dinners to Royal Inland Hospital staff and paramedics for their tireless work throughout the pandemic. In their own words they say, Colombo Lodge is very proud of the Italians that have made Kamloops their home. Community members of Italian ancestrypast and presenthave helped and continue to help Kamloops prosper as a giving, welcoming and inclusive community. Personally, I want to thank all members for their friendship and generosity over the years. Our community is forever grateful for their kindness. The Chair: We'll now proceed to Mr. Harris. Mr. Jack Harris (St. John's East, NDP): Mr. Chair, many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are facing a serious financial crisis. Most people with disabilities are waiting to be included in the Liberals'promised program. Fish plant workers will need support to avoid a disastrous year. Many small businesses don't qualify for programs. Municipalities need emergency help to meet the crisis. People are worried about what will happen when the CERB runs out in two weeks'time, and the coming tourism season looks very grim. The province itself is in serious financial crisis due to the pandemic and the decline in oil prices. The federal government must overhaul and enhance the fiscal stabilization program to help Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and other oil-producing provinces through this crisis. Both the province and the oil and gas industry players have committed to net zero emissions by 2050. This is a challenge and an opportunity to transition to a sustainable energy future, but it will require significant investment and support by government to keep the industry strong and make this a just transition for workers. Much has been done. Much more needs to be done. The Chair: Ms. Gaudreau, you have the floor. Ms. Marie-Hlne Gaudreau (LaurentidesLabelle, BQ): Mr. Chair, all 44elected municipal officials in the riding of LaurentidesLabelle and I have sent a letter to the government asking that cellular and high-speed Internet networks be made available to all. The crisis has accelerated the demonstration of the need for these networks in daily life. The territorial complexity of the Laurentians means that there are areas where the signal is weak, unstable or non-existent. There is an urgent and essential need to change the infrastructure of the current networks. Also, because of the lockdown, Internet failures are being felt, and they prevent distance learning, telemedicine and teleworking, among other things. How can our municipalities develop economically if they can't provide their community with adequate communication tools? We are therefore calling on the government to put the interests of its people first by investing massively right now in the construction of high-speed Internet and cellular infrastructure. The Chair: Mr. Waugh. Mr. Kevin Waugh (SaskatoonGrasswood, CPC): I rise today to pay tribute to Sir Winston Churchill, the former prime minister of Great Britain and one of the greatest leaders history has ever known. In what can only be called a lifetime of service, Churchill's contributions to the Commonwealth and to the world are without equal. During the Second World War he led the allied forces in Europe against the tyranny and fascism of Adolph Hitler and his Nazi regime. When our world was in its darkest hour, Churchill's leadership was a beacon of hope and freedom. I am reminded of something he once said, All the greatest things are simple, and many can be expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honour, duty, mercy, hope. Sir Winston Churchill himself embodied all of these great things and will forever be a symbol of freedom, democracy and hope. The Chair: Mr. Gerretsen. Mr. Mark Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands, Lib.): Mr. Chair, I would like to add my voice to the recognition and celebration of Pride Month, which is celebrated annually during June. Pride Month is important for Canadians because we can be proud of who we are and celebrate our diversity. This June is different from previous years as we cannot celebrate in person all together. However, I know the ongoing pandemic will not stop us from showing our love and support for the LGBTQ+ community. To celebrate Pride Month this year, my office distributed 3,000 pride maple leaf pins across the country; whoever asked received one. Although the majority was sent to constituents in my riding, over 500 pins were sent to the neighbouring ridings of LanarkFrontenacKingston, LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, and HastingsLennox and Addington. It warms my heart to see so many Canadians showing their support. Happy Pride, everyone. The Chair: We will now proceed to the questioning of ministers. Please note that we will suspend the proceedings twice to allow employees who provide support for the sitting to substitute for each other safely. Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell (Louis-Saint-Laurent, CPC): Mr. Chair, I am very pleased to take part in today's meeting of this parliamentary committee. Canada has been dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic for three months now. The situation now seems to be improving, although we must remain vigilant. Economically, business people and the entire Canadian economy depend on government decisions. My question is very simple: when will the economic update take place? Hon. Chrystia Freeland (Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): Mr. Chair, I thank the hon. member for his question. I agree with him that Canada and Canadians are doing an excellent and difficult job in the fight against coronavirus. As for the economy, our government is there for Canadians, for workers and for businesses, and it will continue to be. Mr. Grard Deltell: Canadians, business people and businesses want to know where the government is headed. When will the economic update take place? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, Canadians know that the government is there to support them. Eight The Chair: We return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Canadians and Quebeckers also know that the Government of Quebec will table its economic update this week. Why isn't the federal government doing the same? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I'm pleased to explain to hon. members and to Canadians what the government is doing for the economy The Chair: We return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, it is a real pleasure for me to explain to the minister and everybody in the House of Commons that today the Saskatchewan government will table its economic update. Why can't Ottawa do that? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I'm delighted to have the opportunity to share with Canadians what our government is doing to support workers, businesses and the economy. Eight million Canadians have received the CERB, essential support for Canadian workers and their families. The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, 11 days ago the Newfoundland government tabled its own economic update. We see governments acting correctly for their people, except for the Liberal government, which cannot table an economic update. When will the Liberal government table an economic update, which Canadians would like to see? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I am delighted to share with the member opposite and with Canadians what we are doing practically that has meaning for Canadians. Let me talk about what we are doing for Canadian businesses. Nearly 670,000 Canadian businesses have received support The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: In Canada, the Quebec government will table its economic update this week. The Saskatchewan government tabled its economic update today. The Newfoundland government has tabled its economic update. Everybody is working hard in Canada, and the business community would like to know where the Liberal government is going. The question is crystal clear. When will the Liberal government table an economic update? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, Canadian workers and Canadian businesses want to know that our government is here to support them. I have shared with this House our support for Canadian workers through the CERB. I've spoken about the CEBA, and let me point out that more than $26 billion of support has been given through that essential program. Let me talk about the wage subsidy. More than 2. 6 million The Chair: We'll return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, this is starting to get interesting; the minister is revealing some of these expenses. Could the minister tell us how much the government has spent in the last three months? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I will continue in French by explaining what our government is doing for Canadians and workers The Chair: Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, this is a little bit concerning for all Canadians, because this government cannot say when they will table the economic update, cannot identify how much money they have spent in the last three months and cannot say what is the deficit of Canada. Is somebody in this government running this country correctly? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, absolutely we are running this country, and we are supporting our economy. In fact, we appreciate that Canada currently is experiencing its greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression. That is why we have devoted nearly 11% of GDP to support Canadian workers and Canadian businesses. I want to assure Canadians The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Normandin. Ms. Normandin, you have the floor. Ms. Christine Normandin (Saint-Jean, BQ): Mr. Chair, there are times when Quebec and the provinces are not just two solitudes, but they get along and speak as one, such as when the time comes to tell the government to mind its own business. On reading section91 of the Constitution Act, 1982, which sets out the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal government, nowhere do I find that the federal government must meddle by attaching conditions to health transfers. It is Quebec and the provinces that hire the medical personnel, doctors, nurses and caretakers. It is Quebec and the provinces that are responsible for purchasing the necessary equipment. It is Quebec and the provinces that know what is happening on the ground and what their needs are. Will the government do the only thing within its authority, which is to take the cheque, sign it and put it in the mail? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I thank the hon. member for her question. We fully understand the importance of federal support for the provinces, especially in our national fight against the coronavirus. I agree with the hon. member that we must give financial support to the provinces, including Quebec absolutely. I would also like to point out the importance of the support of the Canadian Armed Forces, who are doing an important and excellent job in Quebec and Ontario today, right now. Ms. Christine Normandin: Mr. Chair, I am glad to see that there is recognition of the importance of transferring this money. My question is whether it can be transferred unconditionally; that's what I'm asking. There's a state of emergency. In the past, we have seen that it takes a long time to negotiate conditions with the federal government. We saw it in the case of the Quebec City tramway, and we are still seeing it now in the case of transfers for housing in Quebec, for which there is no agreement and, therefore, no transfer of money. Will the federal government send the money free of conditions? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the hon. member said in her first question that the only thing the federal government had to do on health care was to sign the cheques. I can't agree because, today, at this time, at the request of the Premier of Quebec, the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces are in Quebec today; they're there to save the lives of seniors The Chair: We now return to Ms. Normandin. Ms. Christine Normandin: It was indeed at Quebec's request. What I'm saying is that, at present, the provinces are unanimously asking that there be no conditions. It's urgent that the money be transferred. The federal government's job here is to sign the cheque and send it to the provinces. The government's job is also to make Parliament work. This is where there should be negotiations so that we can work, among other things, to send money to people living with disabilities, to make sure we fight CERB fraud and to make sure that court time limits are effective in the current crisis. Can the government focus on the issue in order to respect the provinces and transfer money for health care? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: I thank the hon. member for her question, Mr. Chair. I agree with the hon. member that the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces are in Quebec today at the request of the Province of Quebec. That said, I hope that the hon. member will agree with me that being there for Quebec's seniors, that saving the lives of Quebec's seniors, is much more than simply signing cheques. I am very proud of the work the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces are doing. I think we all should thank these people who are working for Canada, for Quebec, and who are doing an important and excellent job. Ms. Christine Normandin: Mr. Chair, I think the Deputy Prime Minister misunderstood me when I was talking about the importance of acting quickly. Negotiations between the government and the provinces take an awfully long time because the federal government decides to place conditions where there shouldn't be any. Right now, the only important thing is to transfer the money quickly so that it can be used in our hospitals and our long-term care facilities, where the need is desperate. Quebec and the provinces know exactly what their needs are. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I would like to point out the extent to which the federal government is there to support the provinces, including Quebec. We have increased funding to the provinces and territories by $500million to help them prepare for COVID-19 outbreaks. This funding is in addition to the $40billion that we already provide annually to the provinces and territories. That's a lot of money. It is strong endorsement The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh (Burnaby South, NDP): Mr. Chair, systemic racism is killing people. It's killing black people and it's killing indigenous people. Recently, Rodney Levi was another victim of systemic racism. He was killed in New Brunswick by the RCMP. To deal with systemic racism, we need systemic change. Will the Liberal government commit to systemic change so that not another life is ever taken again? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I thank the member opposite for the extremely important question, and I'll take this opportunity to acknowledge the work that he has done for many years fighting racism in Canada. Our government absolutely acknowledges that systemic racism exists in Canada. It exists in all of our institutions, including the police and the RCMP. I agree with the member opposite that now is the moment to fight this The Chair: Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, I thank the Deputy Prime Minister very much for the response, but there are some specific actions we need to take. There are movements. Black Lives Matter, as a movement, is calling for the defunding of police. What they're saying is we need to make better choices with how money is being spent. When someone is in need of a wellness check or a mental health check, money, financing and support should go to mental health workers and health care workers, not the police. Is the government prepared to fund and prioritize health care workers over the police? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the member quite rightly began his questions by speaking about systemic racism against indigenous people in Canada, and I would like to speak about that for a moment. I spoke to Perry Bellegarde this morning, because it is such a crucial issue. We can describe it as the original sin of our country. I absolutely agree that we need root and branch reform, including in how policing is done in Canada. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, will the Liberal government commit to a review of the use of force as outlined for the RCMP? Will the Liberals commit to that change? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister and the Minister of Public Safety had many conversations last week with the RCMP. We all accept that The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, will the government commit to ensuring that de-escalation receives priority? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Let me continue, Mr. Chair. Systemic racism exists in all of our federal institutions, including the RCMP. It's time to put an end to it. Let me just say The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, I'm not getting an answer. Will the Prime Minister or the Liberal government commit to something simple and ensure that at the federal level, racial profiling, street checks and carding are expressly prohibited? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, sadly, I can't agree that rooting out systemic racism is going to be simple, but I can agree that racial profiling is absolutely inappropriate. It is not something that we should The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Well, I'm going to try to get another commitment from the government, because they don't seem able to commit to something as clear as ending racial profiling. We know that millions of Canadians in a couple of weeks are going to be faced with the reality of their CERB ending. These families are worried about how they're going to put food on the table, because they can't return to a job. Will the Liberal government commit today so that those families will have some concrete support, yes or no? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, let me be clear, as I was in my previous answer, that our government clearly is opposed to racial profiling. This is a wrong practice and we're very clear about our position there. Now when it comes to the CERB, I absolutely share the concern of the member opposite. The Canadian economy is in its direst state since the Great Depression. We know that all the jobs have not yet come back. We know that Canadian workers, Canadian families, continue to need The Chair: We'll now pause for a short time to allow staff to change within the safety parameters for the COVID-19 virus, and as we resume, we will go to Ms. Harder. Ms. Rachael Harder (Lethbridge, CPC): Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister has mandated his ministers, and I quote, to govern in a positive, open and collaborative way. Ironically, as it stands, Parliament is currently closed for business. Opposition parties have little opportunity to hold the ruling party to account, private members'bills cannot be tabled and legislation cannot be debated. Can the Prime Minister, Mr. Trudeau himself, help us understand how all of this fits into his definition of so-called open government? The Honourable Pablo Rodriguez (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons): Well, Mr. Chair, we're here, right? We're here, and the opposition is asking questions. They have the equivalent of eight question periods instead of five to ask questions. They have more time than before, so I don't know why they're not happy about it. Ms. Rachael Harder: That's like when I'm asking for a full meal and your handing me a few jellybeans and saying, Why aren't you happy with that? Mr. Chair, here's the thing. It's like switching a light on and off when it's convenient for the Prime Minister and for the Liberal Party. That's what they want to do here. That's not Parliament. That's not democracy. When will Mr. Trudeau do the right thing, turn the lights on and get back to work for Canadians? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I'm really sorry to hear that my colleague's not working. I can assure you, Mr. Chair, on this side of the House, we're all actually working very hard and we're answering the questions from the opposition. Why? It's because it's extremely important. I sat there for seven years asking questions. I understand important Ms. Rachael Harder: The member opposite knows very well that he is misleading the Canadian public. This is not true Parliament. This is simply a special committee. Here's the thing. On the Liberal Party website, under the platform commitment, it says that Parliament works best when its members are free to do what they have been elected to do, and that is be the voice for their communities and hold the government to account. This is a Liberal document. Did the Prime Minister forget that strengthening Parliament was part of his 2019 platform commitment? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague for quoting our excellent platform. That was a very very good document. The thing is, I think we've reached a balance whereby MPs can come from different places, mostly around Ottawa, and ask questions; but also we can have colleagues from across the country asking questions. Why does my colleague think it is better to have only 35 MPs participating instead of 338? Ms. Rachael Harder: Does the Prime Minister value democracy, or does he still look up to China's basic dictatorship? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, we're answering all the questions from the opposition, not only from the people in this room, but we're answering The Chair: It's back to Ms. Harder now. Ms. Rachael Harder: I'll ask the question again. Does the Prime Minister still value the basic dictatorship of China over Canada's democracy? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I don't know where the colleague wants to go from here, Mr. Chair. I'd like to know from her why it is not important to her that her colleagues participate directly. Ms. Rachael Harder: Mr. Trudeau wrote to his ministers and said to them that they continue to raise the bar on openness, effectiveness and transparency. He went on to explain that This means. . . government that is open by default. We now have a parliament that is currently shut down. Mr. Trudeau has shut it down and has prevented us from being able to do to the good work that Canadians expect us to do. Is this Mr. Trudeau's idea of open by default? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, do they want to talk about shutting down Parliament? How about the time they prorogued Parliament twicenot only once, but twice? The Conservative government shut down Parliament twice. I was here. I was sitting on the other side of the aisle. It's quite the opposite now. We're taking all the questions. This place is open, and we're answering questions. The Chair: One moment, please. I haven't acknowledged you yet, Ms. Harder. We've stopped the time there. I want to remind honourable members that questions and answers are being given, and we want to hear both sides. Please keep the heckling down. Ms. Harder, please proceed. Ms. Rachael Harder: In 2014, the leader of the Liberal Party developed a policy resolution entitled Restoring Trust in Canada's Democracy. That's ironic, because right now, again, Parliament is currently shut down. We are prevented from being able to do the good work that we are expected to do. At the time, the Prime Minister said, Canadians want their Members of Parliament to be effective voices for their communities in Ottawa, and not merely mouthpieces in their communities for an all-too-powerful Prime Minister. Sadly, Mr. Trudeau has become the all-too-powerful prime minister that he once believed should not exist. Why did he change his mind? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, I'd like to know why my colleague wants to shut down the voices of her colleagues who could not speak and could not participate in this room. Mr. Chair, how would we vote on private members'bills, for example? As you know, it is not a government vote or a party vote; it's per row. You want to come back? Are you going to acceptMr. Chair, through youthat we have electronic voting, yes or no? The Chair: We'll go on to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, we know that the Minister of Foreign Affairs has champagne tastes and London flats, but it's his champagne mortgages that Canadians are concerned about. Specifically, why did the minister only disclose the complete extent of his personal debt to the Chinese government on June 4 of this year? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, as you know, since the minister entered politics, his two mortgages and other liabilities and assets have been fully disclosed to the Ethics Commissioner and placed on the online public registry. It's public, Mr. Chair. It's public. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Now it's public and it's terrible. When will the foreign affairs minister be here to answer these questions himself? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, it's always been public. We're in the middle of a pandemic here, trying to help Canadians, and the best they can do is ask questions about The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: When the minister owes over a million dollars to the Chinese government, people have a right to ask him questions. When will the Minister of Foreign Affairs show up? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: The minister shows up every day, Mr. Chair. He shows up and works for Canadians. Once again, those are public documents. Everything the minister did is public. I still don't know why they ask The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, he doesn't even have to come to the House. All he has to do is appear on the screen. Where is the minister? Why is he hiding? Why won't he answer questions about his personal debt to the Chinese government? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, if he goes online he's going to get the information. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, the minister is hiding. Let's ask some specific questions about their China policy. What is the impact on the decision-making? Three-quarters of Canadians don't want Huawei involved in our 5G network. Will the minister put the interests of Canadians ahead of the interests of his creditors and say no to Huawei? Hon. Navdeep Bains (Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry): Mr. Chair, when it comes to 5G deployment, we are right now currently undergoing a comprehensive review. We have been absolutely clear with allies and with Canadians that we never have and never will compromise Canadians'national interests. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, that is not an answer, and it is completely out of step with what our allies have already recognized. Reports are emerging of multiple deadly viruses exported from Winnipeg's microbiology laboratory to the Wuhan Institute of Virology right before scientists were expelled for policy breaches. In spite of that, scientific co-operation between Canadian institutions and the military-affiliated Wuhan Institute of Virology is continuing. Why hasn't the government put in place new guidelines to prevent the export of sensitive pathogens and information to China? Hon. Patty Hajdu (Minister of Health): Mr. Chair, he's right that in 2019 the National Microbiology Laboratory shared lab samples with the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The National Microbiology Laboratory routinely shares samples with other labs to help advance the international community's understanding of viruses and the research that is ongoing around those viruses. There are strict protocols in place for these transfers, and these samples were transported according to Canadian laws and regulations. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, I think Canadians would be concerned to hear that it's routine to transport viruses to Chinese military-affiliated labs. When Champagne was the parliamentary secretary for finance, the government decided to give hundreds of millions of dollars to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, bankrolling Chinese state-controlled development projects in Asia with weak standards in labour, human rights and environment. Will the minister put Canadian taxpayers ahead of his personal creditors and support a pullout from the Communist Party-controlled development bank? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Once again, Mr. Chair, my colleague is trying to connect the dots, and I don't know exactly where he is going from here, but everything is public. There's a thing called Google. He can go on it and check the information. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, the public can listen to this. I'm sure this exchange will also be available on Google, and the public can draw their own conclusions. We have failures on 5G, failures when it comes to the transport of deadly viruses and failures when it comes to giving over $400 million to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. It's clear that the Bank of China's investment in Minister Champagne is paying off. It's time for the minister to settle his debt with the Communist government and not settle it on the backs of Canadians. When will the minister be here in the House and answer questions about this mortgage? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: My colleague should be cautious with what he is saying in the House, Mr. Chair. This is serious stuff. He should be careful about what he says. The minister is actually working extremely hard for all Canadians and is doing his job correctly, Mr. Chair. We're talking about public information. Once again, let him go to Google and google it. That's it. The Chair: Now we'll go to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett: Canada's ambassador to the United Nations sent a letter last week to all member states of the UN promising that Canada would consider providing more funding for UNRRA, the same UNRRA that is a front for Hamas, which allows weapons of terror to be stored in schools and provides textbooks that call for the destruction of Israel. Do these Liberals have no shame when it comes to their quest for a seat on the UN Security Council? Hon. Mary Ng (Minister of Small Business, Export Promotion and International Trade): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to thank the honourable member for that question. We know that at this time Canada must show leadership in the face of global challenges. More than ever, Canada is playing a positive role by being a champion in diversity and inclusion, supporting the global fight against COVID-19, addressing climate change, leading peace and security efforts and helping the most vulnerable. A seat on the Security Council will allow Canada to be a strong voice for a fairer, more inclusive and prosperous The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett: Mr. Chair, I received a letter from Bob Anderson this week, who's advocating for his neighbours like Jean Grevelding, who owns a cottage at Butternut Bay. Like many people, Jean is an American who owns a property on our side of the border. These people are taxpaying members of our communities. These folks have plans in place to follow all Canadian quarantine rules. They're concerned about leaving their properties uncared for over the summer. Will folks like Jean be allowed to cross the border to check on their properties this summer? Hon. Bill Blair (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Of course, our priority is and always has been and always must be the protection of the health and safety of Canadians. That's why we put in place these restrictions for non-essential travel and have required, through the Public Health Agency of Canada, a 14-day quarantine. I don't know the specifics of the person for whom you advocate, but we want to make sure that if they come into Canada, it is for an essential purpose and that they do it safely and respect the quarantine that has been put in place. Mr. Michael Barrett: With nine branches throughout my riding, the Royal Canadian Legion offers a great deal to veterans and rural communities alike. They have been experiencing hardship and a loss of revenue, to the point where they may be forced to shut their doors. The Zone G2 commander and local mayors such as Roger Haley have reached out to me expressing their dire need. Will the government offer support to Legions across the country so they can continue to carry out their vital work for our veterans? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (Minister of Veterans Affairs): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Yes, we have done a lot to help support groups like the Legions. There is a $350-million emergency community support fund. If they're supplying any help to people regarding COVID, this fund is there. Indeed, we're doing everything we can to make sure that we help the Legions and other groups that do so much to help veterans right across the country. Mr. Michael Barrett: On May 21, the minister stated that her team was working as quickly as it could to fill the gaps in CEBA. It has now been three weeks, and many business owners, such as mortgage broker Corinna Smith-Gatcke, are still left in the lurch amid the delays, which are pushing businesses closer to shutting their doors for good. Will these businesses have access to CEBA before it's too late for them? Hon. Mary Ng: Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I thank the honourable member for that really important question on our Canadian small businesses. Those businesses can absolutely have access to the loan at their financial institution this Friday, and I would encourage them to go and see their bank or credit union. I want businesses to know that nothing is more important for us than making sure they get the support they need during this difficult time. Mr. Michael Barrett: The County Road 43 expansion project is critical for my riding and the region as a whole. This project will widen the road, increasing safety for the 18,000 motorists who travel the road every day. It's been 334 days since the provincial and local governments announced funding, but there has been nothing from this Liberal government. It's been 181 days since Minister McKenna told me her staff were reviewing the project. Today, there is still nothing, and for the last month the minister's team has not even found the time to respond to my request for an update. Will Minister McKenna finally stop with the delays and commit to funding this project today? Hon. Catherine McKenna (Minister of Infrastructure and Communities): Mr. Chair, as the member opposite knows, we work with provinces and territories to advance our infrastructure investments. We're making investments across the country. They are making a real difference in people's lives. We're always happy to work with members of Parliament, but they must also work with provinces and territories so that projects are advanced by them to our office. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall (YorktonMelville, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Through you, has Mr. MacAulay read ombudsman Dalton's May 2020 report, Financial Compensation for Canadian Veterans: A comparative analysis of benefit regimes? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I apologize, but I'll have to ask my honourable colleague to repeat the question. The Chair: Mrs. Wagantall, we'll freeze the time so that there's no extra time taken. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Thank you, Chair. My question was whether Mr. MacAulay has read ombudsman Dalton's May 2020 report, Financial Compensation for Canadian Veterans: A comparative analysis of benefit regimes. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I appreciate my honourable colleague's question. Of course, I appreciate Mr. Dalton's input and all that he has done for veterans. We've discussed it many times. I've done everything and worked with him in order to make sure that we bring the proper compensation to veterans The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: As a result of that study, are the financial outcomes Canada seeks to provide for ill and injured veterans now clearly defined within the Department of Veterans Affairs? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, as the member would know, I am to bring a report to the veterans affairs committee, and there are a number of things done in order to make sure that report is The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Then I would suggest that we get our committee up and going as it should be. Where are these financial directions published? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Well, of course, lockdown, but just under $90 million that the government put in supplementary estimates to make sure we address the backlog for Veterans Affairs. It's a major help The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Minister, are Canadian Armed Forces members provided with a copy of this document? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, my honourable colleague would have to ask the Canadian Armed Forces that question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: There are three different providing lifetime benefits for ill and injured veterans. In Ombudsman Dalton's recent report, did any one of these three provide the best compensation in all nine scenarios that were studied? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Of course, as she knows, there's been a lot of work done in order to make sure that we provide the proper compensation to veterans. We're working very hard, with a lot of help from Mr. Dalton, to make sure that the appropriate The Chair: We'll now continue with Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: In the undisclosed settlement of Sean Bruyea's legal case against Seamus O'Regan and the Liberal government, a joint statement says. . . Canadians, especially all Veterans and their families, are encouraged to enter the public debate about policies and programs that affect our Veterans and their families. Does Mr. MacAulay agree with this statement? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I can assure you that anybody is welcome to enter any discussion on compensation of veterans. We're always open to what we can do in order to make sure that we provide appropriate compensation. I don't think the term would be appropriate, but it would provide some compensation to veterans who truly deserve it. They defend our democracy The Chair: We'll go back to Ms. Wagantall. Oh, I'm sorry Ms. Andranne Larouche: Mr. Chair, I have a point of order. The interpretation hasn't worked for a few interventions. It's difficult to follow the exchange between the hon. member and the minister. The Chair: We're having a problem with the interpretation. Minister and Ms. Wagantall, you are joining us virtually. I'm wondering if you have the right language on at the bottom of your screen. We'll start with that for troubleshooting. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: I have English. The Chair: Very good. Minister MacAulay, what do you have? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I have English, Mr. Chair. The Chair: Very good. Then we'll check on our side. Ms. Larouche, did I understand correctly that the interpretation didn't work for both speakers? Ms. Andranne Larouche: The sound didn't allow the interpreters to do their job. It seemed to be a problem with the sound. The Chair: In that case, I would ask both members to maybe put their mike a little bit close to their mouth. We'll see how that works. I'm looking at the screen, and I notice the mike is a little bit far. Could we bend it in a little bit more? I appreciate that. Thank you for your patience. We'll give it another try. Ms. Wagantall, please go ahead. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: On a point of order, quite often while I'm trying to speak, there are lots of other voices in the background. The Chair: I would ask everyone to please be on mute, as well as for anyone in the chamber to please refrain from speaking loudly. Just whisper among yourselves if you have something to say. We'll take this one from the top. We have a minute and 45 seconds left. Ms. Wagantall, please proceed with your next question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: You said next question, so we're not going backwards, Chair? The Chair: Did we have an answer from Minister MacAulay? No? We'll go to Minister MacAulay to finish up the answer. We'll start at 27 seconds, freeze the clock and hear his answer. Then, because of all of the confusion, we'll start at one minute and 45 seconds when we get going again. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Should I repeat the question, sir? The Chair: Please do. The clock is frozen. After we go through the question and the answer, we'll start the clock again. Mr. Wagantall, please repeat the question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Thank you, Chair. In the undisclosed settlement to Sean Bruyea's legal case against Seamus O'Regan and the Liberal government, a joint statement says, Canadians, especially all Veterans and their families, are encouraged to enter the public debate about policies and programs that affect our Veterans and their families. Does Mr. MacAulay agree with this statement? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I appreciate my honourable colleague's question and concern. Of course I agree. Anybody is quite open to indicate whatever they wish in order to make sure we provide as appropriate a compensation as possible. You can never totally compensate veterans truly for what they deserve, but we want to make sure we provide the best compensation possible. That's what we will do and want to do. The Chair: Ms. Wagantall, we will start the clock again. You have one minute and 45 seconds remaining. Please proceed. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: If that's the case, is Minister MacAulay aware of the practice of red-flagging veterans'files? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I'm not aware. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Since the deputy minister has indicated that he runs the department, will the minister ask him for the names of veterans and the dates and the reasons that they are, or have been, red-flagged by VAC? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I would certainly ask any veteran or anybody who has a concern to contact my office. I will do anything I can to make sure that the veterans The Chair: We'll go back to Ms. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Do the most ill and injured still receive from the pension up to $300,000 less for life? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, as you know and as the Prime Minister indicated when the pension for life was put in place, it was stated that if anybody receives lessthe Prime Minister himself indicated it quite clearlythat must be adjusted. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: For veterans in similar circumstances, should the date of their application for compensation be a factor in determining whether they're treated equitably? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Yes, of course, the date is when the compensation would start. Of course, it's very important and very appropriate. The Chair: Now we will proceed to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd (Sturgeon RiverParkland, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Retired Major Mark Campbell in my riding of Sturgeon RiverParkland lost both legs in the line of duty in Afghanistan. He is an avid sport shooter, but understandably, due to his disability, he is very limited in the kinds of firearms he can use, and all of these firearms have now been banned under the Liberal OIC. My question to the Minister of Public Safety is this: Did their department do a legal analysis and consider the section 15 charter rights of disabled Canadians not to be discriminated against when they passed their OIC? Hon. Bill Blair: Yes, there was a very thorough analysis done by the justice department to ensure that the prohibitions we put in place were, in fact, charter compliant. Let me also say, Mr. Chair, how important it was that we prohibited weapons that were not designed for sporting purposes at all. In fact, they were designed for soldiers to use in combat. They have no place in a civil society. We have prohibited them, and we believeand this has been echoed by many people across the countrythat this will make Canadians safer. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, is the minister aware that the AR-15 is the most popular sporting rifle in Canada, and is he aware that disabled veterans like Major Mark Campbell are unable to participate in the sport of sport shooting because of his OIC? Hon. Bill Blair: I can assure the member that what I am aware of is that the AR-15 and other weapons like them have been used in mass killings in Canada on many occasions, such as at cole Polytechnique, at Dawson College, again at the Quebec mosque and in Moncton. The AR-15s in particular were also used at the terrible tragedy in places like Sandy Hook, where a bunch of kids were killed, so there is no place for The Chair: We will go to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, it has been months since the Liberals shut down this Parliament and months since the Minister of Finance should have presented a budget or at least an economic update to Canadians. Since then we have seen billions spent with little oversight and no plan. The minister says that he needs certainty before he can table a budget. Well, that didn't stop Stephen Harper and the Conservatives from tabling a budget in the depth of the last great recession. When are these Liberals finally going to take their job seriously and table an economic update? Hon. Mona Fortier (Minister of Middle Class Prosperity and Associate Minister of Finance): Mr. Chair, we're taking this very seriously. We're working for Canadians and bringing forward supports to make sure that businesses, workers and Canadians can put food on the table and pay their rent. We will continue to support Canadians, and when we have a clear projection to present, we will do that. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, the results are in, and businesses aren't happy with the so-called support programs from these Liberals. In fact, the oil and gas industry has been shut out of many of these economic programs. When is the government going to recognize that their business support plans have been an absolute failure with only a fraction of the billions promised being accessible to businesses? Hon. Seamus O'Regan (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Chair, our government has taken swift and immediate action to support our sector throughout this challenging time. We had the BCAP, which is critically important to providing liquidity to support the SMEs that make up 85% of the jobs in our sector. It has taken an enormous team effort. People are working around the clock to get money where it needs to be. We are helping hard-working Canadians, small businesses and large businesses right across the country, but in particular in our energy sector. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, I'm pleased to see the Minister of Natural Resources online. He tweeted recently to praise the Alberta Carbon Trunk Line and the North West Redwater Partnership refinery in my riding. Can the minister tell us what, if any, support they have given to the innovative carbon capture and sequestration technology in this country? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Mr. Chair, we see carbon capture and sequestration as an integral part of lowering emissions, making emissions more competitive and making our oil and gas industry more competitive. We're seeing where the investment dollars are going. They are going to jurisdictions that are committed to lowering emissions. Obviously, this government is committing to net zero. Mr. Dane Lloyd: I note that the minister couldn't name a single example of government support for carbon capture, utilization and sequestration technology. We have spent a lot of time talking about the COVID-19 pandemic, but Canadians are living with another horrific reality, that being the intensifying opioid overdose epidemic. Reports indicate that in the past four years, 14,000 Canadians have died, and the numbers during COVID-19 have been skyrocketing, with British Columbia seeing a 39% increase this year alone. I know this because I've lost a family member to a fentanyl overdose. When is the government going to take this scourge seriously and take action to save the lives of Canadians? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Mr. Chair, I share the member's deep sadness about the number of lives we've lost to opioid overdose. Our government has been steadily making it easier for people who live with substance use to access medications to treat substance use, such as prescription Suboxone and methadone. We have made it easier to rapidly establish safe injection sites in communities and have supported community-based projects that work with people who are using substances. We need to understand that this is a complex issue, and we need to support people to get the help they need. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes (AlgomaManitoulinKapuskasing, NDP) ): The hon. member for Thrse-DeBlainville. Ms. Louise Chabot (Thrse-De Blainville, BQ): MadamChair, I will come back to the bill introduced last week. As parliamentarians, we felt like we were watching a very bad play, as I imagine the public did. I say that it was theatre, even though it shouldn't be in this place. The government decided to stage a play and act alone and, unfortunately, there were several acts missing. A very important part of this bill was about supporting people with disabilities in this time of crisis. However, the government did not see fit to negotiate with the opposition parties, even though it is in a minority position. Despite this arrogance, the Bloc Qubcois proposed solutions. One of the things we proposed was to split the bill so that we could give this support to people with disabilities, but the Conservatives did not want to do that. We came back and asked for time to negotiate and give support to people with disabilities, but the government defeated the motion. We asked that the House be recalled today so that we could pass this part of the bill concerning support for people with disabilities, but we are still in the dark. Why are we abandoning people with disabilities? Hon. Ahmed Hussen (Minister of Families, Children and Social Development): I thank the hon. member for her question. We know this pandemic has deeply affected the lives and health of all Canadians and has disproportionately affected Canadians with disabilities in particular. From the very beginning, we've taken a disability-inclusive approach to our emergency response to ensure that Canadians with disabilities get the support they need. That is why we announced a one-time payment of $600 for persons with disabilities to address these expenses. This will go a long way toward helping Canadians with disabilities. We encourage and urge all parties in the opposition to support this measure. We're confident that this measure, along with other investments, will benefit Canadians with disabilities, and we hope to get the support of the other parties very soon. Ms. Louise Chabot: MadamChair, I remind you that this measure wasn't passed because we weren't allowed to do so. A measure to help people with disabilities has been put in an omnibus bill. We've tried here, in the House, to provide the means to give that support, so I ask again, can the government be counted on to give a response to people with disabilities? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, it was absolutely not an omnibus bill. It contained assistance for the disabled, of course, but it also contained assistance for our seasonal workers, as well as a number of other measures that the Bloc Qubcois opposed. They refused to debate and, when the question of splitting the bill came up, the Conservatives refused to do that. That is why there is no bill at the moment, and that is very unfortunate. Ms. Louise Chabot: It was a Bloc Qubcois proposal to split the bill. The government had not thought of it, but they found that it was a good idea. Let me return to the attack. This bill proposed changes to the wage subsidy program, it was supposed to make the CERB more flexible, it proposed fines for fraudsters and, since there was a little section about a benefit for the disabled, the government took it for granted that we would support it without any negotiations with the parties. However, we set one very important condition: that the Liberal Party must get its hands out of taxpayers'pockets in terms of the wage subsidy. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, as we listen to the Bloc Qubcois members, we might think that they invented peanut butter and apple pie. This bill contained a number of measures that all Quebeckers and all Canadians needed, but the Bloc Qubcois refused to debate it. No, we did not follow the Bloc Qubcois'example in splitting the bill; we had thought of it a long time previously. We have not been able to do that because of the Conservatives. Because of them, we cannot help those living with disabilities. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Ms. Chabot, you have 45seconds left. Ms. Louise Chabot: We asked on a number of occasions for the House to be able to sit starting today to pass the part of the bill dealing with those with disabilities. What is the status of that, MadamChair? We have not heard about it since. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, my colleague knows very well that things are not as simple as that. There are procedural mechanisms unique to the House. I hope that, one day, we will be able to pass this bill and be able to provide assistance for those living with disabilities. I hope that the Conservatives will change their minds and give us their support. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Don Valley East, Ms. Ratansi. Ms. Yasmin Ratansi (Don Valley East, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be sharing my time with the member for Surrey Centre. Since 2015 our government has been focused on ensuring its policies mitigate the effects of climate change. Several measures have been implemented for phasing out coal, making polluters pay, providing climate incentives, investing in green technologies and much more, which all together have created a climate plan that is doing more to cut pollution than any other in Canada's history. In my riding of Don Valley East, many innovative businesses have benefited from these investments and initiatives. One area of particular interest is our government's work to protect 25% of Canada's land and 25% of its oceans by 2025. Our natural environment is something that Canadians and my constituents care about deeply. Could the minister update this House on the new conservation projects announced on June 5, World Environment Day, and on how our government is protecting our environment? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, protecting nature is an important part of how we will address climate change and the very real challenges it presents. That's why on June 5, World Environment Day, our government announced over 60 conservation projects under development across Canada. These projects are funded through the Canada Nature Fund's target 1 challenge initiative. They'll conserve Canadian nature and biodiversity and protect species at risk, enhance ecological integrity and connectivity, and enhance the size of Canada's vast network of protected areas. Nearly half of these projects are indigenous-led, with the aim of creating indigenous-protected conserved areas. Madam Chair, projects like these move us closer to our goal of protecting 25% of Canada's lands and oceans by 2025. By working together in partnership with the provinces, territories, municipalities, indigenous peoples and Canadians, together we can protect our natural environment for generations to come. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Ms. Ratansi, since you have 25 seconds left, we will go to the honourable member for Surrey Centre. Mr. Randeep Sarai (Surrey Centre, Lib.): Madam Chair, there are many small and medium-sized businesses in my riding of Surrey Centre. Many have been impacted by COVID-19. They saw a decrease in business or needed to close their doors completely in order to adhere to public safety measures to manage the spread of COVID-19. These measures helped keep our most vulnerable citizens safe and ensured that our hospital and health care providers did not become overwhelmed with a sharp spike in cases. Thanks to our government's COVID-19 emergency response, many of these businesses have been able to keep their employees and access important liquidity through the Canada emergency business account, which provides loans to small businesses and non-profits, and the Canada emergency wage subsidy, which is helping businesses to keep and rehire their employees while their revenues are down by providing up to 75% of wages for up to 24 weeks. As we begin to reopen the economy and Canadians across the country return to the job market, those benefits will be even more important to help businesses and industries rehire their staff and make important adjustments to align with public health guidelines to gradually increase their operations. Can the minister please update the committee on how many Canadian businesses have taken advantage of CEBA and CEWS since applications for each have been opened? Hon. Mary Ng: Madam Chair, I want to begin by thanking the member for Surrey Centre for all the work he does to support his constituents and small businesses. Canadians across the country need to know our government has been working tirelessly and will continue to work tirelessly on their behalf. This is why we put in place the important programs to help them get through this crisis during this difficult time, programs such as the wage subsidy program. We know that in so many businesses the employees are often like extended family members. The wage subsidy has helped these businesses keep their employees on the payroll and are now helping in their rehiring as they slowly and safely restart. There are 348,000 businesses being helped with the wage subsidy program, and this means that 2. 6 million workers are being helped. Businesses are also being helped through the interest-free $40,000 loan they can access through CEBA to help stay afloat and pay their expenses during this crisis. I'm pleased to inform this House that to date more than 669,000 The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for St. John's East. Mr. Jack Harris: Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with my colleague, the member for LondonFanshawe. Madam Chair, with so many recent reports and videos of police using force, sometimes deadly force, and violence against indigenous and black people in Canada, I've called for the public safety committee to reconvene. If the members agree, will the minister come to the committee and provide concrete answers as to how the government intends to address racism inherent in Canada's law enforcement, and in particular the RCMP? Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I thank my colleague for the question. It's perhaps the most important one facing Canada today. Madam Chair, indigenous people, black Canadians and other racialized people are far too often experiencing systemic racism and disparate outcomes within the entire criminal justice system. In order to respond appropriately, I think it's necessary to begin by acknowledging the lived experience of people who've known bias and discrimination at the hands of the police and our courts and within our prisons. We remain committed to working with all racialized people and all of the members of this House to ensure that we work toward social justice for all Canadians, and I look forward to discussing the member's motion further with him. Mr. Jack Harris: Will the minister and the government commit to facilitating such a meeting of this committee virtually? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, the decisions of the committee are the committee's, so I'm sure that this will be a discussion within the committee, but if called, I will certainly be pleased to come with my officials to provide the committee with whatever support and information it needs to contribute to this very important discussion. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Harris, you have 40 seconds. Mr. Jack Harris: In light of what we've seen with Chief Adam in Fort McMurray and the RCMP accepting that the actions were reasonable, will the minister commit to a full review of the use of force by the RCMP, in particular the philosophy, tactics and training that is given to RCMP officers in dealing with the public? Hon. Bill Blair: I thank the member and I want to assure him, first of all, that this is work that is ongoing, not just in the RCMP but throughout the police community. May I also take this opportunity, Madam Chair, to say that I think all police training has to begin with one very important principle, and that's the preservation of all life and the respect for all Canadians. We also know the importance of de-escalation training. We're committed to continuing to work with indigenous communities, racialized communities and with police services and all participants in the criminal justice system to make sure that it is fair for all Canadians. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for LondonFanshawe, Ms. Mathyssen. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen (LondonFanshawe, NDP): Madam Chair, we need more justice for black, indigenous and racialized people in Canada. They can't be asked to keep waiting. This government recognizes that systemic racism exists but refuses to collect race-based data that would allow us to quantify and truly address this injustice. We need data to protect Canadians. When will this government do the right thing and start collecting race-based data? Hon. Bardish Chagger (Minister of Diversity and Inclusion and Youth): Madam Chair, our government agrees that it's important that we collect data, and that's exactly why, in the anti-racism secretariat and the anti-racism strategy, there is a commitment to have money go to Statistics Canada to collect race-based data. We look forward to working with all members to ensure it happens. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen: Madam Chair, we know that Statistics Canada will start to collect job numbers based on race. This will allow us to identify systemic racism where it is and where we need to ensure a fair and more equal job market for black, indigenous and racialized people in Canada. Why is this government refusing to follow suit so we can tackle systemic racism everywhere, in every sector? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I'd like to thank my honourable colleague for her question. She's absolutely correct in her assessment that we need to collect more data, reliable data, data that will help us deal with some of the challenges we're seeing with systemic discrimination, but, more broadly, we want to make sure that we continue to engage with an anti-racism strategy that will allow us to collect that disaggregated data. That is why we allocated $6. 2 million to that initiative through Statistics Canada, but we know we must do more and we will do more. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen: We know that all people are susceptible to catching COVID-19, but health authorities are clear that parts of cities like Montreal and Toronto have been more impacted than others. For black and racialized people living in these cities, this data is a matter of life and death. Will the government collect and share disaggregated data so we can identify and erase systemic racism, yes or no? Hon. Bardish Chagger: Madam Chair, making decisions based on science and evidence is essential for our government. We took that practice from day one. It is exactly the step we will take moving forward and that's why we are making those investments to ensure that data exists. We are working across all departments. My mandate letter is public. I look forward to continuing to work not only with all ministers, departments and agencies, but all allies and all parties to get this work done. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Blaney, the honourable member for BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, has the floor. Hon. Steven Blaney (BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, CPC): Thank you, MadamChair. Last week, my plumber told me that, each time Justin Trudeau comes down the steps to make announcements totalling several billion dollars, he feels like someone is rifling through his pockets. My question is simple and goes to the Minister of Finance: where is this money coming from? Hon. Mona Fortier: MadamChair, I would like to thank my honourable colleague for his question. Currently, the health and safety of Canadians are our top priorities. We have implemented an emergency economic plan to support Canadians, workers and companies. We will continue to support them during this crisis. Hon. Steven Blaney: The answer I would have liked is simple: we are borrowing the money and we are going to have to pay it back one day. That is another Liberal craze: they borrow money, they make campaign promises, and off they go. Under the Conservative government, the Chantier Davie in Lvis had 1,700workers for the supply ship Asterix. In the election campaign, the Liberals promised icebreakers. When are the Liberals going to award the icebreaker contracts to the Chantier Davie? Hon. David Lametti (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada): MadamChair, we are very proud of the Chantier Davie and we completely understand its role in the system. We are currently assessing those requests. We are going to establish the process for the polar ice-breaker, which is essential for the work of the Coast Guard in northern communities, and we are going to make sure that The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Blaney has the floor. Hon. Steven Blaney: The workers do not need words; they need contracts and jobs. The same is true for young people who want to work. There is money in the Canada summer jobs program: in my constituency alone, $150,000has been approved. Companies want young people to work and want to hire them. What is the minister waiting for in order to confirm those positions? In my constituency, and everywhere else in the country, our young people want to work. What is the government waiting for in order to send some cash to the Canada summer jobs program? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we are proud of the Canada summer jobs program. We are introducing flexibilities into the system to enable employers to be able to hire summer students. We recognize the importance of this program to provide both financial resources and necessary experience for young people. We believe in continuing to invest in the Canada summer jobs program. Hon. Steven Blaney: The workers, the young people and the employers have been waiting for weeks. The money is available; where is the announcement? MadamChair, our young people are not the only ones who want to work. There are also the temporary foreign workers. Let me use Jessie Gito as an example; he has been working at Plate2000 in Saint-Anselme for years. When the time came to renew his work permit, he found out that he has to have some biometric tests. But he cannot get them because the offices are closed. Is the minister going to allow Jessie Gito and the thousands of other temporary foreign workers who want to work to be able to do so until the government biometric testing centres reopen? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, it is important for the honourable member to recognize that we are in the early recovery stage of the pandemic. Employers are slowly reopening businesses. We will ensure that we support both our students and our temporary foreign workers to make sure we get the recovery right. We will continue to invest in the Canada summer jobs program. We've introduced flexibilities into the program to ensure that employers are able to take advantage of the program and give opportunities to young people. Hon. Steven Blaney: It is very simple. Jessie Gito is a foreign worker, who is in a company that provides an essential service. He needs a decision that will let him go to work, rather than staying home and doing nothing. Then, when the government's biometric testing centres are open again, he will gladly go to one. Young people want to work in agriculture as well, and the minister has told us that the government wants young people working and that their files will be processed as quickly as possible. She wants to create 700positions and she knows that people can fill in an application on a first-come first-served basis. Of those 700positions, how many have been confirmed to date? The good weather has arrived, the corn is starting to grow, and this is the time when farmers need the young workers. Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food): MadamChair, the program for young workers in agriculture is open. I also encourage agricultural producers to register for it. This is a program that is not only intended to provide summer jobs, but also to interest young people in making a career in agriculture. As I have said before, the department is processing files as quickly as possible. Each employer will have an answer very shortly. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will now take a short break. Okay, we are ready to start again. We will go to the honourable member for BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte. Mr. Doug Shipley (BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Over the course of the pandemic, has the government been using all avenues possible to source much-needed PPE in Canada? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, we have been very clear that we have a made-in-Canada initiative that has engaged companies across the country. Over 700 companies have retooled and scaled up their operations for personal protective equipment to help front-line health care workers. Mr. Doug Shipley: Madam Chair, I need to ask very quickly which ministry and minister are responsible for the sourcing of PPE in Canada. Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, this is a collective effort. I work with the Minister of Health and the minister for procurement, and we coordinate with the provinces and territories to make sure there are appropriate levels of PPE to help front-line health care workers and essential workers across the country. Mr. Doug Shipley: Thank you for that clarification. That will make this question all the more pertinent. My riding of BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte is the home of Southmedic Inc. Southmedic is a renowned medical supply business. For over 37 years, it has provided front-line health care workers with an extensive line of PPE and other essential products required when dealing with respiratory illnesses. This company specializes in respiratory illness equipment. Southmedic currently employs over 700 people, and it has been recognized as one of Canada's best-managed companies by Deloitte on numerous occasions. Since the beginning of the pandemic, both I and the member for BarrieInnisfil have been attempting to obtain some assistance for Southmedic from the federal government. Calls and emails were falling on deaf ears. In early May, I wrote a letter to Minister Anand outlining the situation. I received a letter back from the minister dated May 27 indicating that this issue of Southmedic falls under the mandate of the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada. I have heard nothing more. When will the federal government reach out and help this great Canadian company and therefore ensure that all front-line workers will have the proper PPE they require? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I'd like to thank my honourable colleague for his question. He knows full well that this is a very challenging time. That is why we had a call to action to engage Canadians right across the country. Since then, we've seen over 6,000 companies step up to offer solutions and ideas, and over 700 companies have retooled their efforts. I acknowledge that some companies are still engaging with the government, and we'll continue to explore all possible options to make sure we continue to procure the necessary levels of personal protective equipment to protect Canadians and to protect front-line health care workers. That has always been our priority. I want to thank the outstanding Canadian companies that have come forward and have helped us in this endeavour. We continue to look forward to working with them. Mr. Doug Shipley: Thank you for that answer. Just to follow up, there's no retooling required at this company. They could have been up and going very quickly. They just needed a little assistance at the beginning. Moving on to a different issue, while walking to my office this morning, I stopped at my local small family-run coffee shop and was discussing the current economic situation with the two owners of the establishment. They indicated they are having a very tough time surviving this economic downturn. The only thing keeping them hopeful is that soon the public service will start returning to work, and therefore their business will begin to return. Could the government please give us some indication as to what the plans are for returning the civil service back to work safely, and when? Hon. Jean-Yves Duclos (President of the Treasury Board): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm delighted to answer this question. This is a very important topic, but I'd like to take the opportunity first to thank our public servants, who have worked very hard in the last few weeks, both personally and professionally. In fact, today is a wonderful day to say that, because today is the start of National Public Service Week. That's one more reason to thank them for their dedicated work. They are not going to go back to work. They've been at work for the last few monthsin different circumstances, but they have been working very hard to deliver the services and the support Canadians need and deserve. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Next we'll go to the honourable member for SelkirkInterlakeEastman, Mr. Bezan. Mr. James Bezan (SelkirkInterlakeEastman, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. My questions are for the Minister of National Defence. First of all, I want to thank the great men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces for the fantastic job they're doing in Operation LASER, serving on the front lines battling COVID-19. Can the Minister of National Defence give the House an update on exactly where we are at with the number of Canadian Armed Forces members who have been infected with COVID-19? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan (Minister of National Defence): Madam Chair, I want to echo the member opposite's comments in thanking our Canadian Armed Forces members. Currently, we have 13 active cases in the Canadian Armed Forces, but in the long-term care facilities we currently have 50 cases. No member has been currently hospitalized. We have also conducted very thorough reviews of our protection protocols as well. Mr. James Bezan: Through you, Chair, Minister Sajjan, does that number of active cases include the active cases that are in long-term care facilities right now in Operation LASER? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, as I stated, the 50 cases are strictly from the long-term care facilities. The 13 cases I mentioned are not in the long-term care facilities. Just to give the actual clarification, no member has been currently hospitalized. Mr. James Bezan: In those numbers, Madam Chair, can Mr. Sajjan say how many of those cases in long-term care facilities are active and how many are recovered? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, I don't have the exact number. What I can say to break it down further is that in Quebec we currently have 36 and in Ontario we have 14. As well, 36 of the members have been out of isolation. I'll get more details and pass them on directly to the member, Madam Chair. Mr. James Bezan: Thank you, Minister. Madam Chair, I have a quick question while we're still talking about Operation LASER. The President of the Treasury Board has said, The Canadian Armed Forces will be present as long as their presence is needed in Quebec. This contradicts what Prime Minister Trudeau is saying, which is that we have a hard deadline of June 26 for the withdrawal of our troops for Operation LASER. That means taking our troops out of our long-term care facilities. Minister, is June 26 the hard date for the winding down of Operation LASER? Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I'm delighted to have the opportunity to clarify for the House. We've been in very extensive discussions with the Province of Quebec, with my counterpart Minister Guilbault, and we are working very diligently to ensure we have a sustained, appropriate response to the request from Quebec for assistance. That response will result in a transition from the currently deployed Canadian Armed Forces to the deployment of paid volunteers, trained personnel who will take on the important role of providing services to those Canadians who need our help in Quebec. Mr. James Bezan: I'll go back to the Minister of National Defence. The Department of National Defence auditors have called out the Liberal government for mismanagement over the $553-billion investment in our Canadian military through the defence policy. Only three people have been assigned to oversee the rollout of this money. This is a $553-billion investment in our armed forces, and only three people are managing it. Could the minister tell us how that is even possible? Is this the reason that over 100 projects are currently behind schedule? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, first of all, I want to highlight the unprecedented investment that we're making in defence. We have conducted internal reviews of our procurement. The report the member opposite is talking about is from the previous year. This is the ongoing work we're doing to make sure that we make procurement better. When it comes to the management of this, it's conducted by me and the minister of procurement. We are working toward making our procurement even better. We have already streamlined some aspects of our procurement and we'll continue to do more as well. Mr. James Bezan: Minister Sajjan, you've had this report since November of 2019. You've been rolling out this plan since 2017. Only three people are overseeing an expenditure of $553 billion. This is taxpayers'money. Are we going to see more cuts because you have been unable to actually roll out these dollars? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, I can assure you we're not going to be cutting. We'll be investing in our defence. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Before I go to the next speaker, I want to remind members that they are to address their questions and comments directly through the chair. We will go now to the honourable member for Fort McMurrayCold Lake, Mr. Yurdiga. Mr. David Yurdiga (Fort McMurrayCold Lake, CPC): Madam Chair, the Canada summer jobs program has many challenges. I've seen many indigenous communities in my riding rejected for funding even though they had received funding in previous years. Here are a few examples of communities that were rejected: Beaver Lake Cree Nation, Buffalo Lake Mtis Settlement and the Mtis Nation of Alberta, Region 1. The list goes on. Could the Prime Minister explain why so many indigenous communities have been denied funding from the Canada summer jobs program? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we recognize the important role that the Canada summer jobs program plays in supporting employers and young workers in our community across the country every year. We're working very hard to help employers adapt to the realities of the COVID-19 pandemic and are supporting young Canadians as they begin to look for summer employment. We are introducing increased flexibilities into the Canada summer jobs program to hire youth, while also providing more supports to employers that deliver essential services to Canadians. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, that didn't really answer my question. Why are so many indigenous communities left out of the Canada summer jobs program? This is very important to my community and to communities throughout the province. Will the government investigate why these communities were rejected? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that we, of course, value the important role that the Canada summer jobs program plays in all communities, including indigenous communities in Canada. I will certainly have an off-line conversation with the honourable member, if he so wishes, about a particular issue, but I can assure him that in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, we have had to assist employers to introduce flexibilities The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Yurdiga. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, in my riding, the City of Cold Lake has been in dispute with the federal government for many years over payment in lieu of taxes. My office has sent many letters over the years regarding the PILT dispute. Could the Minister of Public Services and Procurement give me a rough estimate of when I will receive a response from the minister's office to my first letter, from 2017, and my letters from 2018,2019 and 2020? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that I will go to the minister, and we will come back with an answer to his question. Mr. David Yurdiga: How much longer does the minister intend to perpetuate the ongoing PILT dispute, which is in excess of $11 million, with the City of Cold Lake? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, once again, I can assure the honourable member that I will speak with the minister and get an answer to his question. Mr. David Yurdiga: Well, do you know what? I've been writing letters to the department for many years. When you say you're going to get back to me, I really have a hard time believing that. Will the minister agree to follow the prior recommendations of the dispute advisory panel that were accepted by the minister? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that I will check with the minister and that she will return to the member in due course. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, the drug Trikafta has been proven to increase the quality of life for 90% of cystic fibrosis patients. Two weeks ago, my office sent a letter to the Minister of Health about the boy in my riding named Cael, who through the special access program is able to get Trikafta in Canada. I requested that the minister use her powers to fast-track Trikafta for commercial use, but I have yet to receive a response back. When will the minister make a decision on Trikafta? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, I'm glad to hear that Cael was able to access Trikafta through the special access program. In fact, that program is very helpful for people who are seeking access to medication that's not currently marketed in Canada. As the member opposite knows, Vertex has not applied to market Trikafta in Canada, but we look forward to their application, and I encourage him to write a letter to the manufacturer to also encourage them. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Vancouver Granville, Ms. Wilson-Raybould. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould (Vancouver Granville, Ind.): Thank you, Chair. I was very troubled to hear that a CBC radio host in the Yukon felt compelled to resign because, as an indigenous person, she could not speak her truth. While we know the Broadcasting Act states that the Canadian broadcasting system should reflect the linguistic duality and multicultural and multiracial nature of Canadian society and the special place of indigenous peoples, it would seem there are some challenges. Therefore, does the Minister of Heritage share the concern of some journalists that problems of systemic racism in Canada are still existing within the institution of the CBC, and will the government now acknowledge the need to recognize the jurisdiction of indigenous governments? Hon. Steven Guilbeault (Minister of Canadian Heritage): Thank you, Madame Chair; and I thank the member for this important question. As stated by the Prime Minister on numerous occasions, our government recognizes that systemic racism exists in Canada, and we have made a commitment to do everything we can to combat it in whichever organization of the Canadian government. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould: Thank you. When I was in the government, and as a minister, I learned the term red meat issues. I understand these issues to be ones that challenge societal norms, that are not politically expedient to address because they can lose you votes, even though addressing them is morally right and a smart thing to do. Mostly these are issues addressing inequality and the most marginalized in our society. In the justice system, examples include mandatory minimum penalties, defunding police, and even investing in restorative justice. Red-meat issues often become defining issues for society and for governments as the world changes. Surely now these issues are politically less of a consideration than the tragic reality of even more slain indigenous Canadians at the hands of police, or thousands of indigenous people still incarcerated or living in poverty. Will this government please finally commit to the necessary work originally promised in 2015 and repeal in the justice system the vast majority of mandatory minimum penalties, assuring the necessary discretion for judges, and meaningfully invest in restorative justice measures? Hon. David Lametti: Madame Chair, I thank the honourable member for her question, as well as for her work as Minister of Justice, and indeed my predecessor. This is an important time. This is a time when we recognize systemic racism. This is a time when we recognize systemic over-incarceration of indigenous peoples, of black peoples, in our criminal justice system. This is a time when we need to look at all potential options to reduce what is a shameful overrepresentation in our criminal justice system. Too often racialized peoples and indigenous peoples have experienced prejudice and systemic discrimination in our justice system, and that has to change. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould: I'll go on to another red meat issue. In British Columbia we are in the fifth year of the opioid overdose public health emergency crisis. Sadly, May marks the deadliest month of overdose-related deaths. We are halfway into the year and have currently passed 500 deaths caused by overdose. Many of the deaths are related to COVID-19 measures that have prevented people from accessing supervised consumption sites, so they are overdosing alone. While the provinces welcomed the federal backing of safe supply exemption back in March, it is to expire in September of 2020. Echoing the call of the chief coroner of B. C. and Dr. Henry, more is needed from the federal government, more action. Will the government provide the necessary supports to the province and help support safe supply initiatives in the provinces? Hon. Patty Hajdu: It's been a pleasure to work with the Province of British Columbia on innovative ways to work on the tragic situation of opioid overdose. I remain committed to working with the province and in fact any province that wants to work towards solutions that treat people who use substances with the dignity they deserve. Madam Chair, this is a complex issue. We're working closely with our partners to make sure that we can prevent more lives from being lost. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for South OkanaganWest Kootenay, Mr. Cannings. Mr. Richard Cannings (South OkanaganWest Kootenay, NDP): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with the member for SkeenaBulkley Valley. In my riding, Theo's in Penticton is a beloved restaurant. They've been serving great food for 40 years, but now they're struggling, because they don't qualify for the emergency wage subsidy. Why is that? The original owners retired last year and sold it to another operator. The new owner can't use a year-to-year comparison to apply for the wage subsidy because he didn't own the restaurant last spring. He is forced to use receipts from January and February, the darkest doldrums of the restaurant year, to compare with the results from May, traditionally one of their best months. Now he has to compete with other local restaurants that can access the subsidy. When will the government fix this inequity and let Theo's compete and survive? Hon. Mona Fortier: Madam Chair, the Canada emergency wage subsidy is supporting over 2. 5 million workers across the country. To help even more businesses support their workers and rehire people as they reopen, our government is extending the CEWS, and we will continue to extend the CEWS for an additional 12 weeks to August 29 to ensure that Canadian workers continue to have the support they need during these very difficult times. By extending eligibility, our government is ensuring that more Canadian workers in more sectors have the support they need. Mr. Richard Cannings: The owner just wants to be able to apply for the wage subsidy, and right now he cannot, and he will not be able to. Thousands of other businesses are hit that way as well. I'd like to move on to forestry. Canada's forest sector has been declared essential during this pandemic, but it's been hit hard after a very difficult 2019. Despite soft markets and thousands out of work, government support programs have left many Canadian forest product companies behind. In my riding, the pulp mill in Castlegar is closing for the month of July because local sawmills aren't producing enough wood chips. What is the government going to do to finally support Canadian forestry workers and communities? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The time is almost up, but I will allow for the answer from the honourable minister. Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Thank you, Madam Chair. We have supported and we will continue to support the forestry sector, including through regional development programs. In fact, in Quebec, partnering with Les Bois Francs DV Inc. , we have widened market access to our products and updated technology systems. In North Bay we've partnered with the Canadian Wood Council to promote the sector. In Vancouver we're working with FPInnovations to create the indigenous forest sector technical support program. We are supporting the forestry sector and its different needs region by region. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Now we go to the honourable member for SkeenaBulkley Valley, Mr. Bachrach. Mr. Taylor Bachrach (SkeenaBulkley Valley, NDP): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm going to pick up where my colleague left off, with B. C.'s forest industry. What we've seen in B. C. are multiple rounds of mill shutdowns and start-ups, and in some cases this has made it difficult for forestry workers to qualify for EI. My question to the minister is this: Will the minister work to make the EI program more flexible for forestry workers, similar to what this government has done for oil and gas workers? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, in the oil and gas sector we have focused on workers. That has been key in the inactive and orphan well program, which we are working on with the provincial governments of Saskatchewan, British Columbia and Alberta. The focus on workers has assured that success, and we will continue to focus on workers in all the industries, particularly our natural resource industry, as they go through this extraordinarily difficult time. Mr. Taylor Bachrach: Madam Chair, reforestation is a very important part of the forest industry in the riding I represent, and people were keenly interested to hear this government's plan to plant two billion trees in the next 10 years. That's a lot of trees. I'm wondering if the minister could tell us how many trees are going to be planted under this program by the end of this season. Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, this government is committed to two billion trees. We are working with forestry associations, the industry and with individual companies to ensure this tree-planting season will be one of the largest the country has ever seen. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The floor goes to the honourable member for Rivire-du-Nord. Mr. Rhal Fortin (Rivire-du-Nord, BQ): MadamChair, last week, the government introduced BillC-17 and the Minister of Justice sent us briefing notes in which he said that it was important to suspend a number of time limits and to extend others, and that the failure to do so could have important repercussions on Canadians, their families, their situations, their finances and their ability to exercise their rights. We in the Bloc Qubcois agree with that. When are we going to talk about it? Hon. David Lametti: MadamChair, the contents of BillC-17 are clearly very important. We have addressed the mandatory time limits in federal legislation as well as certain time limits that courts may not be able to handle. It is very important that we address this issue. That is why the law The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Fortin, you have the floor. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, we agree that it is important. I concur. The minister's briefing notes say that, among other things, when it comes to divorcewhich means children are involved people are waiting on custody rights, child support and visitation rights. The minister pointed out that the national security review would require consultations if no decision is made in the prescribed time frame. It could pose a national security risk. It is really a big deal. When are we going to debate it? Hon. David Lametti: MadamChair, I completely agree with my honourable colleague. The issue needs to be addressed. That is why it is in the bill. That is another reason to debate the bill. I beseech my colleagues opposite to debate it with us. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, what a coincidence, because I beseech my colleague opposite to debate it with us. That is what we are asking. Last week, the leader of the Bloc Qubcois asked the Liberal government to debate BillC-17 today. He did not get an answer. It does not seem to matter. Richard Wagner, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, who is hardly a dimwit or greenhorn, told us that the justice system needs to be modernized. As recently as this past Saturday in LaPresse, Justice Wagner said that it is essential that the Criminal Code be amended to address the backlog of court proceedings. When will the Liberal government opposite pull up its socks, do its job, govern the federation, sit down with the opposition and discuss the vital matters in BillC-17? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, if I were my colleague, I would be a little embarrassed, because the bill was sent to the Bloc Qubcois several days in advance. They received a technical note several days in advance. We were all available to take questions. When we asked for the support of the Bloc Qubcois and the other parties to debate itwe were not even asking them to vote in favour of the billthey refused. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, we never refused to debate it. Actually, we were the ones who asked to debate it. What exactly does debate it mean? We set some conditions. For example, we asked the Liberals to put the money back into the wage subsidy fund and to commit to dip into it no longer. Are we asking too much of our colleagues opposite? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Can my colleague explain to me what the emergency wage subsidy has to do with a bill about justice? This is an absolutely fundamental piece of legislation. We wanted to debate it, but they refused to do so. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, I would like nothing better than to explain it to him, but I must remind him that he is the leader of the party in power, the party that is supposed to govern the country. So I do not know why he is asking me that. My party proposed that we debate this today but we did not get an answer. Meanwhile, court time limits are running out and people are losing rights. I am thinking of families, child support, child custody, labour law disputes in Federal Court, marine transportation, interprovincial transportation, aviation, banks, and those with grievances waiting for a Federal Court ruling. The whole system, the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal, everything is on hold because nobody in the government wants to do their job. We want to discuss BillC-17. When can we talk about it? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, we have done our job. We have introduced the bill. We informed them in advance. We told them they could ask us any questions they wanted. We asked for a debate in the House. However, when we asked the Bloc Qubcois if they wanted to debate the bill, they said no, instead of doing what they usually do and saying yes. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for Essex, Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis (Essex, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. When the CERB runs out, many workers in my riding of Essex will not have sufficient hours to collect their EI benefits. In early July, the midnight shift at Chrysler will be eliminated. Because of the shutdown, a mom-to-be who had just returned to work in January, and several hundred of her fellow employees, may not have the 600 hours required for regular or EI parental benefits. Immediate action is needed. What is the government doing now to backstop these workers? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, the Canada emergency response benefit has been providing much-needed help to Canadian workers across the country who have stopped working due to COVID-19. We know that there is still a lot of uncertainty for many Canadian workers, and we know that many will be exhausting their benefits in the weeks to come. We will have more to share soon, as early as this week, on our continuing efforts to support Canadian workers and make sure that help is available during this The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Go ahead, Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Minister, for the answer. The EI system needs to be fixed. Even before the shutdown, the system was deeply flawed. Will this government commit to a complete review and overhaul of the EI system? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we have been there for Canadian workers. We will continue to make sure that we make the necessary investments in the EI delivery system and modernize it to continue to meet The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. Small businesses have been hit extremely hard by the COVID-19 shutdown. Many have already been forced into bankruptcy. Much uncertainty lies ahead. As the economy reopens, what is the government doing to help small businesses recover? Hon. Mary Ng: Madam Chair, today we are seeing small businesses that have been helped, whether it is getting access to the small business loan, which some are also using in the restart as they are safely restarting, or getting help with their payroll, helping them keep their employees The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. Employees are key to a small business's success. How will the government incentivize workers to return to their jobs when recalled? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister can give a brief answer. Hon. Mary Ng: The Canada emergency wage subsidy is an excellent program to help those employees stay employed and for those employers who are looking at rehiring them right now during this restart process. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair, many of my constituents are in a committed cross-border relationship and have not been able to see their partners in quite some time. The current restrictions are arbitrary. Denmark has found a fair resolution. Will Canada adopt the Danish model, and if not, why not? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, as we said from the outset, we've implemented restrictions at the U. S. border on non-essential travel with a single purpose in mind: to protect the health and safety of Canadians. As the member is aware, just last week we introduced new measures that allow people in family relationships to stay together as long as they commit to the necessary 14-day period of quarantine. We'll continue to work with families. Our intention is to keep people together, but mostly to keep people safe. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair, with regard to child care, as our economy continues to open, parents are facing a stark choice: Who will care for their children? What's the plan to provide access to child care so parents can confidently return to work? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we are of course committed to continuing to make the record investments that we've been making in child care. Since 2015 we've created over 40,000 affordable child care spaces. We're committed to creating an additional 250,000 before-school and after-school child care spaces. We will continue to invest in this sector because we understand that without investment The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. It sounds as though this government has a desire to force parents to choose between their job and care for their child. Can the government please respond to that quote? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, nothing could be further from the truth. We are committed to the child care sector. Our investments and our results prove the opposite of what the member is asserting. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I'm sorry. We're out of time. The committee now stands adjourned until tomorrow at noon.

Hon. Lawrence MacAulay assured that everyone was welcome to enter the discussion to provide as appropriate compensation as possible. On the other side, it represented democracy.

tr-sq-1214

tr-sq-1214_0

Summarize the discussion about the budget and the disabilities. The Chair (Hon. Anthony Rota (NipissingTimiskaming, Lib.) ): I call this meeting to order. Welcome to meeting number 22 of the House of Commons Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic. A reminder to all members that in order to avoid issues with sound, members participating in person should not also be connected to the video conference. For those joining via video conference, I would like to remind you that, when speaking, you should be on the same channel as the language you are speaking. As usual, please direct your remarks through the chair. I understand we don't have any ministerial announcements today, so we'll proceed to presenting petitions. I would like to remind members that any petition presented during a meeting of the special committee must have already been certified by the clerk of petitions. For members participating in person, we ask that they please come and drop the signed certificate off at the table once the petition is presented. The first petition will be presented by Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May (SaanichGulf Islands, GP): Mr. Chair, it's an honour to rise in meeting number 22 of the COVID-19 committee, otherwise known as something like the House of Commons. I'm here to present two petitions containing hundreds of signatures on the issue of the treatment of Falun Gong practitioners by the People's Republic of China, particularly the practice that's alleged of involuntary organ harvesting. The petitioners ask the Government of Canada to condemn this practice and to publicly call for an end to the persecution of Falun Gong in the People's Republic of China. The second petition is from residents throughout SaanichGulf Islands concerned about what was, at the time this petition was submitted, a future problem. It remains an issue, and I present it on behalf of petitioners who wish the Government of Canada not to put public funds into purchasing or maintaining the Trans Mountain pipeline or towards any expansion of the pipeline. The Chair: Next we'll go to Ms. Kwan. Ms. Jenny Kwan (Vancouver East, NDP): Mr. Chair, I rise to table two petitions. The first petition deals with the COVID-19 situation. The petitioners note the pandemic is having a devastating impact on many Canadians nationwide, especially those who have low to modest income, small business gig workers, freelancers, artists, film industry workers, non-salaried workers and individuals on fixed incomes such as seniors and those on disability. It further notes that rent, mortgage and utility payments are due at the end of each month, putting countless Canadians at risk of losing their housing. It is paramount there be safe self-isolation opportunities for all individuals in this country. To that end, the petitioners are calling for the government to immediately enact a nationwide rent freeze, eviction freeze, mortgage freeze and utility freeze, enforce mortgage deferrals for homeowners without penalty or interest charges from financial institutions and provide direct assistance in the form of a monthly, universal, direct payment of $2,000 per month for all, with an additional $250 per child immediately. The second petition deals with the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion. These petitioners join the hundreds of thousands of people who are opposed to the expansion. Trans Mountain, in building the pipeline, brings massive environmental and economic risk with no substantial benefit to British Columbia or to local residents. Approximately 40,000 barrels of oil have already leaked from existing Kinder Morgan pipelines, including two major spills in Burnaby since 2007. I might note, Mr. Chair, that just this past weekend there was yet another spill to the tune of 1,195 barrels here in British Columbia. There is no known scientific technology to clean up the bitumen when there is a spill, and the number of tankers would go from eight to 34 per month into the Burrard Inlet. It puts at risk many residential neighbourhoods and the traditional territories of at least 15 first nations. The Chair: May I interrupt for a moment, Ms. Kwan. I want to remind all members in the House that when presenting a petition, the idea is to be as concise as possible. Ms. Kwan, I'll let you wrap up, please. Ms. Jenny Kwan: Thank you, Mr. Chair. The petitioners are calling for the government to immediately act to prevent this new oil pipeline from proceeding through British Columbia. The Chair: Thank you. We'll now go to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood ParkFort Saskatchewan, CPC): Mr. Chair, I have four petitions to present today. The first petition reflects the outrage of my constituents at the ever-expanding order in council from the government banning more and more firearms. In particular, the petitioners highlight the failure of the government to act on the issue of illegal guns. The petitioners note that virtually all violent crimes committed in Canada, including the recent shooting in Nova Scotia, involve illegal firearms in the hands of those who are already not permitted to possess them. The petition has two asks. First of all, it asks that we reverse the order in council banning certain firearms, but also that we propose measures that will effectively address the illegal use of firearms by criminals while respecting the rights of law-abiding citizens. It also asks that we ensure that substantial changes to firearms laws in future actually be made by Parliament, not by the government acting in an unaccountable manner. The second petition deals with Bill C-8, which is the government's bill around conversion therapy. The petitioners support efforts to ban conversion therapy. They express concern about problems in the wording of the definition used in the legislation. They're asking the government to support amendments to fix the definition to address the issue of conversion therapy and ensure that the definition is correct and doesn't criminalize certain forms of counselling that individuals may voluntarily enter into. The third petition is regarding Bill S-204, a bill in the Senate that seeks to make it a criminal offence for a person to go abroad to receive an organ without consent, dealing especially with the horrific practice of forced organ harvesting and trafficking in China. The petitioners are supportive of Bill S-204 and want to see it move forward. The final petition is with respect to Bill C-7. There's been much discussion in this House about the need to do better in terms of long-term care. Rather than working to do better in long-term care, unfortunately we've seen the government removing vital safeguards in the area of euthanasia. I think our focus should be on assisting life rather than removing safeguards that are required in association with the euthanasia regime. The petitioners are particularly concerned about the government's plan to remove a 10-day reflection period that normally takes place. That period can already be waived under certain circumstances, but Bill C-7 proposes to remove it entirely as well as reduce the number of witnesses involved. The petitioners are quite concerned about what's going on in Bill C-7 and call for it to be stopped or amended. The Chair: Presenting petitions. We'll proceed to statements by members. We'll start off with Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly (NanaimoLadysmith, GP): Mr. Chair, we are in the midst of a global pandemic and an economic shock. Recent events have ripped open the wound of systemic racism in our country. Racialized and marginalized communities have been disproportionally affected by the pandemic. Thousands of seniors in long-term care facilities have died. It is clear that we need system change. In the past, governments have bailed out banks and corporations because they were too big to fail. It is time to bail out humanity and the planet. No one will be immune from the threat of climate change and mass extinction. Both are the result of the exploitation of the natural world in the name of the economy. Humans created the economy. We can choose to change it. We must protect our environment or perish. COVID-19 has demonstrated that together we can take courageous action for the common good. We need to do the same for the climate crisis, because humanity and our planet are too big to fail. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Spengemann. Mr. Sven Spengemann (MississaugaLakeshore, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, today marks World Elder Abuse Awareness Day. Underestimated and under-reported, elder abuse exists across the world. At risk of neglect and assault, many of the most vulnerable older persons reside in our long-term care facilities. They are the seniors who have built our country and shaped our communities, who have shown us resilience, courage and selflessness, who have made us stronger, and whose work and teachings continue to inspire us. They are parents and grandparents, brothers and sisters, friends and mentors. We have not been there for them in the same way they've been there for us throughout their lives. The Canadian Forces report, alongside the climbing disproportionate death toll in our long-term care facilities, has reconfirmed the ugly, indefensible reality of elder abuse and neglect in Canada. In my community, we mourn the deaths of 68 seniors from one long-term care facility alone, Camilla Care. We must make the same unwavering commitment to older persons as they have shown to us. We must protect and uphold their human rights. We must do better. The Chair: Before proceeding, I just want to bring up to the members in the background that we want to keep it as simple and as parliamentary as possible in keeping it neutral. We'll now move to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett (LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, CPC): During these trying times, the residents of LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes have risen to the challenge. They've made sacrifices and gone above and beyond to make the lives of their neighbours better and to keep our communities safe. It would be impossible to list everyone who has emerged as a community hero, but I'd like to highlight a few, like Lily, an eight-year-old from Elgin who raised funds for her local food bank by building and selling squirrel picnic tables, and Louise Boardman from Spencerville who's making masks for long-term care facilities and selling others in support of the Breast Cancer Action centre. The Knights of Columbus in Prescott raised funds and are distributing some $27,000 in support of charitable groups throughout the region. The Knights of Columbus in Kemptville are working overtime operating the local food bank. Who can forget our top-notch health care workers like Hannah and Mary at the Brockville COVID-19 testing centre? It is the people of LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes that make it so great. To everyone working to make a difference and to all of our essential workers, thank you. The Chair: Next is Mr. Anandasangaree. Mr. Gary Anandasangaree (ScarboroughRouge Park, Lib.): Mr. Chair, the Indian Act enshrined racism into Canadian law in 1876, and, through residential schools, the child welfare system, our legal system and our police, we criminalized and tore apart indigenous peoples. The deaths of Chantel Moore and Rodney Levi and the assault on Chief Allan Adam are recent examples of systemic racism within the RCMP. Sadly, the RCMP leadership has failed to acknowledge this reality and its root causes. These same systems negatively impact black Canadians. Anti-black racism has resulted in more young black men being jailed, children being streamed or excluded from schools and negative police interaction due to profiling. Black lives matter. No single Canadian is responsible for the prevalence of systemic racism; we all are. Collectively we build institutions that discriminate based on race. It is now time to reimagine and rework our institutions, starting with our police, to ensure that all Canadians can achieve their truest potential. The Chair: Ms. Larouche, you have the floor. Ms. Andranne Larouche (Shefford, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chair. June15 is World Elder Abuse Awareness Day. I want to remind members of the link between abuse and the problems of economic dependency among seniors. Improving their purchasing power means reducing the risk of them falling victim to abusive people. That's why the increase in the old age security benefit and the guaranteed income supplement must be extended beyond the pandemic. In three weeks, our seniors will receive their first cheque, when they should be receiving their second. A date must also be announced for the new horizons for seniors program, which helps several groups develop projects to break the isolation of seniors. In closing, I would like to mention the organization Justice alternative et mdiation that during the pandemic, along with other organizations in Shefford, has set up the project Une histoire pour la tienne, which also serves to mark this day. It's a virtual meeting between young people and seniors, allowing them to exchange some inspiring life experiences. Since age prejudice is very much present, I applaud this project, which aims to make us understand each other better and judge each other less. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Sangha. Mr. Ramesh Sangha (Brampton Centre, Lib.): Mr. Chair, in the time of this terrible crisis affecting all Canadians, when we are all thinking about how best to deal with it, let's all think about the people around us. Let's show our representation not only to those in the sector of sanctioned workers, but also to all those Canadians who day by day stand up and make a difference. Every day I am proud of the reactions of Canadians to this crisis. I want to acknowledge and celebrate all the contributions made by the people of Brampton Centre, all religious institutions, civil society and community organizations like Knights Table in my riding. We are all standing together to fight COVID-19. Let's continue working hard with that same spirit to get positive results out. Thank you very much. The Chair: I will proceed to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff (BruceGreyOwen Sound, CPC): Mr. Chair, whether graduating from elementary school, high school, Georgian College or graduating from colleges or universities across the country, I am proud of the accomplishments of all the graduates across BruceGreyOwen Sound. I would also like to congratulate and thank all the teachers and parents who have adapted to teaching online or from home and who have supported these graduates over the course of their academic careers. I'd like to extend special congratulations to Cameron Lovell, who just graduated from grade eight, as well as to Neebeesh and Neebin Elliott, originally from the Nawash unceded first nation on the Bruce Peninsula, who will be headed to Michigan State University, and to Jared Lumley from Owen Sound, who just graduated from my alma mater, the Royal Military College of Canada. The college motto of Truth, Duty, Valour is something all Canadians should aspire to live by. I wish all the best to these graduates on their next adventures. I and Canada cannot wait to see how their dreams and goals impact and change the world. I congratulate BruceGreyOwen Sound graduates. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Cormier. Mr. Serge Cormier (AcadieBathurst, Lib.): Today I pay tribute to RichardLosier, an entrepreneur, visionary and builder who died on June9,2020, surrounded by his family. Mr. Losier is a giant in the Acadian Peninsula business community. In1968, he co-founded St. Isidore Asphalte, a company that now has more than 200employees. He also launched many other businesses over the years. He was unifying and generous, a philanthropist who cared about young people and never missed an opportunity to improve their lives. I met Mr. Losier when I was 14years old, and I can say that he has been a positive influence in my life. Every time I met him, he gave me a lot of advice and encouragement, which I've never forgotten. Mr. Losier's legacy to his community is invaluable. His commitment remains an example for all of us to follow. Mr. Losier now joins his wife, Nolla. I offer my most sincere condolences to his children, Richard Jr. , Ronald, Nathalie, Caroline and Stphane, and to his family and friends. Rest in peace, Mr. Losier. You will be greatly missed. Thank you for everything you've done for our region. The Chair: We will now go to Ms. Dabrusin. Ms. Julie Dabrusin (TorontoDanforth, Lib.): Hello from my community in east end Toronto. People talk about how a city the size of Toronto can be cold, but that's far from the truth in my community. I want to give a shout-out to our teachers, like Mr. Wong of Earl Grey Senior Public School, who delivered home-baked cookies and handwritten notes to all of his students, or Monsieur Steve, who's offering online French classes, or the teachers of Riverdale Collegiate, who paraded through our streets to celebrate our graduates. Our local Michael Garron Hospital put out a call for community members to sew masks and received over 60,000 masks, including those made by Lisa Tancre of Chartwell Avondale Retirement Residence. Michelle Beaton organized a front window scavenger hunt to entertain children and their families. Restaurants, even while facing adversity, have been generously donating food, like the members of the Leslieville BIA or Mezes. There are so many more stories of generosity that I could share, but I'm out of time. I thank everyone who has stepped up. We all appreciate all of their hard work. The Chair: We will now go to Ms. Sahota. Ms. Jag Sahota (Calgary Skyview, CPC): Mr. Chair, on Saturday night, Calgarians, particularly those in the northeast, in my riding of Calgary Skyview, witnessed a devastating storm, the likes of which I have not seen in my lifetime. Homes, vehicles, community buildings and structures suffered significant damage due to large hail, floods and high winds. People acted quickly to seek shelter. I'm so grateful that there have been no reports of personal injury or loss of life. I went around the community yesterday to survey the damage. It is extensive. My heart aches for those who have been impacted by the storm in an already incredibly difficult time, but we are resilient. We know that in the coming weeks there will be a lot of cleanup required, both to personal property and in the community. I know my constituents, and we will help one another get through this together. I will work hard to do everything I can to help rebuild this community. The Chair: Mr. Serr, you have the floor. Mr. Marc Serr (Nickel Belt, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to express my sincere gratitude to the people of West Nippissing who organized Pride activities to celebrate the LGBTQ community in June. This week, we are also celebrating National Public Service Week. I thank the public servants for their dedication to the Nickel Belt community and the Valley East and Rayside-Balfour areas. The Chair: Next is Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya (MarkhamUnionville, CPC): Mr. Chair, when COVID-19 began spreading across Ontario, Markham, like many other communities, was unprepared. Our front-line health care workers did not have enough personal protective equipment to do their jobs safely. When Markham residents heard about these shortages, my office was flooded with calls from people who had PPE and wanted to donate. Since then my office has been able to deliver tens of thousands of PPE supplies to front-line health care workers and five masks to each family in need. This pandemic has shown that no matter what the challenge is, the Markham community will overcome it. Today, I would like to thank the front-line health care workers who are doing incredible work. I would also like to thank all those who have helped in Markham's hour of need. The Chair: I understand we had a bit of a glitch there. I'm sorry. With the pause, we thought that was the end of it. Mr. Serr, I would ask you to continue. I understand you started to switch languages. Please continue. You have 30seconds. Mr. Marc Serr: Thank you. I'm switching to English now. Thank you to our nurses, doctors, pharmacists, cashiers, janitors. Thank you to various retail workers and first responders dealing with COVID-19. You keep our communities safe and healthy, and you feed us. Your dedication and sacrifice are greatly appreciated. As we start to see local businesses reopen, it is important for all of us to remember to follow best practices outlined by local public health. Our front-line workers deserve our respect. It is important for all of us to respect social distancing, to protect all workers and their families. Together we can remain strong and united as we continue to face this challenge together. The Chair: Again, my apologies for skipping over there, but now we'll to to Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod (KamloopsThompsonCariboo, CPC): Mr. Chair, in commemoration of Italian Heritage Month, I would like to pay tribute to the Colombo Lodge and Italian Cultural Centre in Kamloops, British Columbia. The Colombo Lodge was founded in 1914 and is an integral part of our community. Recently they began Colombo Cares take-home dinners with proceeds distributed to different non-profit organizations throughout the region. Last month they very generously gave away hundreds of dinners to Royal Inland Hospital staff and paramedics for their tireless work throughout the pandemic. In their own words they say, Colombo Lodge is very proud of the Italians that have made Kamloops their home. Community members of Italian ancestrypast and presenthave helped and continue to help Kamloops prosper as a giving, welcoming and inclusive community. Personally, I want to thank all members for their friendship and generosity over the years. Our community is forever grateful for their kindness. The Chair: We'll now proceed to Mr. Harris. Mr. Jack Harris (St. John's East, NDP): Mr. Chair, many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are facing a serious financial crisis. Most people with disabilities are waiting to be included in the Liberals'promised program. Fish plant workers will need support to avoid a disastrous year. Many small businesses don't qualify for programs. Municipalities need emergency help to meet the crisis. People are worried about what will happen when the CERB runs out in two weeks'time, and the coming tourism season looks very grim. The province itself is in serious financial crisis due to the pandemic and the decline in oil prices. The federal government must overhaul and enhance the fiscal stabilization program to help Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and other oil-producing provinces through this crisis. Both the province and the oil and gas industry players have committed to net zero emissions by 2050. This is a challenge and an opportunity to transition to a sustainable energy future, but it will require significant investment and support by government to keep the industry strong and make this a just transition for workers. Much has been done. Much more needs to be done. The Chair: Ms. Gaudreau, you have the floor. Ms. Marie-Hlne Gaudreau (LaurentidesLabelle, BQ): Mr. Chair, all 44elected municipal officials in the riding of LaurentidesLabelle and I have sent a letter to the government asking that cellular and high-speed Internet networks be made available to all. The crisis has accelerated the demonstration of the need for these networks in daily life. The territorial complexity of the Laurentians means that there are areas where the signal is weak, unstable or non-existent. There is an urgent and essential need to change the infrastructure of the current networks. Also, because of the lockdown, Internet failures are being felt, and they prevent distance learning, telemedicine and teleworking, among other things. How can our municipalities develop economically if they can't provide their community with adequate communication tools? We are therefore calling on the government to put the interests of its people first by investing massively right now in the construction of high-speed Internet and cellular infrastructure. The Chair: Mr. Waugh. Mr. Kevin Waugh (SaskatoonGrasswood, CPC): I rise today to pay tribute to Sir Winston Churchill, the former prime minister of Great Britain and one of the greatest leaders history has ever known. In what can only be called a lifetime of service, Churchill's contributions to the Commonwealth and to the world are without equal. During the Second World War he led the allied forces in Europe against the tyranny and fascism of Adolph Hitler and his Nazi regime. When our world was in its darkest hour, Churchill's leadership was a beacon of hope and freedom. I am reminded of something he once said, All the greatest things are simple, and many can be expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honour, duty, mercy, hope. Sir Winston Churchill himself embodied all of these great things and will forever be a symbol of freedom, democracy and hope. The Chair: Mr. Gerretsen. Mr. Mark Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands, Lib.): Mr. Chair, I would like to add my voice to the recognition and celebration of Pride Month, which is celebrated annually during June. Pride Month is important for Canadians because we can be proud of who we are and celebrate our diversity. This June is different from previous years as we cannot celebrate in person all together. However, I know the ongoing pandemic will not stop us from showing our love and support for the LGBTQ+ community. To celebrate Pride Month this year, my office distributed 3,000 pride maple leaf pins across the country; whoever asked received one. Although the majority was sent to constituents in my riding, over 500 pins were sent to the neighbouring ridings of LanarkFrontenacKingston, LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, and HastingsLennox and Addington. It warms my heart to see so many Canadians showing their support. Happy Pride, everyone. The Chair: We will now proceed to the questioning of ministers. Please note that we will suspend the proceedings twice to allow employees who provide support for the sitting to substitute for each other safely. Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell (Louis-Saint-Laurent, CPC): Mr. Chair, I am very pleased to take part in today's meeting of this parliamentary committee. Canada has been dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic for three months now. The situation now seems to be improving, although we must remain vigilant. Economically, business people and the entire Canadian economy depend on government decisions. My question is very simple: when will the economic update take place? Hon. Chrystia Freeland (Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): Mr. Chair, I thank the hon. member for his question. I agree with him that Canada and Canadians are doing an excellent and difficult job in the fight against coronavirus. As for the economy, our government is there for Canadians, for workers and for businesses, and it will continue to be. Mr. Grard Deltell: Canadians, business people and businesses want to know where the government is headed. When will the economic update take place? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, Canadians know that the government is there to support them. Eight The Chair: We return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Canadians and Quebeckers also know that the Government of Quebec will table its economic update this week. Why isn't the federal government doing the same? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I'm pleased to explain to hon. members and to Canadians what the government is doing for the economy The Chair: We return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, it is a real pleasure for me to explain to the minister and everybody in the House of Commons that today the Saskatchewan government will table its economic update. Why can't Ottawa do that? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I'm delighted to have the opportunity to share with Canadians what our government is doing to support workers, businesses and the economy. Eight million Canadians have received the CERB, essential support for Canadian workers and their families. The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, 11 days ago the Newfoundland government tabled its own economic update. We see governments acting correctly for their people, except for the Liberal government, which cannot table an economic update. When will the Liberal government table an economic update, which Canadians would like to see? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I am delighted to share with the member opposite and with Canadians what we are doing practically that has meaning for Canadians. Let me talk about what we are doing for Canadian businesses. Nearly 670,000 Canadian businesses have received support The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: In Canada, the Quebec government will table its economic update this week. The Saskatchewan government tabled its economic update today. The Newfoundland government has tabled its economic update. Everybody is working hard in Canada, and the business community would like to know where the Liberal government is going. The question is crystal clear. When will the Liberal government table an economic update? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, Canadian workers and Canadian businesses want to know that our government is here to support them. I have shared with this House our support for Canadian workers through the CERB. I've spoken about the CEBA, and let me point out that more than $26 billion of support has been given through that essential program. Let me talk about the wage subsidy. More than 2. 6 million The Chair: We'll return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, this is starting to get interesting; the minister is revealing some of these expenses. Could the minister tell us how much the government has spent in the last three months? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I will continue in French by explaining what our government is doing for Canadians and workers The Chair: Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, this is a little bit concerning for all Canadians, because this government cannot say when they will table the economic update, cannot identify how much money they have spent in the last three months and cannot say what is the deficit of Canada. Is somebody in this government running this country correctly? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, absolutely we are running this country, and we are supporting our economy. In fact, we appreciate that Canada currently is experiencing its greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression. That is why we have devoted nearly 11% of GDP to support Canadian workers and Canadian businesses. I want to assure Canadians The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Normandin. Ms. Normandin, you have the floor. Ms. Christine Normandin (Saint-Jean, BQ): Mr. Chair, there are times when Quebec and the provinces are not just two solitudes, but they get along and speak as one, such as when the time comes to tell the government to mind its own business. On reading section91 of the Constitution Act, 1982, which sets out the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal government, nowhere do I find that the federal government must meddle by attaching conditions to health transfers. It is Quebec and the provinces that hire the medical personnel, doctors, nurses and caretakers. It is Quebec and the provinces that are responsible for purchasing the necessary equipment. It is Quebec and the provinces that know what is happening on the ground and what their needs are. Will the government do the only thing within its authority, which is to take the cheque, sign it and put it in the mail? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I thank the hon. member for her question. We fully understand the importance of federal support for the provinces, especially in our national fight against the coronavirus. I agree with the hon. member that we must give financial support to the provinces, including Quebec absolutely. I would also like to point out the importance of the support of the Canadian Armed Forces, who are doing an important and excellent job in Quebec and Ontario today, right now. Ms. Christine Normandin: Mr. Chair, I am glad to see that there is recognition of the importance of transferring this money. My question is whether it can be transferred unconditionally; that's what I'm asking. There's a state of emergency. In the past, we have seen that it takes a long time to negotiate conditions with the federal government. We saw it in the case of the Quebec City tramway, and we are still seeing it now in the case of transfers for housing in Quebec, for which there is no agreement and, therefore, no transfer of money. Will the federal government send the money free of conditions? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the hon. member said in her first question that the only thing the federal government had to do on health care was to sign the cheques. I can't agree because, today, at this time, at the request of the Premier of Quebec, the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces are in Quebec today; they're there to save the lives of seniors The Chair: We now return to Ms. Normandin. Ms. Christine Normandin: It was indeed at Quebec's request. What I'm saying is that, at present, the provinces are unanimously asking that there be no conditions. It's urgent that the money be transferred. The federal government's job here is to sign the cheque and send it to the provinces. The government's job is also to make Parliament work. This is where there should be negotiations so that we can work, among other things, to send money to people living with disabilities, to make sure we fight CERB fraud and to make sure that court time limits are effective in the current crisis. Can the government focus on the issue in order to respect the provinces and transfer money for health care? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: I thank the hon. member for her question, Mr. Chair. I agree with the hon. member that the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces are in Quebec today at the request of the Province of Quebec. That said, I hope that the hon. member will agree with me that being there for Quebec's seniors, that saving the lives of Quebec's seniors, is much more than simply signing cheques. I am very proud of the work the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces are doing. I think we all should thank these people who are working for Canada, for Quebec, and who are doing an important and excellent job. Ms. Christine Normandin: Mr. Chair, I think the Deputy Prime Minister misunderstood me when I was talking about the importance of acting quickly. Negotiations between the government and the provinces take an awfully long time because the federal government decides to place conditions where there shouldn't be any. Right now, the only important thing is to transfer the money quickly so that it can be used in our hospitals and our long-term care facilities, where the need is desperate. Quebec and the provinces know exactly what their needs are. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I would like to point out the extent to which the federal government is there to support the provinces, including Quebec. We have increased funding to the provinces and territories by $500million to help them prepare for COVID-19 outbreaks. This funding is in addition to the $40billion that we already provide annually to the provinces and territories. That's a lot of money. It is strong endorsement The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh (Burnaby South, NDP): Mr. Chair, systemic racism is killing people. It's killing black people and it's killing indigenous people. Recently, Rodney Levi was another victim of systemic racism. He was killed in New Brunswick by the RCMP. To deal with systemic racism, we need systemic change. Will the Liberal government commit to systemic change so that not another life is ever taken again? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I thank the member opposite for the extremely important question, and I'll take this opportunity to acknowledge the work that he has done for many years fighting racism in Canada. Our government absolutely acknowledges that systemic racism exists in Canada. It exists in all of our institutions, including the police and the RCMP. I agree with the member opposite that now is the moment to fight this The Chair: Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, I thank the Deputy Prime Minister very much for the response, but there are some specific actions we need to take. There are movements. Black Lives Matter, as a movement, is calling for the defunding of police. What they're saying is we need to make better choices with how money is being spent. When someone is in need of a wellness check or a mental health check, money, financing and support should go to mental health workers and health care workers, not the police. Is the government prepared to fund and prioritize health care workers over the police? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the member quite rightly began his questions by speaking about systemic racism against indigenous people in Canada, and I would like to speak about that for a moment. I spoke to Perry Bellegarde this morning, because it is such a crucial issue. We can describe it as the original sin of our country. I absolutely agree that we need root and branch reform, including in how policing is done in Canada. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, will the Liberal government commit to a review of the use of force as outlined for the RCMP? Will the Liberals commit to that change? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister and the Minister of Public Safety had many conversations last week with the RCMP. We all accept that The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, will the government commit to ensuring that de-escalation receives priority? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Let me continue, Mr. Chair. Systemic racism exists in all of our federal institutions, including the RCMP. It's time to put an end to it. Let me just say The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, I'm not getting an answer. Will the Prime Minister or the Liberal government commit to something simple and ensure that at the federal level, racial profiling, street checks and carding are expressly prohibited? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, sadly, I can't agree that rooting out systemic racism is going to be simple, but I can agree that racial profiling is absolutely inappropriate. It is not something that we should The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Well, I'm going to try to get another commitment from the government, because they don't seem able to commit to something as clear as ending racial profiling. We know that millions of Canadians in a couple of weeks are going to be faced with the reality of their CERB ending. These families are worried about how they're going to put food on the table, because they can't return to a job. Will the Liberal government commit today so that those families will have some concrete support, yes or no? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, let me be clear, as I was in my previous answer, that our government clearly is opposed to racial profiling. This is a wrong practice and we're very clear about our position there. Now when it comes to the CERB, I absolutely share the concern of the member opposite. The Canadian economy is in its direst state since the Great Depression. We know that all the jobs have not yet come back. We know that Canadian workers, Canadian families, continue to need The Chair: We'll now pause for a short time to allow staff to change within the safety parameters for the COVID-19 virus, and as we resume, we will go to Ms. Harder. Ms. Rachael Harder (Lethbridge, CPC): Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister has mandated his ministers, and I quote, to govern in a positive, open and collaborative way. Ironically, as it stands, Parliament is currently closed for business. Opposition parties have little opportunity to hold the ruling party to account, private members'bills cannot be tabled and legislation cannot be debated. Can the Prime Minister, Mr. Trudeau himself, help us understand how all of this fits into his definition of so-called open government? The Honourable Pablo Rodriguez (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons): Well, Mr. Chair, we're here, right? We're here, and the opposition is asking questions. They have the equivalent of eight question periods instead of five to ask questions. They have more time than before, so I don't know why they're not happy about it. Ms. Rachael Harder: That's like when I'm asking for a full meal and your handing me a few jellybeans and saying, Why aren't you happy with that? Mr. Chair, here's the thing. It's like switching a light on and off when it's convenient for the Prime Minister and for the Liberal Party. That's what they want to do here. That's not Parliament. That's not democracy. When will Mr. Trudeau do the right thing, turn the lights on and get back to work for Canadians? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I'm really sorry to hear that my colleague's not working. I can assure you, Mr. Chair, on this side of the House, we're all actually working very hard and we're answering the questions from the opposition. Why? It's because it's extremely important. I sat there for seven years asking questions. I understand important Ms. Rachael Harder: The member opposite knows very well that he is misleading the Canadian public. This is not true Parliament. This is simply a special committee. Here's the thing. On the Liberal Party website, under the platform commitment, it says that Parliament works best when its members are free to do what they have been elected to do, and that is be the voice for their communities and hold the government to account. This is a Liberal document. Did the Prime Minister forget that strengthening Parliament was part of his 2019 platform commitment? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague for quoting our excellent platform. That was a very very good document. The thing is, I think we've reached a balance whereby MPs can come from different places, mostly around Ottawa, and ask questions; but also we can have colleagues from across the country asking questions. Why does my colleague think it is better to have only 35 MPs participating instead of 338? Ms. Rachael Harder: Does the Prime Minister value democracy, or does he still look up to China's basic dictatorship? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, we're answering all the questions from the opposition, not only from the people in this room, but we're answering The Chair: It's back to Ms. Harder now. Ms. Rachael Harder: I'll ask the question again. Does the Prime Minister still value the basic dictatorship of China over Canada's democracy? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I don't know where the colleague wants to go from here, Mr. Chair. I'd like to know from her why it is not important to her that her colleagues participate directly. Ms. Rachael Harder: Mr. Trudeau wrote to his ministers and said to them that they continue to raise the bar on openness, effectiveness and transparency. He went on to explain that This means. . . government that is open by default. We now have a parliament that is currently shut down. Mr. Trudeau has shut it down and has prevented us from being able to do to the good work that Canadians expect us to do. Is this Mr. Trudeau's idea of open by default? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, do they want to talk about shutting down Parliament? How about the time they prorogued Parliament twicenot only once, but twice? The Conservative government shut down Parliament twice. I was here. I was sitting on the other side of the aisle. It's quite the opposite now. We're taking all the questions. This place is open, and we're answering questions. The Chair: One moment, please. I haven't acknowledged you yet, Ms. Harder. We've stopped the time there. I want to remind honourable members that questions and answers are being given, and we want to hear both sides. Please keep the heckling down. Ms. Harder, please proceed. Ms. Rachael Harder: In 2014, the leader of the Liberal Party developed a policy resolution entitled Restoring Trust in Canada's Democracy. That's ironic, because right now, again, Parliament is currently shut down. We are prevented from being able to do the good work that we are expected to do. At the time, the Prime Minister said, Canadians want their Members of Parliament to be effective voices for their communities in Ottawa, and not merely mouthpieces in their communities for an all-too-powerful Prime Minister. Sadly, Mr. Trudeau has become the all-too-powerful prime minister that he once believed should not exist. Why did he change his mind? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, I'd like to know why my colleague wants to shut down the voices of her colleagues who could not speak and could not participate in this room. Mr. Chair, how would we vote on private members'bills, for example? As you know, it is not a government vote or a party vote; it's per row. You want to come back? Are you going to acceptMr. Chair, through youthat we have electronic voting, yes or no? The Chair: We'll go on to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, we know that the Minister of Foreign Affairs has champagne tastes and London flats, but it's his champagne mortgages that Canadians are concerned about. Specifically, why did the minister only disclose the complete extent of his personal debt to the Chinese government on June 4 of this year? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, as you know, since the minister entered politics, his two mortgages and other liabilities and assets have been fully disclosed to the Ethics Commissioner and placed on the online public registry. It's public, Mr. Chair. It's public. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Now it's public and it's terrible. When will the foreign affairs minister be here to answer these questions himself? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, it's always been public. We're in the middle of a pandemic here, trying to help Canadians, and the best they can do is ask questions about The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: When the minister owes over a million dollars to the Chinese government, people have a right to ask him questions. When will the Minister of Foreign Affairs show up? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: The minister shows up every day, Mr. Chair. He shows up and works for Canadians. Once again, those are public documents. Everything the minister did is public. I still don't know why they ask The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, he doesn't even have to come to the House. All he has to do is appear on the screen. Where is the minister? Why is he hiding? Why won't he answer questions about his personal debt to the Chinese government? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, if he goes online he's going to get the information. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, the minister is hiding. Let's ask some specific questions about their China policy. What is the impact on the decision-making? Three-quarters of Canadians don't want Huawei involved in our 5G network. Will the minister put the interests of Canadians ahead of the interests of his creditors and say no to Huawei? Hon. Navdeep Bains (Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry): Mr. Chair, when it comes to 5G deployment, we are right now currently undergoing a comprehensive review. We have been absolutely clear with allies and with Canadians that we never have and never will compromise Canadians'national interests. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, that is not an answer, and it is completely out of step with what our allies have already recognized. Reports are emerging of multiple deadly viruses exported from Winnipeg's microbiology laboratory to the Wuhan Institute of Virology right before scientists were expelled for policy breaches. In spite of that, scientific co-operation between Canadian institutions and the military-affiliated Wuhan Institute of Virology is continuing. Why hasn't the government put in place new guidelines to prevent the export of sensitive pathogens and information to China? Hon. Patty Hajdu (Minister of Health): Mr. Chair, he's right that in 2019 the National Microbiology Laboratory shared lab samples with the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The National Microbiology Laboratory routinely shares samples with other labs to help advance the international community's understanding of viruses and the research that is ongoing around those viruses. There are strict protocols in place for these transfers, and these samples were transported according to Canadian laws and regulations. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, I think Canadians would be concerned to hear that it's routine to transport viruses to Chinese military-affiliated labs. When Champagne was the parliamentary secretary for finance, the government decided to give hundreds of millions of dollars to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, bankrolling Chinese state-controlled development projects in Asia with weak standards in labour, human rights and environment. Will the minister put Canadian taxpayers ahead of his personal creditors and support a pullout from the Communist Party-controlled development bank? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Once again, Mr. Chair, my colleague is trying to connect the dots, and I don't know exactly where he is going from here, but everything is public. There's a thing called Google. He can go on it and check the information. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, the public can listen to this. I'm sure this exchange will also be available on Google, and the public can draw their own conclusions. We have failures on 5G, failures when it comes to the transport of deadly viruses and failures when it comes to giving over $400 million to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. It's clear that the Bank of China's investment in Minister Champagne is paying off. It's time for the minister to settle his debt with the Communist government and not settle it on the backs of Canadians. When will the minister be here in the House and answer questions about this mortgage? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: My colleague should be cautious with what he is saying in the House, Mr. Chair. This is serious stuff. He should be careful about what he says. The minister is actually working extremely hard for all Canadians and is doing his job correctly, Mr. Chair. We're talking about public information. Once again, let him go to Google and google it. That's it. The Chair: Now we'll go to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett: Canada's ambassador to the United Nations sent a letter last week to all member states of the UN promising that Canada would consider providing more funding for UNRRA, the same UNRRA that is a front for Hamas, which allows weapons of terror to be stored in schools and provides textbooks that call for the destruction of Israel. Do these Liberals have no shame when it comes to their quest for a seat on the UN Security Council? Hon. Mary Ng (Minister of Small Business, Export Promotion and International Trade): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to thank the honourable member for that question. We know that at this time Canada must show leadership in the face of global challenges. More than ever, Canada is playing a positive role by being a champion in diversity and inclusion, supporting the global fight against COVID-19, addressing climate change, leading peace and security efforts and helping the most vulnerable. A seat on the Security Council will allow Canada to be a strong voice for a fairer, more inclusive and prosperous The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett: Mr. Chair, I received a letter from Bob Anderson this week, who's advocating for his neighbours like Jean Grevelding, who owns a cottage at Butternut Bay. Like many people, Jean is an American who owns a property on our side of the border. These people are taxpaying members of our communities. These folks have plans in place to follow all Canadian quarantine rules. They're concerned about leaving their properties uncared for over the summer. Will folks like Jean be allowed to cross the border to check on their properties this summer? Hon. Bill Blair (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Of course, our priority is and always has been and always must be the protection of the health and safety of Canadians. That's why we put in place these restrictions for non-essential travel and have required, through the Public Health Agency of Canada, a 14-day quarantine. I don't know the specifics of the person for whom you advocate, but we want to make sure that if they come into Canada, it is for an essential purpose and that they do it safely and respect the quarantine that has been put in place. Mr. Michael Barrett: With nine branches throughout my riding, the Royal Canadian Legion offers a great deal to veterans and rural communities alike. They have been experiencing hardship and a loss of revenue, to the point where they may be forced to shut their doors. The Zone G2 commander and local mayors such as Roger Haley have reached out to me expressing their dire need. Will the government offer support to Legions across the country so they can continue to carry out their vital work for our veterans? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (Minister of Veterans Affairs): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Yes, we have done a lot to help support groups like the Legions. There is a $350-million emergency community support fund. If they're supplying any help to people regarding COVID, this fund is there. Indeed, we're doing everything we can to make sure that we help the Legions and other groups that do so much to help veterans right across the country. Mr. Michael Barrett: On May 21, the minister stated that her team was working as quickly as it could to fill the gaps in CEBA. It has now been three weeks, and many business owners, such as mortgage broker Corinna Smith-Gatcke, are still left in the lurch amid the delays, which are pushing businesses closer to shutting their doors for good. Will these businesses have access to CEBA before it's too late for them? Hon. Mary Ng: Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I thank the honourable member for that really important question on our Canadian small businesses. Those businesses can absolutely have access to the loan at their financial institution this Friday, and I would encourage them to go and see their bank or credit union. I want businesses to know that nothing is more important for us than making sure they get the support they need during this difficult time. Mr. Michael Barrett: The County Road 43 expansion project is critical for my riding and the region as a whole. This project will widen the road, increasing safety for the 18,000 motorists who travel the road every day. It's been 334 days since the provincial and local governments announced funding, but there has been nothing from this Liberal government. It's been 181 days since Minister McKenna told me her staff were reviewing the project. Today, there is still nothing, and for the last month the minister's team has not even found the time to respond to my request for an update. Will Minister McKenna finally stop with the delays and commit to funding this project today? Hon. Catherine McKenna (Minister of Infrastructure and Communities): Mr. Chair, as the member opposite knows, we work with provinces and territories to advance our infrastructure investments. We're making investments across the country. They are making a real difference in people's lives. We're always happy to work with members of Parliament, but they must also work with provinces and territories so that projects are advanced by them to our office. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall (YorktonMelville, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Through you, has Mr. MacAulay read ombudsman Dalton's May 2020 report, Financial Compensation for Canadian Veterans: A comparative analysis of benefit regimes? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I apologize, but I'll have to ask my honourable colleague to repeat the question. The Chair: Mrs. Wagantall, we'll freeze the time so that there's no extra time taken. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Thank you, Chair. My question was whether Mr. MacAulay has read ombudsman Dalton's May 2020 report, Financial Compensation for Canadian Veterans: A comparative analysis of benefit regimes. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I appreciate my honourable colleague's question. Of course, I appreciate Mr. Dalton's input and all that he has done for veterans. We've discussed it many times. I've done everything and worked with him in order to make sure that we bring the proper compensation to veterans The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: As a result of that study, are the financial outcomes Canada seeks to provide for ill and injured veterans now clearly defined within the Department of Veterans Affairs? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, as the member would know, I am to bring a report to the veterans affairs committee, and there are a number of things done in order to make sure that report is The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Then I would suggest that we get our committee up and going as it should be. Where are these financial directions published? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Well, of course, lockdown, but just under $90 million that the government put in supplementary estimates to make sure we address the backlog for Veterans Affairs. It's a major help The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Minister, are Canadian Armed Forces members provided with a copy of this document? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, my honourable colleague would have to ask the Canadian Armed Forces that question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: There are three different providing lifetime benefits for ill and injured veterans. In Ombudsman Dalton's recent report, did any one of these three provide the best compensation in all nine scenarios that were studied? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Of course, as she knows, there's been a lot of work done in order to make sure that we provide the proper compensation to veterans. We're working very hard, with a lot of help from Mr. Dalton, to make sure that the appropriate The Chair: We'll now continue with Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: In the undisclosed settlement of Sean Bruyea's legal case against Seamus O'Regan and the Liberal government, a joint statement says. . . Canadians, especially all Veterans and their families, are encouraged to enter the public debate about policies and programs that affect our Veterans and their families. Does Mr. MacAulay agree with this statement? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I can assure you that anybody is welcome to enter any discussion on compensation of veterans. We're always open to what we can do in order to make sure that we provide appropriate compensation. I don't think the term would be appropriate, but it would provide some compensation to veterans who truly deserve it. They defend our democracy The Chair: We'll go back to Ms. Wagantall. Oh, I'm sorry Ms. Andranne Larouche: Mr. Chair, I have a point of order. The interpretation hasn't worked for a few interventions. It's difficult to follow the exchange between the hon. member and the minister. The Chair: We're having a problem with the interpretation. Minister and Ms. Wagantall, you are joining us virtually. I'm wondering if you have the right language on at the bottom of your screen. We'll start with that for troubleshooting. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: I have English. The Chair: Very good. Minister MacAulay, what do you have? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I have English, Mr. Chair. The Chair: Very good. Then we'll check on our side. Ms. Larouche, did I understand correctly that the interpretation didn't work for both speakers? Ms. Andranne Larouche: The sound didn't allow the interpreters to do their job. It seemed to be a problem with the sound. The Chair: In that case, I would ask both members to maybe put their mike a little bit close to their mouth. We'll see how that works. I'm looking at the screen, and I notice the mike is a little bit far. Could we bend it in a little bit more? I appreciate that. Thank you for your patience. We'll give it another try. Ms. Wagantall, please go ahead. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: On a point of order, quite often while I'm trying to speak, there are lots of other voices in the background. The Chair: I would ask everyone to please be on mute, as well as for anyone in the chamber to please refrain from speaking loudly. Just whisper among yourselves if you have something to say. We'll take this one from the top. We have a minute and 45 seconds left. Ms. Wagantall, please proceed with your next question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: You said next question, so we're not going backwards, Chair? The Chair: Did we have an answer from Minister MacAulay? No? We'll go to Minister MacAulay to finish up the answer. We'll start at 27 seconds, freeze the clock and hear his answer. Then, because of all of the confusion, we'll start at one minute and 45 seconds when we get going again. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Should I repeat the question, sir? The Chair: Please do. The clock is frozen. After we go through the question and the answer, we'll start the clock again. Mr. Wagantall, please repeat the question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Thank you, Chair. In the undisclosed settlement to Sean Bruyea's legal case against Seamus O'Regan and the Liberal government, a joint statement says, Canadians, especially all Veterans and their families, are encouraged to enter the public debate about policies and programs that affect our Veterans and their families. Does Mr. MacAulay agree with this statement? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I appreciate my honourable colleague's question and concern. Of course I agree. Anybody is quite open to indicate whatever they wish in order to make sure we provide as appropriate a compensation as possible. You can never totally compensate veterans truly for what they deserve, but we want to make sure we provide the best compensation possible. That's what we will do and want to do. The Chair: Ms. Wagantall, we will start the clock again. You have one minute and 45 seconds remaining. Please proceed. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: If that's the case, is Minister MacAulay aware of the practice of red-flagging veterans'files? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I'm not aware. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Since the deputy minister has indicated that he runs the department, will the minister ask him for the names of veterans and the dates and the reasons that they are, or have been, red-flagged by VAC? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I would certainly ask any veteran or anybody who has a concern to contact my office. I will do anything I can to make sure that the veterans The Chair: We'll go back to Ms. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Do the most ill and injured still receive from the pension up to $300,000 less for life? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, as you know and as the Prime Minister indicated when the pension for life was put in place, it was stated that if anybody receives lessthe Prime Minister himself indicated it quite clearlythat must be adjusted. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: For veterans in similar circumstances, should the date of their application for compensation be a factor in determining whether they're treated equitably? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Yes, of course, the date is when the compensation would start. Of course, it's very important and very appropriate. The Chair: Now we will proceed to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd (Sturgeon RiverParkland, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Retired Major Mark Campbell in my riding of Sturgeon RiverParkland lost both legs in the line of duty in Afghanistan. He is an avid sport shooter, but understandably, due to his disability, he is very limited in the kinds of firearms he can use, and all of these firearms have now been banned under the Liberal OIC. My question to the Minister of Public Safety is this: Did their department do a legal analysis and consider the section 15 charter rights of disabled Canadians not to be discriminated against when they passed their OIC? Hon. Bill Blair: Yes, there was a very thorough analysis done by the justice department to ensure that the prohibitions we put in place were, in fact, charter compliant. Let me also say, Mr. Chair, how important it was that we prohibited weapons that were not designed for sporting purposes at all. In fact, they were designed for soldiers to use in combat. They have no place in a civil society. We have prohibited them, and we believeand this has been echoed by many people across the countrythat this will make Canadians safer. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, is the minister aware that the AR-15 is the most popular sporting rifle in Canada, and is he aware that disabled veterans like Major Mark Campbell are unable to participate in the sport of sport shooting because of his OIC? Hon. Bill Blair: I can assure the member that what I am aware of is that the AR-15 and other weapons like them have been used in mass killings in Canada on many occasions, such as at cole Polytechnique, at Dawson College, again at the Quebec mosque and in Moncton. The AR-15s in particular were also used at the terrible tragedy in places like Sandy Hook, where a bunch of kids were killed, so there is no place for The Chair: We will go to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, it has been months since the Liberals shut down this Parliament and months since the Minister of Finance should have presented a budget or at least an economic update to Canadians. Since then we have seen billions spent with little oversight and no plan. The minister says that he needs certainty before he can table a budget. Well, that didn't stop Stephen Harper and the Conservatives from tabling a budget in the depth of the last great recession. When are these Liberals finally going to take their job seriously and table an economic update? Hon. Mona Fortier (Minister of Middle Class Prosperity and Associate Minister of Finance): Mr. Chair, we're taking this very seriously. We're working for Canadians and bringing forward supports to make sure that businesses, workers and Canadians can put food on the table and pay their rent. We will continue to support Canadians, and when we have a clear projection to present, we will do that. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, the results are in, and businesses aren't happy with the so-called support programs from these Liberals. In fact, the oil and gas industry has been shut out of many of these economic programs. When is the government going to recognize that their business support plans have been an absolute failure with only a fraction of the billions promised being accessible to businesses? Hon. Seamus O'Regan (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Chair, our government has taken swift and immediate action to support our sector throughout this challenging time. We had the BCAP, which is critically important to providing liquidity to support the SMEs that make up 85% of the jobs in our sector. It has taken an enormous team effort. People are working around the clock to get money where it needs to be. We are helping hard-working Canadians, small businesses and large businesses right across the country, but in particular in our energy sector. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, I'm pleased to see the Minister of Natural Resources online. He tweeted recently to praise the Alberta Carbon Trunk Line and the North West Redwater Partnership refinery in my riding. Can the minister tell us what, if any, support they have given to the innovative carbon capture and sequestration technology in this country? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Mr. Chair, we see carbon capture and sequestration as an integral part of lowering emissions, making emissions more competitive and making our oil and gas industry more competitive. We're seeing where the investment dollars are going. They are going to jurisdictions that are committed to lowering emissions. Obviously, this government is committing to net zero. Mr. Dane Lloyd: I note that the minister couldn't name a single example of government support for carbon capture, utilization and sequestration technology. We have spent a lot of time talking about the COVID-19 pandemic, but Canadians are living with another horrific reality, that being the intensifying opioid overdose epidemic. Reports indicate that in the past four years, 14,000 Canadians have died, and the numbers during COVID-19 have been skyrocketing, with British Columbia seeing a 39% increase this year alone. I know this because I've lost a family member to a fentanyl overdose. When is the government going to take this scourge seriously and take action to save the lives of Canadians? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Mr. Chair, I share the member's deep sadness about the number of lives we've lost to opioid overdose. Our government has been steadily making it easier for people who live with substance use to access medications to treat substance use, such as prescription Suboxone and methadone. We have made it easier to rapidly establish safe injection sites in communities and have supported community-based projects that work with people who are using substances. We need to understand that this is a complex issue, and we need to support people to get the help they need. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes (AlgomaManitoulinKapuskasing, NDP) ): The hon. member for Thrse-DeBlainville. Ms. Louise Chabot (Thrse-De Blainville, BQ): MadamChair, I will come back to the bill introduced last week. As parliamentarians, we felt like we were watching a very bad play, as I imagine the public did. I say that it was theatre, even though it shouldn't be in this place. The government decided to stage a play and act alone and, unfortunately, there were several acts missing. A very important part of this bill was about supporting people with disabilities in this time of crisis. However, the government did not see fit to negotiate with the opposition parties, even though it is in a minority position. Despite this arrogance, the Bloc Qubcois proposed solutions. One of the things we proposed was to split the bill so that we could give this support to people with disabilities, but the Conservatives did not want to do that. We came back and asked for time to negotiate and give support to people with disabilities, but the government defeated the motion. We asked that the House be recalled today so that we could pass this part of the bill concerning support for people with disabilities, but we are still in the dark. Why are we abandoning people with disabilities? Hon. Ahmed Hussen (Minister of Families, Children and Social Development): I thank the hon. member for her question. We know this pandemic has deeply affected the lives and health of all Canadians and has disproportionately affected Canadians with disabilities in particular. From the very beginning, we've taken a disability-inclusive approach to our emergency response to ensure that Canadians with disabilities get the support they need. That is why we announced a one-time payment of $600 for persons with disabilities to address these expenses. This will go a long way toward helping Canadians with disabilities. We encourage and urge all parties in the opposition to support this measure. We're confident that this measure, along with other investments, will benefit Canadians with disabilities, and we hope to get the support of the other parties very soon. Ms. Louise Chabot: MadamChair, I remind you that this measure wasn't passed because we weren't allowed to do so. A measure to help people with disabilities has been put in an omnibus bill. We've tried here, in the House, to provide the means to give that support, so I ask again, can the government be counted on to give a response to people with disabilities? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, it was absolutely not an omnibus bill. It contained assistance for the disabled, of course, but it also contained assistance for our seasonal workers, as well as a number of other measures that the Bloc Qubcois opposed. They refused to debate and, when the question of splitting the bill came up, the Conservatives refused to do that. That is why there is no bill at the moment, and that is very unfortunate. Ms. Louise Chabot: It was a Bloc Qubcois proposal to split the bill. The government had not thought of it, but they found that it was a good idea. Let me return to the attack. This bill proposed changes to the wage subsidy program, it was supposed to make the CERB more flexible, it proposed fines for fraudsters and, since there was a little section about a benefit for the disabled, the government took it for granted that we would support it without any negotiations with the parties. However, we set one very important condition: that the Liberal Party must get its hands out of taxpayers'pockets in terms of the wage subsidy. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, as we listen to the Bloc Qubcois members, we might think that they invented peanut butter and apple pie. This bill contained a number of measures that all Quebeckers and all Canadians needed, but the Bloc Qubcois refused to debate it. No, we did not follow the Bloc Qubcois'example in splitting the bill; we had thought of it a long time previously. We have not been able to do that because of the Conservatives. Because of them, we cannot help those living with disabilities. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Ms. Chabot, you have 45seconds left. Ms. Louise Chabot: We asked on a number of occasions for the House to be able to sit starting today to pass the part of the bill dealing with those with disabilities. What is the status of that, MadamChair? We have not heard about it since. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, my colleague knows very well that things are not as simple as that. There are procedural mechanisms unique to the House. I hope that, one day, we will be able to pass this bill and be able to provide assistance for those living with disabilities. I hope that the Conservatives will change their minds and give us their support. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Don Valley East, Ms. Ratansi. Ms. Yasmin Ratansi (Don Valley East, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be sharing my time with the member for Surrey Centre. Since 2015 our government has been focused on ensuring its policies mitigate the effects of climate change. Several measures have been implemented for phasing out coal, making polluters pay, providing climate incentives, investing in green technologies and much more, which all together have created a climate plan that is doing more to cut pollution than any other in Canada's history. In my riding of Don Valley East, many innovative businesses have benefited from these investments and initiatives. One area of particular interest is our government's work to protect 25% of Canada's land and 25% of its oceans by 2025. Our natural environment is something that Canadians and my constituents care about deeply. Could the minister update this House on the new conservation projects announced on June 5, World Environment Day, and on how our government is protecting our environment? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, protecting nature is an important part of how we will address climate change and the very real challenges it presents. That's why on June 5, World Environment Day, our government announced over 60 conservation projects under development across Canada. These projects are funded through the Canada Nature Fund's target 1 challenge initiative. They'll conserve Canadian nature and biodiversity and protect species at risk, enhance ecological integrity and connectivity, and enhance the size of Canada's vast network of protected areas. Nearly half of these projects are indigenous-led, with the aim of creating indigenous-protected conserved areas. Madam Chair, projects like these move us closer to our goal of protecting 25% of Canada's lands and oceans by 2025. By working together in partnership with the provinces, territories, municipalities, indigenous peoples and Canadians, together we can protect our natural environment for generations to come. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Ms. Ratansi, since you have 25 seconds left, we will go to the honourable member for Surrey Centre. Mr. Randeep Sarai (Surrey Centre, Lib.): Madam Chair, there are many small and medium-sized businesses in my riding of Surrey Centre. Many have been impacted by COVID-19. They saw a decrease in business or needed to close their doors completely in order to adhere to public safety measures to manage the spread of COVID-19. These measures helped keep our most vulnerable citizens safe and ensured that our hospital and health care providers did not become overwhelmed with a sharp spike in cases. Thanks to our government's COVID-19 emergency response, many of these businesses have been able to keep their employees and access important liquidity through the Canada emergency business account, which provides loans to small businesses and non-profits, and the Canada emergency wage subsidy, which is helping businesses to keep and rehire their employees while their revenues are down by providing up to 75% of wages for up to 24 weeks. As we begin to reopen the economy and Canadians across the country return to the job market, those benefits will be even more important to help businesses and industries rehire their staff and make important adjustments to align with public health guidelines to gradually increase their operations. Can the minister please update the committee on how many Canadian businesses have taken advantage of CEBA and CEWS since applications for each have been opened? Hon. Mary Ng: Madam Chair, I want to begin by thanking the member for Surrey Centre for all the work he does to support his constituents and small businesses. Canadians across the country need to know our government has been working tirelessly and will continue to work tirelessly on their behalf. This is why we put in place the important programs to help them get through this crisis during this difficult time, programs such as the wage subsidy program. We know that in so many businesses the employees are often like extended family members. The wage subsidy has helped these businesses keep their employees on the payroll and are now helping in their rehiring as they slowly and safely restart. There are 348,000 businesses being helped with the wage subsidy program, and this means that 2. 6 million workers are being helped. Businesses are also being helped through the interest-free $40,000 loan they can access through CEBA to help stay afloat and pay their expenses during this crisis. I'm pleased to inform this House that to date more than 669,000 The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for St. John's East. Mr. Jack Harris: Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with my colleague, the member for LondonFanshawe. Madam Chair, with so many recent reports and videos of police using force, sometimes deadly force, and violence against indigenous and black people in Canada, I've called for the public safety committee to reconvene. If the members agree, will the minister come to the committee and provide concrete answers as to how the government intends to address racism inherent in Canada's law enforcement, and in particular the RCMP? Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I thank my colleague for the question. It's perhaps the most important one facing Canada today. Madam Chair, indigenous people, black Canadians and other racialized people are far too often experiencing systemic racism and disparate outcomes within the entire criminal justice system. In order to respond appropriately, I think it's necessary to begin by acknowledging the lived experience of people who've known bias and discrimination at the hands of the police and our courts and within our prisons. We remain committed to working with all racialized people and all of the members of this House to ensure that we work toward social justice for all Canadians, and I look forward to discussing the member's motion further with him. Mr. Jack Harris: Will the minister and the government commit to facilitating such a meeting of this committee virtually? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, the decisions of the committee are the committee's, so I'm sure that this will be a discussion within the committee, but if called, I will certainly be pleased to come with my officials to provide the committee with whatever support and information it needs to contribute to this very important discussion. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Harris, you have 40 seconds. Mr. Jack Harris: In light of what we've seen with Chief Adam in Fort McMurray and the RCMP accepting that the actions were reasonable, will the minister commit to a full review of the use of force by the RCMP, in particular the philosophy, tactics and training that is given to RCMP officers in dealing with the public? Hon. Bill Blair: I thank the member and I want to assure him, first of all, that this is work that is ongoing, not just in the RCMP but throughout the police community. May I also take this opportunity, Madam Chair, to say that I think all police training has to begin with one very important principle, and that's the preservation of all life and the respect for all Canadians. We also know the importance of de-escalation training. We're committed to continuing to work with indigenous communities, racialized communities and with police services and all participants in the criminal justice system to make sure that it is fair for all Canadians. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for LondonFanshawe, Ms. Mathyssen. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen (LondonFanshawe, NDP): Madam Chair, we need more justice for black, indigenous and racialized people in Canada. They can't be asked to keep waiting. This government recognizes that systemic racism exists but refuses to collect race-based data that would allow us to quantify and truly address this injustice. We need data to protect Canadians. When will this government do the right thing and start collecting race-based data? Hon. Bardish Chagger (Minister of Diversity and Inclusion and Youth): Madam Chair, our government agrees that it's important that we collect data, and that's exactly why, in the anti-racism secretariat and the anti-racism strategy, there is a commitment to have money go to Statistics Canada to collect race-based data. We look forward to working with all members to ensure it happens. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen: Madam Chair, we know that Statistics Canada will start to collect job numbers based on race. This will allow us to identify systemic racism where it is and where we need to ensure a fair and more equal job market for black, indigenous and racialized people in Canada. Why is this government refusing to follow suit so we can tackle systemic racism everywhere, in every sector? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I'd like to thank my honourable colleague for her question. She's absolutely correct in her assessment that we need to collect more data, reliable data, data that will help us deal with some of the challenges we're seeing with systemic discrimination, but, more broadly, we want to make sure that we continue to engage with an anti-racism strategy that will allow us to collect that disaggregated data. That is why we allocated $6. 2 million to that initiative through Statistics Canada, but we know we must do more and we will do more. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen: We know that all people are susceptible to catching COVID-19, but health authorities are clear that parts of cities like Montreal and Toronto have been more impacted than others. For black and racialized people living in these cities, this data is a matter of life and death. Will the government collect and share disaggregated data so we can identify and erase systemic racism, yes or no? Hon. Bardish Chagger: Madam Chair, making decisions based on science and evidence is essential for our government. We took that practice from day one. It is exactly the step we will take moving forward and that's why we are making those investments to ensure that data exists. We are working across all departments. My mandate letter is public. I look forward to continuing to work not only with all ministers, departments and agencies, but all allies and all parties to get this work done. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Blaney, the honourable member for BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, has the floor. Hon. Steven Blaney (BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, CPC): Thank you, MadamChair. Last week, my plumber told me that, each time Justin Trudeau comes down the steps to make announcements totalling several billion dollars, he feels like someone is rifling through his pockets. My question is simple and goes to the Minister of Finance: where is this money coming from? Hon. Mona Fortier: MadamChair, I would like to thank my honourable colleague for his question. Currently, the health and safety of Canadians are our top priorities. We have implemented an emergency economic plan to support Canadians, workers and companies. We will continue to support them during this crisis. Hon. Steven Blaney: The answer I would have liked is simple: we are borrowing the money and we are going to have to pay it back one day. That is another Liberal craze: they borrow money, they make campaign promises, and off they go. Under the Conservative government, the Chantier Davie in Lvis had 1,700workers for the supply ship Asterix. In the election campaign, the Liberals promised icebreakers. When are the Liberals going to award the icebreaker contracts to the Chantier Davie? Hon. David Lametti (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada): MadamChair, we are very proud of the Chantier Davie and we completely understand its role in the system. We are currently assessing those requests. We are going to establish the process for the polar ice-breaker, which is essential for the work of the Coast Guard in northern communities, and we are going to make sure that The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Blaney has the floor. Hon. Steven Blaney: The workers do not need words; they need contracts and jobs. The same is true for young people who want to work. There is money in the Canada summer jobs program: in my constituency alone, $150,000has been approved. Companies want young people to work and want to hire them. What is the minister waiting for in order to confirm those positions? In my constituency, and everywhere else in the country, our young people want to work. What is the government waiting for in order to send some cash to the Canada summer jobs program? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we are proud of the Canada summer jobs program. We are introducing flexibilities into the system to enable employers to be able to hire summer students. We recognize the importance of this program to provide both financial resources and necessary experience for young people. We believe in continuing to invest in the Canada summer jobs program. Hon. Steven Blaney: The workers, the young people and the employers have been waiting for weeks. The money is available; where is the announcement? MadamChair, our young people are not the only ones who want to work. There are also the temporary foreign workers. Let me use Jessie Gito as an example; he has been working at Plate2000 in Saint-Anselme for years. When the time came to renew his work permit, he found out that he has to have some biometric tests. But he cannot get them because the offices are closed. Is the minister going to allow Jessie Gito and the thousands of other temporary foreign workers who want to work to be able to do so until the government biometric testing centres reopen? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, it is important for the honourable member to recognize that we are in the early recovery stage of the pandemic. Employers are slowly reopening businesses. We will ensure that we support both our students and our temporary foreign workers to make sure we get the recovery right. We will continue to invest in the Canada summer jobs program. We've introduced flexibilities into the program to ensure that employers are able to take advantage of the program and give opportunities to young people. Hon. Steven Blaney: It is very simple. Jessie Gito is a foreign worker, who is in a company that provides an essential service. He needs a decision that will let him go to work, rather than staying home and doing nothing. Then, when the government's biometric testing centres are open again, he will gladly go to one. Young people want to work in agriculture as well, and the minister has told us that the government wants young people working and that their files will be processed as quickly as possible. She wants to create 700positions and she knows that people can fill in an application on a first-come first-served basis. Of those 700positions, how many have been confirmed to date? The good weather has arrived, the corn is starting to grow, and this is the time when farmers need the young workers. Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food): MadamChair, the program for young workers in agriculture is open. I also encourage agricultural producers to register for it. This is a program that is not only intended to provide summer jobs, but also to interest young people in making a career in agriculture. As I have said before, the department is processing files as quickly as possible. Each employer will have an answer very shortly. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will now take a short break. Okay, we are ready to start again. We will go to the honourable member for BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte. Mr. Doug Shipley (BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Over the course of the pandemic, has the government been using all avenues possible to source much-needed PPE in Canada? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, we have been very clear that we have a made-in-Canada initiative that has engaged companies across the country. Over 700 companies have retooled and scaled up their operations for personal protective equipment to help front-line health care workers. Mr. Doug Shipley: Madam Chair, I need to ask very quickly which ministry and minister are responsible for the sourcing of PPE in Canada. Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, this is a collective effort. I work with the Minister of Health and the minister for procurement, and we coordinate with the provinces and territories to make sure there are appropriate levels of PPE to help front-line health care workers and essential workers across the country. Mr. Doug Shipley: Thank you for that clarification. That will make this question all the more pertinent. My riding of BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte is the home of Southmedic Inc. Southmedic is a renowned medical supply business. For over 37 years, it has provided front-line health care workers with an extensive line of PPE and other essential products required when dealing with respiratory illnesses. This company specializes in respiratory illness equipment. Southmedic currently employs over 700 people, and it has been recognized as one of Canada's best-managed companies by Deloitte on numerous occasions. Since the beginning of the pandemic, both I and the member for BarrieInnisfil have been attempting to obtain some assistance for Southmedic from the federal government. Calls and emails were falling on deaf ears. In early May, I wrote a letter to Minister Anand outlining the situation. I received a letter back from the minister dated May 27 indicating that this issue of Southmedic falls under the mandate of the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada. I have heard nothing more. When will the federal government reach out and help this great Canadian company and therefore ensure that all front-line workers will have the proper PPE they require? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I'd like to thank my honourable colleague for his question. He knows full well that this is a very challenging time. That is why we had a call to action to engage Canadians right across the country. Since then, we've seen over 6,000 companies step up to offer solutions and ideas, and over 700 companies have retooled their efforts. I acknowledge that some companies are still engaging with the government, and we'll continue to explore all possible options to make sure we continue to procure the necessary levels of personal protective equipment to protect Canadians and to protect front-line health care workers. That has always been our priority. I want to thank the outstanding Canadian companies that have come forward and have helped us in this endeavour. We continue to look forward to working with them. Mr. Doug Shipley: Thank you for that answer. Just to follow up, there's no retooling required at this company. They could have been up and going very quickly. They just needed a little assistance at the beginning. Moving on to a different issue, while walking to my office this morning, I stopped at my local small family-run coffee shop and was discussing the current economic situation with the two owners of the establishment. They indicated they are having a very tough time surviving this economic downturn. The only thing keeping them hopeful is that soon the public service will start returning to work, and therefore their business will begin to return. Could the government please give us some indication as to what the plans are for returning the civil service back to work safely, and when? Hon. Jean-Yves Duclos (President of the Treasury Board): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm delighted to answer this question. This is a very important topic, but I'd like to take the opportunity first to thank our public servants, who have worked very hard in the last few weeks, both personally and professionally. In fact, today is a wonderful day to say that, because today is the start of National Public Service Week. That's one more reason to thank them for their dedicated work. They are not going to go back to work. They've been at work for the last few monthsin different circumstances, but they have been working very hard to deliver the services and the support Canadians need and deserve. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Next we'll go to the honourable member for SelkirkInterlakeEastman, Mr. Bezan. Mr. James Bezan (SelkirkInterlakeEastman, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. My questions are for the Minister of National Defence. First of all, I want to thank the great men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces for the fantastic job they're doing in Operation LASER, serving on the front lines battling COVID-19. Can the Minister of National Defence give the House an update on exactly where we are at with the number of Canadian Armed Forces members who have been infected with COVID-19? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan (Minister of National Defence): Madam Chair, I want to echo the member opposite's comments in thanking our Canadian Armed Forces members. Currently, we have 13 active cases in the Canadian Armed Forces, but in the long-term care facilities we currently have 50 cases. No member has been currently hospitalized. We have also conducted very thorough reviews of our protection protocols as well. Mr. James Bezan: Through you, Chair, Minister Sajjan, does that number of active cases include the active cases that are in long-term care facilities right now in Operation LASER? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, as I stated, the 50 cases are strictly from the long-term care facilities. The 13 cases I mentioned are not in the long-term care facilities. Just to give the actual clarification, no member has been currently hospitalized. Mr. James Bezan: In those numbers, Madam Chair, can Mr. Sajjan say how many of those cases in long-term care facilities are active and how many are recovered? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, I don't have the exact number. What I can say to break it down further is that in Quebec we currently have 36 and in Ontario we have 14. As well, 36 of the members have been out of isolation. I'll get more details and pass them on directly to the member, Madam Chair. Mr. James Bezan: Thank you, Minister. Madam Chair, I have a quick question while we're still talking about Operation LASER. The President of the Treasury Board has said, The Canadian Armed Forces will be present as long as their presence is needed in Quebec. This contradicts what Prime Minister Trudeau is saying, which is that we have a hard deadline of June 26 for the withdrawal of our troops for Operation LASER. That means taking our troops out of our long-term care facilities. Minister, is June 26 the hard date for the winding down of Operation LASER? Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I'm delighted to have the opportunity to clarify for the House. We've been in very extensive discussions with the Province of Quebec, with my counterpart Minister Guilbault, and we are working very diligently to ensure we have a sustained, appropriate response to the request from Quebec for assistance. That response will result in a transition from the currently deployed Canadian Armed Forces to the deployment of paid volunteers, trained personnel who will take on the important role of providing services to those Canadians who need our help in Quebec. Mr. James Bezan: I'll go back to the Minister of National Defence. The Department of National Defence auditors have called out the Liberal government for mismanagement over the $553-billion investment in our Canadian military through the defence policy. Only three people have been assigned to oversee the rollout of this money. This is a $553-billion investment in our armed forces, and only three people are managing it. Could the minister tell us how that is even possible? Is this the reason that over 100 projects are currently behind schedule? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, first of all, I want to highlight the unprecedented investment that we're making in defence. We have conducted internal reviews of our procurement. The report the member opposite is talking about is from the previous year. This is the ongoing work we're doing to make sure that we make procurement better. When it comes to the management of this, it's conducted by me and the minister of procurement. We are working toward making our procurement even better. We have already streamlined some aspects of our procurement and we'll continue to do more as well. Mr. James Bezan: Minister Sajjan, you've had this report since November of 2019. You've been rolling out this plan since 2017. Only three people are overseeing an expenditure of $553 billion. This is taxpayers'money. Are we going to see more cuts because you have been unable to actually roll out these dollars? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, I can assure you we're not going to be cutting. We'll be investing in our defence. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Before I go to the next speaker, I want to remind members that they are to address their questions and comments directly through the chair. We will go now to the honourable member for Fort McMurrayCold Lake, Mr. Yurdiga. Mr. David Yurdiga (Fort McMurrayCold Lake, CPC): Madam Chair, the Canada summer jobs program has many challenges. I've seen many indigenous communities in my riding rejected for funding even though they had received funding in previous years. Here are a few examples of communities that were rejected: Beaver Lake Cree Nation, Buffalo Lake Mtis Settlement and the Mtis Nation of Alberta, Region 1. The list goes on. Could the Prime Minister explain why so many indigenous communities have been denied funding from the Canada summer jobs program? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we recognize the important role that the Canada summer jobs program plays in supporting employers and young workers in our community across the country every year. We're working very hard to help employers adapt to the realities of the COVID-19 pandemic and are supporting young Canadians as they begin to look for summer employment. We are introducing increased flexibilities into the Canada summer jobs program to hire youth, while also providing more supports to employers that deliver essential services to Canadians. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, that didn't really answer my question. Why are so many indigenous communities left out of the Canada summer jobs program? This is very important to my community and to communities throughout the province. Will the government investigate why these communities were rejected? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that we, of course, value the important role that the Canada summer jobs program plays in all communities, including indigenous communities in Canada. I will certainly have an off-line conversation with the honourable member, if he so wishes, about a particular issue, but I can assure him that in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, we have had to assist employers to introduce flexibilities The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Yurdiga. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, in my riding, the City of Cold Lake has been in dispute with the federal government for many years over payment in lieu of taxes. My office has sent many letters over the years regarding the PILT dispute. Could the Minister of Public Services and Procurement give me a rough estimate of when I will receive a response from the minister's office to my first letter, from 2017, and my letters from 2018,2019 and 2020? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that I will go to the minister, and we will come back with an answer to his question. Mr. David Yurdiga: How much longer does the minister intend to perpetuate the ongoing PILT dispute, which is in excess of $11 million, with the City of Cold Lake? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, once again, I can assure the honourable member that I will speak with the minister and get an answer to his question. Mr. David Yurdiga: Well, do you know what? I've been writing letters to the department for many years. When you say you're going to get back to me, I really have a hard time believing that. Will the minister agree to follow the prior recommendations of the dispute advisory panel that were accepted by the minister? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that I will check with the minister and that she will return to the member in due course. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, the drug Trikafta has been proven to increase the quality of life for 90% of cystic fibrosis patients. Two weeks ago, my office sent a letter to the Minister of Health about the boy in my riding named Cael, who through the special access program is able to get Trikafta in Canada. I requested that the minister use her powers to fast-track Trikafta for commercial use, but I have yet to receive a response back. When will the minister make a decision on Trikafta? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, I'm glad to hear that Cael was able to access Trikafta through the special access program. In fact, that program is very helpful for people who are seeking access to medication that's not currently marketed in Canada. As the member opposite knows, Vertex has not applied to market Trikafta in Canada, but we look forward to their application, and I encourage him to write a letter to the manufacturer to also encourage them. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Vancouver Granville, Ms. Wilson-Raybould. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould (Vancouver Granville, Ind.): Thank you, Chair. I was very troubled to hear that a CBC radio host in the Yukon felt compelled to resign because, as an indigenous person, she could not speak her truth. While we know the Broadcasting Act states that the Canadian broadcasting system should reflect the linguistic duality and multicultural and multiracial nature of Canadian society and the special place of indigenous peoples, it would seem there are some challenges. Therefore, does the Minister of Heritage share the concern of some journalists that problems of systemic racism in Canada are still existing within the institution of the CBC, and will the government now acknowledge the need to recognize the jurisdiction of indigenous governments? Hon. Steven Guilbeault (Minister of Canadian Heritage): Thank you, Madame Chair; and I thank the member for this important question. As stated by the Prime Minister on numerous occasions, our government recognizes that systemic racism exists in Canada, and we have made a commitment to do everything we can to combat it in whichever organization of the Canadian government. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould: Thank you. When I was in the government, and as a minister, I learned the term red meat issues. I understand these issues to be ones that challenge societal norms, that are not politically expedient to address because they can lose you votes, even though addressing them is morally right and a smart thing to do. Mostly these are issues addressing inequality and the most marginalized in our society. In the justice system, examples include mandatory minimum penalties, defunding police, and even investing in restorative justice. Red-meat issues often become defining issues for society and for governments as the world changes. Surely now these issues are politically less of a consideration than the tragic reality of even more slain indigenous Canadians at the hands of police, or thousands of indigenous people still incarcerated or living in poverty. Will this government please finally commit to the necessary work originally promised in 2015 and repeal in the justice system the vast majority of mandatory minimum penalties, assuring the necessary discretion for judges, and meaningfully invest in restorative justice measures? Hon. David Lametti: Madame Chair, I thank the honourable member for her question, as well as for her work as Minister of Justice, and indeed my predecessor. This is an important time. This is a time when we recognize systemic racism. This is a time when we recognize systemic over-incarceration of indigenous peoples, of black peoples, in our criminal justice system. This is a time when we need to look at all potential options to reduce what is a shameful overrepresentation in our criminal justice system. Too often racialized peoples and indigenous peoples have experienced prejudice and systemic discrimination in our justice system, and that has to change. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould: I'll go on to another red meat issue. In British Columbia we are in the fifth year of the opioid overdose public health emergency crisis. Sadly, May marks the deadliest month of overdose-related deaths. We are halfway into the year and have currently passed 500 deaths caused by overdose. Many of the deaths are related to COVID-19 measures that have prevented people from accessing supervised consumption sites, so they are overdosing alone. While the provinces welcomed the federal backing of safe supply exemption back in March, it is to expire in September of 2020. Echoing the call of the chief coroner of B. C. and Dr. Henry, more is needed from the federal government, more action. Will the government provide the necessary supports to the province and help support safe supply initiatives in the provinces? Hon. Patty Hajdu: It's been a pleasure to work with the Province of British Columbia on innovative ways to work on the tragic situation of opioid overdose. I remain committed to working with the province and in fact any province that wants to work towards solutions that treat people who use substances with the dignity they deserve. Madam Chair, this is a complex issue. We're working closely with our partners to make sure that we can prevent more lives from being lost. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for South OkanaganWest Kootenay, Mr. Cannings. Mr. Richard Cannings (South OkanaganWest Kootenay, NDP): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with the member for SkeenaBulkley Valley. In my riding, Theo's in Penticton is a beloved restaurant. They've been serving great food for 40 years, but now they're struggling, because they don't qualify for the emergency wage subsidy. Why is that? The original owners retired last year and sold it to another operator. The new owner can't use a year-to-year comparison to apply for the wage subsidy because he didn't own the restaurant last spring. He is forced to use receipts from January and February, the darkest doldrums of the restaurant year, to compare with the results from May, traditionally one of their best months. Now he has to compete with other local restaurants that can access the subsidy. When will the government fix this inequity and let Theo's compete and survive? Hon. Mona Fortier: Madam Chair, the Canada emergency wage subsidy is supporting over 2. 5 million workers across the country. To help even more businesses support their workers and rehire people as they reopen, our government is extending the CEWS, and we will continue to extend the CEWS for an additional 12 weeks to August 29 to ensure that Canadian workers continue to have the support they need during these very difficult times. By extending eligibility, our government is ensuring that more Canadian workers in more sectors have the support they need. Mr. Richard Cannings: The owner just wants to be able to apply for the wage subsidy, and right now he cannot, and he will not be able to. Thousands of other businesses are hit that way as well. I'd like to move on to forestry. Canada's forest sector has been declared essential during this pandemic, but it's been hit hard after a very difficult 2019. Despite soft markets and thousands out of work, government support programs have left many Canadian forest product companies behind. In my riding, the pulp mill in Castlegar is closing for the month of July because local sawmills aren't producing enough wood chips. What is the government going to do to finally support Canadian forestry workers and communities? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The time is almost up, but I will allow for the answer from the honourable minister. Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Thank you, Madam Chair. We have supported and we will continue to support the forestry sector, including through regional development programs. In fact, in Quebec, partnering with Les Bois Francs DV Inc. , we have widened market access to our products and updated technology systems. In North Bay we've partnered with the Canadian Wood Council to promote the sector. In Vancouver we're working with FPInnovations to create the indigenous forest sector technical support program. We are supporting the forestry sector and its different needs region by region. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Now we go to the honourable member for SkeenaBulkley Valley, Mr. Bachrach. Mr. Taylor Bachrach (SkeenaBulkley Valley, NDP): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm going to pick up where my colleague left off, with B. C.'s forest industry. What we've seen in B. C. are multiple rounds of mill shutdowns and start-ups, and in some cases this has made it difficult for forestry workers to qualify for EI. My question to the minister is this: Will the minister work to make the EI program more flexible for forestry workers, similar to what this government has done for oil and gas workers? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, in the oil and gas sector we have focused on workers. That has been key in the inactive and orphan well program, which we are working on with the provincial governments of Saskatchewan, British Columbia and Alberta. The focus on workers has assured that success, and we will continue to focus on workers in all the industries, particularly our natural resource industry, as they go through this extraordinarily difficult time. Mr. Taylor Bachrach: Madam Chair, reforestation is a very important part of the forest industry in the riding I represent, and people were keenly interested to hear this government's plan to plant two billion trees in the next 10 years. That's a lot of trees. I'm wondering if the minister could tell us how many trees are going to be planted under this program by the end of this season. Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, this government is committed to two billion trees. We are working with forestry associations, the industry and with individual companies to ensure this tree-planting season will be one of the largest the country has ever seen. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The floor goes to the honourable member for Rivire-du-Nord. Mr. Rhal Fortin (Rivire-du-Nord, BQ): MadamChair, last week, the government introduced BillC-17 and the Minister of Justice sent us briefing notes in which he said that it was important to suspend a number of time limits and to extend others, and that the failure to do so could have important repercussions on Canadians, their families, their situations, their finances and their ability to exercise their rights. We in the Bloc Qubcois agree with that. When are we going to talk about it? Hon. David Lametti: MadamChair, the contents of BillC-17 are clearly very important. We have addressed the mandatory time limits in federal legislation as well as certain time limits that courts may not be able to handle. It is very important that we address this issue. That is why the law The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Fortin, you have the floor. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, we agree that it is important. I concur. The minister's briefing notes say that, among other things, when it comes to divorcewhich means children are involved people are waiting on custody rights, child support and visitation rights. The minister pointed out that the national security review would require consultations if no decision is made in the prescribed time frame. It could pose a national security risk. It is really a big deal. When are we going to debate it? Hon. David Lametti: MadamChair, I completely agree with my honourable colleague. The issue needs to be addressed. That is why it is in the bill. That is another reason to debate the bill. I beseech my colleagues opposite to debate it with us. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, what a coincidence, because I beseech my colleague opposite to debate it with us. That is what we are asking. Last week, the leader of the Bloc Qubcois asked the Liberal government to debate BillC-17 today. He did not get an answer. It does not seem to matter. Richard Wagner, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, who is hardly a dimwit or greenhorn, told us that the justice system needs to be modernized. As recently as this past Saturday in LaPresse, Justice Wagner said that it is essential that the Criminal Code be amended to address the backlog of court proceedings. When will the Liberal government opposite pull up its socks, do its job, govern the federation, sit down with the opposition and discuss the vital matters in BillC-17? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, if I were my colleague, I would be a little embarrassed, because the bill was sent to the Bloc Qubcois several days in advance. They received a technical note several days in advance. We were all available to take questions. When we asked for the support of the Bloc Qubcois and the other parties to debate itwe were not even asking them to vote in favour of the billthey refused. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, we never refused to debate it. Actually, we were the ones who asked to debate it. What exactly does debate it mean? We set some conditions. For example, we asked the Liberals to put the money back into the wage subsidy fund and to commit to dip into it no longer. Are we asking too much of our colleagues opposite? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Can my colleague explain to me what the emergency wage subsidy has to do with a bill about justice? This is an absolutely fundamental piece of legislation. We wanted to debate it, but they refused to do so. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, I would like nothing better than to explain it to him, but I must remind him that he is the leader of the party in power, the party that is supposed to govern the country. So I do not know why he is asking me that. My party proposed that we debate this today but we did not get an answer. Meanwhile, court time limits are running out and people are losing rights. I am thinking of families, child support, child custody, labour law disputes in Federal Court, marine transportation, interprovincial transportation, aviation, banks, and those with grievances waiting for a Federal Court ruling. The whole system, the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal, everything is on hold because nobody in the government wants to do their job. We want to discuss BillC-17. When can we talk about it? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, we have done our job. We have introduced the bill. We informed them in advance. We told them they could ask us any questions they wanted. We asked for a debate in the House. However, when we asked the Bloc Qubcois if they wanted to debate the bill, they said no, instead of doing what they usually do and saying yes. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for Essex, Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis (Essex, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. When the CERB runs out, many workers in my riding of Essex will not have sufficient hours to collect their EI benefits. In early July, the midnight shift at Chrysler will be eliminated. Because of the shutdown, a mom-to-be who had just returned to work in January, and several hundred of her fellow employees, may not have the 600 hours required for regular or EI parental benefits. Immediate action is needed. What is the government doing now to backstop these workers? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, the Canada emergency response benefit has been providing much-needed help to Canadian workers across the country who have stopped working due to COVID-19. We know that there is still a lot of uncertainty for many Canadian workers, and we know that many will be exhausting their benefits in the weeks to come. We will have more to share soon, as early as this week, on our continuing efforts to support Canadian workers and make sure that help is available during this The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Go ahead, Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Minister, for the answer. The EI system needs to be fixed. Even before the shutdown, the system was deeply flawed. Will this government commit to a complete review and overhaul of the EI system? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we have been there for Canadian workers. We will continue to make sure that we make the necessary investments in the EI delivery system and modernize it to continue to meet The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. Small businesses have been hit extremely hard by the COVID-19 shutdown. Many have already been forced into bankruptcy. Much uncertainty lies ahead. As the economy reopens, what is the government doing to help small businesses recover? Hon. Mary Ng: Madam Chair, today we are seeing small businesses that have been helped, whether it is getting access to the small business loan, which some are also using in the restart as they are safely restarting, or getting help with their payroll, helping them keep their employees The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. Employees are key to a small business's success. How will the government incentivize workers to return to their jobs when recalled? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister can give a brief answer. Hon. Mary Ng: The Canada emergency wage subsidy is an excellent program to help those employees stay employed and for those employers who are looking at rehiring them right now during this restart process. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair, many of my constituents are in a committed cross-border relationship and have not been able to see their partners in quite some time. The current restrictions are arbitrary. Denmark has found a fair resolution. Will Canada adopt the Danish model, and if not, why not? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, as we said from the outset, we've implemented restrictions at the U. S. border on non-essential travel with a single purpose in mind: to protect the health and safety of Canadians. As the member is aware, just last week we introduced new measures that allow people in family relationships to stay together as long as they commit to the necessary 14-day period of quarantine. We'll continue to work with families. Our intention is to keep people together, but mostly to keep people safe. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair, with regard to child care, as our economy continues to open, parents are facing a stark choice: Who will care for their children? What's the plan to provide access to child care so parents can confidently return to work? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we are of course committed to continuing to make the record investments that we've been making in child care. Since 2015 we've created over 40,000 affordable child care spaces. We're committed to creating an additional 250,000 before-school and after-school child care spaces. We will continue to invest in this sector because we understand that without investment The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. It sounds as though this government has a desire to force parents to choose between their job and care for their child. Can the government please respond to that quote? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, nothing could be further from the truth. We are committed to the child care sector. Our investments and our results prove the opposite of what the member is asserting. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I'm sorry. We're out of time. The committee now stands adjourned until tomorrow at noon.

Dane Lloyd asked about the budget given by the government in the economic recession, This was to table an economic update and provide jobs. As for the disabilities, Louise Chabot pointed to the bill regarding the disabilities and why it was not passed.

tr-sq-1215

tr-sq-1215_0

What would Canadian government do to save the lives of Canadians when talking about the budget and the disabilities? The Chair (Hon. Anthony Rota (NipissingTimiskaming, Lib.) ): I call this meeting to order. Welcome to meeting number 22 of the House of Commons Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic. A reminder to all members that in order to avoid issues with sound, members participating in person should not also be connected to the video conference. For those joining via video conference, I would like to remind you that, when speaking, you should be on the same channel as the language you are speaking. As usual, please direct your remarks through the chair. I understand we don't have any ministerial announcements today, so we'll proceed to presenting petitions. I would like to remind members that any petition presented during a meeting of the special committee must have already been certified by the clerk of petitions. For members participating in person, we ask that they please come and drop the signed certificate off at the table once the petition is presented. The first petition will be presented by Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May (SaanichGulf Islands, GP): Mr. Chair, it's an honour to rise in meeting number 22 of the COVID-19 committee, otherwise known as something like the House of Commons. I'm here to present two petitions containing hundreds of signatures on the issue of the treatment of Falun Gong practitioners by the People's Republic of China, particularly the practice that's alleged of involuntary organ harvesting. The petitioners ask the Government of Canada to condemn this practice and to publicly call for an end to the persecution of Falun Gong in the People's Republic of China. The second petition is from residents throughout SaanichGulf Islands concerned about what was, at the time this petition was submitted, a future problem. It remains an issue, and I present it on behalf of petitioners who wish the Government of Canada not to put public funds into purchasing or maintaining the Trans Mountain pipeline or towards any expansion of the pipeline. The Chair: Next we'll go to Ms. Kwan. Ms. Jenny Kwan (Vancouver East, NDP): Mr. Chair, I rise to table two petitions. The first petition deals with the COVID-19 situation. The petitioners note the pandemic is having a devastating impact on many Canadians nationwide, especially those who have low to modest income, small business gig workers, freelancers, artists, film industry workers, non-salaried workers and individuals on fixed incomes such as seniors and those on disability. It further notes that rent, mortgage and utility payments are due at the end of each month, putting countless Canadians at risk of losing their housing. It is paramount there be safe self-isolation opportunities for all individuals in this country. To that end, the petitioners are calling for the government to immediately enact a nationwide rent freeze, eviction freeze, mortgage freeze and utility freeze, enforce mortgage deferrals for homeowners without penalty or interest charges from financial institutions and provide direct assistance in the form of a monthly, universal, direct payment of $2,000 per month for all, with an additional $250 per child immediately. The second petition deals with the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion. These petitioners join the hundreds of thousands of people who are opposed to the expansion. Trans Mountain, in building the pipeline, brings massive environmental and economic risk with no substantial benefit to British Columbia or to local residents. Approximately 40,000 barrels of oil have already leaked from existing Kinder Morgan pipelines, including two major spills in Burnaby since 2007. I might note, Mr. Chair, that just this past weekend there was yet another spill to the tune of 1,195 barrels here in British Columbia. There is no known scientific technology to clean up the bitumen when there is a spill, and the number of tankers would go from eight to 34 per month into the Burrard Inlet. It puts at risk many residential neighbourhoods and the traditional territories of at least 15 first nations. The Chair: May I interrupt for a moment, Ms. Kwan. I want to remind all members in the House that when presenting a petition, the idea is to be as concise as possible. Ms. Kwan, I'll let you wrap up, please. Ms. Jenny Kwan: Thank you, Mr. Chair. The petitioners are calling for the government to immediately act to prevent this new oil pipeline from proceeding through British Columbia. The Chair: Thank you. We'll now go to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood ParkFort Saskatchewan, CPC): Mr. Chair, I have four petitions to present today. The first petition reflects the outrage of my constituents at the ever-expanding order in council from the government banning more and more firearms. In particular, the petitioners highlight the failure of the government to act on the issue of illegal guns. The petitioners note that virtually all violent crimes committed in Canada, including the recent shooting in Nova Scotia, involve illegal firearms in the hands of those who are already not permitted to possess them. The petition has two asks. First of all, it asks that we reverse the order in council banning certain firearms, but also that we propose measures that will effectively address the illegal use of firearms by criminals while respecting the rights of law-abiding citizens. It also asks that we ensure that substantial changes to firearms laws in future actually be made by Parliament, not by the government acting in an unaccountable manner. The second petition deals with Bill C-8, which is the government's bill around conversion therapy. The petitioners support efforts to ban conversion therapy. They express concern about problems in the wording of the definition used in the legislation. They're asking the government to support amendments to fix the definition to address the issue of conversion therapy and ensure that the definition is correct and doesn't criminalize certain forms of counselling that individuals may voluntarily enter into. The third petition is regarding Bill S-204, a bill in the Senate that seeks to make it a criminal offence for a person to go abroad to receive an organ without consent, dealing especially with the horrific practice of forced organ harvesting and trafficking in China. The petitioners are supportive of Bill S-204 and want to see it move forward. The final petition is with respect to Bill C-7. There's been much discussion in this House about the need to do better in terms of long-term care. Rather than working to do better in long-term care, unfortunately we've seen the government removing vital safeguards in the area of euthanasia. I think our focus should be on assisting life rather than removing safeguards that are required in association with the euthanasia regime. The petitioners are particularly concerned about the government's plan to remove a 10-day reflection period that normally takes place. That period can already be waived under certain circumstances, but Bill C-7 proposes to remove it entirely as well as reduce the number of witnesses involved. The petitioners are quite concerned about what's going on in Bill C-7 and call for it to be stopped or amended. The Chair: Presenting petitions. We'll proceed to statements by members. We'll start off with Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly (NanaimoLadysmith, GP): Mr. Chair, we are in the midst of a global pandemic and an economic shock. Recent events have ripped open the wound of systemic racism in our country. Racialized and marginalized communities have been disproportionally affected by the pandemic. Thousands of seniors in long-term care facilities have died. It is clear that we need system change. In the past, governments have bailed out banks and corporations because they were too big to fail. It is time to bail out humanity and the planet. No one will be immune from the threat of climate change and mass extinction. Both are the result of the exploitation of the natural world in the name of the economy. Humans created the economy. We can choose to change it. We must protect our environment or perish. COVID-19 has demonstrated that together we can take courageous action for the common good. We need to do the same for the climate crisis, because humanity and our planet are too big to fail. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Spengemann. Mr. Sven Spengemann (MississaugaLakeshore, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, today marks World Elder Abuse Awareness Day. Underestimated and under-reported, elder abuse exists across the world. At risk of neglect and assault, many of the most vulnerable older persons reside in our long-term care facilities. They are the seniors who have built our country and shaped our communities, who have shown us resilience, courage and selflessness, who have made us stronger, and whose work and teachings continue to inspire us. They are parents and grandparents, brothers and sisters, friends and mentors. We have not been there for them in the same way they've been there for us throughout their lives. The Canadian Forces report, alongside the climbing disproportionate death toll in our long-term care facilities, has reconfirmed the ugly, indefensible reality of elder abuse and neglect in Canada. In my community, we mourn the deaths of 68 seniors from one long-term care facility alone, Camilla Care. We must make the same unwavering commitment to older persons as they have shown to us. We must protect and uphold their human rights. We must do better. The Chair: Before proceeding, I just want to bring up to the members in the background that we want to keep it as simple and as parliamentary as possible in keeping it neutral. We'll now move to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett (LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, CPC): During these trying times, the residents of LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes have risen to the challenge. They've made sacrifices and gone above and beyond to make the lives of their neighbours better and to keep our communities safe. It would be impossible to list everyone who has emerged as a community hero, but I'd like to highlight a few, like Lily, an eight-year-old from Elgin who raised funds for her local food bank by building and selling squirrel picnic tables, and Louise Boardman from Spencerville who's making masks for long-term care facilities and selling others in support of the Breast Cancer Action centre. The Knights of Columbus in Prescott raised funds and are distributing some $27,000 in support of charitable groups throughout the region. The Knights of Columbus in Kemptville are working overtime operating the local food bank. Who can forget our top-notch health care workers like Hannah and Mary at the Brockville COVID-19 testing centre? It is the people of LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes that make it so great. To everyone working to make a difference and to all of our essential workers, thank you. The Chair: Next is Mr. Anandasangaree. Mr. Gary Anandasangaree (ScarboroughRouge Park, Lib.): Mr. Chair, the Indian Act enshrined racism into Canadian law in 1876, and, through residential schools, the child welfare system, our legal system and our police, we criminalized and tore apart indigenous peoples. The deaths of Chantel Moore and Rodney Levi and the assault on Chief Allan Adam are recent examples of systemic racism within the RCMP. Sadly, the RCMP leadership has failed to acknowledge this reality and its root causes. These same systems negatively impact black Canadians. Anti-black racism has resulted in more young black men being jailed, children being streamed or excluded from schools and negative police interaction due to profiling. Black lives matter. No single Canadian is responsible for the prevalence of systemic racism; we all are. Collectively we build institutions that discriminate based on race. It is now time to reimagine and rework our institutions, starting with our police, to ensure that all Canadians can achieve their truest potential. The Chair: Ms. Larouche, you have the floor. Ms. Andranne Larouche (Shefford, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chair. June15 is World Elder Abuse Awareness Day. I want to remind members of the link between abuse and the problems of economic dependency among seniors. Improving their purchasing power means reducing the risk of them falling victim to abusive people. That's why the increase in the old age security benefit and the guaranteed income supplement must be extended beyond the pandemic. In three weeks, our seniors will receive their first cheque, when they should be receiving their second. A date must also be announced for the new horizons for seniors program, which helps several groups develop projects to break the isolation of seniors. In closing, I would like to mention the organization Justice alternative et mdiation that during the pandemic, along with other organizations in Shefford, has set up the project Une histoire pour la tienne, which also serves to mark this day. It's a virtual meeting between young people and seniors, allowing them to exchange some inspiring life experiences. Since age prejudice is very much present, I applaud this project, which aims to make us understand each other better and judge each other less. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Sangha. Mr. Ramesh Sangha (Brampton Centre, Lib.): Mr. Chair, in the time of this terrible crisis affecting all Canadians, when we are all thinking about how best to deal with it, let's all think about the people around us. Let's show our representation not only to those in the sector of sanctioned workers, but also to all those Canadians who day by day stand up and make a difference. Every day I am proud of the reactions of Canadians to this crisis. I want to acknowledge and celebrate all the contributions made by the people of Brampton Centre, all religious institutions, civil society and community organizations like Knights Table in my riding. We are all standing together to fight COVID-19. Let's continue working hard with that same spirit to get positive results out. Thank you very much. The Chair: I will proceed to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff (BruceGreyOwen Sound, CPC): Mr. Chair, whether graduating from elementary school, high school, Georgian College or graduating from colleges or universities across the country, I am proud of the accomplishments of all the graduates across BruceGreyOwen Sound. I would also like to congratulate and thank all the teachers and parents who have adapted to teaching online or from home and who have supported these graduates over the course of their academic careers. I'd like to extend special congratulations to Cameron Lovell, who just graduated from grade eight, as well as to Neebeesh and Neebin Elliott, originally from the Nawash unceded first nation on the Bruce Peninsula, who will be headed to Michigan State University, and to Jared Lumley from Owen Sound, who just graduated from my alma mater, the Royal Military College of Canada. The college motto of Truth, Duty, Valour is something all Canadians should aspire to live by. I wish all the best to these graduates on their next adventures. I and Canada cannot wait to see how their dreams and goals impact and change the world. I congratulate BruceGreyOwen Sound graduates. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Cormier. Mr. Serge Cormier (AcadieBathurst, Lib.): Today I pay tribute to RichardLosier, an entrepreneur, visionary and builder who died on June9,2020, surrounded by his family. Mr. Losier is a giant in the Acadian Peninsula business community. In1968, he co-founded St. Isidore Asphalte, a company that now has more than 200employees. He also launched many other businesses over the years. He was unifying and generous, a philanthropist who cared about young people and never missed an opportunity to improve their lives. I met Mr. Losier when I was 14years old, and I can say that he has been a positive influence in my life. Every time I met him, he gave me a lot of advice and encouragement, which I've never forgotten. Mr. Losier's legacy to his community is invaluable. His commitment remains an example for all of us to follow. Mr. Losier now joins his wife, Nolla. I offer my most sincere condolences to his children, Richard Jr. , Ronald, Nathalie, Caroline and Stphane, and to his family and friends. Rest in peace, Mr. Losier. You will be greatly missed. Thank you for everything you've done for our region. The Chair: We will now go to Ms. Dabrusin. Ms. Julie Dabrusin (TorontoDanforth, Lib.): Hello from my community in east end Toronto. People talk about how a city the size of Toronto can be cold, but that's far from the truth in my community. I want to give a shout-out to our teachers, like Mr. Wong of Earl Grey Senior Public School, who delivered home-baked cookies and handwritten notes to all of his students, or Monsieur Steve, who's offering online French classes, or the teachers of Riverdale Collegiate, who paraded through our streets to celebrate our graduates. Our local Michael Garron Hospital put out a call for community members to sew masks and received over 60,000 masks, including those made by Lisa Tancre of Chartwell Avondale Retirement Residence. Michelle Beaton organized a front window scavenger hunt to entertain children and their families. Restaurants, even while facing adversity, have been generously donating food, like the members of the Leslieville BIA or Mezes. There are so many more stories of generosity that I could share, but I'm out of time. I thank everyone who has stepped up. We all appreciate all of their hard work. The Chair: We will now go to Ms. Sahota. Ms. Jag Sahota (Calgary Skyview, CPC): Mr. Chair, on Saturday night, Calgarians, particularly those in the northeast, in my riding of Calgary Skyview, witnessed a devastating storm, the likes of which I have not seen in my lifetime. Homes, vehicles, community buildings and structures suffered significant damage due to large hail, floods and high winds. People acted quickly to seek shelter. I'm so grateful that there have been no reports of personal injury or loss of life. I went around the community yesterday to survey the damage. It is extensive. My heart aches for those who have been impacted by the storm in an already incredibly difficult time, but we are resilient. We know that in the coming weeks there will be a lot of cleanup required, both to personal property and in the community. I know my constituents, and we will help one another get through this together. I will work hard to do everything I can to help rebuild this community. The Chair: Mr. Serr, you have the floor. Mr. Marc Serr (Nickel Belt, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to express my sincere gratitude to the people of West Nippissing who organized Pride activities to celebrate the LGBTQ community in June. This week, we are also celebrating National Public Service Week. I thank the public servants for their dedication to the Nickel Belt community and the Valley East and Rayside-Balfour areas. The Chair: Next is Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya (MarkhamUnionville, CPC): Mr. Chair, when COVID-19 began spreading across Ontario, Markham, like many other communities, was unprepared. Our front-line health care workers did not have enough personal protective equipment to do their jobs safely. When Markham residents heard about these shortages, my office was flooded with calls from people who had PPE and wanted to donate. Since then my office has been able to deliver tens of thousands of PPE supplies to front-line health care workers and five masks to each family in need. This pandemic has shown that no matter what the challenge is, the Markham community will overcome it. Today, I would like to thank the front-line health care workers who are doing incredible work. I would also like to thank all those who have helped in Markham's hour of need. The Chair: I understand we had a bit of a glitch there. I'm sorry. With the pause, we thought that was the end of it. Mr. Serr, I would ask you to continue. I understand you started to switch languages. Please continue. You have 30seconds. Mr. Marc Serr: Thank you. I'm switching to English now. Thank you to our nurses, doctors, pharmacists, cashiers, janitors. Thank you to various retail workers and first responders dealing with COVID-19. You keep our communities safe and healthy, and you feed us. Your dedication and sacrifice are greatly appreciated. As we start to see local businesses reopen, it is important for all of us to remember to follow best practices outlined by local public health. Our front-line workers deserve our respect. It is important for all of us to respect social distancing, to protect all workers and their families. Together we can remain strong and united as we continue to face this challenge together. The Chair: Again, my apologies for skipping over there, but now we'll to to Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod (KamloopsThompsonCariboo, CPC): Mr. Chair, in commemoration of Italian Heritage Month, I would like to pay tribute to the Colombo Lodge and Italian Cultural Centre in Kamloops, British Columbia. The Colombo Lodge was founded in 1914 and is an integral part of our community. Recently they began Colombo Cares take-home dinners with proceeds distributed to different non-profit organizations throughout the region. Last month they very generously gave away hundreds of dinners to Royal Inland Hospital staff and paramedics for their tireless work throughout the pandemic. In their own words they say, Colombo Lodge is very proud of the Italians that have made Kamloops their home. Community members of Italian ancestrypast and presenthave helped and continue to help Kamloops prosper as a giving, welcoming and inclusive community. Personally, I want to thank all members for their friendship and generosity over the years. Our community is forever grateful for their kindness. The Chair: We'll now proceed to Mr. Harris. Mr. Jack Harris (St. John's East, NDP): Mr. Chair, many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are facing a serious financial crisis. Most people with disabilities are waiting to be included in the Liberals'promised program. Fish plant workers will need support to avoid a disastrous year. Many small businesses don't qualify for programs. Municipalities need emergency help to meet the crisis. People are worried about what will happen when the CERB runs out in two weeks'time, and the coming tourism season looks very grim. The province itself is in serious financial crisis due to the pandemic and the decline in oil prices. The federal government must overhaul and enhance the fiscal stabilization program to help Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and other oil-producing provinces through this crisis. Both the province and the oil and gas industry players have committed to net zero emissions by 2050. This is a challenge and an opportunity to transition to a sustainable energy future, but it will require significant investment and support by government to keep the industry strong and make this a just transition for workers. Much has been done. Much more needs to be done. The Chair: Ms. Gaudreau, you have the floor. Ms. Marie-Hlne Gaudreau (LaurentidesLabelle, BQ): Mr. Chair, all 44elected municipal officials in the riding of LaurentidesLabelle and I have sent a letter to the government asking that cellular and high-speed Internet networks be made available to all. The crisis has accelerated the demonstration of the need for these networks in daily life. The territorial complexity of the Laurentians means that there are areas where the signal is weak, unstable or non-existent. There is an urgent and essential need to change the infrastructure of the current networks. Also, because of the lockdown, Internet failures are being felt, and they prevent distance learning, telemedicine and teleworking, among other things. How can our municipalities develop economically if they can't provide their community with adequate communication tools? We are therefore calling on the government to put the interests of its people first by investing massively right now in the construction of high-speed Internet and cellular infrastructure. The Chair: Mr. Waugh. Mr. Kevin Waugh (SaskatoonGrasswood, CPC): I rise today to pay tribute to Sir Winston Churchill, the former prime minister of Great Britain and one of the greatest leaders history has ever known. In what can only be called a lifetime of service, Churchill's contributions to the Commonwealth and to the world are without equal. During the Second World War he led the allied forces in Europe against the tyranny and fascism of Adolph Hitler and his Nazi regime. When our world was in its darkest hour, Churchill's leadership was a beacon of hope and freedom. I am reminded of something he once said, All the greatest things are simple, and many can be expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honour, duty, mercy, hope. Sir Winston Churchill himself embodied all of these great things and will forever be a symbol of freedom, democracy and hope. The Chair: Mr. Gerretsen. Mr. Mark Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands, Lib.): Mr. Chair, I would like to add my voice to the recognition and celebration of Pride Month, which is celebrated annually during June. Pride Month is important for Canadians because we can be proud of who we are and celebrate our diversity. This June is different from previous years as we cannot celebrate in person all together. However, I know the ongoing pandemic will not stop us from showing our love and support for the LGBTQ+ community. To celebrate Pride Month this year, my office distributed 3,000 pride maple leaf pins across the country; whoever asked received one. Although the majority was sent to constituents in my riding, over 500 pins were sent to the neighbouring ridings of LanarkFrontenacKingston, LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, and HastingsLennox and Addington. It warms my heart to see so many Canadians showing their support. Happy Pride, everyone. The Chair: We will now proceed to the questioning of ministers. Please note that we will suspend the proceedings twice to allow employees who provide support for the sitting to substitute for each other safely. Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell (Louis-Saint-Laurent, CPC): Mr. Chair, I am very pleased to take part in today's meeting of this parliamentary committee. Canada has been dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic for three months now. The situation now seems to be improving, although we must remain vigilant. Economically, business people and the entire Canadian economy depend on government decisions. My question is very simple: when will the economic update take place? Hon. Chrystia Freeland (Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): Mr. Chair, I thank the hon. member for his question. I agree with him that Canada and Canadians are doing an excellent and difficult job in the fight against coronavirus. As for the economy, our government is there for Canadians, for workers and for businesses, and it will continue to be. Mr. Grard Deltell: Canadians, business people and businesses want to know where the government is headed. When will the economic update take place? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, Canadians know that the government is there to support them. Eight The Chair: We return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Canadians and Quebeckers also know that the Government of Quebec will table its economic update this week. Why isn't the federal government doing the same? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I'm pleased to explain to hon. members and to Canadians what the government is doing for the economy The Chair: We return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, it is a real pleasure for me to explain to the minister and everybody in the House of Commons that today the Saskatchewan government will table its economic update. Why can't Ottawa do that? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I'm delighted to have the opportunity to share with Canadians what our government is doing to support workers, businesses and the economy. Eight million Canadians have received the CERB, essential support for Canadian workers and their families. The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, 11 days ago the Newfoundland government tabled its own economic update. We see governments acting correctly for their people, except for the Liberal government, which cannot table an economic update. When will the Liberal government table an economic update, which Canadians would like to see? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I am delighted to share with the member opposite and with Canadians what we are doing practically that has meaning for Canadians. Let me talk about what we are doing for Canadian businesses. Nearly 670,000 Canadian businesses have received support The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: In Canada, the Quebec government will table its economic update this week. The Saskatchewan government tabled its economic update today. The Newfoundland government has tabled its economic update. Everybody is working hard in Canada, and the business community would like to know where the Liberal government is going. The question is crystal clear. When will the Liberal government table an economic update? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, Canadian workers and Canadian businesses want to know that our government is here to support them. I have shared with this House our support for Canadian workers through the CERB. I've spoken about the CEBA, and let me point out that more than $26 billion of support has been given through that essential program. Let me talk about the wage subsidy. More than 2. 6 million The Chair: We'll return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, this is starting to get interesting; the minister is revealing some of these expenses. Could the minister tell us how much the government has spent in the last three months? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I will continue in French by explaining what our government is doing for Canadians and workers The Chair: Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, this is a little bit concerning for all Canadians, because this government cannot say when they will table the economic update, cannot identify how much money they have spent in the last three months and cannot say what is the deficit of Canada. Is somebody in this government running this country correctly? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, absolutely we are running this country, and we are supporting our economy. In fact, we appreciate that Canada currently is experiencing its greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression. That is why we have devoted nearly 11% of GDP to support Canadian workers and Canadian businesses. I want to assure Canadians The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Normandin. Ms. Normandin, you have the floor. Ms. Christine Normandin (Saint-Jean, BQ): Mr. Chair, there are times when Quebec and the provinces are not just two solitudes, but they get along and speak as one, such as when the time comes to tell the government to mind its own business. On reading section91 of the Constitution Act, 1982, which sets out the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal government, nowhere do I find that the federal government must meddle by attaching conditions to health transfers. It is Quebec and the provinces that hire the medical personnel, doctors, nurses and caretakers. It is Quebec and the provinces that are responsible for purchasing the necessary equipment. It is Quebec and the provinces that know what is happening on the ground and what their needs are. Will the government do the only thing within its authority, which is to take the cheque, sign it and put it in the mail? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I thank the hon. member for her question. We fully understand the importance of federal support for the provinces, especially in our national fight against the coronavirus. I agree with the hon. member that we must give financial support to the provinces, including Quebec absolutely. I would also like to point out the importance of the support of the Canadian Armed Forces, who are doing an important and excellent job in Quebec and Ontario today, right now. Ms. Christine Normandin: Mr. Chair, I am glad to see that there is recognition of the importance of transferring this money. My question is whether it can be transferred unconditionally; that's what I'm asking. There's a state of emergency. In the past, we have seen that it takes a long time to negotiate conditions with the federal government. We saw it in the case of the Quebec City tramway, and we are still seeing it now in the case of transfers for housing in Quebec, for which there is no agreement and, therefore, no transfer of money. Will the federal government send the money free of conditions? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the hon. member said in her first question that the only thing the federal government had to do on health care was to sign the cheques. I can't agree because, today, at this time, at the request of the Premier of Quebec, the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces are in Quebec today; they're there to save the lives of seniors The Chair: We now return to Ms. Normandin. Ms. Christine Normandin: It was indeed at Quebec's request. What I'm saying is that, at present, the provinces are unanimously asking that there be no conditions. It's urgent that the money be transferred. The federal government's job here is to sign the cheque and send it to the provinces. The government's job is also to make Parliament work. This is where there should be negotiations so that we can work, among other things, to send money to people living with disabilities, to make sure we fight CERB fraud and to make sure that court time limits are effective in the current crisis. Can the government focus on the issue in order to respect the provinces and transfer money for health care? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: I thank the hon. member for her question, Mr. Chair. I agree with the hon. member that the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces are in Quebec today at the request of the Province of Quebec. That said, I hope that the hon. member will agree with me that being there for Quebec's seniors, that saving the lives of Quebec's seniors, is much more than simply signing cheques. I am very proud of the work the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces are doing. I think we all should thank these people who are working for Canada, for Quebec, and who are doing an important and excellent job. Ms. Christine Normandin: Mr. Chair, I think the Deputy Prime Minister misunderstood me when I was talking about the importance of acting quickly. Negotiations between the government and the provinces take an awfully long time because the federal government decides to place conditions where there shouldn't be any. Right now, the only important thing is to transfer the money quickly so that it can be used in our hospitals and our long-term care facilities, where the need is desperate. Quebec and the provinces know exactly what their needs are. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I would like to point out the extent to which the federal government is there to support the provinces, including Quebec. We have increased funding to the provinces and territories by $500million to help them prepare for COVID-19 outbreaks. This funding is in addition to the $40billion that we already provide annually to the provinces and territories. That's a lot of money. It is strong endorsement The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh (Burnaby South, NDP): Mr. Chair, systemic racism is killing people. It's killing black people and it's killing indigenous people. Recently, Rodney Levi was another victim of systemic racism. He was killed in New Brunswick by the RCMP. To deal with systemic racism, we need systemic change. Will the Liberal government commit to systemic change so that not another life is ever taken again? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I thank the member opposite for the extremely important question, and I'll take this opportunity to acknowledge the work that he has done for many years fighting racism in Canada. Our government absolutely acknowledges that systemic racism exists in Canada. It exists in all of our institutions, including the police and the RCMP. I agree with the member opposite that now is the moment to fight this The Chair: Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, I thank the Deputy Prime Minister very much for the response, but there are some specific actions we need to take. There are movements. Black Lives Matter, as a movement, is calling for the defunding of police. What they're saying is we need to make better choices with how money is being spent. When someone is in need of a wellness check or a mental health check, money, financing and support should go to mental health workers and health care workers, not the police. Is the government prepared to fund and prioritize health care workers over the police? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the member quite rightly began his questions by speaking about systemic racism against indigenous people in Canada, and I would like to speak about that for a moment. I spoke to Perry Bellegarde this morning, because it is such a crucial issue. We can describe it as the original sin of our country. I absolutely agree that we need root and branch reform, including in how policing is done in Canada. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, will the Liberal government commit to a review of the use of force as outlined for the RCMP? Will the Liberals commit to that change? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister and the Minister of Public Safety had many conversations last week with the RCMP. We all accept that The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, will the government commit to ensuring that de-escalation receives priority? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Let me continue, Mr. Chair. Systemic racism exists in all of our federal institutions, including the RCMP. It's time to put an end to it. Let me just say The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, I'm not getting an answer. Will the Prime Minister or the Liberal government commit to something simple and ensure that at the federal level, racial profiling, street checks and carding are expressly prohibited? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, sadly, I can't agree that rooting out systemic racism is going to be simple, but I can agree that racial profiling is absolutely inappropriate. It is not something that we should The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Well, I'm going to try to get another commitment from the government, because they don't seem able to commit to something as clear as ending racial profiling. We know that millions of Canadians in a couple of weeks are going to be faced with the reality of their CERB ending. These families are worried about how they're going to put food on the table, because they can't return to a job. Will the Liberal government commit today so that those families will have some concrete support, yes or no? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, let me be clear, as I was in my previous answer, that our government clearly is opposed to racial profiling. This is a wrong practice and we're very clear about our position there. Now when it comes to the CERB, I absolutely share the concern of the member opposite. The Canadian economy is in its direst state since the Great Depression. We know that all the jobs have not yet come back. We know that Canadian workers, Canadian families, continue to need The Chair: We'll now pause for a short time to allow staff to change within the safety parameters for the COVID-19 virus, and as we resume, we will go to Ms. Harder. Ms. Rachael Harder (Lethbridge, CPC): Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister has mandated his ministers, and I quote, to govern in a positive, open and collaborative way. Ironically, as it stands, Parliament is currently closed for business. Opposition parties have little opportunity to hold the ruling party to account, private members'bills cannot be tabled and legislation cannot be debated. Can the Prime Minister, Mr. Trudeau himself, help us understand how all of this fits into his definition of so-called open government? The Honourable Pablo Rodriguez (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons): Well, Mr. Chair, we're here, right? We're here, and the opposition is asking questions. They have the equivalent of eight question periods instead of five to ask questions. They have more time than before, so I don't know why they're not happy about it. Ms. Rachael Harder: That's like when I'm asking for a full meal and your handing me a few jellybeans and saying, Why aren't you happy with that? Mr. Chair, here's the thing. It's like switching a light on and off when it's convenient for the Prime Minister and for the Liberal Party. That's what they want to do here. That's not Parliament. That's not democracy. When will Mr. Trudeau do the right thing, turn the lights on and get back to work for Canadians? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I'm really sorry to hear that my colleague's not working. I can assure you, Mr. Chair, on this side of the House, we're all actually working very hard and we're answering the questions from the opposition. Why? It's because it's extremely important. I sat there for seven years asking questions. I understand important Ms. Rachael Harder: The member opposite knows very well that he is misleading the Canadian public. This is not true Parliament. This is simply a special committee. Here's the thing. On the Liberal Party website, under the platform commitment, it says that Parliament works best when its members are free to do what they have been elected to do, and that is be the voice for their communities and hold the government to account. This is a Liberal document. Did the Prime Minister forget that strengthening Parliament was part of his 2019 platform commitment? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague for quoting our excellent platform. That was a very very good document. The thing is, I think we've reached a balance whereby MPs can come from different places, mostly around Ottawa, and ask questions; but also we can have colleagues from across the country asking questions. Why does my colleague think it is better to have only 35 MPs participating instead of 338? Ms. Rachael Harder: Does the Prime Minister value democracy, or does he still look up to China's basic dictatorship? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, we're answering all the questions from the opposition, not only from the people in this room, but we're answering The Chair: It's back to Ms. Harder now. Ms. Rachael Harder: I'll ask the question again. Does the Prime Minister still value the basic dictatorship of China over Canada's democracy? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I don't know where the colleague wants to go from here, Mr. Chair. I'd like to know from her why it is not important to her that her colleagues participate directly. Ms. Rachael Harder: Mr. Trudeau wrote to his ministers and said to them that they continue to raise the bar on openness, effectiveness and transparency. He went on to explain that This means. . . government that is open by default. We now have a parliament that is currently shut down. Mr. Trudeau has shut it down and has prevented us from being able to do to the good work that Canadians expect us to do. Is this Mr. Trudeau's idea of open by default? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, do they want to talk about shutting down Parliament? How about the time they prorogued Parliament twicenot only once, but twice? The Conservative government shut down Parliament twice. I was here. I was sitting on the other side of the aisle. It's quite the opposite now. We're taking all the questions. This place is open, and we're answering questions. The Chair: One moment, please. I haven't acknowledged you yet, Ms. Harder. We've stopped the time there. I want to remind honourable members that questions and answers are being given, and we want to hear both sides. Please keep the heckling down. Ms. Harder, please proceed. Ms. Rachael Harder: In 2014, the leader of the Liberal Party developed a policy resolution entitled Restoring Trust in Canada's Democracy. That's ironic, because right now, again, Parliament is currently shut down. We are prevented from being able to do the good work that we are expected to do. At the time, the Prime Minister said, Canadians want their Members of Parliament to be effective voices for their communities in Ottawa, and not merely mouthpieces in their communities for an all-too-powerful Prime Minister. Sadly, Mr. Trudeau has become the all-too-powerful prime minister that he once believed should not exist. Why did he change his mind? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, I'd like to know why my colleague wants to shut down the voices of her colleagues who could not speak and could not participate in this room. Mr. Chair, how would we vote on private members'bills, for example? As you know, it is not a government vote or a party vote; it's per row. You want to come back? Are you going to acceptMr. Chair, through youthat we have electronic voting, yes or no? The Chair: We'll go on to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, we know that the Minister of Foreign Affairs has champagne tastes and London flats, but it's his champagne mortgages that Canadians are concerned about. Specifically, why did the minister only disclose the complete extent of his personal debt to the Chinese government on June 4 of this year? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, as you know, since the minister entered politics, his two mortgages and other liabilities and assets have been fully disclosed to the Ethics Commissioner and placed on the online public registry. It's public, Mr. Chair. It's public. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Now it's public and it's terrible. When will the foreign affairs minister be here to answer these questions himself? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, it's always been public. We're in the middle of a pandemic here, trying to help Canadians, and the best they can do is ask questions about The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: When the minister owes over a million dollars to the Chinese government, people have a right to ask him questions. When will the Minister of Foreign Affairs show up? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: The minister shows up every day, Mr. Chair. He shows up and works for Canadians. Once again, those are public documents. Everything the minister did is public. I still don't know why they ask The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, he doesn't even have to come to the House. All he has to do is appear on the screen. Where is the minister? Why is he hiding? Why won't he answer questions about his personal debt to the Chinese government? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, if he goes online he's going to get the information. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, the minister is hiding. Let's ask some specific questions about their China policy. What is the impact on the decision-making? Three-quarters of Canadians don't want Huawei involved in our 5G network. Will the minister put the interests of Canadians ahead of the interests of his creditors and say no to Huawei? Hon. Navdeep Bains (Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry): Mr. Chair, when it comes to 5G deployment, we are right now currently undergoing a comprehensive review. We have been absolutely clear with allies and with Canadians that we never have and never will compromise Canadians'national interests. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, that is not an answer, and it is completely out of step with what our allies have already recognized. Reports are emerging of multiple deadly viruses exported from Winnipeg's microbiology laboratory to the Wuhan Institute of Virology right before scientists were expelled for policy breaches. In spite of that, scientific co-operation between Canadian institutions and the military-affiliated Wuhan Institute of Virology is continuing. Why hasn't the government put in place new guidelines to prevent the export of sensitive pathogens and information to China? Hon. Patty Hajdu (Minister of Health): Mr. Chair, he's right that in 2019 the National Microbiology Laboratory shared lab samples with the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The National Microbiology Laboratory routinely shares samples with other labs to help advance the international community's understanding of viruses and the research that is ongoing around those viruses. There are strict protocols in place for these transfers, and these samples were transported according to Canadian laws and regulations. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, I think Canadians would be concerned to hear that it's routine to transport viruses to Chinese military-affiliated labs. When Champagne was the parliamentary secretary for finance, the government decided to give hundreds of millions of dollars to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, bankrolling Chinese state-controlled development projects in Asia with weak standards in labour, human rights and environment. Will the minister put Canadian taxpayers ahead of his personal creditors and support a pullout from the Communist Party-controlled development bank? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Once again, Mr. Chair, my colleague is trying to connect the dots, and I don't know exactly where he is going from here, but everything is public. There's a thing called Google. He can go on it and check the information. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, the public can listen to this. I'm sure this exchange will also be available on Google, and the public can draw their own conclusions. We have failures on 5G, failures when it comes to the transport of deadly viruses and failures when it comes to giving over $400 million to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. It's clear that the Bank of China's investment in Minister Champagne is paying off. It's time for the minister to settle his debt with the Communist government and not settle it on the backs of Canadians. When will the minister be here in the House and answer questions about this mortgage? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: My colleague should be cautious with what he is saying in the House, Mr. Chair. This is serious stuff. He should be careful about what he says. The minister is actually working extremely hard for all Canadians and is doing his job correctly, Mr. Chair. We're talking about public information. Once again, let him go to Google and google it. That's it. The Chair: Now we'll go to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett: Canada's ambassador to the United Nations sent a letter last week to all member states of the UN promising that Canada would consider providing more funding for UNRRA, the same UNRRA that is a front for Hamas, which allows weapons of terror to be stored in schools and provides textbooks that call for the destruction of Israel. Do these Liberals have no shame when it comes to their quest for a seat on the UN Security Council? Hon. Mary Ng (Minister of Small Business, Export Promotion and International Trade): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to thank the honourable member for that question. We know that at this time Canada must show leadership in the face of global challenges. More than ever, Canada is playing a positive role by being a champion in diversity and inclusion, supporting the global fight against COVID-19, addressing climate change, leading peace and security efforts and helping the most vulnerable. A seat on the Security Council will allow Canada to be a strong voice for a fairer, more inclusive and prosperous The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett: Mr. Chair, I received a letter from Bob Anderson this week, who's advocating for his neighbours like Jean Grevelding, who owns a cottage at Butternut Bay. Like many people, Jean is an American who owns a property on our side of the border. These people are taxpaying members of our communities. These folks have plans in place to follow all Canadian quarantine rules. They're concerned about leaving their properties uncared for over the summer. Will folks like Jean be allowed to cross the border to check on their properties this summer? Hon. Bill Blair (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Of course, our priority is and always has been and always must be the protection of the health and safety of Canadians. That's why we put in place these restrictions for non-essential travel and have required, through the Public Health Agency of Canada, a 14-day quarantine. I don't know the specifics of the person for whom you advocate, but we want to make sure that if they come into Canada, it is for an essential purpose and that they do it safely and respect the quarantine that has been put in place. Mr. Michael Barrett: With nine branches throughout my riding, the Royal Canadian Legion offers a great deal to veterans and rural communities alike. They have been experiencing hardship and a loss of revenue, to the point where they may be forced to shut their doors. The Zone G2 commander and local mayors such as Roger Haley have reached out to me expressing their dire need. Will the government offer support to Legions across the country so they can continue to carry out their vital work for our veterans? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (Minister of Veterans Affairs): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Yes, we have done a lot to help support groups like the Legions. There is a $350-million emergency community support fund. If they're supplying any help to people regarding COVID, this fund is there. Indeed, we're doing everything we can to make sure that we help the Legions and other groups that do so much to help veterans right across the country. Mr. Michael Barrett: On May 21, the minister stated that her team was working as quickly as it could to fill the gaps in CEBA. It has now been three weeks, and many business owners, such as mortgage broker Corinna Smith-Gatcke, are still left in the lurch amid the delays, which are pushing businesses closer to shutting their doors for good. Will these businesses have access to CEBA before it's too late for them? Hon. Mary Ng: Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I thank the honourable member for that really important question on our Canadian small businesses. Those businesses can absolutely have access to the loan at their financial institution this Friday, and I would encourage them to go and see their bank or credit union. I want businesses to know that nothing is more important for us than making sure they get the support they need during this difficult time. Mr. Michael Barrett: The County Road 43 expansion project is critical for my riding and the region as a whole. This project will widen the road, increasing safety for the 18,000 motorists who travel the road every day. It's been 334 days since the provincial and local governments announced funding, but there has been nothing from this Liberal government. It's been 181 days since Minister McKenna told me her staff were reviewing the project. Today, there is still nothing, and for the last month the minister's team has not even found the time to respond to my request for an update. Will Minister McKenna finally stop with the delays and commit to funding this project today? Hon. Catherine McKenna (Minister of Infrastructure and Communities): Mr. Chair, as the member opposite knows, we work with provinces and territories to advance our infrastructure investments. We're making investments across the country. They are making a real difference in people's lives. We're always happy to work with members of Parliament, but they must also work with provinces and territories so that projects are advanced by them to our office. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall (YorktonMelville, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Through you, has Mr. MacAulay read ombudsman Dalton's May 2020 report, Financial Compensation for Canadian Veterans: A comparative analysis of benefit regimes? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I apologize, but I'll have to ask my honourable colleague to repeat the question. The Chair: Mrs. Wagantall, we'll freeze the time so that there's no extra time taken. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Thank you, Chair. My question was whether Mr. MacAulay has read ombudsman Dalton's May 2020 report, Financial Compensation for Canadian Veterans: A comparative analysis of benefit regimes. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I appreciate my honourable colleague's question. Of course, I appreciate Mr. Dalton's input and all that he has done for veterans. We've discussed it many times. I've done everything and worked with him in order to make sure that we bring the proper compensation to veterans The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: As a result of that study, are the financial outcomes Canada seeks to provide for ill and injured veterans now clearly defined within the Department of Veterans Affairs? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, as the member would know, I am to bring a report to the veterans affairs committee, and there are a number of things done in order to make sure that report is The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Then I would suggest that we get our committee up and going as it should be. Where are these financial directions published? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Well, of course, lockdown, but just under $90 million that the government put in supplementary estimates to make sure we address the backlog for Veterans Affairs. It's a major help The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Minister, are Canadian Armed Forces members provided with a copy of this document? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, my honourable colleague would have to ask the Canadian Armed Forces that question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: There are three different providing lifetime benefits for ill and injured veterans. In Ombudsman Dalton's recent report, did any one of these three provide the best compensation in all nine scenarios that were studied? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Of course, as she knows, there's been a lot of work done in order to make sure that we provide the proper compensation to veterans. We're working very hard, with a lot of help from Mr. Dalton, to make sure that the appropriate The Chair: We'll now continue with Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: In the undisclosed settlement of Sean Bruyea's legal case against Seamus O'Regan and the Liberal government, a joint statement says. . . Canadians, especially all Veterans and their families, are encouraged to enter the public debate about policies and programs that affect our Veterans and their families. Does Mr. MacAulay agree with this statement? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I can assure you that anybody is welcome to enter any discussion on compensation of veterans. We're always open to what we can do in order to make sure that we provide appropriate compensation. I don't think the term would be appropriate, but it would provide some compensation to veterans who truly deserve it. They defend our democracy The Chair: We'll go back to Ms. Wagantall. Oh, I'm sorry Ms. Andranne Larouche: Mr. Chair, I have a point of order. The interpretation hasn't worked for a few interventions. It's difficult to follow the exchange between the hon. member and the minister. The Chair: We're having a problem with the interpretation. Minister and Ms. Wagantall, you are joining us virtually. I'm wondering if you have the right language on at the bottom of your screen. We'll start with that for troubleshooting. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: I have English. The Chair: Very good. Minister MacAulay, what do you have? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I have English, Mr. Chair. The Chair: Very good. Then we'll check on our side. Ms. Larouche, did I understand correctly that the interpretation didn't work for both speakers? Ms. Andranne Larouche: The sound didn't allow the interpreters to do their job. It seemed to be a problem with the sound. The Chair: In that case, I would ask both members to maybe put their mike a little bit close to their mouth. We'll see how that works. I'm looking at the screen, and I notice the mike is a little bit far. Could we bend it in a little bit more? I appreciate that. Thank you for your patience. We'll give it another try. Ms. Wagantall, please go ahead. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: On a point of order, quite often while I'm trying to speak, there are lots of other voices in the background. The Chair: I would ask everyone to please be on mute, as well as for anyone in the chamber to please refrain from speaking loudly. Just whisper among yourselves if you have something to say. We'll take this one from the top. We have a minute and 45 seconds left. Ms. Wagantall, please proceed with your next question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: You said next question, so we're not going backwards, Chair? The Chair: Did we have an answer from Minister MacAulay? No? We'll go to Minister MacAulay to finish up the answer. We'll start at 27 seconds, freeze the clock and hear his answer. Then, because of all of the confusion, we'll start at one minute and 45 seconds when we get going again. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Should I repeat the question, sir? The Chair: Please do. The clock is frozen. After we go through the question and the answer, we'll start the clock again. Mr. Wagantall, please repeat the question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Thank you, Chair. In the undisclosed settlement to Sean Bruyea's legal case against Seamus O'Regan and the Liberal government, a joint statement says, Canadians, especially all Veterans and their families, are encouraged to enter the public debate about policies and programs that affect our Veterans and their families. Does Mr. MacAulay agree with this statement? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I appreciate my honourable colleague's question and concern. Of course I agree. Anybody is quite open to indicate whatever they wish in order to make sure we provide as appropriate a compensation as possible. You can never totally compensate veterans truly for what they deserve, but we want to make sure we provide the best compensation possible. That's what we will do and want to do. The Chair: Ms. Wagantall, we will start the clock again. You have one minute and 45 seconds remaining. Please proceed. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: If that's the case, is Minister MacAulay aware of the practice of red-flagging veterans'files? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I'm not aware. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Since the deputy minister has indicated that he runs the department, will the minister ask him for the names of veterans and the dates and the reasons that they are, or have been, red-flagged by VAC? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I would certainly ask any veteran or anybody who has a concern to contact my office. I will do anything I can to make sure that the veterans The Chair: We'll go back to Ms. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Do the most ill and injured still receive from the pension up to $300,000 less for life? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, as you know and as the Prime Minister indicated when the pension for life was put in place, it was stated that if anybody receives lessthe Prime Minister himself indicated it quite clearlythat must be adjusted. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: For veterans in similar circumstances, should the date of their application for compensation be a factor in determining whether they're treated equitably? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Yes, of course, the date is when the compensation would start. Of course, it's very important and very appropriate. The Chair: Now we will proceed to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd (Sturgeon RiverParkland, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Retired Major Mark Campbell in my riding of Sturgeon RiverParkland lost both legs in the line of duty in Afghanistan. He is an avid sport shooter, but understandably, due to his disability, he is very limited in the kinds of firearms he can use, and all of these firearms have now been banned under the Liberal OIC. My question to the Minister of Public Safety is this: Did their department do a legal analysis and consider the section 15 charter rights of disabled Canadians not to be discriminated against when they passed their OIC? Hon. Bill Blair: Yes, there was a very thorough analysis done by the justice department to ensure that the prohibitions we put in place were, in fact, charter compliant. Let me also say, Mr. Chair, how important it was that we prohibited weapons that were not designed for sporting purposes at all. In fact, they were designed for soldiers to use in combat. They have no place in a civil society. We have prohibited them, and we believeand this has been echoed by many people across the countrythat this will make Canadians safer. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, is the minister aware that the AR-15 is the most popular sporting rifle in Canada, and is he aware that disabled veterans like Major Mark Campbell are unable to participate in the sport of sport shooting because of his OIC? Hon. Bill Blair: I can assure the member that what I am aware of is that the AR-15 and other weapons like them have been used in mass killings in Canada on many occasions, such as at cole Polytechnique, at Dawson College, again at the Quebec mosque and in Moncton. The AR-15s in particular were also used at the terrible tragedy in places like Sandy Hook, where a bunch of kids were killed, so there is no place for The Chair: We will go to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, it has been months since the Liberals shut down this Parliament and months since the Minister of Finance should have presented a budget or at least an economic update to Canadians. Since then we have seen billions spent with little oversight and no plan. The minister says that he needs certainty before he can table a budget. Well, that didn't stop Stephen Harper and the Conservatives from tabling a budget in the depth of the last great recession. When are these Liberals finally going to take their job seriously and table an economic update? Hon. Mona Fortier (Minister of Middle Class Prosperity and Associate Minister of Finance): Mr. Chair, we're taking this very seriously. We're working for Canadians and bringing forward supports to make sure that businesses, workers and Canadians can put food on the table and pay their rent. We will continue to support Canadians, and when we have a clear projection to present, we will do that. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, the results are in, and businesses aren't happy with the so-called support programs from these Liberals. In fact, the oil and gas industry has been shut out of many of these economic programs. When is the government going to recognize that their business support plans have been an absolute failure with only a fraction of the billions promised being accessible to businesses? Hon. Seamus O'Regan (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Chair, our government has taken swift and immediate action to support our sector throughout this challenging time. We had the BCAP, which is critically important to providing liquidity to support the SMEs that make up 85% of the jobs in our sector. It has taken an enormous team effort. People are working around the clock to get money where it needs to be. We are helping hard-working Canadians, small businesses and large businesses right across the country, but in particular in our energy sector. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, I'm pleased to see the Minister of Natural Resources online. He tweeted recently to praise the Alberta Carbon Trunk Line and the North West Redwater Partnership refinery in my riding. Can the minister tell us what, if any, support they have given to the innovative carbon capture and sequestration technology in this country? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Mr. Chair, we see carbon capture and sequestration as an integral part of lowering emissions, making emissions more competitive and making our oil and gas industry more competitive. We're seeing where the investment dollars are going. They are going to jurisdictions that are committed to lowering emissions. Obviously, this government is committing to net zero. Mr. Dane Lloyd: I note that the minister couldn't name a single example of government support for carbon capture, utilization and sequestration technology. We have spent a lot of time talking about the COVID-19 pandemic, but Canadians are living with another horrific reality, that being the intensifying opioid overdose epidemic. Reports indicate that in the past four years, 14,000 Canadians have died, and the numbers during COVID-19 have been skyrocketing, with British Columbia seeing a 39% increase this year alone. I know this because I've lost a family member to a fentanyl overdose. When is the government going to take this scourge seriously and take action to save the lives of Canadians? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Mr. Chair, I share the member's deep sadness about the number of lives we've lost to opioid overdose. Our government has been steadily making it easier for people who live with substance use to access medications to treat substance use, such as prescription Suboxone and methadone. We have made it easier to rapidly establish safe injection sites in communities and have supported community-based projects that work with people who are using substances. We need to understand that this is a complex issue, and we need to support people to get the help they need. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes (AlgomaManitoulinKapuskasing, NDP) ): The hon. member for Thrse-DeBlainville. Ms. Louise Chabot (Thrse-De Blainville, BQ): MadamChair, I will come back to the bill introduced last week. As parliamentarians, we felt like we were watching a very bad play, as I imagine the public did. I say that it was theatre, even though it shouldn't be in this place. The government decided to stage a play and act alone and, unfortunately, there were several acts missing. A very important part of this bill was about supporting people with disabilities in this time of crisis. However, the government did not see fit to negotiate with the opposition parties, even though it is in a minority position. Despite this arrogance, the Bloc Qubcois proposed solutions. One of the things we proposed was to split the bill so that we could give this support to people with disabilities, but the Conservatives did not want to do that. We came back and asked for time to negotiate and give support to people with disabilities, but the government defeated the motion. We asked that the House be recalled today so that we could pass this part of the bill concerning support for people with disabilities, but we are still in the dark. Why are we abandoning people with disabilities? Hon. Ahmed Hussen (Minister of Families, Children and Social Development): I thank the hon. member for her question. We know this pandemic has deeply affected the lives and health of all Canadians and has disproportionately affected Canadians with disabilities in particular. From the very beginning, we've taken a disability-inclusive approach to our emergency response to ensure that Canadians with disabilities get the support they need. That is why we announced a one-time payment of $600 for persons with disabilities to address these expenses. This will go a long way toward helping Canadians with disabilities. We encourage and urge all parties in the opposition to support this measure. We're confident that this measure, along with other investments, will benefit Canadians with disabilities, and we hope to get the support of the other parties very soon. Ms. Louise Chabot: MadamChair, I remind you that this measure wasn't passed because we weren't allowed to do so. A measure to help people with disabilities has been put in an omnibus bill. We've tried here, in the House, to provide the means to give that support, so I ask again, can the government be counted on to give a response to people with disabilities? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, it was absolutely not an omnibus bill. It contained assistance for the disabled, of course, but it also contained assistance for our seasonal workers, as well as a number of other measures that the Bloc Qubcois opposed. They refused to debate and, when the question of splitting the bill came up, the Conservatives refused to do that. That is why there is no bill at the moment, and that is very unfortunate. Ms. Louise Chabot: It was a Bloc Qubcois proposal to split the bill. The government had not thought of it, but they found that it was a good idea. Let me return to the attack. This bill proposed changes to the wage subsidy program, it was supposed to make the CERB more flexible, it proposed fines for fraudsters and, since there was a little section about a benefit for the disabled, the government took it for granted that we would support it without any negotiations with the parties. However, we set one very important condition: that the Liberal Party must get its hands out of taxpayers'pockets in terms of the wage subsidy. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, as we listen to the Bloc Qubcois members, we might think that they invented peanut butter and apple pie. This bill contained a number of measures that all Quebeckers and all Canadians needed, but the Bloc Qubcois refused to debate it. No, we did not follow the Bloc Qubcois'example in splitting the bill; we had thought of it a long time previously. We have not been able to do that because of the Conservatives. Because of them, we cannot help those living with disabilities. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Ms. Chabot, you have 45seconds left. Ms. Louise Chabot: We asked on a number of occasions for the House to be able to sit starting today to pass the part of the bill dealing with those with disabilities. What is the status of that, MadamChair? We have not heard about it since. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, my colleague knows very well that things are not as simple as that. There are procedural mechanisms unique to the House. I hope that, one day, we will be able to pass this bill and be able to provide assistance for those living with disabilities. I hope that the Conservatives will change their minds and give us their support. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Don Valley East, Ms. Ratansi. Ms. Yasmin Ratansi (Don Valley East, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be sharing my time with the member for Surrey Centre. Since 2015 our government has been focused on ensuring its policies mitigate the effects of climate change. Several measures have been implemented for phasing out coal, making polluters pay, providing climate incentives, investing in green technologies and much more, which all together have created a climate plan that is doing more to cut pollution than any other in Canada's history. In my riding of Don Valley East, many innovative businesses have benefited from these investments and initiatives. One area of particular interest is our government's work to protect 25% of Canada's land and 25% of its oceans by 2025. Our natural environment is something that Canadians and my constituents care about deeply. Could the minister update this House on the new conservation projects announced on June 5, World Environment Day, and on how our government is protecting our environment? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, protecting nature is an important part of how we will address climate change and the very real challenges it presents. That's why on June 5, World Environment Day, our government announced over 60 conservation projects under development across Canada. These projects are funded through the Canada Nature Fund's target 1 challenge initiative. They'll conserve Canadian nature and biodiversity and protect species at risk, enhance ecological integrity and connectivity, and enhance the size of Canada's vast network of protected areas. Nearly half of these projects are indigenous-led, with the aim of creating indigenous-protected conserved areas. Madam Chair, projects like these move us closer to our goal of protecting 25% of Canada's lands and oceans by 2025. By working together in partnership with the provinces, territories, municipalities, indigenous peoples and Canadians, together we can protect our natural environment for generations to come. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Ms. Ratansi, since you have 25 seconds left, we will go to the honourable member for Surrey Centre. Mr. Randeep Sarai (Surrey Centre, Lib.): Madam Chair, there are many small and medium-sized businesses in my riding of Surrey Centre. Many have been impacted by COVID-19. They saw a decrease in business or needed to close their doors completely in order to adhere to public safety measures to manage the spread of COVID-19. These measures helped keep our most vulnerable citizens safe and ensured that our hospital and health care providers did not become overwhelmed with a sharp spike in cases. Thanks to our government's COVID-19 emergency response, many of these businesses have been able to keep their employees and access important liquidity through the Canada emergency business account, which provides loans to small businesses and non-profits, and the Canada emergency wage subsidy, which is helping businesses to keep and rehire their employees while their revenues are down by providing up to 75% of wages for up to 24 weeks. As we begin to reopen the economy and Canadians across the country return to the job market, those benefits will be even more important to help businesses and industries rehire their staff and make important adjustments to align with public health guidelines to gradually increase their operations. Can the minister please update the committee on how many Canadian businesses have taken advantage of CEBA and CEWS since applications for each have been opened? Hon. Mary Ng: Madam Chair, I want to begin by thanking the member for Surrey Centre for all the work he does to support his constituents and small businesses. Canadians across the country need to know our government has been working tirelessly and will continue to work tirelessly on their behalf. This is why we put in place the important programs to help them get through this crisis during this difficult time, programs such as the wage subsidy program. We know that in so many businesses the employees are often like extended family members. The wage subsidy has helped these businesses keep their employees on the payroll and are now helping in their rehiring as they slowly and safely restart. There are 348,000 businesses being helped with the wage subsidy program, and this means that 2. 6 million workers are being helped. Businesses are also being helped through the interest-free $40,000 loan they can access through CEBA to help stay afloat and pay their expenses during this crisis. I'm pleased to inform this House that to date more than 669,000 The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for St. John's East. Mr. Jack Harris: Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with my colleague, the member for LondonFanshawe. Madam Chair, with so many recent reports and videos of police using force, sometimes deadly force, and violence against indigenous and black people in Canada, I've called for the public safety committee to reconvene. If the members agree, will the minister come to the committee and provide concrete answers as to how the government intends to address racism inherent in Canada's law enforcement, and in particular the RCMP? Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I thank my colleague for the question. It's perhaps the most important one facing Canada today. Madam Chair, indigenous people, black Canadians and other racialized people are far too often experiencing systemic racism and disparate outcomes within the entire criminal justice system. In order to respond appropriately, I think it's necessary to begin by acknowledging the lived experience of people who've known bias and discrimination at the hands of the police and our courts and within our prisons. We remain committed to working with all racialized people and all of the members of this House to ensure that we work toward social justice for all Canadians, and I look forward to discussing the member's motion further with him. Mr. Jack Harris: Will the minister and the government commit to facilitating such a meeting of this committee virtually? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, the decisions of the committee are the committee's, so I'm sure that this will be a discussion within the committee, but if called, I will certainly be pleased to come with my officials to provide the committee with whatever support and information it needs to contribute to this very important discussion. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Harris, you have 40 seconds. Mr. Jack Harris: In light of what we've seen with Chief Adam in Fort McMurray and the RCMP accepting that the actions were reasonable, will the minister commit to a full review of the use of force by the RCMP, in particular the philosophy, tactics and training that is given to RCMP officers in dealing with the public? Hon. Bill Blair: I thank the member and I want to assure him, first of all, that this is work that is ongoing, not just in the RCMP but throughout the police community. May I also take this opportunity, Madam Chair, to say that I think all police training has to begin with one very important principle, and that's the preservation of all life and the respect for all Canadians. We also know the importance of de-escalation training. We're committed to continuing to work with indigenous communities, racialized communities and with police services and all participants in the criminal justice system to make sure that it is fair for all Canadians. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for LondonFanshawe, Ms. Mathyssen. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen (LondonFanshawe, NDP): Madam Chair, we need more justice for black, indigenous and racialized people in Canada. They can't be asked to keep waiting. This government recognizes that systemic racism exists but refuses to collect race-based data that would allow us to quantify and truly address this injustice. We need data to protect Canadians. When will this government do the right thing and start collecting race-based data? Hon. Bardish Chagger (Minister of Diversity and Inclusion and Youth): Madam Chair, our government agrees that it's important that we collect data, and that's exactly why, in the anti-racism secretariat and the anti-racism strategy, there is a commitment to have money go to Statistics Canada to collect race-based data. We look forward to working with all members to ensure it happens. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen: Madam Chair, we know that Statistics Canada will start to collect job numbers based on race. This will allow us to identify systemic racism where it is and where we need to ensure a fair and more equal job market for black, indigenous and racialized people in Canada. Why is this government refusing to follow suit so we can tackle systemic racism everywhere, in every sector? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I'd like to thank my honourable colleague for her question. She's absolutely correct in her assessment that we need to collect more data, reliable data, data that will help us deal with some of the challenges we're seeing with systemic discrimination, but, more broadly, we want to make sure that we continue to engage with an anti-racism strategy that will allow us to collect that disaggregated data. That is why we allocated $6. 2 million to that initiative through Statistics Canada, but we know we must do more and we will do more. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen: We know that all people are susceptible to catching COVID-19, but health authorities are clear that parts of cities like Montreal and Toronto have been more impacted than others. For black and racialized people living in these cities, this data is a matter of life and death. Will the government collect and share disaggregated data so we can identify and erase systemic racism, yes or no? Hon. Bardish Chagger: Madam Chair, making decisions based on science and evidence is essential for our government. We took that practice from day one. It is exactly the step we will take moving forward and that's why we are making those investments to ensure that data exists. We are working across all departments. My mandate letter is public. I look forward to continuing to work not only with all ministers, departments and agencies, but all allies and all parties to get this work done. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Blaney, the honourable member for BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, has the floor. Hon. Steven Blaney (BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, CPC): Thank you, MadamChair. Last week, my plumber told me that, each time Justin Trudeau comes down the steps to make announcements totalling several billion dollars, he feels like someone is rifling through his pockets. My question is simple and goes to the Minister of Finance: where is this money coming from? Hon. Mona Fortier: MadamChair, I would like to thank my honourable colleague for his question. Currently, the health and safety of Canadians are our top priorities. We have implemented an emergency economic plan to support Canadians, workers and companies. We will continue to support them during this crisis. Hon. Steven Blaney: The answer I would have liked is simple: we are borrowing the money and we are going to have to pay it back one day. That is another Liberal craze: they borrow money, they make campaign promises, and off they go. Under the Conservative government, the Chantier Davie in Lvis had 1,700workers for the supply ship Asterix. In the election campaign, the Liberals promised icebreakers. When are the Liberals going to award the icebreaker contracts to the Chantier Davie? Hon. David Lametti (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada): MadamChair, we are very proud of the Chantier Davie and we completely understand its role in the system. We are currently assessing those requests. We are going to establish the process for the polar ice-breaker, which is essential for the work of the Coast Guard in northern communities, and we are going to make sure that The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Blaney has the floor. Hon. Steven Blaney: The workers do not need words; they need contracts and jobs. The same is true for young people who want to work. There is money in the Canada summer jobs program: in my constituency alone, $150,000has been approved. Companies want young people to work and want to hire them. What is the minister waiting for in order to confirm those positions? In my constituency, and everywhere else in the country, our young people want to work. What is the government waiting for in order to send some cash to the Canada summer jobs program? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we are proud of the Canada summer jobs program. We are introducing flexibilities into the system to enable employers to be able to hire summer students. We recognize the importance of this program to provide both financial resources and necessary experience for young people. We believe in continuing to invest in the Canada summer jobs program. Hon. Steven Blaney: The workers, the young people and the employers have been waiting for weeks. The money is available; where is the announcement? MadamChair, our young people are not the only ones who want to work. There are also the temporary foreign workers. Let me use Jessie Gito as an example; he has been working at Plate2000 in Saint-Anselme for years. When the time came to renew his work permit, he found out that he has to have some biometric tests. But he cannot get them because the offices are closed. Is the minister going to allow Jessie Gito and the thousands of other temporary foreign workers who want to work to be able to do so until the government biometric testing centres reopen? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, it is important for the honourable member to recognize that we are in the early recovery stage of the pandemic. Employers are slowly reopening businesses. We will ensure that we support both our students and our temporary foreign workers to make sure we get the recovery right. We will continue to invest in the Canada summer jobs program. We've introduced flexibilities into the program to ensure that employers are able to take advantage of the program and give opportunities to young people. Hon. Steven Blaney: It is very simple. Jessie Gito is a foreign worker, who is in a company that provides an essential service. He needs a decision that will let him go to work, rather than staying home and doing nothing. Then, when the government's biometric testing centres are open again, he will gladly go to one. Young people want to work in agriculture as well, and the minister has told us that the government wants young people working and that their files will be processed as quickly as possible. She wants to create 700positions and she knows that people can fill in an application on a first-come first-served basis. Of those 700positions, how many have been confirmed to date? The good weather has arrived, the corn is starting to grow, and this is the time when farmers need the young workers. Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food): MadamChair, the program for young workers in agriculture is open. I also encourage agricultural producers to register for it. This is a program that is not only intended to provide summer jobs, but also to interest young people in making a career in agriculture. As I have said before, the department is processing files as quickly as possible. Each employer will have an answer very shortly. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will now take a short break. Okay, we are ready to start again. We will go to the honourable member for BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte. Mr. Doug Shipley (BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Over the course of the pandemic, has the government been using all avenues possible to source much-needed PPE in Canada? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, we have been very clear that we have a made-in-Canada initiative that has engaged companies across the country. Over 700 companies have retooled and scaled up their operations for personal protective equipment to help front-line health care workers. Mr. Doug Shipley: Madam Chair, I need to ask very quickly which ministry and minister are responsible for the sourcing of PPE in Canada. Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, this is a collective effort. I work with the Minister of Health and the minister for procurement, and we coordinate with the provinces and territories to make sure there are appropriate levels of PPE to help front-line health care workers and essential workers across the country. Mr. Doug Shipley: Thank you for that clarification. That will make this question all the more pertinent. My riding of BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte is the home of Southmedic Inc. Southmedic is a renowned medical supply business. For over 37 years, it has provided front-line health care workers with an extensive line of PPE and other essential products required when dealing with respiratory illnesses. This company specializes in respiratory illness equipment. Southmedic currently employs over 700 people, and it has been recognized as one of Canada's best-managed companies by Deloitte on numerous occasions. Since the beginning of the pandemic, both I and the member for BarrieInnisfil have been attempting to obtain some assistance for Southmedic from the federal government. Calls and emails were falling on deaf ears. In early May, I wrote a letter to Minister Anand outlining the situation. I received a letter back from the minister dated May 27 indicating that this issue of Southmedic falls under the mandate of the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada. I have heard nothing more. When will the federal government reach out and help this great Canadian company and therefore ensure that all front-line workers will have the proper PPE they require? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I'd like to thank my honourable colleague for his question. He knows full well that this is a very challenging time. That is why we had a call to action to engage Canadians right across the country. Since then, we've seen over 6,000 companies step up to offer solutions and ideas, and over 700 companies have retooled their efforts. I acknowledge that some companies are still engaging with the government, and we'll continue to explore all possible options to make sure we continue to procure the necessary levels of personal protective equipment to protect Canadians and to protect front-line health care workers. That has always been our priority. I want to thank the outstanding Canadian companies that have come forward and have helped us in this endeavour. We continue to look forward to working with them. Mr. Doug Shipley: Thank you for that answer. Just to follow up, there's no retooling required at this company. They could have been up and going very quickly. They just needed a little assistance at the beginning. Moving on to a different issue, while walking to my office this morning, I stopped at my local small family-run coffee shop and was discussing the current economic situation with the two owners of the establishment. They indicated they are having a very tough time surviving this economic downturn. The only thing keeping them hopeful is that soon the public service will start returning to work, and therefore their business will begin to return. Could the government please give us some indication as to what the plans are for returning the civil service back to work safely, and when? Hon. Jean-Yves Duclos (President of the Treasury Board): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm delighted to answer this question. This is a very important topic, but I'd like to take the opportunity first to thank our public servants, who have worked very hard in the last few weeks, both personally and professionally. In fact, today is a wonderful day to say that, because today is the start of National Public Service Week. That's one more reason to thank them for their dedicated work. They are not going to go back to work. They've been at work for the last few monthsin different circumstances, but they have been working very hard to deliver the services and the support Canadians need and deserve. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Next we'll go to the honourable member for SelkirkInterlakeEastman, Mr. Bezan. Mr. James Bezan (SelkirkInterlakeEastman, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. My questions are for the Minister of National Defence. First of all, I want to thank the great men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces for the fantastic job they're doing in Operation LASER, serving on the front lines battling COVID-19. Can the Minister of National Defence give the House an update on exactly where we are at with the number of Canadian Armed Forces members who have been infected with COVID-19? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan (Minister of National Defence): Madam Chair, I want to echo the member opposite's comments in thanking our Canadian Armed Forces members. Currently, we have 13 active cases in the Canadian Armed Forces, but in the long-term care facilities we currently have 50 cases. No member has been currently hospitalized. We have also conducted very thorough reviews of our protection protocols as well. Mr. James Bezan: Through you, Chair, Minister Sajjan, does that number of active cases include the active cases that are in long-term care facilities right now in Operation LASER? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, as I stated, the 50 cases are strictly from the long-term care facilities. The 13 cases I mentioned are not in the long-term care facilities. Just to give the actual clarification, no member has been currently hospitalized. Mr. James Bezan: In those numbers, Madam Chair, can Mr. Sajjan say how many of those cases in long-term care facilities are active and how many are recovered? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, I don't have the exact number. What I can say to break it down further is that in Quebec we currently have 36 and in Ontario we have 14. As well, 36 of the members have been out of isolation. I'll get more details and pass them on directly to the member, Madam Chair. Mr. James Bezan: Thank you, Minister. Madam Chair, I have a quick question while we're still talking about Operation LASER. The President of the Treasury Board has said, The Canadian Armed Forces will be present as long as their presence is needed in Quebec. This contradicts what Prime Minister Trudeau is saying, which is that we have a hard deadline of June 26 for the withdrawal of our troops for Operation LASER. That means taking our troops out of our long-term care facilities. Minister, is June 26 the hard date for the winding down of Operation LASER? Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I'm delighted to have the opportunity to clarify for the House. We've been in very extensive discussions with the Province of Quebec, with my counterpart Minister Guilbault, and we are working very diligently to ensure we have a sustained, appropriate response to the request from Quebec for assistance. That response will result in a transition from the currently deployed Canadian Armed Forces to the deployment of paid volunteers, trained personnel who will take on the important role of providing services to those Canadians who need our help in Quebec. Mr. James Bezan: I'll go back to the Minister of National Defence. The Department of National Defence auditors have called out the Liberal government for mismanagement over the $553-billion investment in our Canadian military through the defence policy. Only three people have been assigned to oversee the rollout of this money. This is a $553-billion investment in our armed forces, and only three people are managing it. Could the minister tell us how that is even possible? Is this the reason that over 100 projects are currently behind schedule? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, first of all, I want to highlight the unprecedented investment that we're making in defence. We have conducted internal reviews of our procurement. The report the member opposite is talking about is from the previous year. This is the ongoing work we're doing to make sure that we make procurement better. When it comes to the management of this, it's conducted by me and the minister of procurement. We are working toward making our procurement even better. We have already streamlined some aspects of our procurement and we'll continue to do more as well. Mr. James Bezan: Minister Sajjan, you've had this report since November of 2019. You've been rolling out this plan since 2017. Only three people are overseeing an expenditure of $553 billion. This is taxpayers'money. Are we going to see more cuts because you have been unable to actually roll out these dollars? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, I can assure you we're not going to be cutting. We'll be investing in our defence. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Before I go to the next speaker, I want to remind members that they are to address their questions and comments directly through the chair. We will go now to the honourable member for Fort McMurrayCold Lake, Mr. Yurdiga. Mr. David Yurdiga (Fort McMurrayCold Lake, CPC): Madam Chair, the Canada summer jobs program has many challenges. I've seen many indigenous communities in my riding rejected for funding even though they had received funding in previous years. Here are a few examples of communities that were rejected: Beaver Lake Cree Nation, Buffalo Lake Mtis Settlement and the Mtis Nation of Alberta, Region 1. The list goes on. Could the Prime Minister explain why so many indigenous communities have been denied funding from the Canada summer jobs program? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we recognize the important role that the Canada summer jobs program plays in supporting employers and young workers in our community across the country every year. We're working very hard to help employers adapt to the realities of the COVID-19 pandemic and are supporting young Canadians as they begin to look for summer employment. We are introducing increased flexibilities into the Canada summer jobs program to hire youth, while also providing more supports to employers that deliver essential services to Canadians. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, that didn't really answer my question. Why are so many indigenous communities left out of the Canada summer jobs program? This is very important to my community and to communities throughout the province. Will the government investigate why these communities were rejected? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that we, of course, value the important role that the Canada summer jobs program plays in all communities, including indigenous communities in Canada. I will certainly have an off-line conversation with the honourable member, if he so wishes, about a particular issue, but I can assure him that in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, we have had to assist employers to introduce flexibilities The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Yurdiga. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, in my riding, the City of Cold Lake has been in dispute with the federal government for many years over payment in lieu of taxes. My office has sent many letters over the years regarding the PILT dispute. Could the Minister of Public Services and Procurement give me a rough estimate of when I will receive a response from the minister's office to my first letter, from 2017, and my letters from 2018,2019 and 2020? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that I will go to the minister, and we will come back with an answer to his question. Mr. David Yurdiga: How much longer does the minister intend to perpetuate the ongoing PILT dispute, which is in excess of $11 million, with the City of Cold Lake? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, once again, I can assure the honourable member that I will speak with the minister and get an answer to his question. Mr. David Yurdiga: Well, do you know what? I've been writing letters to the department for many years. When you say you're going to get back to me, I really have a hard time believing that. Will the minister agree to follow the prior recommendations of the dispute advisory panel that were accepted by the minister? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that I will check with the minister and that she will return to the member in due course. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, the drug Trikafta has been proven to increase the quality of life for 90% of cystic fibrosis patients. Two weeks ago, my office sent a letter to the Minister of Health about the boy in my riding named Cael, who through the special access program is able to get Trikafta in Canada. I requested that the minister use her powers to fast-track Trikafta for commercial use, but I have yet to receive a response back. When will the minister make a decision on Trikafta? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, I'm glad to hear that Cael was able to access Trikafta through the special access program. In fact, that program is very helpful for people who are seeking access to medication that's not currently marketed in Canada. As the member opposite knows, Vertex has not applied to market Trikafta in Canada, but we look forward to their application, and I encourage him to write a letter to the manufacturer to also encourage them. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Vancouver Granville, Ms. Wilson-Raybould. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould (Vancouver Granville, Ind.): Thank you, Chair. I was very troubled to hear that a CBC radio host in the Yukon felt compelled to resign because, as an indigenous person, she could not speak her truth. While we know the Broadcasting Act states that the Canadian broadcasting system should reflect the linguistic duality and multicultural and multiracial nature of Canadian society and the special place of indigenous peoples, it would seem there are some challenges. Therefore, does the Minister of Heritage share the concern of some journalists that problems of systemic racism in Canada are still existing within the institution of the CBC, and will the government now acknowledge the need to recognize the jurisdiction of indigenous governments? Hon. Steven Guilbeault (Minister of Canadian Heritage): Thank you, Madame Chair; and I thank the member for this important question. As stated by the Prime Minister on numerous occasions, our government recognizes that systemic racism exists in Canada, and we have made a commitment to do everything we can to combat it in whichever organization of the Canadian government. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould: Thank you. When I was in the government, and as a minister, I learned the term red meat issues. I understand these issues to be ones that challenge societal norms, that are not politically expedient to address because they can lose you votes, even though addressing them is morally right and a smart thing to do. Mostly these are issues addressing inequality and the most marginalized in our society. In the justice system, examples include mandatory minimum penalties, defunding police, and even investing in restorative justice. Red-meat issues often become defining issues for society and for governments as the world changes. Surely now these issues are politically less of a consideration than the tragic reality of even more slain indigenous Canadians at the hands of police, or thousands of indigenous people still incarcerated or living in poverty. Will this government please finally commit to the necessary work originally promised in 2015 and repeal in the justice system the vast majority of mandatory minimum penalties, assuring the necessary discretion for judges, and meaningfully invest in restorative justice measures? Hon. David Lametti: Madame Chair, I thank the honourable member for her question, as well as for her work as Minister of Justice, and indeed my predecessor. This is an important time. This is a time when we recognize systemic racism. This is a time when we recognize systemic over-incarceration of indigenous peoples, of black peoples, in our criminal justice system. This is a time when we need to look at all potential options to reduce what is a shameful overrepresentation in our criminal justice system. Too often racialized peoples and indigenous peoples have experienced prejudice and systemic discrimination in our justice system, and that has to change. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould: I'll go on to another red meat issue. In British Columbia we are in the fifth year of the opioid overdose public health emergency crisis. Sadly, May marks the deadliest month of overdose-related deaths. We are halfway into the year and have currently passed 500 deaths caused by overdose. Many of the deaths are related to COVID-19 measures that have prevented people from accessing supervised consumption sites, so they are overdosing alone. While the provinces welcomed the federal backing of safe supply exemption back in March, it is to expire in September of 2020. Echoing the call of the chief coroner of B. C. and Dr. Henry, more is needed from the federal government, more action. Will the government provide the necessary supports to the province and help support safe supply initiatives in the provinces? Hon. Patty Hajdu: It's been a pleasure to work with the Province of British Columbia on innovative ways to work on the tragic situation of opioid overdose. I remain committed to working with the province and in fact any province that wants to work towards solutions that treat people who use substances with the dignity they deserve. Madam Chair, this is a complex issue. We're working closely with our partners to make sure that we can prevent more lives from being lost. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for South OkanaganWest Kootenay, Mr. Cannings. Mr. Richard Cannings (South OkanaganWest Kootenay, NDP): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with the member for SkeenaBulkley Valley. In my riding, Theo's in Penticton is a beloved restaurant. They've been serving great food for 40 years, but now they're struggling, because they don't qualify for the emergency wage subsidy. Why is that? The original owners retired last year and sold it to another operator. The new owner can't use a year-to-year comparison to apply for the wage subsidy because he didn't own the restaurant last spring. He is forced to use receipts from January and February, the darkest doldrums of the restaurant year, to compare with the results from May, traditionally one of their best months. Now he has to compete with other local restaurants that can access the subsidy. When will the government fix this inequity and let Theo's compete and survive? Hon. Mona Fortier: Madam Chair, the Canada emergency wage subsidy is supporting over 2. 5 million workers across the country. To help even more businesses support their workers and rehire people as they reopen, our government is extending the CEWS, and we will continue to extend the CEWS for an additional 12 weeks to August 29 to ensure that Canadian workers continue to have the support they need during these very difficult times. By extending eligibility, our government is ensuring that more Canadian workers in more sectors have the support they need. Mr. Richard Cannings: The owner just wants to be able to apply for the wage subsidy, and right now he cannot, and he will not be able to. Thousands of other businesses are hit that way as well. I'd like to move on to forestry. Canada's forest sector has been declared essential during this pandemic, but it's been hit hard after a very difficult 2019. Despite soft markets and thousands out of work, government support programs have left many Canadian forest product companies behind. In my riding, the pulp mill in Castlegar is closing for the month of July because local sawmills aren't producing enough wood chips. What is the government going to do to finally support Canadian forestry workers and communities? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The time is almost up, but I will allow for the answer from the honourable minister. Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Thank you, Madam Chair. We have supported and we will continue to support the forestry sector, including through regional development programs. In fact, in Quebec, partnering with Les Bois Francs DV Inc. , we have widened market access to our products and updated technology systems. In North Bay we've partnered with the Canadian Wood Council to promote the sector. In Vancouver we're working with FPInnovations to create the indigenous forest sector technical support program. We are supporting the forestry sector and its different needs region by region. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Now we go to the honourable member for SkeenaBulkley Valley, Mr. Bachrach. Mr. Taylor Bachrach (SkeenaBulkley Valley, NDP): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm going to pick up where my colleague left off, with B. C.'s forest industry. What we've seen in B. C. are multiple rounds of mill shutdowns and start-ups, and in some cases this has made it difficult for forestry workers to qualify for EI. My question to the minister is this: Will the minister work to make the EI program more flexible for forestry workers, similar to what this government has done for oil and gas workers? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, in the oil and gas sector we have focused on workers. That has been key in the inactive and orphan well program, which we are working on with the provincial governments of Saskatchewan, British Columbia and Alberta. The focus on workers has assured that success, and we will continue to focus on workers in all the industries, particularly our natural resource industry, as they go through this extraordinarily difficult time. Mr. Taylor Bachrach: Madam Chair, reforestation is a very important part of the forest industry in the riding I represent, and people were keenly interested to hear this government's plan to plant two billion trees in the next 10 years. That's a lot of trees. I'm wondering if the minister could tell us how many trees are going to be planted under this program by the end of this season. Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, this government is committed to two billion trees. We are working with forestry associations, the industry and with individual companies to ensure this tree-planting season will be one of the largest the country has ever seen. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The floor goes to the honourable member for Rivire-du-Nord. Mr. Rhal Fortin (Rivire-du-Nord, BQ): MadamChair, last week, the government introduced BillC-17 and the Minister of Justice sent us briefing notes in which he said that it was important to suspend a number of time limits and to extend others, and that the failure to do so could have important repercussions on Canadians, their families, their situations, their finances and their ability to exercise their rights. We in the Bloc Qubcois agree with that. When are we going to talk about it? Hon. David Lametti: MadamChair, the contents of BillC-17 are clearly very important. We have addressed the mandatory time limits in federal legislation as well as certain time limits that courts may not be able to handle. It is very important that we address this issue. That is why the law The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Fortin, you have the floor. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, we agree that it is important. I concur. The minister's briefing notes say that, among other things, when it comes to divorcewhich means children are involved people are waiting on custody rights, child support and visitation rights. The minister pointed out that the national security review would require consultations if no decision is made in the prescribed time frame. It could pose a national security risk. It is really a big deal. When are we going to debate it? Hon. David Lametti: MadamChair, I completely agree with my honourable colleague. The issue needs to be addressed. That is why it is in the bill. That is another reason to debate the bill. I beseech my colleagues opposite to debate it with us. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, what a coincidence, because I beseech my colleague opposite to debate it with us. That is what we are asking. Last week, the leader of the Bloc Qubcois asked the Liberal government to debate BillC-17 today. He did not get an answer. It does not seem to matter. Richard Wagner, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, who is hardly a dimwit or greenhorn, told us that the justice system needs to be modernized. As recently as this past Saturday in LaPresse, Justice Wagner said that it is essential that the Criminal Code be amended to address the backlog of court proceedings. When will the Liberal government opposite pull up its socks, do its job, govern the federation, sit down with the opposition and discuss the vital matters in BillC-17? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, if I were my colleague, I would be a little embarrassed, because the bill was sent to the Bloc Qubcois several days in advance. They received a technical note several days in advance. We were all available to take questions. When we asked for the support of the Bloc Qubcois and the other parties to debate itwe were not even asking them to vote in favour of the billthey refused. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, we never refused to debate it. Actually, we were the ones who asked to debate it. What exactly does debate it mean? We set some conditions. For example, we asked the Liberals to put the money back into the wage subsidy fund and to commit to dip into it no longer. Are we asking too much of our colleagues opposite? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Can my colleague explain to me what the emergency wage subsidy has to do with a bill about justice? This is an absolutely fundamental piece of legislation. We wanted to debate it, but they refused to do so. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, I would like nothing better than to explain it to him, but I must remind him that he is the leader of the party in power, the party that is supposed to govern the country. So I do not know why he is asking me that. My party proposed that we debate this today but we did not get an answer. Meanwhile, court time limits are running out and people are losing rights. I am thinking of families, child support, child custody, labour law disputes in Federal Court, marine transportation, interprovincial transportation, aviation, banks, and those with grievances waiting for a Federal Court ruling. The whole system, the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal, everything is on hold because nobody in the government wants to do their job. We want to discuss BillC-17. When can we talk about it? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, we have done our job. We have introduced the bill. We informed them in advance. We told them they could ask us any questions they wanted. We asked for a debate in the House. However, when we asked the Bloc Qubcois if they wanted to debate the bill, they said no, instead of doing what they usually do and saying yes. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for Essex, Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis (Essex, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. When the CERB runs out, many workers in my riding of Essex will not have sufficient hours to collect their EI benefits. In early July, the midnight shift at Chrysler will be eliminated. Because of the shutdown, a mom-to-be who had just returned to work in January, and several hundred of her fellow employees, may not have the 600 hours required for regular or EI parental benefits. Immediate action is needed. What is the government doing now to backstop these workers? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, the Canada emergency response benefit has been providing much-needed help to Canadian workers across the country who have stopped working due to COVID-19. We know that there is still a lot of uncertainty for many Canadian workers, and we know that many will be exhausting their benefits in the weeks to come. We will have more to share soon, as early as this week, on our continuing efforts to support Canadian workers and make sure that help is available during this The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Go ahead, Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Minister, for the answer. The EI system needs to be fixed. Even before the shutdown, the system was deeply flawed. Will this government commit to a complete review and overhaul of the EI system? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we have been there for Canadian workers. We will continue to make sure that we make the necessary investments in the EI delivery system and modernize it to continue to meet The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. Small businesses have been hit extremely hard by the COVID-19 shutdown. Many have already been forced into bankruptcy. Much uncertainty lies ahead. As the economy reopens, what is the government doing to help small businesses recover? Hon. Mary Ng: Madam Chair, today we are seeing small businesses that have been helped, whether it is getting access to the small business loan, which some are also using in the restart as they are safely restarting, or getting help with their payroll, helping them keep their employees The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. Employees are key to a small business's success. How will the government incentivize workers to return to their jobs when recalled? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister can give a brief answer. Hon. Mary Ng: The Canada emergency wage subsidy is an excellent program to help those employees stay employed and for those employers who are looking at rehiring them right now during this restart process. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair, many of my constituents are in a committed cross-border relationship and have not been able to see their partners in quite some time. The current restrictions are arbitrary. Denmark has found a fair resolution. Will Canada adopt the Danish model, and if not, why not? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, as we said from the outset, we've implemented restrictions at the U. S. border on non-essential travel with a single purpose in mind: to protect the health and safety of Canadians. As the member is aware, just last week we introduced new measures that allow people in family relationships to stay together as long as they commit to the necessary 14-day period of quarantine. We'll continue to work with families. Our intention is to keep people together, but mostly to keep people safe. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair, with regard to child care, as our economy continues to open, parents are facing a stark choice: Who will care for their children? What's the plan to provide access to child care so parents can confidently return to work? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we are of course committed to continuing to make the record investments that we've been making in child care. Since 2015 we've created over 40,000 affordable child care spaces. We're committed to creating an additional 250,000 before-school and after-school child care spaces. We will continue to invest in this sector because we understand that without investment The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. It sounds as though this government has a desire to force parents to choose between their job and care for their child. Can the government please respond to that quote? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, nothing could be further from the truth. We are committed to the child care sector. Our investments and our results prove the opposite of what the member is asserting. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I'm sorry. We're out of time. The committee now stands adjourned until tomorrow at noon.

The government let people who lived with substance use to access medications more easily. Safe injection sites had been made in communities and community-based projects had been supported for people who were using substances.

tr-sq-1216

tr-sq-1216_0

What did Hon. Ahmed Hussen think about the bill for the disabilities? The Chair (Hon. Anthony Rota (NipissingTimiskaming, Lib.) ): I call this meeting to order. Welcome to meeting number 22 of the House of Commons Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic. A reminder to all members that in order to avoid issues with sound, members participating in person should not also be connected to the video conference. For those joining via video conference, I would like to remind you that, when speaking, you should be on the same channel as the language you are speaking. As usual, please direct your remarks through the chair. I understand we don't have any ministerial announcements today, so we'll proceed to presenting petitions. I would like to remind members that any petition presented during a meeting of the special committee must have already been certified by the clerk of petitions. For members participating in person, we ask that they please come and drop the signed certificate off at the table once the petition is presented. The first petition will be presented by Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May (SaanichGulf Islands, GP): Mr. Chair, it's an honour to rise in meeting number 22 of the COVID-19 committee, otherwise known as something like the House of Commons. I'm here to present two petitions containing hundreds of signatures on the issue of the treatment of Falun Gong practitioners by the People's Republic of China, particularly the practice that's alleged of involuntary organ harvesting. The petitioners ask the Government of Canada to condemn this practice and to publicly call for an end to the persecution of Falun Gong in the People's Republic of China. The second petition is from residents throughout SaanichGulf Islands concerned about what was, at the time this petition was submitted, a future problem. It remains an issue, and I present it on behalf of petitioners who wish the Government of Canada not to put public funds into purchasing or maintaining the Trans Mountain pipeline or towards any expansion of the pipeline. The Chair: Next we'll go to Ms. Kwan. Ms. Jenny Kwan (Vancouver East, NDP): Mr. Chair, I rise to table two petitions. The first petition deals with the COVID-19 situation. The petitioners note the pandemic is having a devastating impact on many Canadians nationwide, especially those who have low to modest income, small business gig workers, freelancers, artists, film industry workers, non-salaried workers and individuals on fixed incomes such as seniors and those on disability. It further notes that rent, mortgage and utility payments are due at the end of each month, putting countless Canadians at risk of losing their housing. It is paramount there be safe self-isolation opportunities for all individuals in this country. To that end, the petitioners are calling for the government to immediately enact a nationwide rent freeze, eviction freeze, mortgage freeze and utility freeze, enforce mortgage deferrals for homeowners without penalty or interest charges from financial institutions and provide direct assistance in the form of a monthly, universal, direct payment of $2,000 per month for all, with an additional $250 per child immediately. The second petition deals with the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion. These petitioners join the hundreds of thousands of people who are opposed to the expansion. Trans Mountain, in building the pipeline, brings massive environmental and economic risk with no substantial benefit to British Columbia or to local residents. Approximately 40,000 barrels of oil have already leaked from existing Kinder Morgan pipelines, including two major spills in Burnaby since 2007. I might note, Mr. Chair, that just this past weekend there was yet another spill to the tune of 1,195 barrels here in British Columbia. There is no known scientific technology to clean up the bitumen when there is a spill, and the number of tankers would go from eight to 34 per month into the Burrard Inlet. It puts at risk many residential neighbourhoods and the traditional territories of at least 15 first nations. The Chair: May I interrupt for a moment, Ms. Kwan. I want to remind all members in the House that when presenting a petition, the idea is to be as concise as possible. Ms. Kwan, I'll let you wrap up, please. Ms. Jenny Kwan: Thank you, Mr. Chair. The petitioners are calling for the government to immediately act to prevent this new oil pipeline from proceeding through British Columbia. The Chair: Thank you. We'll now go to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood ParkFort Saskatchewan, CPC): Mr. Chair, I have four petitions to present today. The first petition reflects the outrage of my constituents at the ever-expanding order in council from the government banning more and more firearms. In particular, the petitioners highlight the failure of the government to act on the issue of illegal guns. The petitioners note that virtually all violent crimes committed in Canada, including the recent shooting in Nova Scotia, involve illegal firearms in the hands of those who are already not permitted to possess them. The petition has two asks. First of all, it asks that we reverse the order in council banning certain firearms, but also that we propose measures that will effectively address the illegal use of firearms by criminals while respecting the rights of law-abiding citizens. It also asks that we ensure that substantial changes to firearms laws in future actually be made by Parliament, not by the government acting in an unaccountable manner. The second petition deals with Bill C-8, which is the government's bill around conversion therapy. The petitioners support efforts to ban conversion therapy. They express concern about problems in the wording of the definition used in the legislation. They're asking the government to support amendments to fix the definition to address the issue of conversion therapy and ensure that the definition is correct and doesn't criminalize certain forms of counselling that individuals may voluntarily enter into. The third petition is regarding Bill S-204, a bill in the Senate that seeks to make it a criminal offence for a person to go abroad to receive an organ without consent, dealing especially with the horrific practice of forced organ harvesting and trafficking in China. The petitioners are supportive of Bill S-204 and want to see it move forward. The final petition is with respect to Bill C-7. There's been much discussion in this House about the need to do better in terms of long-term care. Rather than working to do better in long-term care, unfortunately we've seen the government removing vital safeguards in the area of euthanasia. I think our focus should be on assisting life rather than removing safeguards that are required in association with the euthanasia regime. The petitioners are particularly concerned about the government's plan to remove a 10-day reflection period that normally takes place. That period can already be waived under certain circumstances, but Bill C-7 proposes to remove it entirely as well as reduce the number of witnesses involved. The petitioners are quite concerned about what's going on in Bill C-7 and call for it to be stopped or amended. The Chair: Presenting petitions. We'll proceed to statements by members. We'll start off with Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly (NanaimoLadysmith, GP): Mr. Chair, we are in the midst of a global pandemic and an economic shock. Recent events have ripped open the wound of systemic racism in our country. Racialized and marginalized communities have been disproportionally affected by the pandemic. Thousands of seniors in long-term care facilities have died. It is clear that we need system change. In the past, governments have bailed out banks and corporations because they were too big to fail. It is time to bail out humanity and the planet. No one will be immune from the threat of climate change and mass extinction. Both are the result of the exploitation of the natural world in the name of the economy. Humans created the economy. We can choose to change it. We must protect our environment or perish. COVID-19 has demonstrated that together we can take courageous action for the common good. We need to do the same for the climate crisis, because humanity and our planet are too big to fail. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Spengemann. Mr. Sven Spengemann (MississaugaLakeshore, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, today marks World Elder Abuse Awareness Day. Underestimated and under-reported, elder abuse exists across the world. At risk of neglect and assault, many of the most vulnerable older persons reside in our long-term care facilities. They are the seniors who have built our country and shaped our communities, who have shown us resilience, courage and selflessness, who have made us stronger, and whose work and teachings continue to inspire us. They are parents and grandparents, brothers and sisters, friends and mentors. We have not been there for them in the same way they've been there for us throughout their lives. The Canadian Forces report, alongside the climbing disproportionate death toll in our long-term care facilities, has reconfirmed the ugly, indefensible reality of elder abuse and neglect in Canada. In my community, we mourn the deaths of 68 seniors from one long-term care facility alone, Camilla Care. We must make the same unwavering commitment to older persons as they have shown to us. We must protect and uphold their human rights. We must do better. The Chair: Before proceeding, I just want to bring up to the members in the background that we want to keep it as simple and as parliamentary as possible in keeping it neutral. We'll now move to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett (LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, CPC): During these trying times, the residents of LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes have risen to the challenge. They've made sacrifices and gone above and beyond to make the lives of their neighbours better and to keep our communities safe. It would be impossible to list everyone who has emerged as a community hero, but I'd like to highlight a few, like Lily, an eight-year-old from Elgin who raised funds for her local food bank by building and selling squirrel picnic tables, and Louise Boardman from Spencerville who's making masks for long-term care facilities and selling others in support of the Breast Cancer Action centre. The Knights of Columbus in Prescott raised funds and are distributing some $27,000 in support of charitable groups throughout the region. The Knights of Columbus in Kemptville are working overtime operating the local food bank. Who can forget our top-notch health care workers like Hannah and Mary at the Brockville COVID-19 testing centre? It is the people of LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes that make it so great. To everyone working to make a difference and to all of our essential workers, thank you. The Chair: Next is Mr. Anandasangaree. Mr. Gary Anandasangaree (ScarboroughRouge Park, Lib.): Mr. Chair, the Indian Act enshrined racism into Canadian law in 1876, and, through residential schools, the child welfare system, our legal system and our police, we criminalized and tore apart indigenous peoples. The deaths of Chantel Moore and Rodney Levi and the assault on Chief Allan Adam are recent examples of systemic racism within the RCMP. Sadly, the RCMP leadership has failed to acknowledge this reality and its root causes. These same systems negatively impact black Canadians. Anti-black racism has resulted in more young black men being jailed, children being streamed or excluded from schools and negative police interaction due to profiling. Black lives matter. No single Canadian is responsible for the prevalence of systemic racism; we all are. Collectively we build institutions that discriminate based on race. It is now time to reimagine and rework our institutions, starting with our police, to ensure that all Canadians can achieve their truest potential. The Chair: Ms. Larouche, you have the floor. Ms. Andranne Larouche (Shefford, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chair. June15 is World Elder Abuse Awareness Day. I want to remind members of the link between abuse and the problems of economic dependency among seniors. Improving their purchasing power means reducing the risk of them falling victim to abusive people. That's why the increase in the old age security benefit and the guaranteed income supplement must be extended beyond the pandemic. In three weeks, our seniors will receive their first cheque, when they should be receiving their second. A date must also be announced for the new horizons for seniors program, which helps several groups develop projects to break the isolation of seniors. In closing, I would like to mention the organization Justice alternative et mdiation that during the pandemic, along with other organizations in Shefford, has set up the project Une histoire pour la tienne, which also serves to mark this day. It's a virtual meeting between young people and seniors, allowing them to exchange some inspiring life experiences. Since age prejudice is very much present, I applaud this project, which aims to make us understand each other better and judge each other less. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Sangha. Mr. Ramesh Sangha (Brampton Centre, Lib.): Mr. Chair, in the time of this terrible crisis affecting all Canadians, when we are all thinking about how best to deal with it, let's all think about the people around us. Let's show our representation not only to those in the sector of sanctioned workers, but also to all those Canadians who day by day stand up and make a difference. Every day I am proud of the reactions of Canadians to this crisis. I want to acknowledge and celebrate all the contributions made by the people of Brampton Centre, all religious institutions, civil society and community organizations like Knights Table in my riding. We are all standing together to fight COVID-19. Let's continue working hard with that same spirit to get positive results out. Thank you very much. The Chair: I will proceed to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff (BruceGreyOwen Sound, CPC): Mr. Chair, whether graduating from elementary school, high school, Georgian College or graduating from colleges or universities across the country, I am proud of the accomplishments of all the graduates across BruceGreyOwen Sound. I would also like to congratulate and thank all the teachers and parents who have adapted to teaching online or from home and who have supported these graduates over the course of their academic careers. I'd like to extend special congratulations to Cameron Lovell, who just graduated from grade eight, as well as to Neebeesh and Neebin Elliott, originally from the Nawash unceded first nation on the Bruce Peninsula, who will be headed to Michigan State University, and to Jared Lumley from Owen Sound, who just graduated from my alma mater, the Royal Military College of Canada. The college motto of Truth, Duty, Valour is something all Canadians should aspire to live by. I wish all the best to these graduates on their next adventures. I and Canada cannot wait to see how their dreams and goals impact and change the world. I congratulate BruceGreyOwen Sound graduates. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Cormier. Mr. Serge Cormier (AcadieBathurst, Lib.): Today I pay tribute to RichardLosier, an entrepreneur, visionary and builder who died on June9,2020, surrounded by his family. Mr. Losier is a giant in the Acadian Peninsula business community. In1968, he co-founded St. Isidore Asphalte, a company that now has more than 200employees. He also launched many other businesses over the years. He was unifying and generous, a philanthropist who cared about young people and never missed an opportunity to improve their lives. I met Mr. Losier when I was 14years old, and I can say that he has been a positive influence in my life. Every time I met him, he gave me a lot of advice and encouragement, which I've never forgotten. Mr. Losier's legacy to his community is invaluable. His commitment remains an example for all of us to follow. Mr. Losier now joins his wife, Nolla. I offer my most sincere condolences to his children, Richard Jr. , Ronald, Nathalie, Caroline and Stphane, and to his family and friends. Rest in peace, Mr. Losier. You will be greatly missed. Thank you for everything you've done for our region. The Chair: We will now go to Ms. Dabrusin. Ms. Julie Dabrusin (TorontoDanforth, Lib.): Hello from my community in east end Toronto. People talk about how a city the size of Toronto can be cold, but that's far from the truth in my community. I want to give a shout-out to our teachers, like Mr. Wong of Earl Grey Senior Public School, who delivered home-baked cookies and handwritten notes to all of his students, or Monsieur Steve, who's offering online French classes, or the teachers of Riverdale Collegiate, who paraded through our streets to celebrate our graduates. Our local Michael Garron Hospital put out a call for community members to sew masks and received over 60,000 masks, including those made by Lisa Tancre of Chartwell Avondale Retirement Residence. Michelle Beaton organized a front window scavenger hunt to entertain children and their families. Restaurants, even while facing adversity, have been generously donating food, like the members of the Leslieville BIA or Mezes. There are so many more stories of generosity that I could share, but I'm out of time. I thank everyone who has stepped up. We all appreciate all of their hard work. The Chair: We will now go to Ms. Sahota. Ms. Jag Sahota (Calgary Skyview, CPC): Mr. Chair, on Saturday night, Calgarians, particularly those in the northeast, in my riding of Calgary Skyview, witnessed a devastating storm, the likes of which I have not seen in my lifetime. Homes, vehicles, community buildings and structures suffered significant damage due to large hail, floods and high winds. People acted quickly to seek shelter. I'm so grateful that there have been no reports of personal injury or loss of life. I went around the community yesterday to survey the damage. It is extensive. My heart aches for those who have been impacted by the storm in an already incredibly difficult time, but we are resilient. We know that in the coming weeks there will be a lot of cleanup required, both to personal property and in the community. I know my constituents, and we will help one another get through this together. I will work hard to do everything I can to help rebuild this community. The Chair: Mr. Serr, you have the floor. Mr. Marc Serr (Nickel Belt, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to express my sincere gratitude to the people of West Nippissing who organized Pride activities to celebrate the LGBTQ community in June. This week, we are also celebrating National Public Service Week. I thank the public servants for their dedication to the Nickel Belt community and the Valley East and Rayside-Balfour areas. The Chair: Next is Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya (MarkhamUnionville, CPC): Mr. Chair, when COVID-19 began spreading across Ontario, Markham, like many other communities, was unprepared. Our front-line health care workers did not have enough personal protective equipment to do their jobs safely. When Markham residents heard about these shortages, my office was flooded with calls from people who had PPE and wanted to donate. Since then my office has been able to deliver tens of thousands of PPE supplies to front-line health care workers and five masks to each family in need. This pandemic has shown that no matter what the challenge is, the Markham community will overcome it. Today, I would like to thank the front-line health care workers who are doing incredible work. I would also like to thank all those who have helped in Markham's hour of need. The Chair: I understand we had a bit of a glitch there. I'm sorry. With the pause, we thought that was the end of it. Mr. Serr, I would ask you to continue. I understand you started to switch languages. Please continue. You have 30seconds. Mr. Marc Serr: Thank you. I'm switching to English now. Thank you to our nurses, doctors, pharmacists, cashiers, janitors. Thank you to various retail workers and first responders dealing with COVID-19. You keep our communities safe and healthy, and you feed us. Your dedication and sacrifice are greatly appreciated. As we start to see local businesses reopen, it is important for all of us to remember to follow best practices outlined by local public health. Our front-line workers deserve our respect. It is important for all of us to respect social distancing, to protect all workers and their families. Together we can remain strong and united as we continue to face this challenge together. The Chair: Again, my apologies for skipping over there, but now we'll to to Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod (KamloopsThompsonCariboo, CPC): Mr. Chair, in commemoration of Italian Heritage Month, I would like to pay tribute to the Colombo Lodge and Italian Cultural Centre in Kamloops, British Columbia. The Colombo Lodge was founded in 1914 and is an integral part of our community. Recently they began Colombo Cares take-home dinners with proceeds distributed to different non-profit organizations throughout the region. Last month they very generously gave away hundreds of dinners to Royal Inland Hospital staff and paramedics for their tireless work throughout the pandemic. In their own words they say, Colombo Lodge is very proud of the Italians that have made Kamloops their home. Community members of Italian ancestrypast and presenthave helped and continue to help Kamloops prosper as a giving, welcoming and inclusive community. Personally, I want to thank all members for their friendship and generosity over the years. Our community is forever grateful for their kindness. The Chair: We'll now proceed to Mr. Harris. Mr. Jack Harris (St. John's East, NDP): Mr. Chair, many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are facing a serious financial crisis. Most people with disabilities are waiting to be included in the Liberals'promised program. Fish plant workers will need support to avoid a disastrous year. Many small businesses don't qualify for programs. Municipalities need emergency help to meet the crisis. People are worried about what will happen when the CERB runs out in two weeks'time, and the coming tourism season looks very grim. The province itself is in serious financial crisis due to the pandemic and the decline in oil prices. The federal government must overhaul and enhance the fiscal stabilization program to help Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and other oil-producing provinces through this crisis. Both the province and the oil and gas industry players have committed to net zero emissions by 2050. This is a challenge and an opportunity to transition to a sustainable energy future, but it will require significant investment and support by government to keep the industry strong and make this a just transition for workers. Much has been done. Much more needs to be done. The Chair: Ms. Gaudreau, you have the floor. Ms. Marie-Hlne Gaudreau (LaurentidesLabelle, BQ): Mr. Chair, all 44elected municipal officials in the riding of LaurentidesLabelle and I have sent a letter to the government asking that cellular and high-speed Internet networks be made available to all. The crisis has accelerated the demonstration of the need for these networks in daily life. The territorial complexity of the Laurentians means that there are areas where the signal is weak, unstable or non-existent. There is an urgent and essential need to change the infrastructure of the current networks. Also, because of the lockdown, Internet failures are being felt, and they prevent distance learning, telemedicine and teleworking, among other things. How can our municipalities develop economically if they can't provide their community with adequate communication tools? We are therefore calling on the government to put the interests of its people first by investing massively right now in the construction of high-speed Internet and cellular infrastructure. The Chair: Mr. Waugh. Mr. Kevin Waugh (SaskatoonGrasswood, CPC): I rise today to pay tribute to Sir Winston Churchill, the former prime minister of Great Britain and one of the greatest leaders history has ever known. In what can only be called a lifetime of service, Churchill's contributions to the Commonwealth and to the world are without equal. During the Second World War he led the allied forces in Europe against the tyranny and fascism of Adolph Hitler and his Nazi regime. When our world was in its darkest hour, Churchill's leadership was a beacon of hope and freedom. I am reminded of something he once said, All the greatest things are simple, and many can be expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honour, duty, mercy, hope. Sir Winston Churchill himself embodied all of these great things and will forever be a symbol of freedom, democracy and hope. The Chair: Mr. Gerretsen. Mr. Mark Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands, Lib.): Mr. Chair, I would like to add my voice to the recognition and celebration of Pride Month, which is celebrated annually during June. Pride Month is important for Canadians because we can be proud of who we are and celebrate our diversity. This June is different from previous years as we cannot celebrate in person all together. However, I know the ongoing pandemic will not stop us from showing our love and support for the LGBTQ+ community. To celebrate Pride Month this year, my office distributed 3,000 pride maple leaf pins across the country; whoever asked received one. Although the majority was sent to constituents in my riding, over 500 pins were sent to the neighbouring ridings of LanarkFrontenacKingston, LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, and HastingsLennox and Addington. It warms my heart to see so many Canadians showing their support. Happy Pride, everyone. The Chair: We will now proceed to the questioning of ministers. Please note that we will suspend the proceedings twice to allow employees who provide support for the sitting to substitute for each other safely. Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell (Louis-Saint-Laurent, CPC): Mr. Chair, I am very pleased to take part in today's meeting of this parliamentary committee. Canada has been dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic for three months now. The situation now seems to be improving, although we must remain vigilant. Economically, business people and the entire Canadian economy depend on government decisions. My question is very simple: when will the economic update take place? Hon. Chrystia Freeland (Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): Mr. Chair, I thank the hon. member for his question. I agree with him that Canada and Canadians are doing an excellent and difficult job in the fight against coronavirus. As for the economy, our government is there for Canadians, for workers and for businesses, and it will continue to be. Mr. Grard Deltell: Canadians, business people and businesses want to know where the government is headed. When will the economic update take place? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, Canadians know that the government is there to support them. Eight The Chair: We return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Canadians and Quebeckers also know that the Government of Quebec will table its economic update this week. Why isn't the federal government doing the same? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I'm pleased to explain to hon. members and to Canadians what the government is doing for the economy The Chair: We return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, it is a real pleasure for me to explain to the minister and everybody in the House of Commons that today the Saskatchewan government will table its economic update. Why can't Ottawa do that? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I'm delighted to have the opportunity to share with Canadians what our government is doing to support workers, businesses and the economy. Eight million Canadians have received the CERB, essential support for Canadian workers and their families. The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, 11 days ago the Newfoundland government tabled its own economic update. We see governments acting correctly for their people, except for the Liberal government, which cannot table an economic update. When will the Liberal government table an economic update, which Canadians would like to see? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I am delighted to share with the member opposite and with Canadians what we are doing practically that has meaning for Canadians. Let me talk about what we are doing for Canadian businesses. Nearly 670,000 Canadian businesses have received support The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: In Canada, the Quebec government will table its economic update this week. The Saskatchewan government tabled its economic update today. The Newfoundland government has tabled its economic update. Everybody is working hard in Canada, and the business community would like to know where the Liberal government is going. The question is crystal clear. When will the Liberal government table an economic update? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, Canadian workers and Canadian businesses want to know that our government is here to support them. I have shared with this House our support for Canadian workers through the CERB. I've spoken about the CEBA, and let me point out that more than $26 billion of support has been given through that essential program. Let me talk about the wage subsidy. More than 2. 6 million The Chair: We'll return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, this is starting to get interesting; the minister is revealing some of these expenses. Could the minister tell us how much the government has spent in the last three months? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I will continue in French by explaining what our government is doing for Canadians and workers The Chair: Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, this is a little bit concerning for all Canadians, because this government cannot say when they will table the economic update, cannot identify how much money they have spent in the last three months and cannot say what is the deficit of Canada. Is somebody in this government running this country correctly? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, absolutely we are running this country, and we are supporting our economy. In fact, we appreciate that Canada currently is experiencing its greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression. That is why we have devoted nearly 11% of GDP to support Canadian workers and Canadian businesses. I want to assure Canadians The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Normandin. Ms. Normandin, you have the floor. Ms. Christine Normandin (Saint-Jean, BQ): Mr. Chair, there are times when Quebec and the provinces are not just two solitudes, but they get along and speak as one, such as when the time comes to tell the government to mind its own business. On reading section91 of the Constitution Act, 1982, which sets out the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal government, nowhere do I find that the federal government must meddle by attaching conditions to health transfers. It is Quebec and the provinces that hire the medical personnel, doctors, nurses and caretakers. It is Quebec and the provinces that are responsible for purchasing the necessary equipment. It is Quebec and the provinces that know what is happening on the ground and what their needs are. Will the government do the only thing within its authority, which is to take the cheque, sign it and put it in the mail? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I thank the hon. member for her question. We fully understand the importance of federal support for the provinces, especially in our national fight against the coronavirus. I agree with the hon. member that we must give financial support to the provinces, including Quebec absolutely. I would also like to point out the importance of the support of the Canadian Armed Forces, who are doing an important and excellent job in Quebec and Ontario today, right now. Ms. Christine Normandin: Mr. Chair, I am glad to see that there is recognition of the importance of transferring this money. My question is whether it can be transferred unconditionally; that's what I'm asking. There's a state of emergency. In the past, we have seen that it takes a long time to negotiate conditions with the federal government. We saw it in the case of the Quebec City tramway, and we are still seeing it now in the case of transfers for housing in Quebec, for which there is no agreement and, therefore, no transfer of money. Will the federal government send the money free of conditions? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the hon. member said in her first question that the only thing the federal government had to do on health care was to sign the cheques. I can't agree because, today, at this time, at the request of the Premier of Quebec, the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces are in Quebec today; they're there to save the lives of seniors The Chair: We now return to Ms. Normandin. Ms. Christine Normandin: It was indeed at Quebec's request. What I'm saying is that, at present, the provinces are unanimously asking that there be no conditions. It's urgent that the money be transferred. The federal government's job here is to sign the cheque and send it to the provinces. The government's job is also to make Parliament work. This is where there should be negotiations so that we can work, among other things, to send money to people living with disabilities, to make sure we fight CERB fraud and to make sure that court time limits are effective in the current crisis. Can the government focus on the issue in order to respect the provinces and transfer money for health care? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: I thank the hon. member for her question, Mr. Chair. I agree with the hon. member that the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces are in Quebec today at the request of the Province of Quebec. That said, I hope that the hon. member will agree with me that being there for Quebec's seniors, that saving the lives of Quebec's seniors, is much more than simply signing cheques. I am very proud of the work the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces are doing. I think we all should thank these people who are working for Canada, for Quebec, and who are doing an important and excellent job. Ms. Christine Normandin: Mr. Chair, I think the Deputy Prime Minister misunderstood me when I was talking about the importance of acting quickly. Negotiations between the government and the provinces take an awfully long time because the federal government decides to place conditions where there shouldn't be any. Right now, the only important thing is to transfer the money quickly so that it can be used in our hospitals and our long-term care facilities, where the need is desperate. Quebec and the provinces know exactly what their needs are. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I would like to point out the extent to which the federal government is there to support the provinces, including Quebec. We have increased funding to the provinces and territories by $500million to help them prepare for COVID-19 outbreaks. This funding is in addition to the $40billion that we already provide annually to the provinces and territories. That's a lot of money. It is strong endorsement The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh (Burnaby South, NDP): Mr. Chair, systemic racism is killing people. It's killing black people and it's killing indigenous people. Recently, Rodney Levi was another victim of systemic racism. He was killed in New Brunswick by the RCMP. To deal with systemic racism, we need systemic change. Will the Liberal government commit to systemic change so that not another life is ever taken again? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I thank the member opposite for the extremely important question, and I'll take this opportunity to acknowledge the work that he has done for many years fighting racism in Canada. Our government absolutely acknowledges that systemic racism exists in Canada. It exists in all of our institutions, including the police and the RCMP. I agree with the member opposite that now is the moment to fight this The Chair: Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, I thank the Deputy Prime Minister very much for the response, but there are some specific actions we need to take. There are movements. Black Lives Matter, as a movement, is calling for the defunding of police. What they're saying is we need to make better choices with how money is being spent. When someone is in need of a wellness check or a mental health check, money, financing and support should go to mental health workers and health care workers, not the police. Is the government prepared to fund and prioritize health care workers over the police? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the member quite rightly began his questions by speaking about systemic racism against indigenous people in Canada, and I would like to speak about that for a moment. I spoke to Perry Bellegarde this morning, because it is such a crucial issue. We can describe it as the original sin of our country. I absolutely agree that we need root and branch reform, including in how policing is done in Canada. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, will the Liberal government commit to a review of the use of force as outlined for the RCMP? Will the Liberals commit to that change? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister and the Minister of Public Safety had many conversations last week with the RCMP. We all accept that The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, will the government commit to ensuring that de-escalation receives priority? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Let me continue, Mr. Chair. Systemic racism exists in all of our federal institutions, including the RCMP. It's time to put an end to it. Let me just say The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, I'm not getting an answer. Will the Prime Minister or the Liberal government commit to something simple and ensure that at the federal level, racial profiling, street checks and carding are expressly prohibited? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, sadly, I can't agree that rooting out systemic racism is going to be simple, but I can agree that racial profiling is absolutely inappropriate. It is not something that we should The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Well, I'm going to try to get another commitment from the government, because they don't seem able to commit to something as clear as ending racial profiling. We know that millions of Canadians in a couple of weeks are going to be faced with the reality of their CERB ending. These families are worried about how they're going to put food on the table, because they can't return to a job. Will the Liberal government commit today so that those families will have some concrete support, yes or no? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, let me be clear, as I was in my previous answer, that our government clearly is opposed to racial profiling. This is a wrong practice and we're very clear about our position there. Now when it comes to the CERB, I absolutely share the concern of the member opposite. The Canadian economy is in its direst state since the Great Depression. We know that all the jobs have not yet come back. We know that Canadian workers, Canadian families, continue to need The Chair: We'll now pause for a short time to allow staff to change within the safety parameters for the COVID-19 virus, and as we resume, we will go to Ms. Harder. Ms. Rachael Harder (Lethbridge, CPC): Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister has mandated his ministers, and I quote, to govern in a positive, open and collaborative way. Ironically, as it stands, Parliament is currently closed for business. Opposition parties have little opportunity to hold the ruling party to account, private members'bills cannot be tabled and legislation cannot be debated. Can the Prime Minister, Mr. Trudeau himself, help us understand how all of this fits into his definition of so-called open government? The Honourable Pablo Rodriguez (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons): Well, Mr. Chair, we're here, right? We're here, and the opposition is asking questions. They have the equivalent of eight question periods instead of five to ask questions. They have more time than before, so I don't know why they're not happy about it. Ms. Rachael Harder: That's like when I'm asking for a full meal and your handing me a few jellybeans and saying, Why aren't you happy with that? Mr. Chair, here's the thing. It's like switching a light on and off when it's convenient for the Prime Minister and for the Liberal Party. That's what they want to do here. That's not Parliament. That's not democracy. When will Mr. Trudeau do the right thing, turn the lights on and get back to work for Canadians? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I'm really sorry to hear that my colleague's not working. I can assure you, Mr. Chair, on this side of the House, we're all actually working very hard and we're answering the questions from the opposition. Why? It's because it's extremely important. I sat there for seven years asking questions. I understand important Ms. Rachael Harder: The member opposite knows very well that he is misleading the Canadian public. This is not true Parliament. This is simply a special committee. Here's the thing. On the Liberal Party website, under the platform commitment, it says that Parliament works best when its members are free to do what they have been elected to do, and that is be the voice for their communities and hold the government to account. This is a Liberal document. Did the Prime Minister forget that strengthening Parliament was part of his 2019 platform commitment? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague for quoting our excellent platform. That was a very very good document. The thing is, I think we've reached a balance whereby MPs can come from different places, mostly around Ottawa, and ask questions; but also we can have colleagues from across the country asking questions. Why does my colleague think it is better to have only 35 MPs participating instead of 338? Ms. Rachael Harder: Does the Prime Minister value democracy, or does he still look up to China's basic dictatorship? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, we're answering all the questions from the opposition, not only from the people in this room, but we're answering The Chair: It's back to Ms. Harder now. Ms. Rachael Harder: I'll ask the question again. Does the Prime Minister still value the basic dictatorship of China over Canada's democracy? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I don't know where the colleague wants to go from here, Mr. Chair. I'd like to know from her why it is not important to her that her colleagues participate directly. Ms. Rachael Harder: Mr. Trudeau wrote to his ministers and said to them that they continue to raise the bar on openness, effectiveness and transparency. He went on to explain that This means. . . government that is open by default. We now have a parliament that is currently shut down. Mr. Trudeau has shut it down and has prevented us from being able to do to the good work that Canadians expect us to do. Is this Mr. Trudeau's idea of open by default? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, do they want to talk about shutting down Parliament? How about the time they prorogued Parliament twicenot only once, but twice? The Conservative government shut down Parliament twice. I was here. I was sitting on the other side of the aisle. It's quite the opposite now. We're taking all the questions. This place is open, and we're answering questions. The Chair: One moment, please. I haven't acknowledged you yet, Ms. Harder. We've stopped the time there. I want to remind honourable members that questions and answers are being given, and we want to hear both sides. Please keep the heckling down. Ms. Harder, please proceed. Ms. Rachael Harder: In 2014, the leader of the Liberal Party developed a policy resolution entitled Restoring Trust in Canada's Democracy. That's ironic, because right now, again, Parliament is currently shut down. We are prevented from being able to do the good work that we are expected to do. At the time, the Prime Minister said, Canadians want their Members of Parliament to be effective voices for their communities in Ottawa, and not merely mouthpieces in their communities for an all-too-powerful Prime Minister. Sadly, Mr. Trudeau has become the all-too-powerful prime minister that he once believed should not exist. Why did he change his mind? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, I'd like to know why my colleague wants to shut down the voices of her colleagues who could not speak and could not participate in this room. Mr. Chair, how would we vote on private members'bills, for example? As you know, it is not a government vote or a party vote; it's per row. You want to come back? Are you going to acceptMr. Chair, through youthat we have electronic voting, yes or no? The Chair: We'll go on to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, we know that the Minister of Foreign Affairs has champagne tastes and London flats, but it's his champagne mortgages that Canadians are concerned about. Specifically, why did the minister only disclose the complete extent of his personal debt to the Chinese government on June 4 of this year? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, as you know, since the minister entered politics, his two mortgages and other liabilities and assets have been fully disclosed to the Ethics Commissioner and placed on the online public registry. It's public, Mr. Chair. It's public. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Now it's public and it's terrible. When will the foreign affairs minister be here to answer these questions himself? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, it's always been public. We're in the middle of a pandemic here, trying to help Canadians, and the best they can do is ask questions about The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: When the minister owes over a million dollars to the Chinese government, people have a right to ask him questions. When will the Minister of Foreign Affairs show up? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: The minister shows up every day, Mr. Chair. He shows up and works for Canadians. Once again, those are public documents. Everything the minister did is public. I still don't know why they ask The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, he doesn't even have to come to the House. All he has to do is appear on the screen. Where is the minister? Why is he hiding? Why won't he answer questions about his personal debt to the Chinese government? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, if he goes online he's going to get the information. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, the minister is hiding. Let's ask some specific questions about their China policy. What is the impact on the decision-making? Three-quarters of Canadians don't want Huawei involved in our 5G network. Will the minister put the interests of Canadians ahead of the interests of his creditors and say no to Huawei? Hon. Navdeep Bains (Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry): Mr. Chair, when it comes to 5G deployment, we are right now currently undergoing a comprehensive review. We have been absolutely clear with allies and with Canadians that we never have and never will compromise Canadians'national interests. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, that is not an answer, and it is completely out of step with what our allies have already recognized. Reports are emerging of multiple deadly viruses exported from Winnipeg's microbiology laboratory to the Wuhan Institute of Virology right before scientists were expelled for policy breaches. In spite of that, scientific co-operation between Canadian institutions and the military-affiliated Wuhan Institute of Virology is continuing. Why hasn't the government put in place new guidelines to prevent the export of sensitive pathogens and information to China? Hon. Patty Hajdu (Minister of Health): Mr. Chair, he's right that in 2019 the National Microbiology Laboratory shared lab samples with the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The National Microbiology Laboratory routinely shares samples with other labs to help advance the international community's understanding of viruses and the research that is ongoing around those viruses. There are strict protocols in place for these transfers, and these samples were transported according to Canadian laws and regulations. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, I think Canadians would be concerned to hear that it's routine to transport viruses to Chinese military-affiliated labs. When Champagne was the parliamentary secretary for finance, the government decided to give hundreds of millions of dollars to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, bankrolling Chinese state-controlled development projects in Asia with weak standards in labour, human rights and environment. Will the minister put Canadian taxpayers ahead of his personal creditors and support a pullout from the Communist Party-controlled development bank? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Once again, Mr. Chair, my colleague is trying to connect the dots, and I don't know exactly where he is going from here, but everything is public. There's a thing called Google. He can go on it and check the information. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, the public can listen to this. I'm sure this exchange will also be available on Google, and the public can draw their own conclusions. We have failures on 5G, failures when it comes to the transport of deadly viruses and failures when it comes to giving over $400 million to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. It's clear that the Bank of China's investment in Minister Champagne is paying off. It's time for the minister to settle his debt with the Communist government and not settle it on the backs of Canadians. When will the minister be here in the House and answer questions about this mortgage? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: My colleague should be cautious with what he is saying in the House, Mr. Chair. This is serious stuff. He should be careful about what he says. The minister is actually working extremely hard for all Canadians and is doing his job correctly, Mr. Chair. We're talking about public information. Once again, let him go to Google and google it. That's it. The Chair: Now we'll go to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett: Canada's ambassador to the United Nations sent a letter last week to all member states of the UN promising that Canada would consider providing more funding for UNRRA, the same UNRRA that is a front for Hamas, which allows weapons of terror to be stored in schools and provides textbooks that call for the destruction of Israel. Do these Liberals have no shame when it comes to their quest for a seat on the UN Security Council? Hon. Mary Ng (Minister of Small Business, Export Promotion and International Trade): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to thank the honourable member for that question. We know that at this time Canada must show leadership in the face of global challenges. More than ever, Canada is playing a positive role by being a champion in diversity and inclusion, supporting the global fight against COVID-19, addressing climate change, leading peace and security efforts and helping the most vulnerable. A seat on the Security Council will allow Canada to be a strong voice for a fairer, more inclusive and prosperous The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett: Mr. Chair, I received a letter from Bob Anderson this week, who's advocating for his neighbours like Jean Grevelding, who owns a cottage at Butternut Bay. Like many people, Jean is an American who owns a property on our side of the border. These people are taxpaying members of our communities. These folks have plans in place to follow all Canadian quarantine rules. They're concerned about leaving their properties uncared for over the summer. Will folks like Jean be allowed to cross the border to check on their properties this summer? Hon. Bill Blair (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Of course, our priority is and always has been and always must be the protection of the health and safety of Canadians. That's why we put in place these restrictions for non-essential travel and have required, through the Public Health Agency of Canada, a 14-day quarantine. I don't know the specifics of the person for whom you advocate, but we want to make sure that if they come into Canada, it is for an essential purpose and that they do it safely and respect the quarantine that has been put in place. Mr. Michael Barrett: With nine branches throughout my riding, the Royal Canadian Legion offers a great deal to veterans and rural communities alike. They have been experiencing hardship and a loss of revenue, to the point where they may be forced to shut their doors. The Zone G2 commander and local mayors such as Roger Haley have reached out to me expressing their dire need. Will the government offer support to Legions across the country so they can continue to carry out their vital work for our veterans? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (Minister of Veterans Affairs): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Yes, we have done a lot to help support groups like the Legions. There is a $350-million emergency community support fund. If they're supplying any help to people regarding COVID, this fund is there. Indeed, we're doing everything we can to make sure that we help the Legions and other groups that do so much to help veterans right across the country. Mr. Michael Barrett: On May 21, the minister stated that her team was working as quickly as it could to fill the gaps in CEBA. It has now been three weeks, and many business owners, such as mortgage broker Corinna Smith-Gatcke, are still left in the lurch amid the delays, which are pushing businesses closer to shutting their doors for good. Will these businesses have access to CEBA before it's too late for them? Hon. Mary Ng: Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I thank the honourable member for that really important question on our Canadian small businesses. Those businesses can absolutely have access to the loan at their financial institution this Friday, and I would encourage them to go and see their bank or credit union. I want businesses to know that nothing is more important for us than making sure they get the support they need during this difficult time. Mr. Michael Barrett: The County Road 43 expansion project is critical for my riding and the region as a whole. This project will widen the road, increasing safety for the 18,000 motorists who travel the road every day. It's been 334 days since the provincial and local governments announced funding, but there has been nothing from this Liberal government. It's been 181 days since Minister McKenna told me her staff were reviewing the project. Today, there is still nothing, and for the last month the minister's team has not even found the time to respond to my request for an update. Will Minister McKenna finally stop with the delays and commit to funding this project today? Hon. Catherine McKenna (Minister of Infrastructure and Communities): Mr. Chair, as the member opposite knows, we work with provinces and territories to advance our infrastructure investments. We're making investments across the country. They are making a real difference in people's lives. We're always happy to work with members of Parliament, but they must also work with provinces and territories so that projects are advanced by them to our office. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall (YorktonMelville, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Through you, has Mr. MacAulay read ombudsman Dalton's May 2020 report, Financial Compensation for Canadian Veterans: A comparative analysis of benefit regimes? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I apologize, but I'll have to ask my honourable colleague to repeat the question. The Chair: Mrs. Wagantall, we'll freeze the time so that there's no extra time taken. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Thank you, Chair. My question was whether Mr. MacAulay has read ombudsman Dalton's May 2020 report, Financial Compensation for Canadian Veterans: A comparative analysis of benefit regimes. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I appreciate my honourable colleague's question. Of course, I appreciate Mr. Dalton's input and all that he has done for veterans. We've discussed it many times. I've done everything and worked with him in order to make sure that we bring the proper compensation to veterans The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: As a result of that study, are the financial outcomes Canada seeks to provide for ill and injured veterans now clearly defined within the Department of Veterans Affairs? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, as the member would know, I am to bring a report to the veterans affairs committee, and there are a number of things done in order to make sure that report is The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Then I would suggest that we get our committee up and going as it should be. Where are these financial directions published? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Well, of course, lockdown, but just under $90 million that the government put in supplementary estimates to make sure we address the backlog for Veterans Affairs. It's a major help The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Minister, are Canadian Armed Forces members provided with a copy of this document? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, my honourable colleague would have to ask the Canadian Armed Forces that question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: There are three different providing lifetime benefits for ill and injured veterans. In Ombudsman Dalton's recent report, did any one of these three provide the best compensation in all nine scenarios that were studied? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Of course, as she knows, there's been a lot of work done in order to make sure that we provide the proper compensation to veterans. We're working very hard, with a lot of help from Mr. Dalton, to make sure that the appropriate The Chair: We'll now continue with Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: In the undisclosed settlement of Sean Bruyea's legal case against Seamus O'Regan and the Liberal government, a joint statement says. . . Canadians, especially all Veterans and their families, are encouraged to enter the public debate about policies and programs that affect our Veterans and their families. Does Mr. MacAulay agree with this statement? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I can assure you that anybody is welcome to enter any discussion on compensation of veterans. We're always open to what we can do in order to make sure that we provide appropriate compensation. I don't think the term would be appropriate, but it would provide some compensation to veterans who truly deserve it. They defend our democracy The Chair: We'll go back to Ms. Wagantall. Oh, I'm sorry Ms. Andranne Larouche: Mr. Chair, I have a point of order. The interpretation hasn't worked for a few interventions. It's difficult to follow the exchange between the hon. member and the minister. The Chair: We're having a problem with the interpretation. Minister and Ms. Wagantall, you are joining us virtually. I'm wondering if you have the right language on at the bottom of your screen. We'll start with that for troubleshooting. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: I have English. The Chair: Very good. Minister MacAulay, what do you have? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I have English, Mr. Chair. The Chair: Very good. Then we'll check on our side. Ms. Larouche, did I understand correctly that the interpretation didn't work for both speakers? Ms. Andranne Larouche: The sound didn't allow the interpreters to do their job. It seemed to be a problem with the sound. The Chair: In that case, I would ask both members to maybe put their mike a little bit close to their mouth. We'll see how that works. I'm looking at the screen, and I notice the mike is a little bit far. Could we bend it in a little bit more? I appreciate that. Thank you for your patience. We'll give it another try. Ms. Wagantall, please go ahead. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: On a point of order, quite often while I'm trying to speak, there are lots of other voices in the background. The Chair: I would ask everyone to please be on mute, as well as for anyone in the chamber to please refrain from speaking loudly. Just whisper among yourselves if you have something to say. We'll take this one from the top. We have a minute and 45 seconds left. Ms. Wagantall, please proceed with your next question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: You said next question, so we're not going backwards, Chair? The Chair: Did we have an answer from Minister MacAulay? No? We'll go to Minister MacAulay to finish up the answer. We'll start at 27 seconds, freeze the clock and hear his answer. Then, because of all of the confusion, we'll start at one minute and 45 seconds when we get going again. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Should I repeat the question, sir? The Chair: Please do. The clock is frozen. After we go through the question and the answer, we'll start the clock again. Mr. Wagantall, please repeat the question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Thank you, Chair. In the undisclosed settlement to Sean Bruyea's legal case against Seamus O'Regan and the Liberal government, a joint statement says, Canadians, especially all Veterans and their families, are encouraged to enter the public debate about policies and programs that affect our Veterans and their families. Does Mr. MacAulay agree with this statement? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I appreciate my honourable colleague's question and concern. Of course I agree. Anybody is quite open to indicate whatever they wish in order to make sure we provide as appropriate a compensation as possible. You can never totally compensate veterans truly for what they deserve, but we want to make sure we provide the best compensation possible. That's what we will do and want to do. The Chair: Ms. Wagantall, we will start the clock again. You have one minute and 45 seconds remaining. Please proceed. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: If that's the case, is Minister MacAulay aware of the practice of red-flagging veterans'files? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I'm not aware. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Since the deputy minister has indicated that he runs the department, will the minister ask him for the names of veterans and the dates and the reasons that they are, or have been, red-flagged by VAC? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I would certainly ask any veteran or anybody who has a concern to contact my office. I will do anything I can to make sure that the veterans The Chair: We'll go back to Ms. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Do the most ill and injured still receive from the pension up to $300,000 less for life? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, as you know and as the Prime Minister indicated when the pension for life was put in place, it was stated that if anybody receives lessthe Prime Minister himself indicated it quite clearlythat must be adjusted. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: For veterans in similar circumstances, should the date of their application for compensation be a factor in determining whether they're treated equitably? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Yes, of course, the date is when the compensation would start. Of course, it's very important and very appropriate. The Chair: Now we will proceed to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd (Sturgeon RiverParkland, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Retired Major Mark Campbell in my riding of Sturgeon RiverParkland lost both legs in the line of duty in Afghanistan. He is an avid sport shooter, but understandably, due to his disability, he is very limited in the kinds of firearms he can use, and all of these firearms have now been banned under the Liberal OIC. My question to the Minister of Public Safety is this: Did their department do a legal analysis and consider the section 15 charter rights of disabled Canadians not to be discriminated against when they passed their OIC? Hon. Bill Blair: Yes, there was a very thorough analysis done by the justice department to ensure that the prohibitions we put in place were, in fact, charter compliant. Let me also say, Mr. Chair, how important it was that we prohibited weapons that were not designed for sporting purposes at all. In fact, they were designed for soldiers to use in combat. They have no place in a civil society. We have prohibited them, and we believeand this has been echoed by many people across the countrythat this will make Canadians safer. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, is the minister aware that the AR-15 is the most popular sporting rifle in Canada, and is he aware that disabled veterans like Major Mark Campbell are unable to participate in the sport of sport shooting because of his OIC? Hon. Bill Blair: I can assure the member that what I am aware of is that the AR-15 and other weapons like them have been used in mass killings in Canada on many occasions, such as at cole Polytechnique, at Dawson College, again at the Quebec mosque and in Moncton. The AR-15s in particular were also used at the terrible tragedy in places like Sandy Hook, where a bunch of kids were killed, so there is no place for The Chair: We will go to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, it has been months since the Liberals shut down this Parliament and months since the Minister of Finance should have presented a budget or at least an economic update to Canadians. Since then we have seen billions spent with little oversight and no plan. The minister says that he needs certainty before he can table a budget. Well, that didn't stop Stephen Harper and the Conservatives from tabling a budget in the depth of the last great recession. When are these Liberals finally going to take their job seriously and table an economic update? Hon. Mona Fortier (Minister of Middle Class Prosperity and Associate Minister of Finance): Mr. Chair, we're taking this very seriously. We're working for Canadians and bringing forward supports to make sure that businesses, workers and Canadians can put food on the table and pay their rent. We will continue to support Canadians, and when we have a clear projection to present, we will do that. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, the results are in, and businesses aren't happy with the so-called support programs from these Liberals. In fact, the oil and gas industry has been shut out of many of these economic programs. When is the government going to recognize that their business support plans have been an absolute failure with only a fraction of the billions promised being accessible to businesses? Hon. Seamus O'Regan (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Chair, our government has taken swift and immediate action to support our sector throughout this challenging time. We had the BCAP, which is critically important to providing liquidity to support the SMEs that make up 85% of the jobs in our sector. It has taken an enormous team effort. People are working around the clock to get money where it needs to be. We are helping hard-working Canadians, small businesses and large businesses right across the country, but in particular in our energy sector. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, I'm pleased to see the Minister of Natural Resources online. He tweeted recently to praise the Alberta Carbon Trunk Line and the North West Redwater Partnership refinery in my riding. Can the minister tell us what, if any, support they have given to the innovative carbon capture and sequestration technology in this country? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Mr. Chair, we see carbon capture and sequestration as an integral part of lowering emissions, making emissions more competitive and making our oil and gas industry more competitive. We're seeing where the investment dollars are going. They are going to jurisdictions that are committed to lowering emissions. Obviously, this government is committing to net zero. Mr. Dane Lloyd: I note that the minister couldn't name a single example of government support for carbon capture, utilization and sequestration technology. We have spent a lot of time talking about the COVID-19 pandemic, but Canadians are living with another horrific reality, that being the intensifying opioid overdose epidemic. Reports indicate that in the past four years, 14,000 Canadians have died, and the numbers during COVID-19 have been skyrocketing, with British Columbia seeing a 39% increase this year alone. I know this because I've lost a family member to a fentanyl overdose. When is the government going to take this scourge seriously and take action to save the lives of Canadians? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Mr. Chair, I share the member's deep sadness about the number of lives we've lost to opioid overdose. Our government has been steadily making it easier for people who live with substance use to access medications to treat substance use, such as prescription Suboxone and methadone. We have made it easier to rapidly establish safe injection sites in communities and have supported community-based projects that work with people who are using substances. We need to understand that this is a complex issue, and we need to support people to get the help they need. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes (AlgomaManitoulinKapuskasing, NDP) ): The hon. member for Thrse-DeBlainville. Ms. Louise Chabot (Thrse-De Blainville, BQ): MadamChair, I will come back to the bill introduced last week. As parliamentarians, we felt like we were watching a very bad play, as I imagine the public did. I say that it was theatre, even though it shouldn't be in this place. The government decided to stage a play and act alone and, unfortunately, there were several acts missing. A very important part of this bill was about supporting people with disabilities in this time of crisis. However, the government did not see fit to negotiate with the opposition parties, even though it is in a minority position. Despite this arrogance, the Bloc Qubcois proposed solutions. One of the things we proposed was to split the bill so that we could give this support to people with disabilities, but the Conservatives did not want to do that. We came back and asked for time to negotiate and give support to people with disabilities, but the government defeated the motion. We asked that the House be recalled today so that we could pass this part of the bill concerning support for people with disabilities, but we are still in the dark. Why are we abandoning people with disabilities? Hon. Ahmed Hussen (Minister of Families, Children and Social Development): I thank the hon. member for her question. We know this pandemic has deeply affected the lives and health of all Canadians and has disproportionately affected Canadians with disabilities in particular. From the very beginning, we've taken a disability-inclusive approach to our emergency response to ensure that Canadians with disabilities get the support they need. That is why we announced a one-time payment of $600 for persons with disabilities to address these expenses. This will go a long way toward helping Canadians with disabilities. We encourage and urge all parties in the opposition to support this measure. We're confident that this measure, along with other investments, will benefit Canadians with disabilities, and we hope to get the support of the other parties very soon. Ms. Louise Chabot: MadamChair, I remind you that this measure wasn't passed because we weren't allowed to do so. A measure to help people with disabilities has been put in an omnibus bill. We've tried here, in the House, to provide the means to give that support, so I ask again, can the government be counted on to give a response to people with disabilities? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, it was absolutely not an omnibus bill. It contained assistance for the disabled, of course, but it also contained assistance for our seasonal workers, as well as a number of other measures that the Bloc Qubcois opposed. They refused to debate and, when the question of splitting the bill came up, the Conservatives refused to do that. That is why there is no bill at the moment, and that is very unfortunate. Ms. Louise Chabot: It was a Bloc Qubcois proposal to split the bill. The government had not thought of it, but they found that it was a good idea. Let me return to the attack. This bill proposed changes to the wage subsidy program, it was supposed to make the CERB more flexible, it proposed fines for fraudsters and, since there was a little section about a benefit for the disabled, the government took it for granted that we would support it without any negotiations with the parties. However, we set one very important condition: that the Liberal Party must get its hands out of taxpayers'pockets in terms of the wage subsidy. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, as we listen to the Bloc Qubcois members, we might think that they invented peanut butter and apple pie. This bill contained a number of measures that all Quebeckers and all Canadians needed, but the Bloc Qubcois refused to debate it. No, we did not follow the Bloc Qubcois'example in splitting the bill; we had thought of it a long time previously. We have not been able to do that because of the Conservatives. Because of them, we cannot help those living with disabilities. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Ms. Chabot, you have 45seconds left. Ms. Louise Chabot: We asked on a number of occasions for the House to be able to sit starting today to pass the part of the bill dealing with those with disabilities. What is the status of that, MadamChair? We have not heard about it since. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, my colleague knows very well that things are not as simple as that. There are procedural mechanisms unique to the House. I hope that, one day, we will be able to pass this bill and be able to provide assistance for those living with disabilities. I hope that the Conservatives will change their minds and give us their support. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Don Valley East, Ms. Ratansi. Ms. Yasmin Ratansi (Don Valley East, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be sharing my time with the member for Surrey Centre. Since 2015 our government has been focused on ensuring its policies mitigate the effects of climate change. Several measures have been implemented for phasing out coal, making polluters pay, providing climate incentives, investing in green technologies and much more, which all together have created a climate plan that is doing more to cut pollution than any other in Canada's history. In my riding of Don Valley East, many innovative businesses have benefited from these investments and initiatives. One area of particular interest is our government's work to protect 25% of Canada's land and 25% of its oceans by 2025. Our natural environment is something that Canadians and my constituents care about deeply. Could the minister update this House on the new conservation projects announced on June 5, World Environment Day, and on how our government is protecting our environment? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, protecting nature is an important part of how we will address climate change and the very real challenges it presents. That's why on June 5, World Environment Day, our government announced over 60 conservation projects under development across Canada. These projects are funded through the Canada Nature Fund's target 1 challenge initiative. They'll conserve Canadian nature and biodiversity and protect species at risk, enhance ecological integrity and connectivity, and enhance the size of Canada's vast network of protected areas. Nearly half of these projects are indigenous-led, with the aim of creating indigenous-protected conserved areas. Madam Chair, projects like these move us closer to our goal of protecting 25% of Canada's lands and oceans by 2025. By working together in partnership with the provinces, territories, municipalities, indigenous peoples and Canadians, together we can protect our natural environment for generations to come. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Ms. Ratansi, since you have 25 seconds left, we will go to the honourable member for Surrey Centre. Mr. Randeep Sarai (Surrey Centre, Lib.): Madam Chair, there are many small and medium-sized businesses in my riding of Surrey Centre. Many have been impacted by COVID-19. They saw a decrease in business or needed to close their doors completely in order to adhere to public safety measures to manage the spread of COVID-19. These measures helped keep our most vulnerable citizens safe and ensured that our hospital and health care providers did not become overwhelmed with a sharp spike in cases. Thanks to our government's COVID-19 emergency response, many of these businesses have been able to keep their employees and access important liquidity through the Canada emergency business account, which provides loans to small businesses and non-profits, and the Canada emergency wage subsidy, which is helping businesses to keep and rehire their employees while their revenues are down by providing up to 75% of wages for up to 24 weeks. As we begin to reopen the economy and Canadians across the country return to the job market, those benefits will be even more important to help businesses and industries rehire their staff and make important adjustments to align with public health guidelines to gradually increase their operations. Can the minister please update the committee on how many Canadian businesses have taken advantage of CEBA and CEWS since applications for each have been opened? Hon. Mary Ng: Madam Chair, I want to begin by thanking the member for Surrey Centre for all the work he does to support his constituents and small businesses. Canadians across the country need to know our government has been working tirelessly and will continue to work tirelessly on their behalf. This is why we put in place the important programs to help them get through this crisis during this difficult time, programs such as the wage subsidy program. We know that in so many businesses the employees are often like extended family members. The wage subsidy has helped these businesses keep their employees on the payroll and are now helping in their rehiring as they slowly and safely restart. There are 348,000 businesses being helped with the wage subsidy program, and this means that 2. 6 million workers are being helped. Businesses are also being helped through the interest-free $40,000 loan they can access through CEBA to help stay afloat and pay their expenses during this crisis. I'm pleased to inform this House that to date more than 669,000 The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for St. John's East. Mr. Jack Harris: Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with my colleague, the member for LondonFanshawe. Madam Chair, with so many recent reports and videos of police using force, sometimes deadly force, and violence against indigenous and black people in Canada, I've called for the public safety committee to reconvene. If the members agree, will the minister come to the committee and provide concrete answers as to how the government intends to address racism inherent in Canada's law enforcement, and in particular the RCMP? Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I thank my colleague for the question. It's perhaps the most important one facing Canada today. Madam Chair, indigenous people, black Canadians and other racialized people are far too often experiencing systemic racism and disparate outcomes within the entire criminal justice system. In order to respond appropriately, I think it's necessary to begin by acknowledging the lived experience of people who've known bias and discrimination at the hands of the police and our courts and within our prisons. We remain committed to working with all racialized people and all of the members of this House to ensure that we work toward social justice for all Canadians, and I look forward to discussing the member's motion further with him. Mr. Jack Harris: Will the minister and the government commit to facilitating such a meeting of this committee virtually? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, the decisions of the committee are the committee's, so I'm sure that this will be a discussion within the committee, but if called, I will certainly be pleased to come with my officials to provide the committee with whatever support and information it needs to contribute to this very important discussion. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Harris, you have 40 seconds. Mr. Jack Harris: In light of what we've seen with Chief Adam in Fort McMurray and the RCMP accepting that the actions were reasonable, will the minister commit to a full review of the use of force by the RCMP, in particular the philosophy, tactics and training that is given to RCMP officers in dealing with the public? Hon. Bill Blair: I thank the member and I want to assure him, first of all, that this is work that is ongoing, not just in the RCMP but throughout the police community. May I also take this opportunity, Madam Chair, to say that I think all police training has to begin with one very important principle, and that's the preservation of all life and the respect for all Canadians. We also know the importance of de-escalation training. We're committed to continuing to work with indigenous communities, racialized communities and with police services and all participants in the criminal justice system to make sure that it is fair for all Canadians. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for LondonFanshawe, Ms. Mathyssen. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen (LondonFanshawe, NDP): Madam Chair, we need more justice for black, indigenous and racialized people in Canada. They can't be asked to keep waiting. This government recognizes that systemic racism exists but refuses to collect race-based data that would allow us to quantify and truly address this injustice. We need data to protect Canadians. When will this government do the right thing and start collecting race-based data? Hon. Bardish Chagger (Minister of Diversity and Inclusion and Youth): Madam Chair, our government agrees that it's important that we collect data, and that's exactly why, in the anti-racism secretariat and the anti-racism strategy, there is a commitment to have money go to Statistics Canada to collect race-based data. We look forward to working with all members to ensure it happens. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen: Madam Chair, we know that Statistics Canada will start to collect job numbers based on race. This will allow us to identify systemic racism where it is and where we need to ensure a fair and more equal job market for black, indigenous and racialized people in Canada. Why is this government refusing to follow suit so we can tackle systemic racism everywhere, in every sector? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I'd like to thank my honourable colleague for her question. She's absolutely correct in her assessment that we need to collect more data, reliable data, data that will help us deal with some of the challenges we're seeing with systemic discrimination, but, more broadly, we want to make sure that we continue to engage with an anti-racism strategy that will allow us to collect that disaggregated data. That is why we allocated $6. 2 million to that initiative through Statistics Canada, but we know we must do more and we will do more. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen: We know that all people are susceptible to catching COVID-19, but health authorities are clear that parts of cities like Montreal and Toronto have been more impacted than others. For black and racialized people living in these cities, this data is a matter of life and death. Will the government collect and share disaggregated data so we can identify and erase systemic racism, yes or no? Hon. Bardish Chagger: Madam Chair, making decisions based on science and evidence is essential for our government. We took that practice from day one. It is exactly the step we will take moving forward and that's why we are making those investments to ensure that data exists. We are working across all departments. My mandate letter is public. I look forward to continuing to work not only with all ministers, departments and agencies, but all allies and all parties to get this work done. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Blaney, the honourable member for BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, has the floor. Hon. Steven Blaney (BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, CPC): Thank you, MadamChair. Last week, my plumber told me that, each time Justin Trudeau comes down the steps to make announcements totalling several billion dollars, he feels like someone is rifling through his pockets. My question is simple and goes to the Minister of Finance: where is this money coming from? Hon. Mona Fortier: MadamChair, I would like to thank my honourable colleague for his question. Currently, the health and safety of Canadians are our top priorities. We have implemented an emergency economic plan to support Canadians, workers and companies. We will continue to support them during this crisis. Hon. Steven Blaney: The answer I would have liked is simple: we are borrowing the money and we are going to have to pay it back one day. That is another Liberal craze: they borrow money, they make campaign promises, and off they go. Under the Conservative government, the Chantier Davie in Lvis had 1,700workers for the supply ship Asterix. In the election campaign, the Liberals promised icebreakers. When are the Liberals going to award the icebreaker contracts to the Chantier Davie? Hon. David Lametti (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada): MadamChair, we are very proud of the Chantier Davie and we completely understand its role in the system. We are currently assessing those requests. We are going to establish the process for the polar ice-breaker, which is essential for the work of the Coast Guard in northern communities, and we are going to make sure that The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Blaney has the floor. Hon. Steven Blaney: The workers do not need words; they need contracts and jobs. The same is true for young people who want to work. There is money in the Canada summer jobs program: in my constituency alone, $150,000has been approved. Companies want young people to work and want to hire them. What is the minister waiting for in order to confirm those positions? In my constituency, and everywhere else in the country, our young people want to work. What is the government waiting for in order to send some cash to the Canada summer jobs program? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we are proud of the Canada summer jobs program. We are introducing flexibilities into the system to enable employers to be able to hire summer students. We recognize the importance of this program to provide both financial resources and necessary experience for young people. We believe in continuing to invest in the Canada summer jobs program. Hon. Steven Blaney: The workers, the young people and the employers have been waiting for weeks. The money is available; where is the announcement? MadamChair, our young people are not the only ones who want to work. There are also the temporary foreign workers. Let me use Jessie Gito as an example; he has been working at Plate2000 in Saint-Anselme for years. When the time came to renew his work permit, he found out that he has to have some biometric tests. But he cannot get them because the offices are closed. Is the minister going to allow Jessie Gito and the thousands of other temporary foreign workers who want to work to be able to do so until the government biometric testing centres reopen? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, it is important for the honourable member to recognize that we are in the early recovery stage of the pandemic. Employers are slowly reopening businesses. We will ensure that we support both our students and our temporary foreign workers to make sure we get the recovery right. We will continue to invest in the Canada summer jobs program. We've introduced flexibilities into the program to ensure that employers are able to take advantage of the program and give opportunities to young people. Hon. Steven Blaney: It is very simple. Jessie Gito is a foreign worker, who is in a company that provides an essential service. He needs a decision that will let him go to work, rather than staying home and doing nothing. Then, when the government's biometric testing centres are open again, he will gladly go to one. Young people want to work in agriculture as well, and the minister has told us that the government wants young people working and that their files will be processed as quickly as possible. She wants to create 700positions and she knows that people can fill in an application on a first-come first-served basis. Of those 700positions, how many have been confirmed to date? The good weather has arrived, the corn is starting to grow, and this is the time when farmers need the young workers. Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food): MadamChair, the program for young workers in agriculture is open. I also encourage agricultural producers to register for it. This is a program that is not only intended to provide summer jobs, but also to interest young people in making a career in agriculture. As I have said before, the department is processing files as quickly as possible. Each employer will have an answer very shortly. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will now take a short break. Okay, we are ready to start again. We will go to the honourable member for BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte. Mr. Doug Shipley (BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Over the course of the pandemic, has the government been using all avenues possible to source much-needed PPE in Canada? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, we have been very clear that we have a made-in-Canada initiative that has engaged companies across the country. Over 700 companies have retooled and scaled up their operations for personal protective equipment to help front-line health care workers. Mr. Doug Shipley: Madam Chair, I need to ask very quickly which ministry and minister are responsible for the sourcing of PPE in Canada. Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, this is a collective effort. I work with the Minister of Health and the minister for procurement, and we coordinate with the provinces and territories to make sure there are appropriate levels of PPE to help front-line health care workers and essential workers across the country. Mr. Doug Shipley: Thank you for that clarification. That will make this question all the more pertinent. My riding of BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte is the home of Southmedic Inc. Southmedic is a renowned medical supply business. For over 37 years, it has provided front-line health care workers with an extensive line of PPE and other essential products required when dealing with respiratory illnesses. This company specializes in respiratory illness equipment. Southmedic currently employs over 700 people, and it has been recognized as one of Canada's best-managed companies by Deloitte on numerous occasions. Since the beginning of the pandemic, both I and the member for BarrieInnisfil have been attempting to obtain some assistance for Southmedic from the federal government. Calls and emails were falling on deaf ears. In early May, I wrote a letter to Minister Anand outlining the situation. I received a letter back from the minister dated May 27 indicating that this issue of Southmedic falls under the mandate of the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada. I have heard nothing more. When will the federal government reach out and help this great Canadian company and therefore ensure that all front-line workers will have the proper PPE they require? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I'd like to thank my honourable colleague for his question. He knows full well that this is a very challenging time. That is why we had a call to action to engage Canadians right across the country. Since then, we've seen over 6,000 companies step up to offer solutions and ideas, and over 700 companies have retooled their efforts. I acknowledge that some companies are still engaging with the government, and we'll continue to explore all possible options to make sure we continue to procure the necessary levels of personal protective equipment to protect Canadians and to protect front-line health care workers. That has always been our priority. I want to thank the outstanding Canadian companies that have come forward and have helped us in this endeavour. We continue to look forward to working with them. Mr. Doug Shipley: Thank you for that answer. Just to follow up, there's no retooling required at this company. They could have been up and going very quickly. They just needed a little assistance at the beginning. Moving on to a different issue, while walking to my office this morning, I stopped at my local small family-run coffee shop and was discussing the current economic situation with the two owners of the establishment. They indicated they are having a very tough time surviving this economic downturn. The only thing keeping them hopeful is that soon the public service will start returning to work, and therefore their business will begin to return. Could the government please give us some indication as to what the plans are for returning the civil service back to work safely, and when? Hon. Jean-Yves Duclos (President of the Treasury Board): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm delighted to answer this question. This is a very important topic, but I'd like to take the opportunity first to thank our public servants, who have worked very hard in the last few weeks, both personally and professionally. In fact, today is a wonderful day to say that, because today is the start of National Public Service Week. That's one more reason to thank them for their dedicated work. They are not going to go back to work. They've been at work for the last few monthsin different circumstances, but they have been working very hard to deliver the services and the support Canadians need and deserve. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Next we'll go to the honourable member for SelkirkInterlakeEastman, Mr. Bezan. Mr. James Bezan (SelkirkInterlakeEastman, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. My questions are for the Minister of National Defence. First of all, I want to thank the great men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces for the fantastic job they're doing in Operation LASER, serving on the front lines battling COVID-19. Can the Minister of National Defence give the House an update on exactly where we are at with the number of Canadian Armed Forces members who have been infected with COVID-19? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan (Minister of National Defence): Madam Chair, I want to echo the member opposite's comments in thanking our Canadian Armed Forces members. Currently, we have 13 active cases in the Canadian Armed Forces, but in the long-term care facilities we currently have 50 cases. No member has been currently hospitalized. We have also conducted very thorough reviews of our protection protocols as well. Mr. James Bezan: Through you, Chair, Minister Sajjan, does that number of active cases include the active cases that are in long-term care facilities right now in Operation LASER? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, as I stated, the 50 cases are strictly from the long-term care facilities. The 13 cases I mentioned are not in the long-term care facilities. Just to give the actual clarification, no member has been currently hospitalized. Mr. James Bezan: In those numbers, Madam Chair, can Mr. Sajjan say how many of those cases in long-term care facilities are active and how many are recovered? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, I don't have the exact number. What I can say to break it down further is that in Quebec we currently have 36 and in Ontario we have 14. As well, 36 of the members have been out of isolation. I'll get more details and pass them on directly to the member, Madam Chair. Mr. James Bezan: Thank you, Minister. Madam Chair, I have a quick question while we're still talking about Operation LASER. The President of the Treasury Board has said, The Canadian Armed Forces will be present as long as their presence is needed in Quebec. This contradicts what Prime Minister Trudeau is saying, which is that we have a hard deadline of June 26 for the withdrawal of our troops for Operation LASER. That means taking our troops out of our long-term care facilities. Minister, is June 26 the hard date for the winding down of Operation LASER? Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I'm delighted to have the opportunity to clarify for the House. We've been in very extensive discussions with the Province of Quebec, with my counterpart Minister Guilbault, and we are working very diligently to ensure we have a sustained, appropriate response to the request from Quebec for assistance. That response will result in a transition from the currently deployed Canadian Armed Forces to the deployment of paid volunteers, trained personnel who will take on the important role of providing services to those Canadians who need our help in Quebec. Mr. James Bezan: I'll go back to the Minister of National Defence. The Department of National Defence auditors have called out the Liberal government for mismanagement over the $553-billion investment in our Canadian military through the defence policy. Only three people have been assigned to oversee the rollout of this money. This is a $553-billion investment in our armed forces, and only three people are managing it. Could the minister tell us how that is even possible? Is this the reason that over 100 projects are currently behind schedule? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, first of all, I want to highlight the unprecedented investment that we're making in defence. We have conducted internal reviews of our procurement. The report the member opposite is talking about is from the previous year. This is the ongoing work we're doing to make sure that we make procurement better. When it comes to the management of this, it's conducted by me and the minister of procurement. We are working toward making our procurement even better. We have already streamlined some aspects of our procurement and we'll continue to do more as well. Mr. James Bezan: Minister Sajjan, you've had this report since November of 2019. You've been rolling out this plan since 2017. Only three people are overseeing an expenditure of $553 billion. This is taxpayers'money. Are we going to see more cuts because you have been unable to actually roll out these dollars? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, I can assure you we're not going to be cutting. We'll be investing in our defence. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Before I go to the next speaker, I want to remind members that they are to address their questions and comments directly through the chair. We will go now to the honourable member for Fort McMurrayCold Lake, Mr. Yurdiga. Mr. David Yurdiga (Fort McMurrayCold Lake, CPC): Madam Chair, the Canada summer jobs program has many challenges. I've seen many indigenous communities in my riding rejected for funding even though they had received funding in previous years. Here are a few examples of communities that were rejected: Beaver Lake Cree Nation, Buffalo Lake Mtis Settlement and the Mtis Nation of Alberta, Region 1. The list goes on. Could the Prime Minister explain why so many indigenous communities have been denied funding from the Canada summer jobs program? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we recognize the important role that the Canada summer jobs program plays in supporting employers and young workers in our community across the country every year. We're working very hard to help employers adapt to the realities of the COVID-19 pandemic and are supporting young Canadians as they begin to look for summer employment. We are introducing increased flexibilities into the Canada summer jobs program to hire youth, while also providing more supports to employers that deliver essential services to Canadians. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, that didn't really answer my question. Why are so many indigenous communities left out of the Canada summer jobs program? This is very important to my community and to communities throughout the province. Will the government investigate why these communities were rejected? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that we, of course, value the important role that the Canada summer jobs program plays in all communities, including indigenous communities in Canada. I will certainly have an off-line conversation with the honourable member, if he so wishes, about a particular issue, but I can assure him that in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, we have had to assist employers to introduce flexibilities The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Yurdiga. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, in my riding, the City of Cold Lake has been in dispute with the federal government for many years over payment in lieu of taxes. My office has sent many letters over the years regarding the PILT dispute. Could the Minister of Public Services and Procurement give me a rough estimate of when I will receive a response from the minister's office to my first letter, from 2017, and my letters from 2018,2019 and 2020? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that I will go to the minister, and we will come back with an answer to his question. Mr. David Yurdiga: How much longer does the minister intend to perpetuate the ongoing PILT dispute, which is in excess of $11 million, with the City of Cold Lake? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, once again, I can assure the honourable member that I will speak with the minister and get an answer to his question. Mr. David Yurdiga: Well, do you know what? I've been writing letters to the department for many years. When you say you're going to get back to me, I really have a hard time believing that. Will the minister agree to follow the prior recommendations of the dispute advisory panel that were accepted by the minister? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that I will check with the minister and that she will return to the member in due course. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, the drug Trikafta has been proven to increase the quality of life for 90% of cystic fibrosis patients. Two weeks ago, my office sent a letter to the Minister of Health about the boy in my riding named Cael, who through the special access program is able to get Trikafta in Canada. I requested that the minister use her powers to fast-track Trikafta for commercial use, but I have yet to receive a response back. When will the minister make a decision on Trikafta? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, I'm glad to hear that Cael was able to access Trikafta through the special access program. In fact, that program is very helpful for people who are seeking access to medication that's not currently marketed in Canada. As the member opposite knows, Vertex has not applied to market Trikafta in Canada, but we look forward to their application, and I encourage him to write a letter to the manufacturer to also encourage them. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Vancouver Granville, Ms. Wilson-Raybould. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould (Vancouver Granville, Ind.): Thank you, Chair. I was very troubled to hear that a CBC radio host in the Yukon felt compelled to resign because, as an indigenous person, she could not speak her truth. While we know the Broadcasting Act states that the Canadian broadcasting system should reflect the linguistic duality and multicultural and multiracial nature of Canadian society and the special place of indigenous peoples, it would seem there are some challenges. Therefore, does the Minister of Heritage share the concern of some journalists that problems of systemic racism in Canada are still existing within the institution of the CBC, and will the government now acknowledge the need to recognize the jurisdiction of indigenous governments? Hon. Steven Guilbeault (Minister of Canadian Heritage): Thank you, Madame Chair; and I thank the member for this important question. As stated by the Prime Minister on numerous occasions, our government recognizes that systemic racism exists in Canada, and we have made a commitment to do everything we can to combat it in whichever organization of the Canadian government. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould: Thank you. When I was in the government, and as a minister, I learned the term red meat issues. I understand these issues to be ones that challenge societal norms, that are not politically expedient to address because they can lose you votes, even though addressing them is morally right and a smart thing to do. Mostly these are issues addressing inequality and the most marginalized in our society. In the justice system, examples include mandatory minimum penalties, defunding police, and even investing in restorative justice. Red-meat issues often become defining issues for society and for governments as the world changes. Surely now these issues are politically less of a consideration than the tragic reality of even more slain indigenous Canadians at the hands of police, or thousands of indigenous people still incarcerated or living in poverty. Will this government please finally commit to the necessary work originally promised in 2015 and repeal in the justice system the vast majority of mandatory minimum penalties, assuring the necessary discretion for judges, and meaningfully invest in restorative justice measures? Hon. David Lametti: Madame Chair, I thank the honourable member for her question, as well as for her work as Minister of Justice, and indeed my predecessor. This is an important time. This is a time when we recognize systemic racism. This is a time when we recognize systemic over-incarceration of indigenous peoples, of black peoples, in our criminal justice system. This is a time when we need to look at all potential options to reduce what is a shameful overrepresentation in our criminal justice system. Too often racialized peoples and indigenous peoples have experienced prejudice and systemic discrimination in our justice system, and that has to change. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould: I'll go on to another red meat issue. In British Columbia we are in the fifth year of the opioid overdose public health emergency crisis. Sadly, May marks the deadliest month of overdose-related deaths. We are halfway into the year and have currently passed 500 deaths caused by overdose. Many of the deaths are related to COVID-19 measures that have prevented people from accessing supervised consumption sites, so they are overdosing alone. While the provinces welcomed the federal backing of safe supply exemption back in March, it is to expire in September of 2020. Echoing the call of the chief coroner of B. C. and Dr. Henry, more is needed from the federal government, more action. Will the government provide the necessary supports to the province and help support safe supply initiatives in the provinces? Hon. Patty Hajdu: It's been a pleasure to work with the Province of British Columbia on innovative ways to work on the tragic situation of opioid overdose. I remain committed to working with the province and in fact any province that wants to work towards solutions that treat people who use substances with the dignity they deserve. Madam Chair, this is a complex issue. We're working closely with our partners to make sure that we can prevent more lives from being lost. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for South OkanaganWest Kootenay, Mr. Cannings. Mr. Richard Cannings (South OkanaganWest Kootenay, NDP): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with the member for SkeenaBulkley Valley. In my riding, Theo's in Penticton is a beloved restaurant. They've been serving great food for 40 years, but now they're struggling, because they don't qualify for the emergency wage subsidy. Why is that? The original owners retired last year and sold it to another operator. The new owner can't use a year-to-year comparison to apply for the wage subsidy because he didn't own the restaurant last spring. He is forced to use receipts from January and February, the darkest doldrums of the restaurant year, to compare with the results from May, traditionally one of their best months. Now he has to compete with other local restaurants that can access the subsidy. When will the government fix this inequity and let Theo's compete and survive? Hon. Mona Fortier: Madam Chair, the Canada emergency wage subsidy is supporting over 2. 5 million workers across the country. To help even more businesses support their workers and rehire people as they reopen, our government is extending the CEWS, and we will continue to extend the CEWS for an additional 12 weeks to August 29 to ensure that Canadian workers continue to have the support they need during these very difficult times. By extending eligibility, our government is ensuring that more Canadian workers in more sectors have the support they need. Mr. Richard Cannings: The owner just wants to be able to apply for the wage subsidy, and right now he cannot, and he will not be able to. Thousands of other businesses are hit that way as well. I'd like to move on to forestry. Canada's forest sector has been declared essential during this pandemic, but it's been hit hard after a very difficult 2019. Despite soft markets and thousands out of work, government support programs have left many Canadian forest product companies behind. In my riding, the pulp mill in Castlegar is closing for the month of July because local sawmills aren't producing enough wood chips. What is the government going to do to finally support Canadian forestry workers and communities? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The time is almost up, but I will allow for the answer from the honourable minister. Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Thank you, Madam Chair. We have supported and we will continue to support the forestry sector, including through regional development programs. In fact, in Quebec, partnering with Les Bois Francs DV Inc. , we have widened market access to our products and updated technology systems. In North Bay we've partnered with the Canadian Wood Council to promote the sector. In Vancouver we're working with FPInnovations to create the indigenous forest sector technical support program. We are supporting the forestry sector and its different needs region by region. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Now we go to the honourable member for SkeenaBulkley Valley, Mr. Bachrach. Mr. Taylor Bachrach (SkeenaBulkley Valley, NDP): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm going to pick up where my colleague left off, with B. C.'s forest industry. What we've seen in B. C. are multiple rounds of mill shutdowns and start-ups, and in some cases this has made it difficult for forestry workers to qualify for EI. My question to the minister is this: Will the minister work to make the EI program more flexible for forestry workers, similar to what this government has done for oil and gas workers? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, in the oil and gas sector we have focused on workers. That has been key in the inactive and orphan well program, which we are working on with the provincial governments of Saskatchewan, British Columbia and Alberta. The focus on workers has assured that success, and we will continue to focus on workers in all the industries, particularly our natural resource industry, as they go through this extraordinarily difficult time. Mr. Taylor Bachrach: Madam Chair, reforestation is a very important part of the forest industry in the riding I represent, and people were keenly interested to hear this government's plan to plant two billion trees in the next 10 years. That's a lot of trees. I'm wondering if the minister could tell us how many trees are going to be planted under this program by the end of this season. Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, this government is committed to two billion trees. We are working with forestry associations, the industry and with individual companies to ensure this tree-planting season will be one of the largest the country has ever seen. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The floor goes to the honourable member for Rivire-du-Nord. Mr. Rhal Fortin (Rivire-du-Nord, BQ): MadamChair, last week, the government introduced BillC-17 and the Minister of Justice sent us briefing notes in which he said that it was important to suspend a number of time limits and to extend others, and that the failure to do so could have important repercussions on Canadians, their families, their situations, their finances and their ability to exercise their rights. We in the Bloc Qubcois agree with that. When are we going to talk about it? Hon. David Lametti: MadamChair, the contents of BillC-17 are clearly very important. We have addressed the mandatory time limits in federal legislation as well as certain time limits that courts may not be able to handle. It is very important that we address this issue. That is why the law The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Fortin, you have the floor. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, we agree that it is important. I concur. The minister's briefing notes say that, among other things, when it comes to divorcewhich means children are involved people are waiting on custody rights, child support and visitation rights. The minister pointed out that the national security review would require consultations if no decision is made in the prescribed time frame. It could pose a national security risk. It is really a big deal. When are we going to debate it? Hon. David Lametti: MadamChair, I completely agree with my honourable colleague. The issue needs to be addressed. That is why it is in the bill. That is another reason to debate the bill. I beseech my colleagues opposite to debate it with us. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, what a coincidence, because I beseech my colleague opposite to debate it with us. That is what we are asking. Last week, the leader of the Bloc Qubcois asked the Liberal government to debate BillC-17 today. He did not get an answer. It does not seem to matter. Richard Wagner, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, who is hardly a dimwit or greenhorn, told us that the justice system needs to be modernized. As recently as this past Saturday in LaPresse, Justice Wagner said that it is essential that the Criminal Code be amended to address the backlog of court proceedings. When will the Liberal government opposite pull up its socks, do its job, govern the federation, sit down with the opposition and discuss the vital matters in BillC-17? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, if I were my colleague, I would be a little embarrassed, because the bill was sent to the Bloc Qubcois several days in advance. They received a technical note several days in advance. We were all available to take questions. When we asked for the support of the Bloc Qubcois and the other parties to debate itwe were not even asking them to vote in favour of the billthey refused. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, we never refused to debate it. Actually, we were the ones who asked to debate it. What exactly does debate it mean? We set some conditions. For example, we asked the Liberals to put the money back into the wage subsidy fund and to commit to dip into it no longer. Are we asking too much of our colleagues opposite? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Can my colleague explain to me what the emergency wage subsidy has to do with a bill about justice? This is an absolutely fundamental piece of legislation. We wanted to debate it, but they refused to do so. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, I would like nothing better than to explain it to him, but I must remind him that he is the leader of the party in power, the party that is supposed to govern the country. So I do not know why he is asking me that. My party proposed that we debate this today but we did not get an answer. Meanwhile, court time limits are running out and people are losing rights. I am thinking of families, child support, child custody, labour law disputes in Federal Court, marine transportation, interprovincial transportation, aviation, banks, and those with grievances waiting for a Federal Court ruling. The whole system, the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal, everything is on hold because nobody in the government wants to do their job. We want to discuss BillC-17. When can we talk about it? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, we have done our job. We have introduced the bill. We informed them in advance. We told them they could ask us any questions they wanted. We asked for a debate in the House. However, when we asked the Bloc Qubcois if they wanted to debate the bill, they said no, instead of doing what they usually do and saying yes. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for Essex, Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis (Essex, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. When the CERB runs out, many workers in my riding of Essex will not have sufficient hours to collect their EI benefits. In early July, the midnight shift at Chrysler will be eliminated. Because of the shutdown, a mom-to-be who had just returned to work in January, and several hundred of her fellow employees, may not have the 600 hours required for regular or EI parental benefits. Immediate action is needed. What is the government doing now to backstop these workers? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, the Canada emergency response benefit has been providing much-needed help to Canadian workers across the country who have stopped working due to COVID-19. We know that there is still a lot of uncertainty for many Canadian workers, and we know that many will be exhausting their benefits in the weeks to come. We will have more to share soon, as early as this week, on our continuing efforts to support Canadian workers and make sure that help is available during this The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Go ahead, Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Minister, for the answer. The EI system needs to be fixed. Even before the shutdown, the system was deeply flawed. Will this government commit to a complete review and overhaul of the EI system? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we have been there for Canadian workers. We will continue to make sure that we make the necessary investments in the EI delivery system and modernize it to continue to meet The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. Small businesses have been hit extremely hard by the COVID-19 shutdown. Many have already been forced into bankruptcy. Much uncertainty lies ahead. As the economy reopens, what is the government doing to help small businesses recover? Hon. Mary Ng: Madam Chair, today we are seeing small businesses that have been helped, whether it is getting access to the small business loan, which some are also using in the restart as they are safely restarting, or getting help with their payroll, helping them keep their employees The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. Employees are key to a small business's success. How will the government incentivize workers to return to their jobs when recalled? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister can give a brief answer. Hon. Mary Ng: The Canada emergency wage subsidy is an excellent program to help those employees stay employed and for those employers who are looking at rehiring them right now during this restart process. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair, many of my constituents are in a committed cross-border relationship and have not been able to see their partners in quite some time. The current restrictions are arbitrary. Denmark has found a fair resolution. Will Canada adopt the Danish model, and if not, why not? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, as we said from the outset, we've implemented restrictions at the U. S. border on non-essential travel with a single purpose in mind: to protect the health and safety of Canadians. As the member is aware, just last week we introduced new measures that allow people in family relationships to stay together as long as they commit to the necessary 14-day period of quarantine. We'll continue to work with families. Our intention is to keep people together, but mostly to keep people safe. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair, with regard to child care, as our economy continues to open, parents are facing a stark choice: Who will care for their children? What's the plan to provide access to child care so parents can confidently return to work? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we are of course committed to continuing to make the record investments that we've been making in child care. Since 2015 we've created over 40,000 affordable child care spaces. We're committed to creating an additional 250,000 before-school and after-school child care spaces. We will continue to invest in this sector because we understand that without investment The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. It sounds as though this government has a desire to force parents to choose between their job and care for their child. Can the government please respond to that quote? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, nothing could be further from the truth. We are committed to the child care sector. Our investments and our results prove the opposite of what the member is asserting. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I'm sorry. We're out of time. The committee now stands adjourned until tomorrow at noon.

Hon. Ahmed Hussen mentioned that the government had announced a one-time of $600 for persons with disabilities to address the expense in need. However, this bill was refused by the Conservatives yet it was expected to be passed in one day.

tr-sq-1217

tr-sq-1217_0

Summarize the discussion about employment and workers'safety. The Chair (Hon. Anthony Rota (NipissingTimiskaming, Lib.) ): I call this meeting to order. Welcome to meeting number 22 of the House of Commons Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic. A reminder to all members that in order to avoid issues with sound, members participating in person should not also be connected to the video conference. For those joining via video conference, I would like to remind you that, when speaking, you should be on the same channel as the language you are speaking. As usual, please direct your remarks through the chair. I understand we don't have any ministerial announcements today, so we'll proceed to presenting petitions. I would like to remind members that any petition presented during a meeting of the special committee must have already been certified by the clerk of petitions. For members participating in person, we ask that they please come and drop the signed certificate off at the table once the petition is presented. The first petition will be presented by Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May (SaanichGulf Islands, GP): Mr. Chair, it's an honour to rise in meeting number 22 of the COVID-19 committee, otherwise known as something like the House of Commons. I'm here to present two petitions containing hundreds of signatures on the issue of the treatment of Falun Gong practitioners by the People's Republic of China, particularly the practice that's alleged of involuntary organ harvesting. The petitioners ask the Government of Canada to condemn this practice and to publicly call for an end to the persecution of Falun Gong in the People's Republic of China. The second petition is from residents throughout SaanichGulf Islands concerned about what was, at the time this petition was submitted, a future problem. It remains an issue, and I present it on behalf of petitioners who wish the Government of Canada not to put public funds into purchasing or maintaining the Trans Mountain pipeline or towards any expansion of the pipeline. The Chair: Next we'll go to Ms. Kwan. Ms. Jenny Kwan (Vancouver East, NDP): Mr. Chair, I rise to table two petitions. The first petition deals with the COVID-19 situation. The petitioners note the pandemic is having a devastating impact on many Canadians nationwide, especially those who have low to modest income, small business gig workers, freelancers, artists, film industry workers, non-salaried workers and individuals on fixed incomes such as seniors and those on disability. It further notes that rent, mortgage and utility payments are due at the end of each month, putting countless Canadians at risk of losing their housing. It is paramount there be safe self-isolation opportunities for all individuals in this country. To that end, the petitioners are calling for the government to immediately enact a nationwide rent freeze, eviction freeze, mortgage freeze and utility freeze, enforce mortgage deferrals for homeowners without penalty or interest charges from financial institutions and provide direct assistance in the form of a monthly, universal, direct payment of $2,000 per month for all, with an additional $250 per child immediately. The second petition deals with the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion. These petitioners join the hundreds of thousands of people who are opposed to the expansion. Trans Mountain, in building the pipeline, brings massive environmental and economic risk with no substantial benefit to British Columbia or to local residents. Approximately 40,000 barrels of oil have already leaked from existing Kinder Morgan pipelines, including two major spills in Burnaby since 2007. I might note, Mr. Chair, that just this past weekend there was yet another spill to the tune of 1,195 barrels here in British Columbia. There is no known scientific technology to clean up the bitumen when there is a spill, and the number of tankers would go from eight to 34 per month into the Burrard Inlet. It puts at risk many residential neighbourhoods and the traditional territories of at least 15 first nations. The Chair: May I interrupt for a moment, Ms. Kwan. I want to remind all members in the House that when presenting a petition, the idea is to be as concise as possible. Ms. Kwan, I'll let you wrap up, please. Ms. Jenny Kwan: Thank you, Mr. Chair. The petitioners are calling for the government to immediately act to prevent this new oil pipeline from proceeding through British Columbia. The Chair: Thank you. We'll now go to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood ParkFort Saskatchewan, CPC): Mr. Chair, I have four petitions to present today. The first petition reflects the outrage of my constituents at the ever-expanding order in council from the government banning more and more firearms. In particular, the petitioners highlight the failure of the government to act on the issue of illegal guns. The petitioners note that virtually all violent crimes committed in Canada, including the recent shooting in Nova Scotia, involve illegal firearms in the hands of those who are already not permitted to possess them. The petition has two asks. First of all, it asks that we reverse the order in council banning certain firearms, but also that we propose measures that will effectively address the illegal use of firearms by criminals while respecting the rights of law-abiding citizens. It also asks that we ensure that substantial changes to firearms laws in future actually be made by Parliament, not by the government acting in an unaccountable manner. The second petition deals with Bill C-8, which is the government's bill around conversion therapy. The petitioners support efforts to ban conversion therapy. They express concern about problems in the wording of the definition used in the legislation. They're asking the government to support amendments to fix the definition to address the issue of conversion therapy and ensure that the definition is correct and doesn't criminalize certain forms of counselling that individuals may voluntarily enter into. The third petition is regarding Bill S-204, a bill in the Senate that seeks to make it a criminal offence for a person to go abroad to receive an organ without consent, dealing especially with the horrific practice of forced organ harvesting and trafficking in China. The petitioners are supportive of Bill S-204 and want to see it move forward. The final petition is with respect to Bill C-7. There's been much discussion in this House about the need to do better in terms of long-term care. Rather than working to do better in long-term care, unfortunately we've seen the government removing vital safeguards in the area of euthanasia. I think our focus should be on assisting life rather than removing safeguards that are required in association with the euthanasia regime. The petitioners are particularly concerned about the government's plan to remove a 10-day reflection period that normally takes place. That period can already be waived under certain circumstances, but Bill C-7 proposes to remove it entirely as well as reduce the number of witnesses involved. The petitioners are quite concerned about what's going on in Bill C-7 and call for it to be stopped or amended. The Chair: Presenting petitions. We'll proceed to statements by members. We'll start off with Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly (NanaimoLadysmith, GP): Mr. Chair, we are in the midst of a global pandemic and an economic shock. Recent events have ripped open the wound of systemic racism in our country. Racialized and marginalized communities have been disproportionally affected by the pandemic. Thousands of seniors in long-term care facilities have died. It is clear that we need system change. In the past, governments have bailed out banks and corporations because they were too big to fail. It is time to bail out humanity and the planet. No one will be immune from the threat of climate change and mass extinction. Both are the result of the exploitation of the natural world in the name of the economy. Humans created the economy. We can choose to change it. We must protect our environment or perish. COVID-19 has demonstrated that together we can take courageous action for the common good. We need to do the same for the climate crisis, because humanity and our planet are too big to fail. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Spengemann. Mr. Sven Spengemann (MississaugaLakeshore, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, today marks World Elder Abuse Awareness Day. Underestimated and under-reported, elder abuse exists across the world. At risk of neglect and assault, many of the most vulnerable older persons reside in our long-term care facilities. They are the seniors who have built our country and shaped our communities, who have shown us resilience, courage and selflessness, who have made us stronger, and whose work and teachings continue to inspire us. They are parents and grandparents, brothers and sisters, friends and mentors. We have not been there for them in the same way they've been there for us throughout their lives. The Canadian Forces report, alongside the climbing disproportionate death toll in our long-term care facilities, has reconfirmed the ugly, indefensible reality of elder abuse and neglect in Canada. In my community, we mourn the deaths of 68 seniors from one long-term care facility alone, Camilla Care. We must make the same unwavering commitment to older persons as they have shown to us. We must protect and uphold their human rights. We must do better. The Chair: Before proceeding, I just want to bring up to the members in the background that we want to keep it as simple and as parliamentary as possible in keeping it neutral. We'll now move to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett (LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, CPC): During these trying times, the residents of LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes have risen to the challenge. They've made sacrifices and gone above and beyond to make the lives of their neighbours better and to keep our communities safe. It would be impossible to list everyone who has emerged as a community hero, but I'd like to highlight a few, like Lily, an eight-year-old from Elgin who raised funds for her local food bank by building and selling squirrel picnic tables, and Louise Boardman from Spencerville who's making masks for long-term care facilities and selling others in support of the Breast Cancer Action centre. The Knights of Columbus in Prescott raised funds and are distributing some $27,000 in support of charitable groups throughout the region. The Knights of Columbus in Kemptville are working overtime operating the local food bank. Who can forget our top-notch health care workers like Hannah and Mary at the Brockville COVID-19 testing centre? It is the people of LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes that make it so great. To everyone working to make a difference and to all of our essential workers, thank you. The Chair: Next is Mr. Anandasangaree. Mr. Gary Anandasangaree (ScarboroughRouge Park, Lib.): Mr. Chair, the Indian Act enshrined racism into Canadian law in 1876, and, through residential schools, the child welfare system, our legal system and our police, we criminalized and tore apart indigenous peoples. The deaths of Chantel Moore and Rodney Levi and the assault on Chief Allan Adam are recent examples of systemic racism within the RCMP. Sadly, the RCMP leadership has failed to acknowledge this reality and its root causes. These same systems negatively impact black Canadians. Anti-black racism has resulted in more young black men being jailed, children being streamed or excluded from schools and negative police interaction due to profiling. Black lives matter. No single Canadian is responsible for the prevalence of systemic racism; we all are. Collectively we build institutions that discriminate based on race. It is now time to reimagine and rework our institutions, starting with our police, to ensure that all Canadians can achieve their truest potential. The Chair: Ms. Larouche, you have the floor. Ms. Andranne Larouche (Shefford, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chair. June15 is World Elder Abuse Awareness Day. I want to remind members of the link between abuse and the problems of economic dependency among seniors. Improving their purchasing power means reducing the risk of them falling victim to abusive people. That's why the increase in the old age security benefit and the guaranteed income supplement must be extended beyond the pandemic. In three weeks, our seniors will receive their first cheque, when they should be receiving their second. A date must also be announced for the new horizons for seniors program, which helps several groups develop projects to break the isolation of seniors. In closing, I would like to mention the organization Justice alternative et mdiation that during the pandemic, along with other organizations in Shefford, has set up the project Une histoire pour la tienne, which also serves to mark this day. It's a virtual meeting between young people and seniors, allowing them to exchange some inspiring life experiences. Since age prejudice is very much present, I applaud this project, which aims to make us understand each other better and judge each other less. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Sangha. Mr. Ramesh Sangha (Brampton Centre, Lib.): Mr. Chair, in the time of this terrible crisis affecting all Canadians, when we are all thinking about how best to deal with it, let's all think about the people around us. Let's show our representation not only to those in the sector of sanctioned workers, but also to all those Canadians who day by day stand up and make a difference. Every day I am proud of the reactions of Canadians to this crisis. I want to acknowledge and celebrate all the contributions made by the people of Brampton Centre, all religious institutions, civil society and community organizations like Knights Table in my riding. We are all standing together to fight COVID-19. Let's continue working hard with that same spirit to get positive results out. Thank you very much. The Chair: I will proceed to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff (BruceGreyOwen Sound, CPC): Mr. Chair, whether graduating from elementary school, high school, Georgian College or graduating from colleges or universities across the country, I am proud of the accomplishments of all the graduates across BruceGreyOwen Sound. I would also like to congratulate and thank all the teachers and parents who have adapted to teaching online or from home and who have supported these graduates over the course of their academic careers. I'd like to extend special congratulations to Cameron Lovell, who just graduated from grade eight, as well as to Neebeesh and Neebin Elliott, originally from the Nawash unceded first nation on the Bruce Peninsula, who will be headed to Michigan State University, and to Jared Lumley from Owen Sound, who just graduated from my alma mater, the Royal Military College of Canada. The college motto of Truth, Duty, Valour is something all Canadians should aspire to live by. I wish all the best to these graduates on their next adventures. I and Canada cannot wait to see how their dreams and goals impact and change the world. I congratulate BruceGreyOwen Sound graduates. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Cormier. Mr. Serge Cormier (AcadieBathurst, Lib.): Today I pay tribute to RichardLosier, an entrepreneur, visionary and builder who died on June9,2020, surrounded by his family. Mr. Losier is a giant in the Acadian Peninsula business community. In1968, he co-founded St. Isidore Asphalte, a company that now has more than 200employees. He also launched many other businesses over the years. He was unifying and generous, a philanthropist who cared about young people and never missed an opportunity to improve their lives. I met Mr. Losier when I was 14years old, and I can say that he has been a positive influence in my life. Every time I met him, he gave me a lot of advice and encouragement, which I've never forgotten. Mr. Losier's legacy to his community is invaluable. His commitment remains an example for all of us to follow. Mr. Losier now joins his wife, Nolla. I offer my most sincere condolences to his children, Richard Jr. , Ronald, Nathalie, Caroline and Stphane, and to his family and friends. Rest in peace, Mr. Losier. You will be greatly missed. Thank you for everything you've done for our region. The Chair: We will now go to Ms. Dabrusin. Ms. Julie Dabrusin (TorontoDanforth, Lib.): Hello from my community in east end Toronto. People talk about how a city the size of Toronto can be cold, but that's far from the truth in my community. I want to give a shout-out to our teachers, like Mr. Wong of Earl Grey Senior Public School, who delivered home-baked cookies and handwritten notes to all of his students, or Monsieur Steve, who's offering online French classes, or the teachers of Riverdale Collegiate, who paraded through our streets to celebrate our graduates. Our local Michael Garron Hospital put out a call for community members to sew masks and received over 60,000 masks, including those made by Lisa Tancre of Chartwell Avondale Retirement Residence. Michelle Beaton organized a front window scavenger hunt to entertain children and their families. Restaurants, even while facing adversity, have been generously donating food, like the members of the Leslieville BIA or Mezes. There are so many more stories of generosity that I could share, but I'm out of time. I thank everyone who has stepped up. We all appreciate all of their hard work. The Chair: We will now go to Ms. Sahota. Ms. Jag Sahota (Calgary Skyview, CPC): Mr. Chair, on Saturday night, Calgarians, particularly those in the northeast, in my riding of Calgary Skyview, witnessed a devastating storm, the likes of which I have not seen in my lifetime. Homes, vehicles, community buildings and structures suffered significant damage due to large hail, floods and high winds. People acted quickly to seek shelter. I'm so grateful that there have been no reports of personal injury or loss of life. I went around the community yesterday to survey the damage. It is extensive. My heart aches for those who have been impacted by the storm in an already incredibly difficult time, but we are resilient. We know that in the coming weeks there will be a lot of cleanup required, both to personal property and in the community. I know my constituents, and we will help one another get through this together. I will work hard to do everything I can to help rebuild this community. The Chair: Mr. Serr, you have the floor. Mr. Marc Serr (Nickel Belt, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to express my sincere gratitude to the people of West Nippissing who organized Pride activities to celebrate the LGBTQ community in June. This week, we are also celebrating National Public Service Week. I thank the public servants for their dedication to the Nickel Belt community and the Valley East and Rayside-Balfour areas. The Chair: Next is Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya (MarkhamUnionville, CPC): Mr. Chair, when COVID-19 began spreading across Ontario, Markham, like many other communities, was unprepared. Our front-line health care workers did not have enough personal protective equipment to do their jobs safely. When Markham residents heard about these shortages, my office was flooded with calls from people who had PPE and wanted to donate. Since then my office has been able to deliver tens of thousands of PPE supplies to front-line health care workers and five masks to each family in need. This pandemic has shown that no matter what the challenge is, the Markham community will overcome it. Today, I would like to thank the front-line health care workers who are doing incredible work. I would also like to thank all those who have helped in Markham's hour of need. The Chair: I understand we had a bit of a glitch there. I'm sorry. With the pause, we thought that was the end of it. Mr. Serr, I would ask you to continue. I understand you started to switch languages. Please continue. You have 30seconds. Mr. Marc Serr: Thank you. I'm switching to English now. Thank you to our nurses, doctors, pharmacists, cashiers, janitors. Thank you to various retail workers and first responders dealing with COVID-19. You keep our communities safe and healthy, and you feed us. Your dedication and sacrifice are greatly appreciated. As we start to see local businesses reopen, it is important for all of us to remember to follow best practices outlined by local public health. Our front-line workers deserve our respect. It is important for all of us to respect social distancing, to protect all workers and their families. Together we can remain strong and united as we continue to face this challenge together. The Chair: Again, my apologies for skipping over there, but now we'll to to Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod (KamloopsThompsonCariboo, CPC): Mr. Chair, in commemoration of Italian Heritage Month, I would like to pay tribute to the Colombo Lodge and Italian Cultural Centre in Kamloops, British Columbia. The Colombo Lodge was founded in 1914 and is an integral part of our community. Recently they began Colombo Cares take-home dinners with proceeds distributed to different non-profit organizations throughout the region. Last month they very generously gave away hundreds of dinners to Royal Inland Hospital staff and paramedics for their tireless work throughout the pandemic. In their own words they say, Colombo Lodge is very proud of the Italians that have made Kamloops their home. Community members of Italian ancestrypast and presenthave helped and continue to help Kamloops prosper as a giving, welcoming and inclusive community. Personally, I want to thank all members for their friendship and generosity over the years. Our community is forever grateful for their kindness. The Chair: We'll now proceed to Mr. Harris. Mr. Jack Harris (St. John's East, NDP): Mr. Chair, many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are facing a serious financial crisis. Most people with disabilities are waiting to be included in the Liberals'promised program. Fish plant workers will need support to avoid a disastrous year. Many small businesses don't qualify for programs. Municipalities need emergency help to meet the crisis. People are worried about what will happen when the CERB runs out in two weeks'time, and the coming tourism season looks very grim. The province itself is in serious financial crisis due to the pandemic and the decline in oil prices. The federal government must overhaul and enhance the fiscal stabilization program to help Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and other oil-producing provinces through this crisis. Both the province and the oil and gas industry players have committed to net zero emissions by 2050. This is a challenge and an opportunity to transition to a sustainable energy future, but it will require significant investment and support by government to keep the industry strong and make this a just transition for workers. Much has been done. Much more needs to be done. The Chair: Ms. Gaudreau, you have the floor. Ms. Marie-Hlne Gaudreau (LaurentidesLabelle, BQ): Mr. Chair, all 44elected municipal officials in the riding of LaurentidesLabelle and I have sent a letter to the government asking that cellular and high-speed Internet networks be made available to all. The crisis has accelerated the demonstration of the need for these networks in daily life. The territorial complexity of the Laurentians means that there are areas where the signal is weak, unstable or non-existent. There is an urgent and essential need to change the infrastructure of the current networks. Also, because of the lockdown, Internet failures are being felt, and they prevent distance learning, telemedicine and teleworking, among other things. How can our municipalities develop economically if they can't provide their community with adequate communication tools? We are therefore calling on the government to put the interests of its people first by investing massively right now in the construction of high-speed Internet and cellular infrastructure. The Chair: Mr. Waugh. Mr. Kevin Waugh (SaskatoonGrasswood, CPC): I rise today to pay tribute to Sir Winston Churchill, the former prime minister of Great Britain and one of the greatest leaders history has ever known. In what can only be called a lifetime of service, Churchill's contributions to the Commonwealth and to the world are without equal. During the Second World War he led the allied forces in Europe against the tyranny and fascism of Adolph Hitler and his Nazi regime. When our world was in its darkest hour, Churchill's leadership was a beacon of hope and freedom. I am reminded of something he once said, All the greatest things are simple, and many can be expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honour, duty, mercy, hope. Sir Winston Churchill himself embodied all of these great things and will forever be a symbol of freedom, democracy and hope. The Chair: Mr. Gerretsen. Mr. Mark Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands, Lib.): Mr. Chair, I would like to add my voice to the recognition and celebration of Pride Month, which is celebrated annually during June. Pride Month is important for Canadians because we can be proud of who we are and celebrate our diversity. This June is different from previous years as we cannot celebrate in person all together. However, I know the ongoing pandemic will not stop us from showing our love and support for the LGBTQ+ community. To celebrate Pride Month this year, my office distributed 3,000 pride maple leaf pins across the country; whoever asked received one. Although the majority was sent to constituents in my riding, over 500 pins were sent to the neighbouring ridings of LanarkFrontenacKingston, LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, and HastingsLennox and Addington. It warms my heart to see so many Canadians showing their support. Happy Pride, everyone. The Chair: We will now proceed to the questioning of ministers. Please note that we will suspend the proceedings twice to allow employees who provide support for the sitting to substitute for each other safely. Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell (Louis-Saint-Laurent, CPC): Mr. Chair, I am very pleased to take part in today's meeting of this parliamentary committee. Canada has been dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic for three months now. The situation now seems to be improving, although we must remain vigilant. Economically, business people and the entire Canadian economy depend on government decisions. My question is very simple: when will the economic update take place? Hon. Chrystia Freeland (Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): Mr. Chair, I thank the hon. member for his question. I agree with him that Canada and Canadians are doing an excellent and difficult job in the fight against coronavirus. As for the economy, our government is there for Canadians, for workers and for businesses, and it will continue to be. Mr. Grard Deltell: Canadians, business people and businesses want to know where the government is headed. When will the economic update take place? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, Canadians know that the government is there to support them. Eight The Chair: We return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Canadians and Quebeckers also know that the Government of Quebec will table its economic update this week. Why isn't the federal government doing the same? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I'm pleased to explain to hon. members and to Canadians what the government is doing for the economy The Chair: We return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, it is a real pleasure for me to explain to the minister and everybody in the House of Commons that today the Saskatchewan government will table its economic update. Why can't Ottawa do that? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I'm delighted to have the opportunity to share with Canadians what our government is doing to support workers, businesses and the economy. Eight million Canadians have received the CERB, essential support for Canadian workers and their families. The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, 11 days ago the Newfoundland government tabled its own economic update. We see governments acting correctly for their people, except for the Liberal government, which cannot table an economic update. When will the Liberal government table an economic update, which Canadians would like to see? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I am delighted to share with the member opposite and with Canadians what we are doing practically that has meaning for Canadians. Let me talk about what we are doing for Canadian businesses. Nearly 670,000 Canadian businesses have received support The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: In Canada, the Quebec government will table its economic update this week. The Saskatchewan government tabled its economic update today. The Newfoundland government has tabled its economic update. Everybody is working hard in Canada, and the business community would like to know where the Liberal government is going. The question is crystal clear. When will the Liberal government table an economic update? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, Canadian workers and Canadian businesses want to know that our government is here to support them. I have shared with this House our support for Canadian workers through the CERB. I've spoken about the CEBA, and let me point out that more than $26 billion of support has been given through that essential program. Let me talk about the wage subsidy. More than 2. 6 million The Chair: We'll return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, this is starting to get interesting; the minister is revealing some of these expenses. Could the minister tell us how much the government has spent in the last three months? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I will continue in French by explaining what our government is doing for Canadians and workers The Chair: Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, this is a little bit concerning for all Canadians, because this government cannot say when they will table the economic update, cannot identify how much money they have spent in the last three months and cannot say what is the deficit of Canada. Is somebody in this government running this country correctly? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, absolutely we are running this country, and we are supporting our economy. In fact, we appreciate that Canada currently is experiencing its greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression. That is why we have devoted nearly 11% of GDP to support Canadian workers and Canadian businesses. I want to assure Canadians The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Normandin. Ms. Normandin, you have the floor. Ms. Christine Normandin (Saint-Jean, BQ): Mr. Chair, there are times when Quebec and the provinces are not just two solitudes, but they get along and speak as one, such as when the time comes to tell the government to mind its own business. On reading section91 of the Constitution Act, 1982, which sets out the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal government, nowhere do I find that the federal government must meddle by attaching conditions to health transfers. It is Quebec and the provinces that hire the medical personnel, doctors, nurses and caretakers. It is Quebec and the provinces that are responsible for purchasing the necessary equipment. It is Quebec and the provinces that know what is happening on the ground and what their needs are. Will the government do the only thing within its authority, which is to take the cheque, sign it and put it in the mail? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I thank the hon. member for her question. We fully understand the importance of federal support for the provinces, especially in our national fight against the coronavirus. I agree with the hon. member that we must give financial support to the provinces, including Quebec absolutely. I would also like to point out the importance of the support of the Canadian Armed Forces, who are doing an important and excellent job in Quebec and Ontario today, right now. Ms. Christine Normandin: Mr. Chair, I am glad to see that there is recognition of the importance of transferring this money. My question is whether it can be transferred unconditionally; that's what I'm asking. There's a state of emergency. In the past, we have seen that it takes a long time to negotiate conditions with the federal government. We saw it in the case of the Quebec City tramway, and we are still seeing it now in the case of transfers for housing in Quebec, for which there is no agreement and, therefore, no transfer of money. Will the federal government send the money free of conditions? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the hon. member said in her first question that the only thing the federal government had to do on health care was to sign the cheques. I can't agree because, today, at this time, at the request of the Premier of Quebec, the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces are in Quebec today; they're there to save the lives of seniors The Chair: We now return to Ms. Normandin. Ms. Christine Normandin: It was indeed at Quebec's request. What I'm saying is that, at present, the provinces are unanimously asking that there be no conditions. It's urgent that the money be transferred. The federal government's job here is to sign the cheque and send it to the provinces. The government's job is also to make Parliament work. This is where there should be negotiations so that we can work, among other things, to send money to people living with disabilities, to make sure we fight CERB fraud and to make sure that court time limits are effective in the current crisis. Can the government focus on the issue in order to respect the provinces and transfer money for health care? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: I thank the hon. member for her question, Mr. Chair. I agree with the hon. member that the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces are in Quebec today at the request of the Province of Quebec. That said, I hope that the hon. member will agree with me that being there for Quebec's seniors, that saving the lives of Quebec's seniors, is much more than simply signing cheques. I am very proud of the work the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces are doing. I think we all should thank these people who are working for Canada, for Quebec, and who are doing an important and excellent job. Ms. Christine Normandin: Mr. Chair, I think the Deputy Prime Minister misunderstood me when I was talking about the importance of acting quickly. Negotiations between the government and the provinces take an awfully long time because the federal government decides to place conditions where there shouldn't be any. Right now, the only important thing is to transfer the money quickly so that it can be used in our hospitals and our long-term care facilities, where the need is desperate. Quebec and the provinces know exactly what their needs are. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I would like to point out the extent to which the federal government is there to support the provinces, including Quebec. We have increased funding to the provinces and territories by $500million to help them prepare for COVID-19 outbreaks. This funding is in addition to the $40billion that we already provide annually to the provinces and territories. That's a lot of money. It is strong endorsement The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh (Burnaby South, NDP): Mr. Chair, systemic racism is killing people. It's killing black people and it's killing indigenous people. Recently, Rodney Levi was another victim of systemic racism. He was killed in New Brunswick by the RCMP. To deal with systemic racism, we need systemic change. Will the Liberal government commit to systemic change so that not another life is ever taken again? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I thank the member opposite for the extremely important question, and I'll take this opportunity to acknowledge the work that he has done for many years fighting racism in Canada. Our government absolutely acknowledges that systemic racism exists in Canada. It exists in all of our institutions, including the police and the RCMP. I agree with the member opposite that now is the moment to fight this The Chair: Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, I thank the Deputy Prime Minister very much for the response, but there are some specific actions we need to take. There are movements. Black Lives Matter, as a movement, is calling for the defunding of police. What they're saying is we need to make better choices with how money is being spent. When someone is in need of a wellness check or a mental health check, money, financing and support should go to mental health workers and health care workers, not the police. Is the government prepared to fund and prioritize health care workers over the police? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the member quite rightly began his questions by speaking about systemic racism against indigenous people in Canada, and I would like to speak about that for a moment. I spoke to Perry Bellegarde this morning, because it is such a crucial issue. We can describe it as the original sin of our country. I absolutely agree that we need root and branch reform, including in how policing is done in Canada. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, will the Liberal government commit to a review of the use of force as outlined for the RCMP? Will the Liberals commit to that change? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister and the Minister of Public Safety had many conversations last week with the RCMP. We all accept that The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, will the government commit to ensuring that de-escalation receives priority? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Let me continue, Mr. Chair. Systemic racism exists in all of our federal institutions, including the RCMP. It's time to put an end to it. Let me just say The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, I'm not getting an answer. Will the Prime Minister or the Liberal government commit to something simple and ensure that at the federal level, racial profiling, street checks and carding are expressly prohibited? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, sadly, I can't agree that rooting out systemic racism is going to be simple, but I can agree that racial profiling is absolutely inappropriate. It is not something that we should The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Well, I'm going to try to get another commitment from the government, because they don't seem able to commit to something as clear as ending racial profiling. We know that millions of Canadians in a couple of weeks are going to be faced with the reality of their CERB ending. These families are worried about how they're going to put food on the table, because they can't return to a job. Will the Liberal government commit today so that those families will have some concrete support, yes or no? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, let me be clear, as I was in my previous answer, that our government clearly is opposed to racial profiling. This is a wrong practice and we're very clear about our position there. Now when it comes to the CERB, I absolutely share the concern of the member opposite. The Canadian economy is in its direst state since the Great Depression. We know that all the jobs have not yet come back. We know that Canadian workers, Canadian families, continue to need The Chair: We'll now pause for a short time to allow staff to change within the safety parameters for the COVID-19 virus, and as we resume, we will go to Ms. Harder. Ms. Rachael Harder (Lethbridge, CPC): Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister has mandated his ministers, and I quote, to govern in a positive, open and collaborative way. Ironically, as it stands, Parliament is currently closed for business. Opposition parties have little opportunity to hold the ruling party to account, private members'bills cannot be tabled and legislation cannot be debated. Can the Prime Minister, Mr. Trudeau himself, help us understand how all of this fits into his definition of so-called open government? The Honourable Pablo Rodriguez (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons): Well, Mr. Chair, we're here, right? We're here, and the opposition is asking questions. They have the equivalent of eight question periods instead of five to ask questions. They have more time than before, so I don't know why they're not happy about it. Ms. Rachael Harder: That's like when I'm asking for a full meal and your handing me a few jellybeans and saying, Why aren't you happy with that? Mr. Chair, here's the thing. It's like switching a light on and off when it's convenient for the Prime Minister and for the Liberal Party. That's what they want to do here. That's not Parliament. That's not democracy. When will Mr. Trudeau do the right thing, turn the lights on and get back to work for Canadians? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I'm really sorry to hear that my colleague's not working. I can assure you, Mr. Chair, on this side of the House, we're all actually working very hard and we're answering the questions from the opposition. Why? It's because it's extremely important. I sat there for seven years asking questions. I understand important Ms. Rachael Harder: The member opposite knows very well that he is misleading the Canadian public. This is not true Parliament. This is simply a special committee. Here's the thing. On the Liberal Party website, under the platform commitment, it says that Parliament works best when its members are free to do what they have been elected to do, and that is be the voice for their communities and hold the government to account. This is a Liberal document. Did the Prime Minister forget that strengthening Parliament was part of his 2019 platform commitment? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague for quoting our excellent platform. That was a very very good document. The thing is, I think we've reached a balance whereby MPs can come from different places, mostly around Ottawa, and ask questions; but also we can have colleagues from across the country asking questions. Why does my colleague think it is better to have only 35 MPs participating instead of 338? Ms. Rachael Harder: Does the Prime Minister value democracy, or does he still look up to China's basic dictatorship? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, we're answering all the questions from the opposition, not only from the people in this room, but we're answering The Chair: It's back to Ms. Harder now. Ms. Rachael Harder: I'll ask the question again. Does the Prime Minister still value the basic dictatorship of China over Canada's democracy? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I don't know where the colleague wants to go from here, Mr. Chair. I'd like to know from her why it is not important to her that her colleagues participate directly. Ms. Rachael Harder: Mr. Trudeau wrote to his ministers and said to them that they continue to raise the bar on openness, effectiveness and transparency. He went on to explain that This means. . . government that is open by default. We now have a parliament that is currently shut down. Mr. Trudeau has shut it down and has prevented us from being able to do to the good work that Canadians expect us to do. Is this Mr. Trudeau's idea of open by default? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, do they want to talk about shutting down Parliament? How about the time they prorogued Parliament twicenot only once, but twice? The Conservative government shut down Parliament twice. I was here. I was sitting on the other side of the aisle. It's quite the opposite now. We're taking all the questions. This place is open, and we're answering questions. The Chair: One moment, please. I haven't acknowledged you yet, Ms. Harder. We've stopped the time there. I want to remind honourable members that questions and answers are being given, and we want to hear both sides. Please keep the heckling down. Ms. Harder, please proceed. Ms. Rachael Harder: In 2014, the leader of the Liberal Party developed a policy resolution entitled Restoring Trust in Canada's Democracy. That's ironic, because right now, again, Parliament is currently shut down. We are prevented from being able to do the good work that we are expected to do. At the time, the Prime Minister said, Canadians want their Members of Parliament to be effective voices for their communities in Ottawa, and not merely mouthpieces in their communities for an all-too-powerful Prime Minister. Sadly, Mr. Trudeau has become the all-too-powerful prime minister that he once believed should not exist. Why did he change his mind? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, I'd like to know why my colleague wants to shut down the voices of her colleagues who could not speak and could not participate in this room. Mr. Chair, how would we vote on private members'bills, for example? As you know, it is not a government vote or a party vote; it's per row. You want to come back? Are you going to acceptMr. Chair, through youthat we have electronic voting, yes or no? The Chair: We'll go on to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, we know that the Minister of Foreign Affairs has champagne tastes and London flats, but it's his champagne mortgages that Canadians are concerned about. Specifically, why did the minister only disclose the complete extent of his personal debt to the Chinese government on June 4 of this year? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, as you know, since the minister entered politics, his two mortgages and other liabilities and assets have been fully disclosed to the Ethics Commissioner and placed on the online public registry. It's public, Mr. Chair. It's public. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Now it's public and it's terrible. When will the foreign affairs minister be here to answer these questions himself? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, it's always been public. We're in the middle of a pandemic here, trying to help Canadians, and the best they can do is ask questions about The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: When the minister owes over a million dollars to the Chinese government, people have a right to ask him questions. When will the Minister of Foreign Affairs show up? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: The minister shows up every day, Mr. Chair. He shows up and works for Canadians. Once again, those are public documents. Everything the minister did is public. I still don't know why they ask The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, he doesn't even have to come to the House. All he has to do is appear on the screen. Where is the minister? Why is he hiding? Why won't he answer questions about his personal debt to the Chinese government? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, if he goes online he's going to get the information. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, the minister is hiding. Let's ask some specific questions about their China policy. What is the impact on the decision-making? Three-quarters of Canadians don't want Huawei involved in our 5G network. Will the minister put the interests of Canadians ahead of the interests of his creditors and say no to Huawei? Hon. Navdeep Bains (Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry): Mr. Chair, when it comes to 5G deployment, we are right now currently undergoing a comprehensive review. We have been absolutely clear with allies and with Canadians that we never have and never will compromise Canadians'national interests. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, that is not an answer, and it is completely out of step with what our allies have already recognized. Reports are emerging of multiple deadly viruses exported from Winnipeg's microbiology laboratory to the Wuhan Institute of Virology right before scientists were expelled for policy breaches. In spite of that, scientific co-operation between Canadian institutions and the military-affiliated Wuhan Institute of Virology is continuing. Why hasn't the government put in place new guidelines to prevent the export of sensitive pathogens and information to China? Hon. Patty Hajdu (Minister of Health): Mr. Chair, he's right that in 2019 the National Microbiology Laboratory shared lab samples with the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The National Microbiology Laboratory routinely shares samples with other labs to help advance the international community's understanding of viruses and the research that is ongoing around those viruses. There are strict protocols in place for these transfers, and these samples were transported according to Canadian laws and regulations. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, I think Canadians would be concerned to hear that it's routine to transport viruses to Chinese military-affiliated labs. When Champagne was the parliamentary secretary for finance, the government decided to give hundreds of millions of dollars to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, bankrolling Chinese state-controlled development projects in Asia with weak standards in labour, human rights and environment. Will the minister put Canadian taxpayers ahead of his personal creditors and support a pullout from the Communist Party-controlled development bank? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Once again, Mr. Chair, my colleague is trying to connect the dots, and I don't know exactly where he is going from here, but everything is public. There's a thing called Google. He can go on it and check the information. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, the public can listen to this. I'm sure this exchange will also be available on Google, and the public can draw their own conclusions. We have failures on 5G, failures when it comes to the transport of deadly viruses and failures when it comes to giving over $400 million to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. It's clear that the Bank of China's investment in Minister Champagne is paying off. It's time for the minister to settle his debt with the Communist government and not settle it on the backs of Canadians. When will the minister be here in the House and answer questions about this mortgage? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: My colleague should be cautious with what he is saying in the House, Mr. Chair. This is serious stuff. He should be careful about what he says. The minister is actually working extremely hard for all Canadians and is doing his job correctly, Mr. Chair. We're talking about public information. Once again, let him go to Google and google it. That's it. The Chair: Now we'll go to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett: Canada's ambassador to the United Nations sent a letter last week to all member states of the UN promising that Canada would consider providing more funding for UNRRA, the same UNRRA that is a front for Hamas, which allows weapons of terror to be stored in schools and provides textbooks that call for the destruction of Israel. Do these Liberals have no shame when it comes to their quest for a seat on the UN Security Council? Hon. Mary Ng (Minister of Small Business, Export Promotion and International Trade): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to thank the honourable member for that question. We know that at this time Canada must show leadership in the face of global challenges. More than ever, Canada is playing a positive role by being a champion in diversity and inclusion, supporting the global fight against COVID-19, addressing climate change, leading peace and security efforts and helping the most vulnerable. A seat on the Security Council will allow Canada to be a strong voice for a fairer, more inclusive and prosperous The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett: Mr. Chair, I received a letter from Bob Anderson this week, who's advocating for his neighbours like Jean Grevelding, who owns a cottage at Butternut Bay. Like many people, Jean is an American who owns a property on our side of the border. These people are taxpaying members of our communities. These folks have plans in place to follow all Canadian quarantine rules. They're concerned about leaving their properties uncared for over the summer. Will folks like Jean be allowed to cross the border to check on their properties this summer? Hon. Bill Blair (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Of course, our priority is and always has been and always must be the protection of the health and safety of Canadians. That's why we put in place these restrictions for non-essential travel and have required, through the Public Health Agency of Canada, a 14-day quarantine. I don't know the specifics of the person for whom you advocate, but we want to make sure that if they come into Canada, it is for an essential purpose and that they do it safely and respect the quarantine that has been put in place. Mr. Michael Barrett: With nine branches throughout my riding, the Royal Canadian Legion offers a great deal to veterans and rural communities alike. They have been experiencing hardship and a loss of revenue, to the point where they may be forced to shut their doors. The Zone G2 commander and local mayors such as Roger Haley have reached out to me expressing their dire need. Will the government offer support to Legions across the country so they can continue to carry out their vital work for our veterans? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (Minister of Veterans Affairs): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Yes, we have done a lot to help support groups like the Legions. There is a $350-million emergency community support fund. If they're supplying any help to people regarding COVID, this fund is there. Indeed, we're doing everything we can to make sure that we help the Legions and other groups that do so much to help veterans right across the country. Mr. Michael Barrett: On May 21, the minister stated that her team was working as quickly as it could to fill the gaps in CEBA. It has now been three weeks, and many business owners, such as mortgage broker Corinna Smith-Gatcke, are still left in the lurch amid the delays, which are pushing businesses closer to shutting their doors for good. Will these businesses have access to CEBA before it's too late for them? Hon. Mary Ng: Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I thank the honourable member for that really important question on our Canadian small businesses. Those businesses can absolutely have access to the loan at their financial institution this Friday, and I would encourage them to go and see their bank or credit union. I want businesses to know that nothing is more important for us than making sure they get the support they need during this difficult time. Mr. Michael Barrett: The County Road 43 expansion project is critical for my riding and the region as a whole. This project will widen the road, increasing safety for the 18,000 motorists who travel the road every day. It's been 334 days since the provincial and local governments announced funding, but there has been nothing from this Liberal government. It's been 181 days since Minister McKenna told me her staff were reviewing the project. Today, there is still nothing, and for the last month the minister's team has not even found the time to respond to my request for an update. Will Minister McKenna finally stop with the delays and commit to funding this project today? Hon. Catherine McKenna (Minister of Infrastructure and Communities): Mr. Chair, as the member opposite knows, we work with provinces and territories to advance our infrastructure investments. We're making investments across the country. They are making a real difference in people's lives. We're always happy to work with members of Parliament, but they must also work with provinces and territories so that projects are advanced by them to our office. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall (YorktonMelville, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Through you, has Mr. MacAulay read ombudsman Dalton's May 2020 report, Financial Compensation for Canadian Veterans: A comparative analysis of benefit regimes? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I apologize, but I'll have to ask my honourable colleague to repeat the question. The Chair: Mrs. Wagantall, we'll freeze the time so that there's no extra time taken. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Thank you, Chair. My question was whether Mr. MacAulay has read ombudsman Dalton's May 2020 report, Financial Compensation for Canadian Veterans: A comparative analysis of benefit regimes. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I appreciate my honourable colleague's question. Of course, I appreciate Mr. Dalton's input and all that he has done for veterans. We've discussed it many times. I've done everything and worked with him in order to make sure that we bring the proper compensation to veterans The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: As a result of that study, are the financial outcomes Canada seeks to provide for ill and injured veterans now clearly defined within the Department of Veterans Affairs? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, as the member would know, I am to bring a report to the veterans affairs committee, and there are a number of things done in order to make sure that report is The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Then I would suggest that we get our committee up and going as it should be. Where are these financial directions published? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Well, of course, lockdown, but just under $90 million that the government put in supplementary estimates to make sure we address the backlog for Veterans Affairs. It's a major help The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Minister, are Canadian Armed Forces members provided with a copy of this document? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, my honourable colleague would have to ask the Canadian Armed Forces that question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: There are three different providing lifetime benefits for ill and injured veterans. In Ombudsman Dalton's recent report, did any one of these three provide the best compensation in all nine scenarios that were studied? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Of course, as she knows, there's been a lot of work done in order to make sure that we provide the proper compensation to veterans. We're working very hard, with a lot of help from Mr. Dalton, to make sure that the appropriate The Chair: We'll now continue with Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: In the undisclosed settlement of Sean Bruyea's legal case against Seamus O'Regan and the Liberal government, a joint statement says. . . Canadians, especially all Veterans and their families, are encouraged to enter the public debate about policies and programs that affect our Veterans and their families. Does Mr. MacAulay agree with this statement? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I can assure you that anybody is welcome to enter any discussion on compensation of veterans. We're always open to what we can do in order to make sure that we provide appropriate compensation. I don't think the term would be appropriate, but it would provide some compensation to veterans who truly deserve it. They defend our democracy The Chair: We'll go back to Ms. Wagantall. Oh, I'm sorry Ms. Andranne Larouche: Mr. Chair, I have a point of order. The interpretation hasn't worked for a few interventions. It's difficult to follow the exchange between the hon. member and the minister. The Chair: We're having a problem with the interpretation. Minister and Ms. Wagantall, you are joining us virtually. I'm wondering if you have the right language on at the bottom of your screen. We'll start with that for troubleshooting. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: I have English. The Chair: Very good. Minister MacAulay, what do you have? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I have English, Mr. Chair. The Chair: Very good. Then we'll check on our side. Ms. Larouche, did I understand correctly that the interpretation didn't work for both speakers? Ms. Andranne Larouche: The sound didn't allow the interpreters to do their job. It seemed to be a problem with the sound. The Chair: In that case, I would ask both members to maybe put their mike a little bit close to their mouth. We'll see how that works. I'm looking at the screen, and I notice the mike is a little bit far. Could we bend it in a little bit more? I appreciate that. Thank you for your patience. We'll give it another try. Ms. Wagantall, please go ahead. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: On a point of order, quite often while I'm trying to speak, there are lots of other voices in the background. The Chair: I would ask everyone to please be on mute, as well as for anyone in the chamber to please refrain from speaking loudly. Just whisper among yourselves if you have something to say. We'll take this one from the top. We have a minute and 45 seconds left. Ms. Wagantall, please proceed with your next question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: You said next question, so we're not going backwards, Chair? The Chair: Did we have an answer from Minister MacAulay? No? We'll go to Minister MacAulay to finish up the answer. We'll start at 27 seconds, freeze the clock and hear his answer. Then, because of all of the confusion, we'll start at one minute and 45 seconds when we get going again. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Should I repeat the question, sir? The Chair: Please do. The clock is frozen. After we go through the question and the answer, we'll start the clock again. Mr. Wagantall, please repeat the question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Thank you, Chair. In the undisclosed settlement to Sean Bruyea's legal case against Seamus O'Regan and the Liberal government, a joint statement says, Canadians, especially all Veterans and their families, are encouraged to enter the public debate about policies and programs that affect our Veterans and their families. Does Mr. MacAulay agree with this statement? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I appreciate my honourable colleague's question and concern. Of course I agree. Anybody is quite open to indicate whatever they wish in order to make sure we provide as appropriate a compensation as possible. You can never totally compensate veterans truly for what they deserve, but we want to make sure we provide the best compensation possible. That's what we will do and want to do. The Chair: Ms. Wagantall, we will start the clock again. You have one minute and 45 seconds remaining. Please proceed. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: If that's the case, is Minister MacAulay aware of the practice of red-flagging veterans'files? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I'm not aware. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Since the deputy minister has indicated that he runs the department, will the minister ask him for the names of veterans and the dates and the reasons that they are, or have been, red-flagged by VAC? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I would certainly ask any veteran or anybody who has a concern to contact my office. I will do anything I can to make sure that the veterans The Chair: We'll go back to Ms. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Do the most ill and injured still receive from the pension up to $300,000 less for life? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, as you know and as the Prime Minister indicated when the pension for life was put in place, it was stated that if anybody receives lessthe Prime Minister himself indicated it quite clearlythat must be adjusted. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: For veterans in similar circumstances, should the date of their application for compensation be a factor in determining whether they're treated equitably? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Yes, of course, the date is when the compensation would start. Of course, it's very important and very appropriate. The Chair: Now we will proceed to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd (Sturgeon RiverParkland, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Retired Major Mark Campbell in my riding of Sturgeon RiverParkland lost both legs in the line of duty in Afghanistan. He is an avid sport shooter, but understandably, due to his disability, he is very limited in the kinds of firearms he can use, and all of these firearms have now been banned under the Liberal OIC. My question to the Minister of Public Safety is this: Did their department do a legal analysis and consider the section 15 charter rights of disabled Canadians not to be discriminated against when they passed their OIC? Hon. Bill Blair: Yes, there was a very thorough analysis done by the justice department to ensure that the prohibitions we put in place were, in fact, charter compliant. Let me also say, Mr. Chair, how important it was that we prohibited weapons that were not designed for sporting purposes at all. In fact, they were designed for soldiers to use in combat. They have no place in a civil society. We have prohibited them, and we believeand this has been echoed by many people across the countrythat this will make Canadians safer. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, is the minister aware that the AR-15 is the most popular sporting rifle in Canada, and is he aware that disabled veterans like Major Mark Campbell are unable to participate in the sport of sport shooting because of his OIC? Hon. Bill Blair: I can assure the member that what I am aware of is that the AR-15 and other weapons like them have been used in mass killings in Canada on many occasions, such as at cole Polytechnique, at Dawson College, again at the Quebec mosque and in Moncton. The AR-15s in particular were also used at the terrible tragedy in places like Sandy Hook, where a bunch of kids were killed, so there is no place for The Chair: We will go to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, it has been months since the Liberals shut down this Parliament and months since the Minister of Finance should have presented a budget or at least an economic update to Canadians. Since then we have seen billions spent with little oversight and no plan. The minister says that he needs certainty before he can table a budget. Well, that didn't stop Stephen Harper and the Conservatives from tabling a budget in the depth of the last great recession. When are these Liberals finally going to take their job seriously and table an economic update? Hon. Mona Fortier (Minister of Middle Class Prosperity and Associate Minister of Finance): Mr. Chair, we're taking this very seriously. We're working for Canadians and bringing forward supports to make sure that businesses, workers and Canadians can put food on the table and pay their rent. We will continue to support Canadians, and when we have a clear projection to present, we will do that. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, the results are in, and businesses aren't happy with the so-called support programs from these Liberals. In fact, the oil and gas industry has been shut out of many of these economic programs. When is the government going to recognize that their business support plans have been an absolute failure with only a fraction of the billions promised being accessible to businesses? Hon. Seamus O'Regan (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Chair, our government has taken swift and immediate action to support our sector throughout this challenging time. We had the BCAP, which is critically important to providing liquidity to support the SMEs that make up 85% of the jobs in our sector. It has taken an enormous team effort. People are working around the clock to get money where it needs to be. We are helping hard-working Canadians, small businesses and large businesses right across the country, but in particular in our energy sector. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, I'm pleased to see the Minister of Natural Resources online. He tweeted recently to praise the Alberta Carbon Trunk Line and the North West Redwater Partnership refinery in my riding. Can the minister tell us what, if any, support they have given to the innovative carbon capture and sequestration technology in this country? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Mr. Chair, we see carbon capture and sequestration as an integral part of lowering emissions, making emissions more competitive and making our oil and gas industry more competitive. We're seeing where the investment dollars are going. They are going to jurisdictions that are committed to lowering emissions. Obviously, this government is committing to net zero. Mr. Dane Lloyd: I note that the minister couldn't name a single example of government support for carbon capture, utilization and sequestration technology. We have spent a lot of time talking about the COVID-19 pandemic, but Canadians are living with another horrific reality, that being the intensifying opioid overdose epidemic. Reports indicate that in the past four years, 14,000 Canadians have died, and the numbers during COVID-19 have been skyrocketing, with British Columbia seeing a 39% increase this year alone. I know this because I've lost a family member to a fentanyl overdose. When is the government going to take this scourge seriously and take action to save the lives of Canadians? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Mr. Chair, I share the member's deep sadness about the number of lives we've lost to opioid overdose. Our government has been steadily making it easier for people who live with substance use to access medications to treat substance use, such as prescription Suboxone and methadone. We have made it easier to rapidly establish safe injection sites in communities and have supported community-based projects that work with people who are using substances. We need to understand that this is a complex issue, and we need to support people to get the help they need. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes (AlgomaManitoulinKapuskasing, NDP) ): The hon. member for Thrse-DeBlainville. Ms. Louise Chabot (Thrse-De Blainville, BQ): MadamChair, I will come back to the bill introduced last week. As parliamentarians, we felt like we were watching a very bad play, as I imagine the public did. I say that it was theatre, even though it shouldn't be in this place. The government decided to stage a play and act alone and, unfortunately, there were several acts missing. A very important part of this bill was about supporting people with disabilities in this time of crisis. However, the government did not see fit to negotiate with the opposition parties, even though it is in a minority position. Despite this arrogance, the Bloc Qubcois proposed solutions. One of the things we proposed was to split the bill so that we could give this support to people with disabilities, but the Conservatives did not want to do that. We came back and asked for time to negotiate and give support to people with disabilities, but the government defeated the motion. We asked that the House be recalled today so that we could pass this part of the bill concerning support for people with disabilities, but we are still in the dark. Why are we abandoning people with disabilities? Hon. Ahmed Hussen (Minister of Families, Children and Social Development): I thank the hon. member for her question. We know this pandemic has deeply affected the lives and health of all Canadians and has disproportionately affected Canadians with disabilities in particular. From the very beginning, we've taken a disability-inclusive approach to our emergency response to ensure that Canadians with disabilities get the support they need. That is why we announced a one-time payment of $600 for persons with disabilities to address these expenses. This will go a long way toward helping Canadians with disabilities. We encourage and urge all parties in the opposition to support this measure. We're confident that this measure, along with other investments, will benefit Canadians with disabilities, and we hope to get the support of the other parties very soon. Ms. Louise Chabot: MadamChair, I remind you that this measure wasn't passed because we weren't allowed to do so. A measure to help people with disabilities has been put in an omnibus bill. We've tried here, in the House, to provide the means to give that support, so I ask again, can the government be counted on to give a response to people with disabilities? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, it was absolutely not an omnibus bill. It contained assistance for the disabled, of course, but it also contained assistance for our seasonal workers, as well as a number of other measures that the Bloc Qubcois opposed. They refused to debate and, when the question of splitting the bill came up, the Conservatives refused to do that. That is why there is no bill at the moment, and that is very unfortunate. Ms. Louise Chabot: It was a Bloc Qubcois proposal to split the bill. The government had not thought of it, but they found that it was a good idea. Let me return to the attack. This bill proposed changes to the wage subsidy program, it was supposed to make the CERB more flexible, it proposed fines for fraudsters and, since there was a little section about a benefit for the disabled, the government took it for granted that we would support it without any negotiations with the parties. However, we set one very important condition: that the Liberal Party must get its hands out of taxpayers'pockets in terms of the wage subsidy. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, as we listen to the Bloc Qubcois members, we might think that they invented peanut butter and apple pie. This bill contained a number of measures that all Quebeckers and all Canadians needed, but the Bloc Qubcois refused to debate it. No, we did not follow the Bloc Qubcois'example in splitting the bill; we had thought of it a long time previously. We have not been able to do that because of the Conservatives. Because of them, we cannot help those living with disabilities. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Ms. Chabot, you have 45seconds left. Ms. Louise Chabot: We asked on a number of occasions for the House to be able to sit starting today to pass the part of the bill dealing with those with disabilities. What is the status of that, MadamChair? We have not heard about it since. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, my colleague knows very well that things are not as simple as that. There are procedural mechanisms unique to the House. I hope that, one day, we will be able to pass this bill and be able to provide assistance for those living with disabilities. I hope that the Conservatives will change their minds and give us their support. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Don Valley East, Ms. Ratansi. Ms. Yasmin Ratansi (Don Valley East, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be sharing my time with the member for Surrey Centre. Since 2015 our government has been focused on ensuring its policies mitigate the effects of climate change. Several measures have been implemented for phasing out coal, making polluters pay, providing climate incentives, investing in green technologies and much more, which all together have created a climate plan that is doing more to cut pollution than any other in Canada's history. In my riding of Don Valley East, many innovative businesses have benefited from these investments and initiatives. One area of particular interest is our government's work to protect 25% of Canada's land and 25% of its oceans by 2025. Our natural environment is something that Canadians and my constituents care about deeply. Could the minister update this House on the new conservation projects announced on June 5, World Environment Day, and on how our government is protecting our environment? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, protecting nature is an important part of how we will address climate change and the very real challenges it presents. That's why on June 5, World Environment Day, our government announced over 60 conservation projects under development across Canada. These projects are funded through the Canada Nature Fund's target 1 challenge initiative. They'll conserve Canadian nature and biodiversity and protect species at risk, enhance ecological integrity and connectivity, and enhance the size of Canada's vast network of protected areas. Nearly half of these projects are indigenous-led, with the aim of creating indigenous-protected conserved areas. Madam Chair, projects like these move us closer to our goal of protecting 25% of Canada's lands and oceans by 2025. By working together in partnership with the provinces, territories, municipalities, indigenous peoples and Canadians, together we can protect our natural environment for generations to come. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Ms. Ratansi, since you have 25 seconds left, we will go to the honourable member for Surrey Centre. Mr. Randeep Sarai (Surrey Centre, Lib.): Madam Chair, there are many small and medium-sized businesses in my riding of Surrey Centre. Many have been impacted by COVID-19. They saw a decrease in business or needed to close their doors completely in order to adhere to public safety measures to manage the spread of COVID-19. These measures helped keep our most vulnerable citizens safe and ensured that our hospital and health care providers did not become overwhelmed with a sharp spike in cases. Thanks to our government's COVID-19 emergency response, many of these businesses have been able to keep their employees and access important liquidity through the Canada emergency business account, which provides loans to small businesses and non-profits, and the Canada emergency wage subsidy, which is helping businesses to keep and rehire their employees while their revenues are down by providing up to 75% of wages for up to 24 weeks. As we begin to reopen the economy and Canadians across the country return to the job market, those benefits will be even more important to help businesses and industries rehire their staff and make important adjustments to align with public health guidelines to gradually increase their operations. Can the minister please update the committee on how many Canadian businesses have taken advantage of CEBA and CEWS since applications for each have been opened? Hon. Mary Ng: Madam Chair, I want to begin by thanking the member for Surrey Centre for all the work he does to support his constituents and small businesses. Canadians across the country need to know our government has been working tirelessly and will continue to work tirelessly on their behalf. This is why we put in place the important programs to help them get through this crisis during this difficult time, programs such as the wage subsidy program. We know that in so many businesses the employees are often like extended family members. The wage subsidy has helped these businesses keep their employees on the payroll and are now helping in their rehiring as they slowly and safely restart. There are 348,000 businesses being helped with the wage subsidy program, and this means that 2. 6 million workers are being helped. Businesses are also being helped through the interest-free $40,000 loan they can access through CEBA to help stay afloat and pay their expenses during this crisis. I'm pleased to inform this House that to date more than 669,000 The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for St. John's East. Mr. Jack Harris: Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with my colleague, the member for LondonFanshawe. Madam Chair, with so many recent reports and videos of police using force, sometimes deadly force, and violence against indigenous and black people in Canada, I've called for the public safety committee to reconvene. If the members agree, will the minister come to the committee and provide concrete answers as to how the government intends to address racism inherent in Canada's law enforcement, and in particular the RCMP? Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I thank my colleague for the question. It's perhaps the most important one facing Canada today. Madam Chair, indigenous people, black Canadians and other racialized people are far too often experiencing systemic racism and disparate outcomes within the entire criminal justice system. In order to respond appropriately, I think it's necessary to begin by acknowledging the lived experience of people who've known bias and discrimination at the hands of the police and our courts and within our prisons. We remain committed to working with all racialized people and all of the members of this House to ensure that we work toward social justice for all Canadians, and I look forward to discussing the member's motion further with him. Mr. Jack Harris: Will the minister and the government commit to facilitating such a meeting of this committee virtually? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, the decisions of the committee are the committee's, so I'm sure that this will be a discussion within the committee, but if called, I will certainly be pleased to come with my officials to provide the committee with whatever support and information it needs to contribute to this very important discussion. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Harris, you have 40 seconds. Mr. Jack Harris: In light of what we've seen with Chief Adam in Fort McMurray and the RCMP accepting that the actions were reasonable, will the minister commit to a full review of the use of force by the RCMP, in particular the philosophy, tactics and training that is given to RCMP officers in dealing with the public? Hon. Bill Blair: I thank the member and I want to assure him, first of all, that this is work that is ongoing, not just in the RCMP but throughout the police community. May I also take this opportunity, Madam Chair, to say that I think all police training has to begin with one very important principle, and that's the preservation of all life and the respect for all Canadians. We also know the importance of de-escalation training. We're committed to continuing to work with indigenous communities, racialized communities and with police services and all participants in the criminal justice system to make sure that it is fair for all Canadians. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for LondonFanshawe, Ms. Mathyssen. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen (LondonFanshawe, NDP): Madam Chair, we need more justice for black, indigenous and racialized people in Canada. They can't be asked to keep waiting. This government recognizes that systemic racism exists but refuses to collect race-based data that would allow us to quantify and truly address this injustice. We need data to protect Canadians. When will this government do the right thing and start collecting race-based data? Hon. Bardish Chagger (Minister of Diversity and Inclusion and Youth): Madam Chair, our government agrees that it's important that we collect data, and that's exactly why, in the anti-racism secretariat and the anti-racism strategy, there is a commitment to have money go to Statistics Canada to collect race-based data. We look forward to working with all members to ensure it happens. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen: Madam Chair, we know that Statistics Canada will start to collect job numbers based on race. This will allow us to identify systemic racism where it is and where we need to ensure a fair and more equal job market for black, indigenous and racialized people in Canada. Why is this government refusing to follow suit so we can tackle systemic racism everywhere, in every sector? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I'd like to thank my honourable colleague for her question. She's absolutely correct in her assessment that we need to collect more data, reliable data, data that will help us deal with some of the challenges we're seeing with systemic discrimination, but, more broadly, we want to make sure that we continue to engage with an anti-racism strategy that will allow us to collect that disaggregated data. That is why we allocated $6. 2 million to that initiative through Statistics Canada, but we know we must do more and we will do more. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen: We know that all people are susceptible to catching COVID-19, but health authorities are clear that parts of cities like Montreal and Toronto have been more impacted than others. For black and racialized people living in these cities, this data is a matter of life and death. Will the government collect and share disaggregated data so we can identify and erase systemic racism, yes or no? Hon. Bardish Chagger: Madam Chair, making decisions based on science and evidence is essential for our government. We took that practice from day one. It is exactly the step we will take moving forward and that's why we are making those investments to ensure that data exists. We are working across all departments. My mandate letter is public. I look forward to continuing to work not only with all ministers, departments and agencies, but all allies and all parties to get this work done. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Blaney, the honourable member for BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, has the floor. Hon. Steven Blaney (BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, CPC): Thank you, MadamChair. Last week, my plumber told me that, each time Justin Trudeau comes down the steps to make announcements totalling several billion dollars, he feels like someone is rifling through his pockets. My question is simple and goes to the Minister of Finance: where is this money coming from? Hon. Mona Fortier: MadamChair, I would like to thank my honourable colleague for his question. Currently, the health and safety of Canadians are our top priorities. We have implemented an emergency economic plan to support Canadians, workers and companies. We will continue to support them during this crisis. Hon. Steven Blaney: The answer I would have liked is simple: we are borrowing the money and we are going to have to pay it back one day. That is another Liberal craze: they borrow money, they make campaign promises, and off they go. Under the Conservative government, the Chantier Davie in Lvis had 1,700workers for the supply ship Asterix. In the election campaign, the Liberals promised icebreakers. When are the Liberals going to award the icebreaker contracts to the Chantier Davie? Hon. David Lametti (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada): MadamChair, we are very proud of the Chantier Davie and we completely understand its role in the system. We are currently assessing those requests. We are going to establish the process for the polar ice-breaker, which is essential for the work of the Coast Guard in northern communities, and we are going to make sure that The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Blaney has the floor. Hon. Steven Blaney: The workers do not need words; they need contracts and jobs. The same is true for young people who want to work. There is money in the Canada summer jobs program: in my constituency alone, $150,000has been approved. Companies want young people to work and want to hire them. What is the minister waiting for in order to confirm those positions? In my constituency, and everywhere else in the country, our young people want to work. What is the government waiting for in order to send some cash to the Canada summer jobs program? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we are proud of the Canada summer jobs program. We are introducing flexibilities into the system to enable employers to be able to hire summer students. We recognize the importance of this program to provide both financial resources and necessary experience for young people. We believe in continuing to invest in the Canada summer jobs program. Hon. Steven Blaney: The workers, the young people and the employers have been waiting for weeks. The money is available; where is the announcement? MadamChair, our young people are not the only ones who want to work. There are also the temporary foreign workers. Let me use Jessie Gito as an example; he has been working at Plate2000 in Saint-Anselme for years. When the time came to renew his work permit, he found out that he has to have some biometric tests. But he cannot get them because the offices are closed. Is the minister going to allow Jessie Gito and the thousands of other temporary foreign workers who want to work to be able to do so until the government biometric testing centres reopen? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, it is important for the honourable member to recognize that we are in the early recovery stage of the pandemic. Employers are slowly reopening businesses. We will ensure that we support both our students and our temporary foreign workers to make sure we get the recovery right. We will continue to invest in the Canada summer jobs program. We've introduced flexibilities into the program to ensure that employers are able to take advantage of the program and give opportunities to young people. Hon. Steven Blaney: It is very simple. Jessie Gito is a foreign worker, who is in a company that provides an essential service. He needs a decision that will let him go to work, rather than staying home and doing nothing. Then, when the government's biometric testing centres are open again, he will gladly go to one. Young people want to work in agriculture as well, and the minister has told us that the government wants young people working and that their files will be processed as quickly as possible. She wants to create 700positions and she knows that people can fill in an application on a first-come first-served basis. Of those 700positions, how many have been confirmed to date? The good weather has arrived, the corn is starting to grow, and this is the time when farmers need the young workers. Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food): MadamChair, the program for young workers in agriculture is open. I also encourage agricultural producers to register for it. This is a program that is not only intended to provide summer jobs, but also to interest young people in making a career in agriculture. As I have said before, the department is processing files as quickly as possible. Each employer will have an answer very shortly. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will now take a short break. Okay, we are ready to start again. We will go to the honourable member for BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte. Mr. Doug Shipley (BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Over the course of the pandemic, has the government been using all avenues possible to source much-needed PPE in Canada? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, we have been very clear that we have a made-in-Canada initiative that has engaged companies across the country. Over 700 companies have retooled and scaled up their operations for personal protective equipment to help front-line health care workers. Mr. Doug Shipley: Madam Chair, I need to ask very quickly which ministry and minister are responsible for the sourcing of PPE in Canada. Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, this is a collective effort. I work with the Minister of Health and the minister for procurement, and we coordinate with the provinces and territories to make sure there are appropriate levels of PPE to help front-line health care workers and essential workers across the country. Mr. Doug Shipley: Thank you for that clarification. That will make this question all the more pertinent. My riding of BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte is the home of Southmedic Inc. Southmedic is a renowned medical supply business. For over 37 years, it has provided front-line health care workers with an extensive line of PPE and other essential products required when dealing with respiratory illnesses. This company specializes in respiratory illness equipment. Southmedic currently employs over 700 people, and it has been recognized as one of Canada's best-managed companies by Deloitte on numerous occasions. Since the beginning of the pandemic, both I and the member for BarrieInnisfil have been attempting to obtain some assistance for Southmedic from the federal government. Calls and emails were falling on deaf ears. In early May, I wrote a letter to Minister Anand outlining the situation. I received a letter back from the minister dated May 27 indicating that this issue of Southmedic falls under the mandate of the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada. I have heard nothing more. When will the federal government reach out and help this great Canadian company and therefore ensure that all front-line workers will have the proper PPE they require? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I'd like to thank my honourable colleague for his question. He knows full well that this is a very challenging time. That is why we had a call to action to engage Canadians right across the country. Since then, we've seen over 6,000 companies step up to offer solutions and ideas, and over 700 companies have retooled their efforts. I acknowledge that some companies are still engaging with the government, and we'll continue to explore all possible options to make sure we continue to procure the necessary levels of personal protective equipment to protect Canadians and to protect front-line health care workers. That has always been our priority. I want to thank the outstanding Canadian companies that have come forward and have helped us in this endeavour. We continue to look forward to working with them. Mr. Doug Shipley: Thank you for that answer. Just to follow up, there's no retooling required at this company. They could have been up and going very quickly. They just needed a little assistance at the beginning. Moving on to a different issue, while walking to my office this morning, I stopped at my local small family-run coffee shop and was discussing the current economic situation with the two owners of the establishment. They indicated they are having a very tough time surviving this economic downturn. The only thing keeping them hopeful is that soon the public service will start returning to work, and therefore their business will begin to return. Could the government please give us some indication as to what the plans are for returning the civil service back to work safely, and when? Hon. Jean-Yves Duclos (President of the Treasury Board): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm delighted to answer this question. This is a very important topic, but I'd like to take the opportunity first to thank our public servants, who have worked very hard in the last few weeks, both personally and professionally. In fact, today is a wonderful day to say that, because today is the start of National Public Service Week. That's one more reason to thank them for their dedicated work. They are not going to go back to work. They've been at work for the last few monthsin different circumstances, but they have been working very hard to deliver the services and the support Canadians need and deserve. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Next we'll go to the honourable member for SelkirkInterlakeEastman, Mr. Bezan. Mr. James Bezan (SelkirkInterlakeEastman, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. My questions are for the Minister of National Defence. First of all, I want to thank the great men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces for the fantastic job they're doing in Operation LASER, serving on the front lines battling COVID-19. Can the Minister of National Defence give the House an update on exactly where we are at with the number of Canadian Armed Forces members who have been infected with COVID-19? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan (Minister of National Defence): Madam Chair, I want to echo the member opposite's comments in thanking our Canadian Armed Forces members. Currently, we have 13 active cases in the Canadian Armed Forces, but in the long-term care facilities we currently have 50 cases. No member has been currently hospitalized. We have also conducted very thorough reviews of our protection protocols as well. Mr. James Bezan: Through you, Chair, Minister Sajjan, does that number of active cases include the active cases that are in long-term care facilities right now in Operation LASER? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, as I stated, the 50 cases are strictly from the long-term care facilities. The 13 cases I mentioned are not in the long-term care facilities. Just to give the actual clarification, no member has been currently hospitalized. Mr. James Bezan: In those numbers, Madam Chair, can Mr. Sajjan say how many of those cases in long-term care facilities are active and how many are recovered? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, I don't have the exact number. What I can say to break it down further is that in Quebec we currently have 36 and in Ontario we have 14. As well, 36 of the members have been out of isolation. I'll get more details and pass them on directly to the member, Madam Chair. Mr. James Bezan: Thank you, Minister. Madam Chair, I have a quick question while we're still talking about Operation LASER. The President of the Treasury Board has said, The Canadian Armed Forces will be present as long as their presence is needed in Quebec. This contradicts what Prime Minister Trudeau is saying, which is that we have a hard deadline of June 26 for the withdrawal of our troops for Operation LASER. That means taking our troops out of our long-term care facilities. Minister, is June 26 the hard date for the winding down of Operation LASER? Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I'm delighted to have the opportunity to clarify for the House. We've been in very extensive discussions with the Province of Quebec, with my counterpart Minister Guilbault, and we are working very diligently to ensure we have a sustained, appropriate response to the request from Quebec for assistance. That response will result in a transition from the currently deployed Canadian Armed Forces to the deployment of paid volunteers, trained personnel who will take on the important role of providing services to those Canadians who need our help in Quebec. Mr. James Bezan: I'll go back to the Minister of National Defence. The Department of National Defence auditors have called out the Liberal government for mismanagement over the $553-billion investment in our Canadian military through the defence policy. Only three people have been assigned to oversee the rollout of this money. This is a $553-billion investment in our armed forces, and only three people are managing it. Could the minister tell us how that is even possible? Is this the reason that over 100 projects are currently behind schedule? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, first of all, I want to highlight the unprecedented investment that we're making in defence. We have conducted internal reviews of our procurement. The report the member opposite is talking about is from the previous year. This is the ongoing work we're doing to make sure that we make procurement better. When it comes to the management of this, it's conducted by me and the minister of procurement. We are working toward making our procurement even better. We have already streamlined some aspects of our procurement and we'll continue to do more as well. Mr. James Bezan: Minister Sajjan, you've had this report since November of 2019. You've been rolling out this plan since 2017. Only three people are overseeing an expenditure of $553 billion. This is taxpayers'money. Are we going to see more cuts because you have been unable to actually roll out these dollars? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, I can assure you we're not going to be cutting. We'll be investing in our defence. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Before I go to the next speaker, I want to remind members that they are to address their questions and comments directly through the chair. We will go now to the honourable member for Fort McMurrayCold Lake, Mr. Yurdiga. Mr. David Yurdiga (Fort McMurrayCold Lake, CPC): Madam Chair, the Canada summer jobs program has many challenges. I've seen many indigenous communities in my riding rejected for funding even though they had received funding in previous years. Here are a few examples of communities that were rejected: Beaver Lake Cree Nation, Buffalo Lake Mtis Settlement and the Mtis Nation of Alberta, Region 1. The list goes on. Could the Prime Minister explain why so many indigenous communities have been denied funding from the Canada summer jobs program? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we recognize the important role that the Canada summer jobs program plays in supporting employers and young workers in our community across the country every year. We're working very hard to help employers adapt to the realities of the COVID-19 pandemic and are supporting young Canadians as they begin to look for summer employment. We are introducing increased flexibilities into the Canada summer jobs program to hire youth, while also providing more supports to employers that deliver essential services to Canadians. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, that didn't really answer my question. Why are so many indigenous communities left out of the Canada summer jobs program? This is very important to my community and to communities throughout the province. Will the government investigate why these communities were rejected? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that we, of course, value the important role that the Canada summer jobs program plays in all communities, including indigenous communities in Canada. I will certainly have an off-line conversation with the honourable member, if he so wishes, about a particular issue, but I can assure him that in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, we have had to assist employers to introduce flexibilities The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Yurdiga. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, in my riding, the City of Cold Lake has been in dispute with the federal government for many years over payment in lieu of taxes. My office has sent many letters over the years regarding the PILT dispute. Could the Minister of Public Services and Procurement give me a rough estimate of when I will receive a response from the minister's office to my first letter, from 2017, and my letters from 2018,2019 and 2020? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that I will go to the minister, and we will come back with an answer to his question. Mr. David Yurdiga: How much longer does the minister intend to perpetuate the ongoing PILT dispute, which is in excess of $11 million, with the City of Cold Lake? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, once again, I can assure the honourable member that I will speak with the minister and get an answer to his question. Mr. David Yurdiga: Well, do you know what? I've been writing letters to the department for many years. When you say you're going to get back to me, I really have a hard time believing that. Will the minister agree to follow the prior recommendations of the dispute advisory panel that were accepted by the minister? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that I will check with the minister and that she will return to the member in due course. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, the drug Trikafta has been proven to increase the quality of life for 90% of cystic fibrosis patients. Two weeks ago, my office sent a letter to the Minister of Health about the boy in my riding named Cael, who through the special access program is able to get Trikafta in Canada. I requested that the minister use her powers to fast-track Trikafta for commercial use, but I have yet to receive a response back. When will the minister make a decision on Trikafta? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, I'm glad to hear that Cael was able to access Trikafta through the special access program. In fact, that program is very helpful for people who are seeking access to medication that's not currently marketed in Canada. As the member opposite knows, Vertex has not applied to market Trikafta in Canada, but we look forward to their application, and I encourage him to write a letter to the manufacturer to also encourage them. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Vancouver Granville, Ms. Wilson-Raybould. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould (Vancouver Granville, Ind.): Thank you, Chair. I was very troubled to hear that a CBC radio host in the Yukon felt compelled to resign because, as an indigenous person, she could not speak her truth. While we know the Broadcasting Act states that the Canadian broadcasting system should reflect the linguistic duality and multicultural and multiracial nature of Canadian society and the special place of indigenous peoples, it would seem there are some challenges. Therefore, does the Minister of Heritage share the concern of some journalists that problems of systemic racism in Canada are still existing within the institution of the CBC, and will the government now acknowledge the need to recognize the jurisdiction of indigenous governments? Hon. Steven Guilbeault (Minister of Canadian Heritage): Thank you, Madame Chair; and I thank the member for this important question. As stated by the Prime Minister on numerous occasions, our government recognizes that systemic racism exists in Canada, and we have made a commitment to do everything we can to combat it in whichever organization of the Canadian government. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould: Thank you. When I was in the government, and as a minister, I learned the term red meat issues. I understand these issues to be ones that challenge societal norms, that are not politically expedient to address because they can lose you votes, even though addressing them is morally right and a smart thing to do. Mostly these are issues addressing inequality and the most marginalized in our society. In the justice system, examples include mandatory minimum penalties, defunding police, and even investing in restorative justice. Red-meat issues often become defining issues for society and for governments as the world changes. Surely now these issues are politically less of a consideration than the tragic reality of even more slain indigenous Canadians at the hands of police, or thousands of indigenous people still incarcerated or living in poverty. Will this government please finally commit to the necessary work originally promised in 2015 and repeal in the justice system the vast majority of mandatory minimum penalties, assuring the necessary discretion for judges, and meaningfully invest in restorative justice measures? Hon. David Lametti: Madame Chair, I thank the honourable member for her question, as well as for her work as Minister of Justice, and indeed my predecessor. This is an important time. This is a time when we recognize systemic racism. This is a time when we recognize systemic over-incarceration of indigenous peoples, of black peoples, in our criminal justice system. This is a time when we need to look at all potential options to reduce what is a shameful overrepresentation in our criminal justice system. Too often racialized peoples and indigenous peoples have experienced prejudice and systemic discrimination in our justice system, and that has to change. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould: I'll go on to another red meat issue. In British Columbia we are in the fifth year of the opioid overdose public health emergency crisis. Sadly, May marks the deadliest month of overdose-related deaths. We are halfway into the year and have currently passed 500 deaths caused by overdose. Many of the deaths are related to COVID-19 measures that have prevented people from accessing supervised consumption sites, so they are overdosing alone. While the provinces welcomed the federal backing of safe supply exemption back in March, it is to expire in September of 2020. Echoing the call of the chief coroner of B. C. and Dr. Henry, more is needed from the federal government, more action. Will the government provide the necessary supports to the province and help support safe supply initiatives in the provinces? Hon. Patty Hajdu: It's been a pleasure to work with the Province of British Columbia on innovative ways to work on the tragic situation of opioid overdose. I remain committed to working with the province and in fact any province that wants to work towards solutions that treat people who use substances with the dignity they deserve. Madam Chair, this is a complex issue. We're working closely with our partners to make sure that we can prevent more lives from being lost. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for South OkanaganWest Kootenay, Mr. Cannings. Mr. Richard Cannings (South OkanaganWest Kootenay, NDP): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with the member for SkeenaBulkley Valley. In my riding, Theo's in Penticton is a beloved restaurant. They've been serving great food for 40 years, but now they're struggling, because they don't qualify for the emergency wage subsidy. Why is that? The original owners retired last year and sold it to another operator. The new owner can't use a year-to-year comparison to apply for the wage subsidy because he didn't own the restaurant last spring. He is forced to use receipts from January and February, the darkest doldrums of the restaurant year, to compare with the results from May, traditionally one of their best months. Now he has to compete with other local restaurants that can access the subsidy. When will the government fix this inequity and let Theo's compete and survive? Hon. Mona Fortier: Madam Chair, the Canada emergency wage subsidy is supporting over 2. 5 million workers across the country. To help even more businesses support their workers and rehire people as they reopen, our government is extending the CEWS, and we will continue to extend the CEWS for an additional 12 weeks to August 29 to ensure that Canadian workers continue to have the support they need during these very difficult times. By extending eligibility, our government is ensuring that more Canadian workers in more sectors have the support they need. Mr. Richard Cannings: The owner just wants to be able to apply for the wage subsidy, and right now he cannot, and he will not be able to. Thousands of other businesses are hit that way as well. I'd like to move on to forestry. Canada's forest sector has been declared essential during this pandemic, but it's been hit hard after a very difficult 2019. Despite soft markets and thousands out of work, government support programs have left many Canadian forest product companies behind. In my riding, the pulp mill in Castlegar is closing for the month of July because local sawmills aren't producing enough wood chips. What is the government going to do to finally support Canadian forestry workers and communities? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The time is almost up, but I will allow for the answer from the honourable minister. Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Thank you, Madam Chair. We have supported and we will continue to support the forestry sector, including through regional development programs. In fact, in Quebec, partnering with Les Bois Francs DV Inc. , we have widened market access to our products and updated technology systems. In North Bay we've partnered with the Canadian Wood Council to promote the sector. In Vancouver we're working with FPInnovations to create the indigenous forest sector technical support program. We are supporting the forestry sector and its different needs region by region. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Now we go to the honourable member for SkeenaBulkley Valley, Mr. Bachrach. Mr. Taylor Bachrach (SkeenaBulkley Valley, NDP): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm going to pick up where my colleague left off, with B. C.'s forest industry. What we've seen in B. C. are multiple rounds of mill shutdowns and start-ups, and in some cases this has made it difficult for forestry workers to qualify for EI. My question to the minister is this: Will the minister work to make the EI program more flexible for forestry workers, similar to what this government has done for oil and gas workers? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, in the oil and gas sector we have focused on workers. That has been key in the inactive and orphan well program, which we are working on with the provincial governments of Saskatchewan, British Columbia and Alberta. The focus on workers has assured that success, and we will continue to focus on workers in all the industries, particularly our natural resource industry, as they go through this extraordinarily difficult time. Mr. Taylor Bachrach: Madam Chair, reforestation is a very important part of the forest industry in the riding I represent, and people were keenly interested to hear this government's plan to plant two billion trees in the next 10 years. That's a lot of trees. I'm wondering if the minister could tell us how many trees are going to be planted under this program by the end of this season. Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, this government is committed to two billion trees. We are working with forestry associations, the industry and with individual companies to ensure this tree-planting season will be one of the largest the country has ever seen. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The floor goes to the honourable member for Rivire-du-Nord. Mr. Rhal Fortin (Rivire-du-Nord, BQ): MadamChair, last week, the government introduced BillC-17 and the Minister of Justice sent us briefing notes in which he said that it was important to suspend a number of time limits and to extend others, and that the failure to do so could have important repercussions on Canadians, their families, their situations, their finances and their ability to exercise their rights. We in the Bloc Qubcois agree with that. When are we going to talk about it? Hon. David Lametti: MadamChair, the contents of BillC-17 are clearly very important. We have addressed the mandatory time limits in federal legislation as well as certain time limits that courts may not be able to handle. It is very important that we address this issue. That is why the law The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Fortin, you have the floor. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, we agree that it is important. I concur. The minister's briefing notes say that, among other things, when it comes to divorcewhich means children are involved people are waiting on custody rights, child support and visitation rights. The minister pointed out that the national security review would require consultations if no decision is made in the prescribed time frame. It could pose a national security risk. It is really a big deal. When are we going to debate it? Hon. David Lametti: MadamChair, I completely agree with my honourable colleague. The issue needs to be addressed. That is why it is in the bill. That is another reason to debate the bill. I beseech my colleagues opposite to debate it with us. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, what a coincidence, because I beseech my colleague opposite to debate it with us. That is what we are asking. Last week, the leader of the Bloc Qubcois asked the Liberal government to debate BillC-17 today. He did not get an answer. It does not seem to matter. Richard Wagner, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, who is hardly a dimwit or greenhorn, told us that the justice system needs to be modernized. As recently as this past Saturday in LaPresse, Justice Wagner said that it is essential that the Criminal Code be amended to address the backlog of court proceedings. When will the Liberal government opposite pull up its socks, do its job, govern the federation, sit down with the opposition and discuss the vital matters in BillC-17? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, if I were my colleague, I would be a little embarrassed, because the bill was sent to the Bloc Qubcois several days in advance. They received a technical note several days in advance. We were all available to take questions. When we asked for the support of the Bloc Qubcois and the other parties to debate itwe were not even asking them to vote in favour of the billthey refused. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, we never refused to debate it. Actually, we were the ones who asked to debate it. What exactly does debate it mean? We set some conditions. For example, we asked the Liberals to put the money back into the wage subsidy fund and to commit to dip into it no longer. Are we asking too much of our colleagues opposite? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Can my colleague explain to me what the emergency wage subsidy has to do with a bill about justice? This is an absolutely fundamental piece of legislation. We wanted to debate it, but they refused to do so. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, I would like nothing better than to explain it to him, but I must remind him that he is the leader of the party in power, the party that is supposed to govern the country. So I do not know why he is asking me that. My party proposed that we debate this today but we did not get an answer. Meanwhile, court time limits are running out and people are losing rights. I am thinking of families, child support, child custody, labour law disputes in Federal Court, marine transportation, interprovincial transportation, aviation, banks, and those with grievances waiting for a Federal Court ruling. The whole system, the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal, everything is on hold because nobody in the government wants to do their job. We want to discuss BillC-17. When can we talk about it? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, we have done our job. We have introduced the bill. We informed them in advance. We told them they could ask us any questions they wanted. We asked for a debate in the House. However, when we asked the Bloc Qubcois if they wanted to debate the bill, they said no, instead of doing what they usually do and saying yes. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for Essex, Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis (Essex, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. When the CERB runs out, many workers in my riding of Essex will not have sufficient hours to collect their EI benefits. In early July, the midnight shift at Chrysler will be eliminated. Because of the shutdown, a mom-to-be who had just returned to work in January, and several hundred of her fellow employees, may not have the 600 hours required for regular or EI parental benefits. Immediate action is needed. What is the government doing now to backstop these workers? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, the Canada emergency response benefit has been providing much-needed help to Canadian workers across the country who have stopped working due to COVID-19. We know that there is still a lot of uncertainty for many Canadian workers, and we know that many will be exhausting their benefits in the weeks to come. We will have more to share soon, as early as this week, on our continuing efforts to support Canadian workers and make sure that help is available during this The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Go ahead, Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Minister, for the answer. The EI system needs to be fixed. Even before the shutdown, the system was deeply flawed. Will this government commit to a complete review and overhaul of the EI system? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we have been there for Canadian workers. We will continue to make sure that we make the necessary investments in the EI delivery system and modernize it to continue to meet The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. Small businesses have been hit extremely hard by the COVID-19 shutdown. Many have already been forced into bankruptcy. Much uncertainty lies ahead. As the economy reopens, what is the government doing to help small businesses recover? Hon. Mary Ng: Madam Chair, today we are seeing small businesses that have been helped, whether it is getting access to the small business loan, which some are also using in the restart as they are safely restarting, or getting help with their payroll, helping them keep their employees The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. Employees are key to a small business's success. How will the government incentivize workers to return to their jobs when recalled? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister can give a brief answer. Hon. Mary Ng: The Canada emergency wage subsidy is an excellent program to help those employees stay employed and for those employers who are looking at rehiring them right now during this restart process. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair, many of my constituents are in a committed cross-border relationship and have not been able to see their partners in quite some time. The current restrictions are arbitrary. Denmark has found a fair resolution. Will Canada adopt the Danish model, and if not, why not? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, as we said from the outset, we've implemented restrictions at the U. S. border on non-essential travel with a single purpose in mind: to protect the health and safety of Canadians. As the member is aware, just last week we introduced new measures that allow people in family relationships to stay together as long as they commit to the necessary 14-day period of quarantine. We'll continue to work with families. Our intention is to keep people together, but mostly to keep people safe. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair, with regard to child care, as our economy continues to open, parents are facing a stark choice: Who will care for their children? What's the plan to provide access to child care so parents can confidently return to work? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we are of course committed to continuing to make the record investments that we've been making in child care. Since 2015 we've created over 40,000 affordable child care spaces. We're committed to creating an additional 250,000 before-school and after-school child care spaces. We will continue to invest in this sector because we understand that without investment The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. It sounds as though this government has a desire to force parents to choose between their job and care for their child. Can the government please respond to that quote? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, nothing could be further from the truth. We are committed to the child care sector. Our investments and our results prove the opposite of what the member is asserting. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I'm sorry. We're out of time. The committee now stands adjourned until tomorrow at noon.

This section firstly pointed at the employment issues faced during the pandemic. Next, the topic turned to the emergency wage subsidy that was supporting over a 2. 5million workers. The meeting grouped workers in different sectors and discussed them step by step. The listed groups included the students, foreign workers, health care workers, forestry workers, and workers in the oil and gas sector.

tr-sq-1218

tr-sq-1218_0

What did Hon. Ahmed Hussen think about the summer jobs program when talking about Employment and workers'safety? The Chair (Hon. Anthony Rota (NipissingTimiskaming, Lib.) ): I call this meeting to order. Welcome to meeting number 22 of the House of Commons Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic. A reminder to all members that in order to avoid issues with sound, members participating in person should not also be connected to the video conference. For those joining via video conference, I would like to remind you that, when speaking, you should be on the same channel as the language you are speaking. As usual, please direct your remarks through the chair. I understand we don't have any ministerial announcements today, so we'll proceed to presenting petitions. I would like to remind members that any petition presented during a meeting of the special committee must have already been certified by the clerk of petitions. For members participating in person, we ask that they please come and drop the signed certificate off at the table once the petition is presented. The first petition will be presented by Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May (SaanichGulf Islands, GP): Mr. Chair, it's an honour to rise in meeting number 22 of the COVID-19 committee, otherwise known as something like the House of Commons. I'm here to present two petitions containing hundreds of signatures on the issue of the treatment of Falun Gong practitioners by the People's Republic of China, particularly the practice that's alleged of involuntary organ harvesting. The petitioners ask the Government of Canada to condemn this practice and to publicly call for an end to the persecution of Falun Gong in the People's Republic of China. The second petition is from residents throughout SaanichGulf Islands concerned about what was, at the time this petition was submitted, a future problem. It remains an issue, and I present it on behalf of petitioners who wish the Government of Canada not to put public funds into purchasing or maintaining the Trans Mountain pipeline or towards any expansion of the pipeline. The Chair: Next we'll go to Ms. Kwan. Ms. Jenny Kwan (Vancouver East, NDP): Mr. Chair, I rise to table two petitions. The first petition deals with the COVID-19 situation. The petitioners note the pandemic is having a devastating impact on many Canadians nationwide, especially those who have low to modest income, small business gig workers, freelancers, artists, film industry workers, non-salaried workers and individuals on fixed incomes such as seniors and those on disability. It further notes that rent, mortgage and utility payments are due at the end of each month, putting countless Canadians at risk of losing their housing. It is paramount there be safe self-isolation opportunities for all individuals in this country. To that end, the petitioners are calling for the government to immediately enact a nationwide rent freeze, eviction freeze, mortgage freeze and utility freeze, enforce mortgage deferrals for homeowners without penalty or interest charges from financial institutions and provide direct assistance in the form of a monthly, universal, direct payment of $2,000 per month for all, with an additional $250 per child immediately. The second petition deals with the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion. These petitioners join the hundreds of thousands of people who are opposed to the expansion. Trans Mountain, in building the pipeline, brings massive environmental and economic risk with no substantial benefit to British Columbia or to local residents. Approximately 40,000 barrels of oil have already leaked from existing Kinder Morgan pipelines, including two major spills in Burnaby since 2007. I might note, Mr. Chair, that just this past weekend there was yet another spill to the tune of 1,195 barrels here in British Columbia. There is no known scientific technology to clean up the bitumen when there is a spill, and the number of tankers would go from eight to 34 per month into the Burrard Inlet. It puts at risk many residential neighbourhoods and the traditional territories of at least 15 first nations. The Chair: May I interrupt for a moment, Ms. Kwan. I want to remind all members in the House that when presenting a petition, the idea is to be as concise as possible. Ms. Kwan, I'll let you wrap up, please. Ms. Jenny Kwan: Thank you, Mr. Chair. The petitioners are calling for the government to immediately act to prevent this new oil pipeline from proceeding through British Columbia. The Chair: Thank you. We'll now go to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood ParkFort Saskatchewan, CPC): Mr. Chair, I have four petitions to present today. The first petition reflects the outrage of my constituents at the ever-expanding order in council from the government banning more and more firearms. In particular, the petitioners highlight the failure of the government to act on the issue of illegal guns. The petitioners note that virtually all violent crimes committed in Canada, including the recent shooting in Nova Scotia, involve illegal firearms in the hands of those who are already not permitted to possess them. The petition has two asks. First of all, it asks that we reverse the order in council banning certain firearms, but also that we propose measures that will effectively address the illegal use of firearms by criminals while respecting the rights of law-abiding citizens. It also asks that we ensure that substantial changes to firearms laws in future actually be made by Parliament, not by the government acting in an unaccountable manner. The second petition deals with Bill C-8, which is the government's bill around conversion therapy. The petitioners support efforts to ban conversion therapy. They express concern about problems in the wording of the definition used in the legislation. They're asking the government to support amendments to fix the definition to address the issue of conversion therapy and ensure that the definition is correct and doesn't criminalize certain forms of counselling that individuals may voluntarily enter into. The third petition is regarding Bill S-204, a bill in the Senate that seeks to make it a criminal offence for a person to go abroad to receive an organ without consent, dealing especially with the horrific practice of forced organ harvesting and trafficking in China. The petitioners are supportive of Bill S-204 and want to see it move forward. The final petition is with respect to Bill C-7. There's been much discussion in this House about the need to do better in terms of long-term care. Rather than working to do better in long-term care, unfortunately we've seen the government removing vital safeguards in the area of euthanasia. I think our focus should be on assisting life rather than removing safeguards that are required in association with the euthanasia regime. The petitioners are particularly concerned about the government's plan to remove a 10-day reflection period that normally takes place. That period can already be waived under certain circumstances, but Bill C-7 proposes to remove it entirely as well as reduce the number of witnesses involved. The petitioners are quite concerned about what's going on in Bill C-7 and call for it to be stopped or amended. The Chair: Presenting petitions. We'll proceed to statements by members. We'll start off with Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly (NanaimoLadysmith, GP): Mr. Chair, we are in the midst of a global pandemic and an economic shock. Recent events have ripped open the wound of systemic racism in our country. Racialized and marginalized communities have been disproportionally affected by the pandemic. Thousands of seniors in long-term care facilities have died. It is clear that we need system change. In the past, governments have bailed out banks and corporations because they were too big to fail. It is time to bail out humanity and the planet. No one will be immune from the threat of climate change and mass extinction. Both are the result of the exploitation of the natural world in the name of the economy. Humans created the economy. We can choose to change it. We must protect our environment or perish. COVID-19 has demonstrated that together we can take courageous action for the common good. We need to do the same for the climate crisis, because humanity and our planet are too big to fail. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Spengemann. Mr. Sven Spengemann (MississaugaLakeshore, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, today marks World Elder Abuse Awareness Day. Underestimated and under-reported, elder abuse exists across the world. At risk of neglect and assault, many of the most vulnerable older persons reside in our long-term care facilities. They are the seniors who have built our country and shaped our communities, who have shown us resilience, courage and selflessness, who have made us stronger, and whose work and teachings continue to inspire us. They are parents and grandparents, brothers and sisters, friends and mentors. We have not been there for them in the same way they've been there for us throughout their lives. The Canadian Forces report, alongside the climbing disproportionate death toll in our long-term care facilities, has reconfirmed the ugly, indefensible reality of elder abuse and neglect in Canada. In my community, we mourn the deaths of 68 seniors from one long-term care facility alone, Camilla Care. We must make the same unwavering commitment to older persons as they have shown to us. We must protect and uphold their human rights. We must do better. The Chair: Before proceeding, I just want to bring up to the members in the background that we want to keep it as simple and as parliamentary as possible in keeping it neutral. We'll now move to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett (LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, CPC): During these trying times, the residents of LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes have risen to the challenge. They've made sacrifices and gone above and beyond to make the lives of their neighbours better and to keep our communities safe. It would be impossible to list everyone who has emerged as a community hero, but I'd like to highlight a few, like Lily, an eight-year-old from Elgin who raised funds for her local food bank by building and selling squirrel picnic tables, and Louise Boardman from Spencerville who's making masks for long-term care facilities and selling others in support of the Breast Cancer Action centre. The Knights of Columbus in Prescott raised funds and are distributing some $27,000 in support of charitable groups throughout the region. The Knights of Columbus in Kemptville are working overtime operating the local food bank. Who can forget our top-notch health care workers like Hannah and Mary at the Brockville COVID-19 testing centre? It is the people of LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes that make it so great. To everyone working to make a difference and to all of our essential workers, thank you. The Chair: Next is Mr. Anandasangaree. Mr. Gary Anandasangaree (ScarboroughRouge Park, Lib.): Mr. Chair, the Indian Act enshrined racism into Canadian law in 1876, and, through residential schools, the child welfare system, our legal system and our police, we criminalized and tore apart indigenous peoples. The deaths of Chantel Moore and Rodney Levi and the assault on Chief Allan Adam are recent examples of systemic racism within the RCMP. Sadly, the RCMP leadership has failed to acknowledge this reality and its root causes. These same systems negatively impact black Canadians. Anti-black racism has resulted in more young black men being jailed, children being streamed or excluded from schools and negative police interaction due to profiling. Black lives matter. No single Canadian is responsible for the prevalence of systemic racism; we all are. Collectively we build institutions that discriminate based on race. It is now time to reimagine and rework our institutions, starting with our police, to ensure that all Canadians can achieve their truest potential. The Chair: Ms. Larouche, you have the floor. Ms. Andranne Larouche (Shefford, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chair. June15 is World Elder Abuse Awareness Day. I want to remind members of the link between abuse and the problems of economic dependency among seniors. Improving their purchasing power means reducing the risk of them falling victim to abusive people. That's why the increase in the old age security benefit and the guaranteed income supplement must be extended beyond the pandemic. In three weeks, our seniors will receive their first cheque, when they should be receiving their second. A date must also be announced for the new horizons for seniors program, which helps several groups develop projects to break the isolation of seniors. In closing, I would like to mention the organization Justice alternative et mdiation that during the pandemic, along with other organizations in Shefford, has set up the project Une histoire pour la tienne, which also serves to mark this day. It's a virtual meeting between young people and seniors, allowing them to exchange some inspiring life experiences. Since age prejudice is very much present, I applaud this project, which aims to make us understand each other better and judge each other less. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Sangha. Mr. Ramesh Sangha (Brampton Centre, Lib.): Mr. Chair, in the time of this terrible crisis affecting all Canadians, when we are all thinking about how best to deal with it, let's all think about the people around us. Let's show our representation not only to those in the sector of sanctioned workers, but also to all those Canadians who day by day stand up and make a difference. Every day I am proud of the reactions of Canadians to this crisis. I want to acknowledge and celebrate all the contributions made by the people of Brampton Centre, all religious institutions, civil society and community organizations like Knights Table in my riding. We are all standing together to fight COVID-19. Let's continue working hard with that same spirit to get positive results out. Thank you very much. The Chair: I will proceed to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff (BruceGreyOwen Sound, CPC): Mr. Chair, whether graduating from elementary school, high school, Georgian College or graduating from colleges or universities across the country, I am proud of the accomplishments of all the graduates across BruceGreyOwen Sound. I would also like to congratulate and thank all the teachers and parents who have adapted to teaching online or from home and who have supported these graduates over the course of their academic careers. I'd like to extend special congratulations to Cameron Lovell, who just graduated from grade eight, as well as to Neebeesh and Neebin Elliott, originally from the Nawash unceded first nation on the Bruce Peninsula, who will be headed to Michigan State University, and to Jared Lumley from Owen Sound, who just graduated from my alma mater, the Royal Military College of Canada. The college motto of Truth, Duty, Valour is something all Canadians should aspire to live by. I wish all the best to these graduates on their next adventures. I and Canada cannot wait to see how their dreams and goals impact and change the world. I congratulate BruceGreyOwen Sound graduates. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Cormier. Mr. Serge Cormier (AcadieBathurst, Lib.): Today I pay tribute to RichardLosier, an entrepreneur, visionary and builder who died on June9,2020, surrounded by his family. Mr. Losier is a giant in the Acadian Peninsula business community. In1968, he co-founded St. Isidore Asphalte, a company that now has more than 200employees. He also launched many other businesses over the years. He was unifying and generous, a philanthropist who cared about young people and never missed an opportunity to improve their lives. I met Mr. Losier when I was 14years old, and I can say that he has been a positive influence in my life. Every time I met him, he gave me a lot of advice and encouragement, which I've never forgotten. Mr. Losier's legacy to his community is invaluable. His commitment remains an example for all of us to follow. Mr. Losier now joins his wife, Nolla. I offer my most sincere condolences to his children, Richard Jr. , Ronald, Nathalie, Caroline and Stphane, and to his family and friends. Rest in peace, Mr. Losier. You will be greatly missed. Thank you for everything you've done for our region. The Chair: We will now go to Ms. Dabrusin. Ms. Julie Dabrusin (TorontoDanforth, Lib.): Hello from my community in east end Toronto. People talk about how a city the size of Toronto can be cold, but that's far from the truth in my community. I want to give a shout-out to our teachers, like Mr. Wong of Earl Grey Senior Public School, who delivered home-baked cookies and handwritten notes to all of his students, or Monsieur Steve, who's offering online French classes, or the teachers of Riverdale Collegiate, who paraded through our streets to celebrate our graduates. Our local Michael Garron Hospital put out a call for community members to sew masks and received over 60,000 masks, including those made by Lisa Tancre of Chartwell Avondale Retirement Residence. Michelle Beaton organized a front window scavenger hunt to entertain children and their families. Restaurants, even while facing adversity, have been generously donating food, like the members of the Leslieville BIA or Mezes. There are so many more stories of generosity that I could share, but I'm out of time. I thank everyone who has stepped up. We all appreciate all of their hard work. The Chair: We will now go to Ms. Sahota. Ms. Jag Sahota (Calgary Skyview, CPC): Mr. Chair, on Saturday night, Calgarians, particularly those in the northeast, in my riding of Calgary Skyview, witnessed a devastating storm, the likes of which I have not seen in my lifetime. Homes, vehicles, community buildings and structures suffered significant damage due to large hail, floods and high winds. People acted quickly to seek shelter. I'm so grateful that there have been no reports of personal injury or loss of life. I went around the community yesterday to survey the damage. It is extensive. My heart aches for those who have been impacted by the storm in an already incredibly difficult time, but we are resilient. We know that in the coming weeks there will be a lot of cleanup required, both to personal property and in the community. I know my constituents, and we will help one another get through this together. I will work hard to do everything I can to help rebuild this community. The Chair: Mr. Serr, you have the floor. Mr. Marc Serr (Nickel Belt, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to express my sincere gratitude to the people of West Nippissing who organized Pride activities to celebrate the LGBTQ community in June. This week, we are also celebrating National Public Service Week. I thank the public servants for their dedication to the Nickel Belt community and the Valley East and Rayside-Balfour areas. The Chair: Next is Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya (MarkhamUnionville, CPC): Mr. Chair, when COVID-19 began spreading across Ontario, Markham, like many other communities, was unprepared. Our front-line health care workers did not have enough personal protective equipment to do their jobs safely. When Markham residents heard about these shortages, my office was flooded with calls from people who had PPE and wanted to donate. Since then my office has been able to deliver tens of thousands of PPE supplies to front-line health care workers and five masks to each family in need. This pandemic has shown that no matter what the challenge is, the Markham community will overcome it. Today, I would like to thank the front-line health care workers who are doing incredible work. I would also like to thank all those who have helped in Markham's hour of need. The Chair: I understand we had a bit of a glitch there. I'm sorry. With the pause, we thought that was the end of it. Mr. Serr, I would ask you to continue. I understand you started to switch languages. Please continue. You have 30seconds. Mr. Marc Serr: Thank you. I'm switching to English now. Thank you to our nurses, doctors, pharmacists, cashiers, janitors. Thank you to various retail workers and first responders dealing with COVID-19. You keep our communities safe and healthy, and you feed us. Your dedication and sacrifice are greatly appreciated. As we start to see local businesses reopen, it is important for all of us to remember to follow best practices outlined by local public health. Our front-line workers deserve our respect. It is important for all of us to respect social distancing, to protect all workers and their families. Together we can remain strong and united as we continue to face this challenge together. The Chair: Again, my apologies for skipping over there, but now we'll to to Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod (KamloopsThompsonCariboo, CPC): Mr. Chair, in commemoration of Italian Heritage Month, I would like to pay tribute to the Colombo Lodge and Italian Cultural Centre in Kamloops, British Columbia. The Colombo Lodge was founded in 1914 and is an integral part of our community. Recently they began Colombo Cares take-home dinners with proceeds distributed to different non-profit organizations throughout the region. Last month they very generously gave away hundreds of dinners to Royal Inland Hospital staff and paramedics for their tireless work throughout the pandemic. In their own words they say, Colombo Lodge is very proud of the Italians that have made Kamloops their home. Community members of Italian ancestrypast and presenthave helped and continue to help Kamloops prosper as a giving, welcoming and inclusive community. Personally, I want to thank all members for their friendship and generosity over the years. Our community is forever grateful for their kindness. The Chair: We'll now proceed to Mr. Harris. Mr. Jack Harris (St. John's East, NDP): Mr. Chair, many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are facing a serious financial crisis. Most people with disabilities are waiting to be included in the Liberals'promised program. Fish plant workers will need support to avoid a disastrous year. Many small businesses don't qualify for programs. Municipalities need emergency help to meet the crisis. People are worried about what will happen when the CERB runs out in two weeks'time, and the coming tourism season looks very grim. The province itself is in serious financial crisis due to the pandemic and the decline in oil prices. The federal government must overhaul and enhance the fiscal stabilization program to help Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and other oil-producing provinces through this crisis. Both the province and the oil and gas industry players have committed to net zero emissions by 2050. This is a challenge and an opportunity to transition to a sustainable energy future, but it will require significant investment and support by government to keep the industry strong and make this a just transition for workers. Much has been done. Much more needs to be done. The Chair: Ms. Gaudreau, you have the floor. Ms. Marie-Hlne Gaudreau (LaurentidesLabelle, BQ): Mr. Chair, all 44elected municipal officials in the riding of LaurentidesLabelle and I have sent a letter to the government asking that cellular and high-speed Internet networks be made available to all. The crisis has accelerated the demonstration of the need for these networks in daily life. The territorial complexity of the Laurentians means that there are areas where the signal is weak, unstable or non-existent. There is an urgent and essential need to change the infrastructure of the current networks. Also, because of the lockdown, Internet failures are being felt, and they prevent distance learning, telemedicine and teleworking, among other things. How can our municipalities develop economically if they can't provide their community with adequate communication tools? We are therefore calling on the government to put the interests of its people first by investing massively right now in the construction of high-speed Internet and cellular infrastructure. The Chair: Mr. Waugh. Mr. Kevin Waugh (SaskatoonGrasswood, CPC): I rise today to pay tribute to Sir Winston Churchill, the former prime minister of Great Britain and one of the greatest leaders history has ever known. In what can only be called a lifetime of service, Churchill's contributions to the Commonwealth and to the world are without equal. During the Second World War he led the allied forces in Europe against the tyranny and fascism of Adolph Hitler and his Nazi regime. When our world was in its darkest hour, Churchill's leadership was a beacon of hope and freedom. I am reminded of something he once said, All the greatest things are simple, and many can be expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honour, duty, mercy, hope. Sir Winston Churchill himself embodied all of these great things and will forever be a symbol of freedom, democracy and hope. The Chair: Mr. Gerretsen. Mr. Mark Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands, Lib.): Mr. Chair, I would like to add my voice to the recognition and celebration of Pride Month, which is celebrated annually during June. Pride Month is important for Canadians because we can be proud of who we are and celebrate our diversity. This June is different from previous years as we cannot celebrate in person all together. However, I know the ongoing pandemic will not stop us from showing our love and support for the LGBTQ+ community. To celebrate Pride Month this year, my office distributed 3,000 pride maple leaf pins across the country; whoever asked received one. Although the majority was sent to constituents in my riding, over 500 pins were sent to the neighbouring ridings of LanarkFrontenacKingston, LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, and HastingsLennox and Addington. It warms my heart to see so many Canadians showing their support. Happy Pride, everyone. The Chair: We will now proceed to the questioning of ministers. Please note that we will suspend the proceedings twice to allow employees who provide support for the sitting to substitute for each other safely. Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell (Louis-Saint-Laurent, CPC): Mr. Chair, I am very pleased to take part in today's meeting of this parliamentary committee. Canada has been dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic for three months now. The situation now seems to be improving, although we must remain vigilant. Economically, business people and the entire Canadian economy depend on government decisions. My question is very simple: when will the economic update take place? Hon. Chrystia Freeland (Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): Mr. Chair, I thank the hon. member for his question. I agree with him that Canada and Canadians are doing an excellent and difficult job in the fight against coronavirus. As for the economy, our government is there for Canadians, for workers and for businesses, and it will continue to be. Mr. Grard Deltell: Canadians, business people and businesses want to know where the government is headed. When will the economic update take place? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, Canadians know that the government is there to support them. Eight The Chair: We return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Canadians and Quebeckers also know that the Government of Quebec will table its economic update this week. Why isn't the federal government doing the same? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I'm pleased to explain to hon. members and to Canadians what the government is doing for the economy The Chair: We return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, it is a real pleasure for me to explain to the minister and everybody in the House of Commons that today the Saskatchewan government will table its economic update. Why can't Ottawa do that? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I'm delighted to have the opportunity to share with Canadians what our government is doing to support workers, businesses and the economy. Eight million Canadians have received the CERB, essential support for Canadian workers and their families. The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, 11 days ago the Newfoundland government tabled its own economic update. We see governments acting correctly for their people, except for the Liberal government, which cannot table an economic update. When will the Liberal government table an economic update, which Canadians would like to see? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I am delighted to share with the member opposite and with Canadians what we are doing practically that has meaning for Canadians. Let me talk about what we are doing for Canadian businesses. Nearly 670,000 Canadian businesses have received support The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: In Canada, the Quebec government will table its economic update this week. The Saskatchewan government tabled its economic update today. The Newfoundland government has tabled its economic update. Everybody is working hard in Canada, and the business community would like to know where the Liberal government is going. The question is crystal clear. When will the Liberal government table an economic update? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, Canadian workers and Canadian businesses want to know that our government is here to support them. I have shared with this House our support for Canadian workers through the CERB. I've spoken about the CEBA, and let me point out that more than $26 billion of support has been given through that essential program. Let me talk about the wage subsidy. More than 2. 6 million The Chair: We'll return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, this is starting to get interesting; the minister is revealing some of these expenses. Could the minister tell us how much the government has spent in the last three months? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I will continue in French by explaining what our government is doing for Canadians and workers The Chair: Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, this is a little bit concerning for all Canadians, because this government cannot say when they will table the economic update, cannot identify how much money they have spent in the last three months and cannot say what is the deficit of Canada. Is somebody in this government running this country correctly? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, absolutely we are running this country, and we are supporting our economy. In fact, we appreciate that Canada currently is experiencing its greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression. That is why we have devoted nearly 11% of GDP to support Canadian workers and Canadian businesses. I want to assure Canadians The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Normandin. Ms. Normandin, you have the floor. Ms. Christine Normandin (Saint-Jean, BQ): Mr. Chair, there are times when Quebec and the provinces are not just two solitudes, but they get along and speak as one, such as when the time comes to tell the government to mind its own business. On reading section91 of the Constitution Act, 1982, which sets out the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal government, nowhere do I find that the federal government must meddle by attaching conditions to health transfers. It is Quebec and the provinces that hire the medical personnel, doctors, nurses and caretakers. It is Quebec and the provinces that are responsible for purchasing the necessary equipment. It is Quebec and the provinces that know what is happening on the ground and what their needs are. Will the government do the only thing within its authority, which is to take the cheque, sign it and put it in the mail? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I thank the hon. member for her question. We fully understand the importance of federal support for the provinces, especially in our national fight against the coronavirus. I agree with the hon. member that we must give financial support to the provinces, including Quebec absolutely. I would also like to point out the importance of the support of the Canadian Armed Forces, who are doing an important and excellent job in Quebec and Ontario today, right now. Ms. Christine Normandin: Mr. Chair, I am glad to see that there is recognition of the importance of transferring this money. My question is whether it can be transferred unconditionally; that's what I'm asking. There's a state of emergency. In the past, we have seen that it takes a long time to negotiate conditions with the federal government. We saw it in the case of the Quebec City tramway, and we are still seeing it now in the case of transfers for housing in Quebec, for which there is no agreement and, therefore, no transfer of money. Will the federal government send the money free of conditions? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the hon. member said in her first question that the only thing the federal government had to do on health care was to sign the cheques. I can't agree because, today, at this time, at the request of the Premier of Quebec, the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces are in Quebec today; they're there to save the lives of seniors The Chair: We now return to Ms. Normandin. Ms. Christine Normandin: It was indeed at Quebec's request. What I'm saying is that, at present, the provinces are unanimously asking that there be no conditions. It's urgent that the money be transferred. The federal government's job here is to sign the cheque and send it to the provinces. The government's job is also to make Parliament work. This is where there should be negotiations so that we can work, among other things, to send money to people living with disabilities, to make sure we fight CERB fraud and to make sure that court time limits are effective in the current crisis. Can the government focus on the issue in order to respect the provinces and transfer money for health care? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: I thank the hon. member for her question, Mr. Chair. I agree with the hon. member that the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces are in Quebec today at the request of the Province of Quebec. That said, I hope that the hon. member will agree with me that being there for Quebec's seniors, that saving the lives of Quebec's seniors, is much more than simply signing cheques. I am very proud of the work the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces are doing. I think we all should thank these people who are working for Canada, for Quebec, and who are doing an important and excellent job. Ms. Christine Normandin: Mr. Chair, I think the Deputy Prime Minister misunderstood me when I was talking about the importance of acting quickly. Negotiations between the government and the provinces take an awfully long time because the federal government decides to place conditions where there shouldn't be any. Right now, the only important thing is to transfer the money quickly so that it can be used in our hospitals and our long-term care facilities, where the need is desperate. Quebec and the provinces know exactly what their needs are. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I would like to point out the extent to which the federal government is there to support the provinces, including Quebec. We have increased funding to the provinces and territories by $500million to help them prepare for COVID-19 outbreaks. This funding is in addition to the $40billion that we already provide annually to the provinces and territories. That's a lot of money. It is strong endorsement The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh (Burnaby South, NDP): Mr. Chair, systemic racism is killing people. It's killing black people and it's killing indigenous people. Recently, Rodney Levi was another victim of systemic racism. He was killed in New Brunswick by the RCMP. To deal with systemic racism, we need systemic change. Will the Liberal government commit to systemic change so that not another life is ever taken again? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I thank the member opposite for the extremely important question, and I'll take this opportunity to acknowledge the work that he has done for many years fighting racism in Canada. Our government absolutely acknowledges that systemic racism exists in Canada. It exists in all of our institutions, including the police and the RCMP. I agree with the member opposite that now is the moment to fight this The Chair: Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, I thank the Deputy Prime Minister very much for the response, but there are some specific actions we need to take. There are movements. Black Lives Matter, as a movement, is calling for the defunding of police. What they're saying is we need to make better choices with how money is being spent. When someone is in need of a wellness check or a mental health check, money, financing and support should go to mental health workers and health care workers, not the police. Is the government prepared to fund and prioritize health care workers over the police? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the member quite rightly began his questions by speaking about systemic racism against indigenous people in Canada, and I would like to speak about that for a moment. I spoke to Perry Bellegarde this morning, because it is such a crucial issue. We can describe it as the original sin of our country. I absolutely agree that we need root and branch reform, including in how policing is done in Canada. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, will the Liberal government commit to a review of the use of force as outlined for the RCMP? Will the Liberals commit to that change? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister and the Minister of Public Safety had many conversations last week with the RCMP. We all accept that The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, will the government commit to ensuring that de-escalation receives priority? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Let me continue, Mr. Chair. Systemic racism exists in all of our federal institutions, including the RCMP. It's time to put an end to it. Let me just say The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, I'm not getting an answer. Will the Prime Minister or the Liberal government commit to something simple and ensure that at the federal level, racial profiling, street checks and carding are expressly prohibited? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, sadly, I can't agree that rooting out systemic racism is going to be simple, but I can agree that racial profiling is absolutely inappropriate. It is not something that we should The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Well, I'm going to try to get another commitment from the government, because they don't seem able to commit to something as clear as ending racial profiling. We know that millions of Canadians in a couple of weeks are going to be faced with the reality of their CERB ending. These families are worried about how they're going to put food on the table, because they can't return to a job. Will the Liberal government commit today so that those families will have some concrete support, yes or no? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, let me be clear, as I was in my previous answer, that our government clearly is opposed to racial profiling. This is a wrong practice and we're very clear about our position there. Now when it comes to the CERB, I absolutely share the concern of the member opposite. The Canadian economy is in its direst state since the Great Depression. We know that all the jobs have not yet come back. We know that Canadian workers, Canadian families, continue to need The Chair: We'll now pause for a short time to allow staff to change within the safety parameters for the COVID-19 virus, and as we resume, we will go to Ms. Harder. Ms. Rachael Harder (Lethbridge, CPC): Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister has mandated his ministers, and I quote, to govern in a positive, open and collaborative way. Ironically, as it stands, Parliament is currently closed for business. Opposition parties have little opportunity to hold the ruling party to account, private members'bills cannot be tabled and legislation cannot be debated. Can the Prime Minister, Mr. Trudeau himself, help us understand how all of this fits into his definition of so-called open government? The Honourable Pablo Rodriguez (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons): Well, Mr. Chair, we're here, right? We're here, and the opposition is asking questions. They have the equivalent of eight question periods instead of five to ask questions. They have more time than before, so I don't know why they're not happy about it. Ms. Rachael Harder: That's like when I'm asking for a full meal and your handing me a few jellybeans and saying, Why aren't you happy with that? Mr. Chair, here's the thing. It's like switching a light on and off when it's convenient for the Prime Minister and for the Liberal Party. That's what they want to do here. That's not Parliament. That's not democracy. When will Mr. Trudeau do the right thing, turn the lights on and get back to work for Canadians? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I'm really sorry to hear that my colleague's not working. I can assure you, Mr. Chair, on this side of the House, we're all actually working very hard and we're answering the questions from the opposition. Why? It's because it's extremely important. I sat there for seven years asking questions. I understand important Ms. Rachael Harder: The member opposite knows very well that he is misleading the Canadian public. This is not true Parliament. This is simply a special committee. Here's the thing. On the Liberal Party website, under the platform commitment, it says that Parliament works best when its members are free to do what they have been elected to do, and that is be the voice for their communities and hold the government to account. This is a Liberal document. Did the Prime Minister forget that strengthening Parliament was part of his 2019 platform commitment? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague for quoting our excellent platform. That was a very very good document. The thing is, I think we've reached a balance whereby MPs can come from different places, mostly around Ottawa, and ask questions; but also we can have colleagues from across the country asking questions. Why does my colleague think it is better to have only 35 MPs participating instead of 338? Ms. Rachael Harder: Does the Prime Minister value democracy, or does he still look up to China's basic dictatorship? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, we're answering all the questions from the opposition, not only from the people in this room, but we're answering The Chair: It's back to Ms. Harder now. Ms. Rachael Harder: I'll ask the question again. Does the Prime Minister still value the basic dictatorship of China over Canada's democracy? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I don't know where the colleague wants to go from here, Mr. Chair. I'd like to know from her why it is not important to her that her colleagues participate directly. Ms. Rachael Harder: Mr. Trudeau wrote to his ministers and said to them that they continue to raise the bar on openness, effectiveness and transparency. He went on to explain that This means. . . government that is open by default. We now have a parliament that is currently shut down. Mr. Trudeau has shut it down and has prevented us from being able to do to the good work that Canadians expect us to do. Is this Mr. Trudeau's idea of open by default? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, do they want to talk about shutting down Parliament? How about the time they prorogued Parliament twicenot only once, but twice? The Conservative government shut down Parliament twice. I was here. I was sitting on the other side of the aisle. It's quite the opposite now. We're taking all the questions. This place is open, and we're answering questions. The Chair: One moment, please. I haven't acknowledged you yet, Ms. Harder. We've stopped the time there. I want to remind honourable members that questions and answers are being given, and we want to hear both sides. Please keep the heckling down. Ms. Harder, please proceed. Ms. Rachael Harder: In 2014, the leader of the Liberal Party developed a policy resolution entitled Restoring Trust in Canada's Democracy. That's ironic, because right now, again, Parliament is currently shut down. We are prevented from being able to do the good work that we are expected to do. At the time, the Prime Minister said, Canadians want their Members of Parliament to be effective voices for their communities in Ottawa, and not merely mouthpieces in their communities for an all-too-powerful Prime Minister. Sadly, Mr. Trudeau has become the all-too-powerful prime minister that he once believed should not exist. Why did he change his mind? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, I'd like to know why my colleague wants to shut down the voices of her colleagues who could not speak and could not participate in this room. Mr. Chair, how would we vote on private members'bills, for example? As you know, it is not a government vote or a party vote; it's per row. You want to come back? Are you going to acceptMr. Chair, through youthat we have electronic voting, yes or no? The Chair: We'll go on to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, we know that the Minister of Foreign Affairs has champagne tastes and London flats, but it's his champagne mortgages that Canadians are concerned about. Specifically, why did the minister only disclose the complete extent of his personal debt to the Chinese government on June 4 of this year? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, as you know, since the minister entered politics, his two mortgages and other liabilities and assets have been fully disclosed to the Ethics Commissioner and placed on the online public registry. It's public, Mr. Chair. It's public. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Now it's public and it's terrible. When will the foreign affairs minister be here to answer these questions himself? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, it's always been public. We're in the middle of a pandemic here, trying to help Canadians, and the best they can do is ask questions about The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: When the minister owes over a million dollars to the Chinese government, people have a right to ask him questions. When will the Minister of Foreign Affairs show up? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: The minister shows up every day, Mr. Chair. He shows up and works for Canadians. Once again, those are public documents. Everything the minister did is public. I still don't know why they ask The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, he doesn't even have to come to the House. All he has to do is appear on the screen. Where is the minister? Why is he hiding? Why won't he answer questions about his personal debt to the Chinese government? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, if he goes online he's going to get the information. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, the minister is hiding. Let's ask some specific questions about their China policy. What is the impact on the decision-making? Three-quarters of Canadians don't want Huawei involved in our 5G network. Will the minister put the interests of Canadians ahead of the interests of his creditors and say no to Huawei? Hon. Navdeep Bains (Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry): Mr. Chair, when it comes to 5G deployment, we are right now currently undergoing a comprehensive review. We have been absolutely clear with allies and with Canadians that we never have and never will compromise Canadians'national interests. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, that is not an answer, and it is completely out of step with what our allies have already recognized. Reports are emerging of multiple deadly viruses exported from Winnipeg's microbiology laboratory to the Wuhan Institute of Virology right before scientists were expelled for policy breaches. In spite of that, scientific co-operation between Canadian institutions and the military-affiliated Wuhan Institute of Virology is continuing. Why hasn't the government put in place new guidelines to prevent the export of sensitive pathogens and information to China? Hon. Patty Hajdu (Minister of Health): Mr. Chair, he's right that in 2019 the National Microbiology Laboratory shared lab samples with the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The National Microbiology Laboratory routinely shares samples with other labs to help advance the international community's understanding of viruses and the research that is ongoing around those viruses. There are strict protocols in place for these transfers, and these samples were transported according to Canadian laws and regulations. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, I think Canadians would be concerned to hear that it's routine to transport viruses to Chinese military-affiliated labs. When Champagne was the parliamentary secretary for finance, the government decided to give hundreds of millions of dollars to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, bankrolling Chinese state-controlled development projects in Asia with weak standards in labour, human rights and environment. Will the minister put Canadian taxpayers ahead of his personal creditors and support a pullout from the Communist Party-controlled development bank? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Once again, Mr. Chair, my colleague is trying to connect the dots, and I don't know exactly where he is going from here, but everything is public. There's a thing called Google. He can go on it and check the information. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, the public can listen to this. I'm sure this exchange will also be available on Google, and the public can draw their own conclusions. We have failures on 5G, failures when it comes to the transport of deadly viruses and failures when it comes to giving over $400 million to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. It's clear that the Bank of China's investment in Minister Champagne is paying off. It's time for the minister to settle his debt with the Communist government and not settle it on the backs of Canadians. When will the minister be here in the House and answer questions about this mortgage? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: My colleague should be cautious with what he is saying in the House, Mr. Chair. This is serious stuff. He should be careful about what he says. The minister is actually working extremely hard for all Canadians and is doing his job correctly, Mr. Chair. We're talking about public information. Once again, let him go to Google and google it. That's it. The Chair: Now we'll go to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett: Canada's ambassador to the United Nations sent a letter last week to all member states of the UN promising that Canada would consider providing more funding for UNRRA, the same UNRRA that is a front for Hamas, which allows weapons of terror to be stored in schools and provides textbooks that call for the destruction of Israel. Do these Liberals have no shame when it comes to their quest for a seat on the UN Security Council? Hon. Mary Ng (Minister of Small Business, Export Promotion and International Trade): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to thank the honourable member for that question. We know that at this time Canada must show leadership in the face of global challenges. More than ever, Canada is playing a positive role by being a champion in diversity and inclusion, supporting the global fight against COVID-19, addressing climate change, leading peace and security efforts and helping the most vulnerable. A seat on the Security Council will allow Canada to be a strong voice for a fairer, more inclusive and prosperous The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett: Mr. Chair, I received a letter from Bob Anderson this week, who's advocating for his neighbours like Jean Grevelding, who owns a cottage at Butternut Bay. Like many people, Jean is an American who owns a property on our side of the border. These people are taxpaying members of our communities. These folks have plans in place to follow all Canadian quarantine rules. They're concerned about leaving their properties uncared for over the summer. Will folks like Jean be allowed to cross the border to check on their properties this summer? Hon. Bill Blair (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Of course, our priority is and always has been and always must be the protection of the health and safety of Canadians. That's why we put in place these restrictions for non-essential travel and have required, through the Public Health Agency of Canada, a 14-day quarantine. I don't know the specifics of the person for whom you advocate, but we want to make sure that if they come into Canada, it is for an essential purpose and that they do it safely and respect the quarantine that has been put in place. Mr. Michael Barrett: With nine branches throughout my riding, the Royal Canadian Legion offers a great deal to veterans and rural communities alike. They have been experiencing hardship and a loss of revenue, to the point where they may be forced to shut their doors. The Zone G2 commander and local mayors such as Roger Haley have reached out to me expressing their dire need. Will the government offer support to Legions across the country so they can continue to carry out their vital work for our veterans? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (Minister of Veterans Affairs): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Yes, we have done a lot to help support groups like the Legions. There is a $350-million emergency community support fund. If they're supplying any help to people regarding COVID, this fund is there. Indeed, we're doing everything we can to make sure that we help the Legions and other groups that do so much to help veterans right across the country. Mr. Michael Barrett: On May 21, the minister stated that her team was working as quickly as it could to fill the gaps in CEBA. It has now been three weeks, and many business owners, such as mortgage broker Corinna Smith-Gatcke, are still left in the lurch amid the delays, which are pushing businesses closer to shutting their doors for good. Will these businesses have access to CEBA before it's too late for them? Hon. Mary Ng: Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I thank the honourable member for that really important question on our Canadian small businesses. Those businesses can absolutely have access to the loan at their financial institution this Friday, and I would encourage them to go and see their bank or credit union. I want businesses to know that nothing is more important for us than making sure they get the support they need during this difficult time. Mr. Michael Barrett: The County Road 43 expansion project is critical for my riding and the region as a whole. This project will widen the road, increasing safety for the 18,000 motorists who travel the road every day. It's been 334 days since the provincial and local governments announced funding, but there has been nothing from this Liberal government. It's been 181 days since Minister McKenna told me her staff were reviewing the project. Today, there is still nothing, and for the last month the minister's team has not even found the time to respond to my request for an update. Will Minister McKenna finally stop with the delays and commit to funding this project today? Hon. Catherine McKenna (Minister of Infrastructure and Communities): Mr. Chair, as the member opposite knows, we work with provinces and territories to advance our infrastructure investments. We're making investments across the country. They are making a real difference in people's lives. We're always happy to work with members of Parliament, but they must also work with provinces and territories so that projects are advanced by them to our office. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall (YorktonMelville, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Through you, has Mr. MacAulay read ombudsman Dalton's May 2020 report, Financial Compensation for Canadian Veterans: A comparative analysis of benefit regimes? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I apologize, but I'll have to ask my honourable colleague to repeat the question. The Chair: Mrs. Wagantall, we'll freeze the time so that there's no extra time taken. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Thank you, Chair. My question was whether Mr. MacAulay has read ombudsman Dalton's May 2020 report, Financial Compensation for Canadian Veterans: A comparative analysis of benefit regimes. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I appreciate my honourable colleague's question. Of course, I appreciate Mr. Dalton's input and all that he has done for veterans. We've discussed it many times. I've done everything and worked with him in order to make sure that we bring the proper compensation to veterans The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: As a result of that study, are the financial outcomes Canada seeks to provide for ill and injured veterans now clearly defined within the Department of Veterans Affairs? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, as the member would know, I am to bring a report to the veterans affairs committee, and there are a number of things done in order to make sure that report is The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Then I would suggest that we get our committee up and going as it should be. Where are these financial directions published? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Well, of course, lockdown, but just under $90 million that the government put in supplementary estimates to make sure we address the backlog for Veterans Affairs. It's a major help The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Minister, are Canadian Armed Forces members provided with a copy of this document? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, my honourable colleague would have to ask the Canadian Armed Forces that question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: There are three different providing lifetime benefits for ill and injured veterans. In Ombudsman Dalton's recent report, did any one of these three provide the best compensation in all nine scenarios that were studied? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Of course, as she knows, there's been a lot of work done in order to make sure that we provide the proper compensation to veterans. We're working very hard, with a lot of help from Mr. Dalton, to make sure that the appropriate The Chair: We'll now continue with Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: In the undisclosed settlement of Sean Bruyea's legal case against Seamus O'Regan and the Liberal government, a joint statement says. . . Canadians, especially all Veterans and their families, are encouraged to enter the public debate about policies and programs that affect our Veterans and their families. Does Mr. MacAulay agree with this statement? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I can assure you that anybody is welcome to enter any discussion on compensation of veterans. We're always open to what we can do in order to make sure that we provide appropriate compensation. I don't think the term would be appropriate, but it would provide some compensation to veterans who truly deserve it. They defend our democracy The Chair: We'll go back to Ms. Wagantall. Oh, I'm sorry Ms. Andranne Larouche: Mr. Chair, I have a point of order. The interpretation hasn't worked for a few interventions. It's difficult to follow the exchange between the hon. member and the minister. The Chair: We're having a problem with the interpretation. Minister and Ms. Wagantall, you are joining us virtually. I'm wondering if you have the right language on at the bottom of your screen. We'll start with that for troubleshooting. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: I have English. The Chair: Very good. Minister MacAulay, what do you have? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I have English, Mr. Chair. The Chair: Very good. Then we'll check on our side. Ms. Larouche, did I understand correctly that the interpretation didn't work for both speakers? Ms. Andranne Larouche: The sound didn't allow the interpreters to do their job. It seemed to be a problem with the sound. The Chair: In that case, I would ask both members to maybe put their mike a little bit close to their mouth. We'll see how that works. I'm looking at the screen, and I notice the mike is a little bit far. Could we bend it in a little bit more? I appreciate that. Thank you for your patience. We'll give it another try. Ms. Wagantall, please go ahead. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: On a point of order, quite often while I'm trying to speak, there are lots of other voices in the background. The Chair: I would ask everyone to please be on mute, as well as for anyone in the chamber to please refrain from speaking loudly. Just whisper among yourselves if you have something to say. We'll take this one from the top. We have a minute and 45 seconds left. Ms. Wagantall, please proceed with your next question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: You said next question, so we're not going backwards, Chair? The Chair: Did we have an answer from Minister MacAulay? No? We'll go to Minister MacAulay to finish up the answer. We'll start at 27 seconds, freeze the clock and hear his answer. Then, because of all of the confusion, we'll start at one minute and 45 seconds when we get going again. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Should I repeat the question, sir? The Chair: Please do. The clock is frozen. After we go through the question and the answer, we'll start the clock again. Mr. Wagantall, please repeat the question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Thank you, Chair. In the undisclosed settlement to Sean Bruyea's legal case against Seamus O'Regan and the Liberal government, a joint statement says, Canadians, especially all Veterans and their families, are encouraged to enter the public debate about policies and programs that affect our Veterans and their families. Does Mr. MacAulay agree with this statement? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I appreciate my honourable colleague's question and concern. Of course I agree. Anybody is quite open to indicate whatever they wish in order to make sure we provide as appropriate a compensation as possible. You can never totally compensate veterans truly for what they deserve, but we want to make sure we provide the best compensation possible. That's what we will do and want to do. The Chair: Ms. Wagantall, we will start the clock again. You have one minute and 45 seconds remaining. Please proceed. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: If that's the case, is Minister MacAulay aware of the practice of red-flagging veterans'files? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I'm not aware. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Since the deputy minister has indicated that he runs the department, will the minister ask him for the names of veterans and the dates and the reasons that they are, or have been, red-flagged by VAC? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I would certainly ask any veteran or anybody who has a concern to contact my office. I will do anything I can to make sure that the veterans The Chair: We'll go back to Ms. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Do the most ill and injured still receive from the pension up to $300,000 less for life? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, as you know and as the Prime Minister indicated when the pension for life was put in place, it was stated that if anybody receives lessthe Prime Minister himself indicated it quite clearlythat must be adjusted. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: For veterans in similar circumstances, should the date of their application for compensation be a factor in determining whether they're treated equitably? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Yes, of course, the date is when the compensation would start. Of course, it's very important and very appropriate. The Chair: Now we will proceed to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd (Sturgeon RiverParkland, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Retired Major Mark Campbell in my riding of Sturgeon RiverParkland lost both legs in the line of duty in Afghanistan. He is an avid sport shooter, but understandably, due to his disability, he is very limited in the kinds of firearms he can use, and all of these firearms have now been banned under the Liberal OIC. My question to the Minister of Public Safety is this: Did their department do a legal analysis and consider the section 15 charter rights of disabled Canadians not to be discriminated against when they passed their OIC? Hon. Bill Blair: Yes, there was a very thorough analysis done by the justice department to ensure that the prohibitions we put in place were, in fact, charter compliant. Let me also say, Mr. Chair, how important it was that we prohibited weapons that were not designed for sporting purposes at all. In fact, they were designed for soldiers to use in combat. They have no place in a civil society. We have prohibited them, and we believeand this has been echoed by many people across the countrythat this will make Canadians safer. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, is the minister aware that the AR-15 is the most popular sporting rifle in Canada, and is he aware that disabled veterans like Major Mark Campbell are unable to participate in the sport of sport shooting because of his OIC? Hon. Bill Blair: I can assure the member that what I am aware of is that the AR-15 and other weapons like them have been used in mass killings in Canada on many occasions, such as at cole Polytechnique, at Dawson College, again at the Quebec mosque and in Moncton. The AR-15s in particular were also used at the terrible tragedy in places like Sandy Hook, where a bunch of kids were killed, so there is no place for The Chair: We will go to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, it has been months since the Liberals shut down this Parliament and months since the Minister of Finance should have presented a budget or at least an economic update to Canadians. Since then we have seen billions spent with little oversight and no plan. The minister says that he needs certainty before he can table a budget. Well, that didn't stop Stephen Harper and the Conservatives from tabling a budget in the depth of the last great recession. When are these Liberals finally going to take their job seriously and table an economic update? Hon. Mona Fortier (Minister of Middle Class Prosperity and Associate Minister of Finance): Mr. Chair, we're taking this very seriously. We're working for Canadians and bringing forward supports to make sure that businesses, workers and Canadians can put food on the table and pay their rent. We will continue to support Canadians, and when we have a clear projection to present, we will do that. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, the results are in, and businesses aren't happy with the so-called support programs from these Liberals. In fact, the oil and gas industry has been shut out of many of these economic programs. When is the government going to recognize that their business support plans have been an absolute failure with only a fraction of the billions promised being accessible to businesses? Hon. Seamus O'Regan (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Chair, our government has taken swift and immediate action to support our sector throughout this challenging time. We had the BCAP, which is critically important to providing liquidity to support the SMEs that make up 85% of the jobs in our sector. It has taken an enormous team effort. People are working around the clock to get money where it needs to be. We are helping hard-working Canadians, small businesses and large businesses right across the country, but in particular in our energy sector. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, I'm pleased to see the Minister of Natural Resources online. He tweeted recently to praise the Alberta Carbon Trunk Line and the North West Redwater Partnership refinery in my riding. Can the minister tell us what, if any, support they have given to the innovative carbon capture and sequestration technology in this country? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Mr. Chair, we see carbon capture and sequestration as an integral part of lowering emissions, making emissions more competitive and making our oil and gas industry more competitive. We're seeing where the investment dollars are going. They are going to jurisdictions that are committed to lowering emissions. Obviously, this government is committing to net zero. Mr. Dane Lloyd: I note that the minister couldn't name a single example of government support for carbon capture, utilization and sequestration technology. We have spent a lot of time talking about the COVID-19 pandemic, but Canadians are living with another horrific reality, that being the intensifying opioid overdose epidemic. Reports indicate that in the past four years, 14,000 Canadians have died, and the numbers during COVID-19 have been skyrocketing, with British Columbia seeing a 39% increase this year alone. I know this because I've lost a family member to a fentanyl overdose. When is the government going to take this scourge seriously and take action to save the lives of Canadians? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Mr. Chair, I share the member's deep sadness about the number of lives we've lost to opioid overdose. Our government has been steadily making it easier for people who live with substance use to access medications to treat substance use, such as prescription Suboxone and methadone. We have made it easier to rapidly establish safe injection sites in communities and have supported community-based projects that work with people who are using substances. We need to understand that this is a complex issue, and we need to support people to get the help they need. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes (AlgomaManitoulinKapuskasing, NDP) ): The hon. member for Thrse-DeBlainville. Ms. Louise Chabot (Thrse-De Blainville, BQ): MadamChair, I will come back to the bill introduced last week. As parliamentarians, we felt like we were watching a very bad play, as I imagine the public did. I say that it was theatre, even though it shouldn't be in this place. The government decided to stage a play and act alone and, unfortunately, there were several acts missing. A very important part of this bill was about supporting people with disabilities in this time of crisis. However, the government did not see fit to negotiate with the opposition parties, even though it is in a minority position. Despite this arrogance, the Bloc Qubcois proposed solutions. One of the things we proposed was to split the bill so that we could give this support to people with disabilities, but the Conservatives did not want to do that. We came back and asked for time to negotiate and give support to people with disabilities, but the government defeated the motion. We asked that the House be recalled today so that we could pass this part of the bill concerning support for people with disabilities, but we are still in the dark. Why are we abandoning people with disabilities? Hon. Ahmed Hussen (Minister of Families, Children and Social Development): I thank the hon. member for her question. We know this pandemic has deeply affected the lives and health of all Canadians and has disproportionately affected Canadians with disabilities in particular. From the very beginning, we've taken a disability-inclusive approach to our emergency response to ensure that Canadians with disabilities get the support they need. That is why we announced a one-time payment of $600 for persons with disabilities to address these expenses. This will go a long way toward helping Canadians with disabilities. We encourage and urge all parties in the opposition to support this measure. We're confident that this measure, along with other investments, will benefit Canadians with disabilities, and we hope to get the support of the other parties very soon. Ms. Louise Chabot: MadamChair, I remind you that this measure wasn't passed because we weren't allowed to do so. A measure to help people with disabilities has been put in an omnibus bill. We've tried here, in the House, to provide the means to give that support, so I ask again, can the government be counted on to give a response to people with disabilities? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, it was absolutely not an omnibus bill. It contained assistance for the disabled, of course, but it also contained assistance for our seasonal workers, as well as a number of other measures that the Bloc Qubcois opposed. They refused to debate and, when the question of splitting the bill came up, the Conservatives refused to do that. That is why there is no bill at the moment, and that is very unfortunate. Ms. Louise Chabot: It was a Bloc Qubcois proposal to split the bill. The government had not thought of it, but they found that it was a good idea. Let me return to the attack. This bill proposed changes to the wage subsidy program, it was supposed to make the CERB more flexible, it proposed fines for fraudsters and, since there was a little section about a benefit for the disabled, the government took it for granted that we would support it without any negotiations with the parties. However, we set one very important condition: that the Liberal Party must get its hands out of taxpayers'pockets in terms of the wage subsidy. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, as we listen to the Bloc Qubcois members, we might think that they invented peanut butter and apple pie. This bill contained a number of measures that all Quebeckers and all Canadians needed, but the Bloc Qubcois refused to debate it. No, we did not follow the Bloc Qubcois'example in splitting the bill; we had thought of it a long time previously. We have not been able to do that because of the Conservatives. Because of them, we cannot help those living with disabilities. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Ms. Chabot, you have 45seconds left. Ms. Louise Chabot: We asked on a number of occasions for the House to be able to sit starting today to pass the part of the bill dealing with those with disabilities. What is the status of that, MadamChair? We have not heard about it since. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, my colleague knows very well that things are not as simple as that. There are procedural mechanisms unique to the House. I hope that, one day, we will be able to pass this bill and be able to provide assistance for those living with disabilities. I hope that the Conservatives will change their minds and give us their support. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Don Valley East, Ms. Ratansi. Ms. Yasmin Ratansi (Don Valley East, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be sharing my time with the member for Surrey Centre. Since 2015 our government has been focused on ensuring its policies mitigate the effects of climate change. Several measures have been implemented for phasing out coal, making polluters pay, providing climate incentives, investing in green technologies and much more, which all together have created a climate plan that is doing more to cut pollution than any other in Canada's history. In my riding of Don Valley East, many innovative businesses have benefited from these investments and initiatives. One area of particular interest is our government's work to protect 25% of Canada's land and 25% of its oceans by 2025. Our natural environment is something that Canadians and my constituents care about deeply. Could the minister update this House on the new conservation projects announced on June 5, World Environment Day, and on how our government is protecting our environment? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, protecting nature is an important part of how we will address climate change and the very real challenges it presents. That's why on June 5, World Environment Day, our government announced over 60 conservation projects under development across Canada. These projects are funded through the Canada Nature Fund's target 1 challenge initiative. They'll conserve Canadian nature and biodiversity and protect species at risk, enhance ecological integrity and connectivity, and enhance the size of Canada's vast network of protected areas. Nearly half of these projects are indigenous-led, with the aim of creating indigenous-protected conserved areas. Madam Chair, projects like these move us closer to our goal of protecting 25% of Canada's lands and oceans by 2025. By working together in partnership with the provinces, territories, municipalities, indigenous peoples and Canadians, together we can protect our natural environment for generations to come. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Ms. Ratansi, since you have 25 seconds left, we will go to the honourable member for Surrey Centre. Mr. Randeep Sarai (Surrey Centre, Lib.): Madam Chair, there are many small and medium-sized businesses in my riding of Surrey Centre. Many have been impacted by COVID-19. They saw a decrease in business or needed to close their doors completely in order to adhere to public safety measures to manage the spread of COVID-19. These measures helped keep our most vulnerable citizens safe and ensured that our hospital and health care providers did not become overwhelmed with a sharp spike in cases. Thanks to our government's COVID-19 emergency response, many of these businesses have been able to keep their employees and access important liquidity through the Canada emergency business account, which provides loans to small businesses and non-profits, and the Canada emergency wage subsidy, which is helping businesses to keep and rehire their employees while their revenues are down by providing up to 75% of wages for up to 24 weeks. As we begin to reopen the economy and Canadians across the country return to the job market, those benefits will be even more important to help businesses and industries rehire their staff and make important adjustments to align with public health guidelines to gradually increase their operations. Can the minister please update the committee on how many Canadian businesses have taken advantage of CEBA and CEWS since applications for each have been opened? Hon. Mary Ng: Madam Chair, I want to begin by thanking the member for Surrey Centre for all the work he does to support his constituents and small businesses. Canadians across the country need to know our government has been working tirelessly and will continue to work tirelessly on their behalf. This is why we put in place the important programs to help them get through this crisis during this difficult time, programs such as the wage subsidy program. We know that in so many businesses the employees are often like extended family members. The wage subsidy has helped these businesses keep their employees on the payroll and are now helping in their rehiring as they slowly and safely restart. There are 348,000 businesses being helped with the wage subsidy program, and this means that 2. 6 million workers are being helped. Businesses are also being helped through the interest-free $40,000 loan they can access through CEBA to help stay afloat and pay their expenses during this crisis. I'm pleased to inform this House that to date more than 669,000 The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for St. John's East. Mr. Jack Harris: Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with my colleague, the member for LondonFanshawe. Madam Chair, with so many recent reports and videos of police using force, sometimes deadly force, and violence against indigenous and black people in Canada, I've called for the public safety committee to reconvene. If the members agree, will the minister come to the committee and provide concrete answers as to how the government intends to address racism inherent in Canada's law enforcement, and in particular the RCMP? Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I thank my colleague for the question. It's perhaps the most important one facing Canada today. Madam Chair, indigenous people, black Canadians and other racialized people are far too often experiencing systemic racism and disparate outcomes within the entire criminal justice system. In order to respond appropriately, I think it's necessary to begin by acknowledging the lived experience of people who've known bias and discrimination at the hands of the police and our courts and within our prisons. We remain committed to working with all racialized people and all of the members of this House to ensure that we work toward social justice for all Canadians, and I look forward to discussing the member's motion further with him. Mr. Jack Harris: Will the minister and the government commit to facilitating such a meeting of this committee virtually? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, the decisions of the committee are the committee's, so I'm sure that this will be a discussion within the committee, but if called, I will certainly be pleased to come with my officials to provide the committee with whatever support and information it needs to contribute to this very important discussion. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Harris, you have 40 seconds. Mr. Jack Harris: In light of what we've seen with Chief Adam in Fort McMurray and the RCMP accepting that the actions were reasonable, will the minister commit to a full review of the use of force by the RCMP, in particular the philosophy, tactics and training that is given to RCMP officers in dealing with the public? Hon. Bill Blair: I thank the member and I want to assure him, first of all, that this is work that is ongoing, not just in the RCMP but throughout the police community. May I also take this opportunity, Madam Chair, to say that I think all police training has to begin with one very important principle, and that's the preservation of all life and the respect for all Canadians. We also know the importance of de-escalation training. We're committed to continuing to work with indigenous communities, racialized communities and with police services and all participants in the criminal justice system to make sure that it is fair for all Canadians. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for LondonFanshawe, Ms. Mathyssen. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen (LondonFanshawe, NDP): Madam Chair, we need more justice for black, indigenous and racialized people in Canada. They can't be asked to keep waiting. This government recognizes that systemic racism exists but refuses to collect race-based data that would allow us to quantify and truly address this injustice. We need data to protect Canadians. When will this government do the right thing and start collecting race-based data? Hon. Bardish Chagger (Minister of Diversity and Inclusion and Youth): Madam Chair, our government agrees that it's important that we collect data, and that's exactly why, in the anti-racism secretariat and the anti-racism strategy, there is a commitment to have money go to Statistics Canada to collect race-based data. We look forward to working with all members to ensure it happens. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen: Madam Chair, we know that Statistics Canada will start to collect job numbers based on race. This will allow us to identify systemic racism where it is and where we need to ensure a fair and more equal job market for black, indigenous and racialized people in Canada. Why is this government refusing to follow suit so we can tackle systemic racism everywhere, in every sector? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I'd like to thank my honourable colleague for her question. She's absolutely correct in her assessment that we need to collect more data, reliable data, data that will help us deal with some of the challenges we're seeing with systemic discrimination, but, more broadly, we want to make sure that we continue to engage with an anti-racism strategy that will allow us to collect that disaggregated data. That is why we allocated $6. 2 million to that initiative through Statistics Canada, but we know we must do more and we will do more. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen: We know that all people are susceptible to catching COVID-19, but health authorities are clear that parts of cities like Montreal and Toronto have been more impacted than others. For black and racialized people living in these cities, this data is a matter of life and death. Will the government collect and share disaggregated data so we can identify and erase systemic racism, yes or no? Hon. Bardish Chagger: Madam Chair, making decisions based on science and evidence is essential for our government. We took that practice from day one. It is exactly the step we will take moving forward and that's why we are making those investments to ensure that data exists. We are working across all departments. My mandate letter is public. I look forward to continuing to work not only with all ministers, departments and agencies, but all allies and all parties to get this work done. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Blaney, the honourable member for BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, has the floor. Hon. Steven Blaney (BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, CPC): Thank you, MadamChair. Last week, my plumber told me that, each time Justin Trudeau comes down the steps to make announcements totalling several billion dollars, he feels like someone is rifling through his pockets. My question is simple and goes to the Minister of Finance: where is this money coming from? Hon. Mona Fortier: MadamChair, I would like to thank my honourable colleague for his question. Currently, the health and safety of Canadians are our top priorities. We have implemented an emergency economic plan to support Canadians, workers and companies. We will continue to support them during this crisis. Hon. Steven Blaney: The answer I would have liked is simple: we are borrowing the money and we are going to have to pay it back one day. That is another Liberal craze: they borrow money, they make campaign promises, and off they go. Under the Conservative government, the Chantier Davie in Lvis had 1,700workers for the supply ship Asterix. In the election campaign, the Liberals promised icebreakers. When are the Liberals going to award the icebreaker contracts to the Chantier Davie? Hon. David Lametti (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada): MadamChair, we are very proud of the Chantier Davie and we completely understand its role in the system. We are currently assessing those requests. We are going to establish the process for the polar ice-breaker, which is essential for the work of the Coast Guard in northern communities, and we are going to make sure that The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Blaney has the floor. Hon. Steven Blaney: The workers do not need words; they need contracts and jobs. The same is true for young people who want to work. There is money in the Canada summer jobs program: in my constituency alone, $150,000has been approved. Companies want young people to work and want to hire them. What is the minister waiting for in order to confirm those positions? In my constituency, and everywhere else in the country, our young people want to work. What is the government waiting for in order to send some cash to the Canada summer jobs program? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we are proud of the Canada summer jobs program. We are introducing flexibilities into the system to enable employers to be able to hire summer students. We recognize the importance of this program to provide both financial resources and necessary experience for young people. We believe in continuing to invest in the Canada summer jobs program. Hon. Steven Blaney: The workers, the young people and the employers have been waiting for weeks. The money is available; where is the announcement? MadamChair, our young people are not the only ones who want to work. There are also the temporary foreign workers. Let me use Jessie Gito as an example; he has been working at Plate2000 in Saint-Anselme for years. When the time came to renew his work permit, he found out that he has to have some biometric tests. But he cannot get them because the offices are closed. Is the minister going to allow Jessie Gito and the thousands of other temporary foreign workers who want to work to be able to do so until the government biometric testing centres reopen? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, it is important for the honourable member to recognize that we are in the early recovery stage of the pandemic. Employers are slowly reopening businesses. We will ensure that we support both our students and our temporary foreign workers to make sure we get the recovery right. We will continue to invest in the Canada summer jobs program. We've introduced flexibilities into the program to ensure that employers are able to take advantage of the program and give opportunities to young people. Hon. Steven Blaney: It is very simple. Jessie Gito is a foreign worker, who is in a company that provides an essential service. He needs a decision that will let him go to work, rather than staying home and doing nothing. Then, when the government's biometric testing centres are open again, he will gladly go to one. Young people want to work in agriculture as well, and the minister has told us that the government wants young people working and that their files will be processed as quickly as possible. She wants to create 700positions and she knows that people can fill in an application on a first-come first-served basis. Of those 700positions, how many have been confirmed to date? The good weather has arrived, the corn is starting to grow, and this is the time when farmers need the young workers. Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food): MadamChair, the program for young workers in agriculture is open. I also encourage agricultural producers to register for it. This is a program that is not only intended to provide summer jobs, but also to interest young people in making a career in agriculture. As I have said before, the department is processing files as quickly as possible. Each employer will have an answer very shortly. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will now take a short break. Okay, we are ready to start again. We will go to the honourable member for BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte. Mr. Doug Shipley (BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Over the course of the pandemic, has the government been using all avenues possible to source much-needed PPE in Canada? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, we have been very clear that we have a made-in-Canada initiative that has engaged companies across the country. Over 700 companies have retooled and scaled up their operations for personal protective equipment to help front-line health care workers. Mr. Doug Shipley: Madam Chair, I need to ask very quickly which ministry and minister are responsible for the sourcing of PPE in Canada. Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, this is a collective effort. I work with the Minister of Health and the minister for procurement, and we coordinate with the provinces and territories to make sure there are appropriate levels of PPE to help front-line health care workers and essential workers across the country. Mr. Doug Shipley: Thank you for that clarification. That will make this question all the more pertinent. My riding of BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte is the home of Southmedic Inc. Southmedic is a renowned medical supply business. For over 37 years, it has provided front-line health care workers with an extensive line of PPE and other essential products required when dealing with respiratory illnesses. This company specializes in respiratory illness equipment. Southmedic currently employs over 700 people, and it has been recognized as one of Canada's best-managed companies by Deloitte on numerous occasions. Since the beginning of the pandemic, both I and the member for BarrieInnisfil have been attempting to obtain some assistance for Southmedic from the federal government. Calls and emails were falling on deaf ears. In early May, I wrote a letter to Minister Anand outlining the situation. I received a letter back from the minister dated May 27 indicating that this issue of Southmedic falls under the mandate of the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada. I have heard nothing more. When will the federal government reach out and help this great Canadian company and therefore ensure that all front-line workers will have the proper PPE they require? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I'd like to thank my honourable colleague for his question. He knows full well that this is a very challenging time. That is why we had a call to action to engage Canadians right across the country. Since then, we've seen over 6,000 companies step up to offer solutions and ideas, and over 700 companies have retooled their efforts. I acknowledge that some companies are still engaging with the government, and we'll continue to explore all possible options to make sure we continue to procure the necessary levels of personal protective equipment to protect Canadians and to protect front-line health care workers. That has always been our priority. I want to thank the outstanding Canadian companies that have come forward and have helped us in this endeavour. We continue to look forward to working with them. Mr. Doug Shipley: Thank you for that answer. Just to follow up, there's no retooling required at this company. They could have been up and going very quickly. They just needed a little assistance at the beginning. Moving on to a different issue, while walking to my office this morning, I stopped at my local small family-run coffee shop and was discussing the current economic situation with the two owners of the establishment. They indicated they are having a very tough time surviving this economic downturn. The only thing keeping them hopeful is that soon the public service will start returning to work, and therefore their business will begin to return. Could the government please give us some indication as to what the plans are for returning the civil service back to work safely, and when? Hon. Jean-Yves Duclos (President of the Treasury Board): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm delighted to answer this question. This is a very important topic, but I'd like to take the opportunity first to thank our public servants, who have worked very hard in the last few weeks, both personally and professionally. In fact, today is a wonderful day to say that, because today is the start of National Public Service Week. That's one more reason to thank them for their dedicated work. They are not going to go back to work. They've been at work for the last few monthsin different circumstances, but they have been working very hard to deliver the services and the support Canadians need and deserve. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Next we'll go to the honourable member for SelkirkInterlakeEastman, Mr. Bezan. Mr. James Bezan (SelkirkInterlakeEastman, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. My questions are for the Minister of National Defence. First of all, I want to thank the great men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces for the fantastic job they're doing in Operation LASER, serving on the front lines battling COVID-19. Can the Minister of National Defence give the House an update on exactly where we are at with the number of Canadian Armed Forces members who have been infected with COVID-19? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan (Minister of National Defence): Madam Chair, I want to echo the member opposite's comments in thanking our Canadian Armed Forces members. Currently, we have 13 active cases in the Canadian Armed Forces, but in the long-term care facilities we currently have 50 cases. No member has been currently hospitalized. We have also conducted very thorough reviews of our protection protocols as well. Mr. James Bezan: Through you, Chair, Minister Sajjan, does that number of active cases include the active cases that are in long-term care facilities right now in Operation LASER? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, as I stated, the 50 cases are strictly from the long-term care facilities. The 13 cases I mentioned are not in the long-term care facilities. Just to give the actual clarification, no member has been currently hospitalized. Mr. James Bezan: In those numbers, Madam Chair, can Mr. Sajjan say how many of those cases in long-term care facilities are active and how many are recovered? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, I don't have the exact number. What I can say to break it down further is that in Quebec we currently have 36 and in Ontario we have 14. As well, 36 of the members have been out of isolation. I'll get more details and pass them on directly to the member, Madam Chair. Mr. James Bezan: Thank you, Minister. Madam Chair, I have a quick question while we're still talking about Operation LASER. The President of the Treasury Board has said, The Canadian Armed Forces will be present as long as their presence is needed in Quebec. This contradicts what Prime Minister Trudeau is saying, which is that we have a hard deadline of June 26 for the withdrawal of our troops for Operation LASER. That means taking our troops out of our long-term care facilities. Minister, is June 26 the hard date for the winding down of Operation LASER? Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I'm delighted to have the opportunity to clarify for the House. We've been in very extensive discussions with the Province of Quebec, with my counterpart Minister Guilbault, and we are working very diligently to ensure we have a sustained, appropriate response to the request from Quebec for assistance. That response will result in a transition from the currently deployed Canadian Armed Forces to the deployment of paid volunteers, trained personnel who will take on the important role of providing services to those Canadians who need our help in Quebec. Mr. James Bezan: I'll go back to the Minister of National Defence. The Department of National Defence auditors have called out the Liberal government for mismanagement over the $553-billion investment in our Canadian military through the defence policy. Only three people have been assigned to oversee the rollout of this money. This is a $553-billion investment in our armed forces, and only three people are managing it. Could the minister tell us how that is even possible? Is this the reason that over 100 projects are currently behind schedule? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, first of all, I want to highlight the unprecedented investment that we're making in defence. We have conducted internal reviews of our procurement. The report the member opposite is talking about is from the previous year. This is the ongoing work we're doing to make sure that we make procurement better. When it comes to the management of this, it's conducted by me and the minister of procurement. We are working toward making our procurement even better. We have already streamlined some aspects of our procurement and we'll continue to do more as well. Mr. James Bezan: Minister Sajjan, you've had this report since November of 2019. You've been rolling out this plan since 2017. Only three people are overseeing an expenditure of $553 billion. This is taxpayers'money. Are we going to see more cuts because you have been unable to actually roll out these dollars? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, I can assure you we're not going to be cutting. We'll be investing in our defence. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Before I go to the next speaker, I want to remind members that they are to address their questions and comments directly through the chair. We will go now to the honourable member for Fort McMurrayCold Lake, Mr. Yurdiga. Mr. David Yurdiga (Fort McMurrayCold Lake, CPC): Madam Chair, the Canada summer jobs program has many challenges. I've seen many indigenous communities in my riding rejected for funding even though they had received funding in previous years. Here are a few examples of communities that were rejected: Beaver Lake Cree Nation, Buffalo Lake Mtis Settlement and the Mtis Nation of Alberta, Region 1. The list goes on. Could the Prime Minister explain why so many indigenous communities have been denied funding from the Canada summer jobs program? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we recognize the important role that the Canada summer jobs program plays in supporting employers and young workers in our community across the country every year. We're working very hard to help employers adapt to the realities of the COVID-19 pandemic and are supporting young Canadians as they begin to look for summer employment. We are introducing increased flexibilities into the Canada summer jobs program to hire youth, while also providing more supports to employers that deliver essential services to Canadians. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, that didn't really answer my question. Why are so many indigenous communities left out of the Canada summer jobs program? This is very important to my community and to communities throughout the province. Will the government investigate why these communities were rejected? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that we, of course, value the important role that the Canada summer jobs program plays in all communities, including indigenous communities in Canada. I will certainly have an off-line conversation with the honourable member, if he so wishes, about a particular issue, but I can assure him that in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, we have had to assist employers to introduce flexibilities The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Yurdiga. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, in my riding, the City of Cold Lake has been in dispute with the federal government for many years over payment in lieu of taxes. My office has sent many letters over the years regarding the PILT dispute. Could the Minister of Public Services and Procurement give me a rough estimate of when I will receive a response from the minister's office to my first letter, from 2017, and my letters from 2018,2019 and 2020? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that I will go to the minister, and we will come back with an answer to his question. Mr. David Yurdiga: How much longer does the minister intend to perpetuate the ongoing PILT dispute, which is in excess of $11 million, with the City of Cold Lake? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, once again, I can assure the honourable member that I will speak with the minister and get an answer to his question. Mr. David Yurdiga: Well, do you know what? I've been writing letters to the department for many years. When you say you're going to get back to me, I really have a hard time believing that. Will the minister agree to follow the prior recommendations of the dispute advisory panel that were accepted by the minister? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that I will check with the minister and that she will return to the member in due course. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, the drug Trikafta has been proven to increase the quality of life for 90% of cystic fibrosis patients. Two weeks ago, my office sent a letter to the Minister of Health about the boy in my riding named Cael, who through the special access program is able to get Trikafta in Canada. I requested that the minister use her powers to fast-track Trikafta for commercial use, but I have yet to receive a response back. When will the minister make a decision on Trikafta? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, I'm glad to hear that Cael was able to access Trikafta through the special access program. In fact, that program is very helpful for people who are seeking access to medication that's not currently marketed in Canada. As the member opposite knows, Vertex has not applied to market Trikafta in Canada, but we look forward to their application, and I encourage him to write a letter to the manufacturer to also encourage them. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Vancouver Granville, Ms. Wilson-Raybould. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould (Vancouver Granville, Ind.): Thank you, Chair. I was very troubled to hear that a CBC radio host in the Yukon felt compelled to resign because, as an indigenous person, she could not speak her truth. While we know the Broadcasting Act states that the Canadian broadcasting system should reflect the linguistic duality and multicultural and multiracial nature of Canadian society and the special place of indigenous peoples, it would seem there are some challenges. Therefore, does the Minister of Heritage share the concern of some journalists that problems of systemic racism in Canada are still existing within the institution of the CBC, and will the government now acknowledge the need to recognize the jurisdiction of indigenous governments? Hon. Steven Guilbeault (Minister of Canadian Heritage): Thank you, Madame Chair; and I thank the member for this important question. As stated by the Prime Minister on numerous occasions, our government recognizes that systemic racism exists in Canada, and we have made a commitment to do everything we can to combat it in whichever organization of the Canadian government. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould: Thank you. When I was in the government, and as a minister, I learned the term red meat issues. I understand these issues to be ones that challenge societal norms, that are not politically expedient to address because they can lose you votes, even though addressing them is morally right and a smart thing to do. Mostly these are issues addressing inequality and the most marginalized in our society. In the justice system, examples include mandatory minimum penalties, defunding police, and even investing in restorative justice. Red-meat issues often become defining issues for society and for governments as the world changes. Surely now these issues are politically less of a consideration than the tragic reality of even more slain indigenous Canadians at the hands of police, or thousands of indigenous people still incarcerated or living in poverty. Will this government please finally commit to the necessary work originally promised in 2015 and repeal in the justice system the vast majority of mandatory minimum penalties, assuring the necessary discretion for judges, and meaningfully invest in restorative justice measures? Hon. David Lametti: Madame Chair, I thank the honourable member for her question, as well as for her work as Minister of Justice, and indeed my predecessor. This is an important time. This is a time when we recognize systemic racism. This is a time when we recognize systemic over-incarceration of indigenous peoples, of black peoples, in our criminal justice system. This is a time when we need to look at all potential options to reduce what is a shameful overrepresentation in our criminal justice system. Too often racialized peoples and indigenous peoples have experienced prejudice and systemic discrimination in our justice system, and that has to change. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould: I'll go on to another red meat issue. In British Columbia we are in the fifth year of the opioid overdose public health emergency crisis. Sadly, May marks the deadliest month of overdose-related deaths. We are halfway into the year and have currently passed 500 deaths caused by overdose. Many of the deaths are related to COVID-19 measures that have prevented people from accessing supervised consumption sites, so they are overdosing alone. While the provinces welcomed the federal backing of safe supply exemption back in March, it is to expire in September of 2020. Echoing the call of the chief coroner of B. C. and Dr. Henry, more is needed from the federal government, more action. Will the government provide the necessary supports to the province and help support safe supply initiatives in the provinces? Hon. Patty Hajdu: It's been a pleasure to work with the Province of British Columbia on innovative ways to work on the tragic situation of opioid overdose. I remain committed to working with the province and in fact any province that wants to work towards solutions that treat people who use substances with the dignity they deserve. Madam Chair, this is a complex issue. We're working closely with our partners to make sure that we can prevent more lives from being lost. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for South OkanaganWest Kootenay, Mr. Cannings. Mr. Richard Cannings (South OkanaganWest Kootenay, NDP): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with the member for SkeenaBulkley Valley. In my riding, Theo's in Penticton is a beloved restaurant. They've been serving great food for 40 years, but now they're struggling, because they don't qualify for the emergency wage subsidy. Why is that? The original owners retired last year and sold it to another operator. The new owner can't use a year-to-year comparison to apply for the wage subsidy because he didn't own the restaurant last spring. He is forced to use receipts from January and February, the darkest doldrums of the restaurant year, to compare with the results from May, traditionally one of their best months. Now he has to compete with other local restaurants that can access the subsidy. When will the government fix this inequity and let Theo's compete and survive? Hon. Mona Fortier: Madam Chair, the Canada emergency wage subsidy is supporting over 2. 5 million workers across the country. To help even more businesses support their workers and rehire people as they reopen, our government is extending the CEWS, and we will continue to extend the CEWS for an additional 12 weeks to August 29 to ensure that Canadian workers continue to have the support they need during these very difficult times. By extending eligibility, our government is ensuring that more Canadian workers in more sectors have the support they need. Mr. Richard Cannings: The owner just wants to be able to apply for the wage subsidy, and right now he cannot, and he will not be able to. Thousands of other businesses are hit that way as well. I'd like to move on to forestry. Canada's forest sector has been declared essential during this pandemic, but it's been hit hard after a very difficult 2019. Despite soft markets and thousands out of work, government support programs have left many Canadian forest product companies behind. In my riding, the pulp mill in Castlegar is closing for the month of July because local sawmills aren't producing enough wood chips. What is the government going to do to finally support Canadian forestry workers and communities? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The time is almost up, but I will allow for the answer from the honourable minister. Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Thank you, Madam Chair. We have supported and we will continue to support the forestry sector, including through regional development programs. In fact, in Quebec, partnering with Les Bois Francs DV Inc. , we have widened market access to our products and updated technology systems. In North Bay we've partnered with the Canadian Wood Council to promote the sector. In Vancouver we're working with FPInnovations to create the indigenous forest sector technical support program. We are supporting the forestry sector and its different needs region by region. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Now we go to the honourable member for SkeenaBulkley Valley, Mr. Bachrach. Mr. Taylor Bachrach (SkeenaBulkley Valley, NDP): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm going to pick up where my colleague left off, with B. C.'s forest industry. What we've seen in B. C. are multiple rounds of mill shutdowns and start-ups, and in some cases this has made it difficult for forestry workers to qualify for EI. My question to the minister is this: Will the minister work to make the EI program more flexible for forestry workers, similar to what this government has done for oil and gas workers? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, in the oil and gas sector we have focused on workers. That has been key in the inactive and orphan well program, which we are working on with the provincial governments of Saskatchewan, British Columbia and Alberta. The focus on workers has assured that success, and we will continue to focus on workers in all the industries, particularly our natural resource industry, as they go through this extraordinarily difficult time. Mr. Taylor Bachrach: Madam Chair, reforestation is a very important part of the forest industry in the riding I represent, and people were keenly interested to hear this government's plan to plant two billion trees in the next 10 years. That's a lot of trees. I'm wondering if the minister could tell us how many trees are going to be planted under this program by the end of this season. Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, this government is committed to two billion trees. We are working with forestry associations, the industry and with individual companies to ensure this tree-planting season will be one of the largest the country has ever seen. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The floor goes to the honourable member for Rivire-du-Nord. Mr. Rhal Fortin (Rivire-du-Nord, BQ): MadamChair, last week, the government introduced BillC-17 and the Minister of Justice sent us briefing notes in which he said that it was important to suspend a number of time limits and to extend others, and that the failure to do so could have important repercussions on Canadians, their families, their situations, their finances and their ability to exercise their rights. We in the Bloc Qubcois agree with that. When are we going to talk about it? Hon. David Lametti: MadamChair, the contents of BillC-17 are clearly very important. We have addressed the mandatory time limits in federal legislation as well as certain time limits that courts may not be able to handle. It is very important that we address this issue. That is why the law The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Fortin, you have the floor. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, we agree that it is important. I concur. The minister's briefing notes say that, among other things, when it comes to divorcewhich means children are involved people are waiting on custody rights, child support and visitation rights. The minister pointed out that the national security review would require consultations if no decision is made in the prescribed time frame. It could pose a national security risk. It is really a big deal. When are we going to debate it? Hon. David Lametti: MadamChair, I completely agree with my honourable colleague. The issue needs to be addressed. That is why it is in the bill. That is another reason to debate the bill. I beseech my colleagues opposite to debate it with us. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, what a coincidence, because I beseech my colleague opposite to debate it with us. That is what we are asking. Last week, the leader of the Bloc Qubcois asked the Liberal government to debate BillC-17 today. He did not get an answer. It does not seem to matter. Richard Wagner, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, who is hardly a dimwit or greenhorn, told us that the justice system needs to be modernized. As recently as this past Saturday in LaPresse, Justice Wagner said that it is essential that the Criminal Code be amended to address the backlog of court proceedings. When will the Liberal government opposite pull up its socks, do its job, govern the federation, sit down with the opposition and discuss the vital matters in BillC-17? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, if I were my colleague, I would be a little embarrassed, because the bill was sent to the Bloc Qubcois several days in advance. They received a technical note several days in advance. We were all available to take questions. When we asked for the support of the Bloc Qubcois and the other parties to debate itwe were not even asking them to vote in favour of the billthey refused. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, we never refused to debate it. Actually, we were the ones who asked to debate it. What exactly does debate it mean? We set some conditions. For example, we asked the Liberals to put the money back into the wage subsidy fund and to commit to dip into it no longer. Are we asking too much of our colleagues opposite? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Can my colleague explain to me what the emergency wage subsidy has to do with a bill about justice? This is an absolutely fundamental piece of legislation. We wanted to debate it, but they refused to do so. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, I would like nothing better than to explain it to him, but I must remind him that he is the leader of the party in power, the party that is supposed to govern the country. So I do not know why he is asking me that. My party proposed that we debate this today but we did not get an answer. Meanwhile, court time limits are running out and people are losing rights. I am thinking of families, child support, child custody, labour law disputes in Federal Court, marine transportation, interprovincial transportation, aviation, banks, and those with grievances waiting for a Federal Court ruling. The whole system, the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal, everything is on hold because nobody in the government wants to do their job. We want to discuss BillC-17. When can we talk about it? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, we have done our job. We have introduced the bill. We informed them in advance. We told them they could ask us any questions they wanted. We asked for a debate in the House. However, when we asked the Bloc Qubcois if they wanted to debate the bill, they said no, instead of doing what they usually do and saying yes. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for Essex, Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis (Essex, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. When the CERB runs out, many workers in my riding of Essex will not have sufficient hours to collect their EI benefits. In early July, the midnight shift at Chrysler will be eliminated. Because of the shutdown, a mom-to-be who had just returned to work in January, and several hundred of her fellow employees, may not have the 600 hours required for regular or EI parental benefits. Immediate action is needed. What is the government doing now to backstop these workers? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, the Canada emergency response benefit has been providing much-needed help to Canadian workers across the country who have stopped working due to COVID-19. We know that there is still a lot of uncertainty for many Canadian workers, and we know that many will be exhausting their benefits in the weeks to come. We will have more to share soon, as early as this week, on our continuing efforts to support Canadian workers and make sure that help is available during this The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Go ahead, Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Minister, for the answer. The EI system needs to be fixed. Even before the shutdown, the system was deeply flawed. Will this government commit to a complete review and overhaul of the EI system? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we have been there for Canadian workers. We will continue to make sure that we make the necessary investments in the EI delivery system and modernize it to continue to meet The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. Small businesses have been hit extremely hard by the COVID-19 shutdown. Many have already been forced into bankruptcy. Much uncertainty lies ahead. As the economy reopens, what is the government doing to help small businesses recover? Hon. Mary Ng: Madam Chair, today we are seeing small businesses that have been helped, whether it is getting access to the small business loan, which some are also using in the restart as they are safely restarting, or getting help with their payroll, helping them keep their employees The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. Employees are key to a small business's success. How will the government incentivize workers to return to their jobs when recalled? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister can give a brief answer. Hon. Mary Ng: The Canada emergency wage subsidy is an excellent program to help those employees stay employed and for those employers who are looking at rehiring them right now during this restart process. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair, many of my constituents are in a committed cross-border relationship and have not been able to see their partners in quite some time. The current restrictions are arbitrary. Denmark has found a fair resolution. Will Canada adopt the Danish model, and if not, why not? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, as we said from the outset, we've implemented restrictions at the U. S. border on non-essential travel with a single purpose in mind: to protect the health and safety of Canadians. As the member is aware, just last week we introduced new measures that allow people in family relationships to stay together as long as they commit to the necessary 14-day period of quarantine. We'll continue to work with families. Our intention is to keep people together, but mostly to keep people safe. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair, with regard to child care, as our economy continues to open, parents are facing a stark choice: Who will care for their children? What's the plan to provide access to child care so parents can confidently return to work? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we are of course committed to continuing to make the record investments that we've been making in child care. Since 2015 we've created over 40,000 affordable child care spaces. We're committed to creating an additional 250,000 before-school and after-school child care spaces. We will continue to invest in this sector because we understand that without investment The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. It sounds as though this government has a desire to force parents to choose between their job and care for their child. Can the government please respond to that quote? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, nothing could be further from the truth. We are committed to the child care sector. Our investments and our results prove the opposite of what the member is asserting. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I'm sorry. We're out of time. The committee now stands adjourned until tomorrow at noon.

Hon. Ahmed Hussen appreciated the work of the summer jobs program which can provide both financial resources and necessary experience for young people. Thus the investment of the Canada summer jobs problem would be continued.

tr-sq-1219

tr-sq-1219_0

How did the Canadian government source much-needed PPE? The Chair (Hon. Anthony Rota (NipissingTimiskaming, Lib.) ): I call this meeting to order. Welcome to meeting number 22 of the House of Commons Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic. A reminder to all members that in order to avoid issues with sound, members participating in person should not also be connected to the video conference. For those joining via video conference, I would like to remind you that, when speaking, you should be on the same channel as the language you are speaking. As usual, please direct your remarks through the chair. I understand we don't have any ministerial announcements today, so we'll proceed to presenting petitions. I would like to remind members that any petition presented during a meeting of the special committee must have already been certified by the clerk of petitions. For members participating in person, we ask that they please come and drop the signed certificate off at the table once the petition is presented. The first petition will be presented by Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May (SaanichGulf Islands, GP): Mr. Chair, it's an honour to rise in meeting number 22 of the COVID-19 committee, otherwise known as something like the House of Commons. I'm here to present two petitions containing hundreds of signatures on the issue of the treatment of Falun Gong practitioners by the People's Republic of China, particularly the practice that's alleged of involuntary organ harvesting. The petitioners ask the Government of Canada to condemn this practice and to publicly call for an end to the persecution of Falun Gong in the People's Republic of China. The second petition is from residents throughout SaanichGulf Islands concerned about what was, at the time this petition was submitted, a future problem. It remains an issue, and I present it on behalf of petitioners who wish the Government of Canada not to put public funds into purchasing or maintaining the Trans Mountain pipeline or towards any expansion of the pipeline. The Chair: Next we'll go to Ms. Kwan. Ms. Jenny Kwan (Vancouver East, NDP): Mr. Chair, I rise to table two petitions. The first petition deals with the COVID-19 situation. The petitioners note the pandemic is having a devastating impact on many Canadians nationwide, especially those who have low to modest income, small business gig workers, freelancers, artists, film industry workers, non-salaried workers and individuals on fixed incomes such as seniors and those on disability. It further notes that rent, mortgage and utility payments are due at the end of each month, putting countless Canadians at risk of losing their housing. It is paramount there be safe self-isolation opportunities for all individuals in this country. To that end, the petitioners are calling for the government to immediately enact a nationwide rent freeze, eviction freeze, mortgage freeze and utility freeze, enforce mortgage deferrals for homeowners without penalty or interest charges from financial institutions and provide direct assistance in the form of a monthly, universal, direct payment of $2,000 per month for all, with an additional $250 per child immediately. The second petition deals with the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion. These petitioners join the hundreds of thousands of people who are opposed to the expansion. Trans Mountain, in building the pipeline, brings massive environmental and economic risk with no substantial benefit to British Columbia or to local residents. Approximately 40,000 barrels of oil have already leaked from existing Kinder Morgan pipelines, including two major spills in Burnaby since 2007. I might note, Mr. Chair, that just this past weekend there was yet another spill to the tune of 1,195 barrels here in British Columbia. There is no known scientific technology to clean up the bitumen when there is a spill, and the number of tankers would go from eight to 34 per month into the Burrard Inlet. It puts at risk many residential neighbourhoods and the traditional territories of at least 15 first nations. The Chair: May I interrupt for a moment, Ms. Kwan. I want to remind all members in the House that when presenting a petition, the idea is to be as concise as possible. Ms. Kwan, I'll let you wrap up, please. Ms. Jenny Kwan: Thank you, Mr. Chair. The petitioners are calling for the government to immediately act to prevent this new oil pipeline from proceeding through British Columbia. The Chair: Thank you. We'll now go to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood ParkFort Saskatchewan, CPC): Mr. Chair, I have four petitions to present today. The first petition reflects the outrage of my constituents at the ever-expanding order in council from the government banning more and more firearms. In particular, the petitioners highlight the failure of the government to act on the issue of illegal guns. The petitioners note that virtually all violent crimes committed in Canada, including the recent shooting in Nova Scotia, involve illegal firearms in the hands of those who are already not permitted to possess them. The petition has two asks. First of all, it asks that we reverse the order in council banning certain firearms, but also that we propose measures that will effectively address the illegal use of firearms by criminals while respecting the rights of law-abiding citizens. It also asks that we ensure that substantial changes to firearms laws in future actually be made by Parliament, not by the government acting in an unaccountable manner. The second petition deals with Bill C-8, which is the government's bill around conversion therapy. The petitioners support efforts to ban conversion therapy. They express concern about problems in the wording of the definition used in the legislation. They're asking the government to support amendments to fix the definition to address the issue of conversion therapy and ensure that the definition is correct and doesn't criminalize certain forms of counselling that individuals may voluntarily enter into. The third petition is regarding Bill S-204, a bill in the Senate that seeks to make it a criminal offence for a person to go abroad to receive an organ without consent, dealing especially with the horrific practice of forced organ harvesting and trafficking in China. The petitioners are supportive of Bill S-204 and want to see it move forward. The final petition is with respect to Bill C-7. There's been much discussion in this House about the need to do better in terms of long-term care. Rather than working to do better in long-term care, unfortunately we've seen the government removing vital safeguards in the area of euthanasia. I think our focus should be on assisting life rather than removing safeguards that are required in association with the euthanasia regime. The petitioners are particularly concerned about the government's plan to remove a 10-day reflection period that normally takes place. That period can already be waived under certain circumstances, but Bill C-7 proposes to remove it entirely as well as reduce the number of witnesses involved. The petitioners are quite concerned about what's going on in Bill C-7 and call for it to be stopped or amended. The Chair: Presenting petitions. We'll proceed to statements by members. We'll start off with Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly (NanaimoLadysmith, GP): Mr. Chair, we are in the midst of a global pandemic and an economic shock. Recent events have ripped open the wound of systemic racism in our country. Racialized and marginalized communities have been disproportionally affected by the pandemic. Thousands of seniors in long-term care facilities have died. It is clear that we need system change. In the past, governments have bailed out banks and corporations because they were too big to fail. It is time to bail out humanity and the planet. No one will be immune from the threat of climate change and mass extinction. Both are the result of the exploitation of the natural world in the name of the economy. Humans created the economy. We can choose to change it. We must protect our environment or perish. COVID-19 has demonstrated that together we can take courageous action for the common good. We need to do the same for the climate crisis, because humanity and our planet are too big to fail. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Spengemann. Mr. Sven Spengemann (MississaugaLakeshore, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, today marks World Elder Abuse Awareness Day. Underestimated and under-reported, elder abuse exists across the world. At risk of neglect and assault, many of the most vulnerable older persons reside in our long-term care facilities. They are the seniors who have built our country and shaped our communities, who have shown us resilience, courage and selflessness, who have made us stronger, and whose work and teachings continue to inspire us. They are parents and grandparents, brothers and sisters, friends and mentors. We have not been there for them in the same way they've been there for us throughout their lives. The Canadian Forces report, alongside the climbing disproportionate death toll in our long-term care facilities, has reconfirmed the ugly, indefensible reality of elder abuse and neglect in Canada. In my community, we mourn the deaths of 68 seniors from one long-term care facility alone, Camilla Care. We must make the same unwavering commitment to older persons as they have shown to us. We must protect and uphold their human rights. We must do better. The Chair: Before proceeding, I just want to bring up to the members in the background that we want to keep it as simple and as parliamentary as possible in keeping it neutral. We'll now move to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett (LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, CPC): During these trying times, the residents of LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes have risen to the challenge. They've made sacrifices and gone above and beyond to make the lives of their neighbours better and to keep our communities safe. It would be impossible to list everyone who has emerged as a community hero, but I'd like to highlight a few, like Lily, an eight-year-old from Elgin who raised funds for her local food bank by building and selling squirrel picnic tables, and Louise Boardman from Spencerville who's making masks for long-term care facilities and selling others in support of the Breast Cancer Action centre. The Knights of Columbus in Prescott raised funds and are distributing some $27,000 in support of charitable groups throughout the region. The Knights of Columbus in Kemptville are working overtime operating the local food bank. Who can forget our top-notch health care workers like Hannah and Mary at the Brockville COVID-19 testing centre? It is the people of LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes that make it so great. To everyone working to make a difference and to all of our essential workers, thank you. The Chair: Next is Mr. Anandasangaree. Mr. Gary Anandasangaree (ScarboroughRouge Park, Lib.): Mr. Chair, the Indian Act enshrined racism into Canadian law in 1876, and, through residential schools, the child welfare system, our legal system and our police, we criminalized and tore apart indigenous peoples. The deaths of Chantel Moore and Rodney Levi and the assault on Chief Allan Adam are recent examples of systemic racism within the RCMP. Sadly, the RCMP leadership has failed to acknowledge this reality and its root causes. These same systems negatively impact black Canadians. Anti-black racism has resulted in more young black men being jailed, children being streamed or excluded from schools and negative police interaction due to profiling. Black lives matter. No single Canadian is responsible for the prevalence of systemic racism; we all are. Collectively we build institutions that discriminate based on race. It is now time to reimagine and rework our institutions, starting with our police, to ensure that all Canadians can achieve their truest potential. The Chair: Ms. Larouche, you have the floor. Ms. Andranne Larouche (Shefford, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chair. June15 is World Elder Abuse Awareness Day. I want to remind members of the link between abuse and the problems of economic dependency among seniors. Improving their purchasing power means reducing the risk of them falling victim to abusive people. That's why the increase in the old age security benefit and the guaranteed income supplement must be extended beyond the pandemic. In three weeks, our seniors will receive their first cheque, when they should be receiving their second. A date must also be announced for the new horizons for seniors program, which helps several groups develop projects to break the isolation of seniors. In closing, I would like to mention the organization Justice alternative et mdiation that during the pandemic, along with other organizations in Shefford, has set up the project Une histoire pour la tienne, which also serves to mark this day. It's a virtual meeting between young people and seniors, allowing them to exchange some inspiring life experiences. Since age prejudice is very much present, I applaud this project, which aims to make us understand each other better and judge each other less. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Sangha. Mr. Ramesh Sangha (Brampton Centre, Lib.): Mr. Chair, in the time of this terrible crisis affecting all Canadians, when we are all thinking about how best to deal with it, let's all think about the people around us. Let's show our representation not only to those in the sector of sanctioned workers, but also to all those Canadians who day by day stand up and make a difference. Every day I am proud of the reactions of Canadians to this crisis. I want to acknowledge and celebrate all the contributions made by the people of Brampton Centre, all religious institutions, civil society and community organizations like Knights Table in my riding. We are all standing together to fight COVID-19. Let's continue working hard with that same spirit to get positive results out. Thank you very much. The Chair: I will proceed to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff (BruceGreyOwen Sound, CPC): Mr. Chair, whether graduating from elementary school, high school, Georgian College or graduating from colleges or universities across the country, I am proud of the accomplishments of all the graduates across BruceGreyOwen Sound. I would also like to congratulate and thank all the teachers and parents who have adapted to teaching online or from home and who have supported these graduates over the course of their academic careers. I'd like to extend special congratulations to Cameron Lovell, who just graduated from grade eight, as well as to Neebeesh and Neebin Elliott, originally from the Nawash unceded first nation on the Bruce Peninsula, who will be headed to Michigan State University, and to Jared Lumley from Owen Sound, who just graduated from my alma mater, the Royal Military College of Canada. The college motto of Truth, Duty, Valour is something all Canadians should aspire to live by. I wish all the best to these graduates on their next adventures. I and Canada cannot wait to see how their dreams and goals impact and change the world. I congratulate BruceGreyOwen Sound graduates. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Cormier. Mr. Serge Cormier (AcadieBathurst, Lib.): Today I pay tribute to RichardLosier, an entrepreneur, visionary and builder who died on June9,2020, surrounded by his family. Mr. Losier is a giant in the Acadian Peninsula business community. In1968, he co-founded St. Isidore Asphalte, a company that now has more than 200employees. He also launched many other businesses over the years. He was unifying and generous, a philanthropist who cared about young people and never missed an opportunity to improve their lives. I met Mr. Losier when I was 14years old, and I can say that he has been a positive influence in my life. Every time I met him, he gave me a lot of advice and encouragement, which I've never forgotten. Mr. Losier's legacy to his community is invaluable. His commitment remains an example for all of us to follow. Mr. Losier now joins his wife, Nolla. I offer my most sincere condolences to his children, Richard Jr. , Ronald, Nathalie, Caroline and Stphane, and to his family and friends. Rest in peace, Mr. Losier. You will be greatly missed. Thank you for everything you've done for our region. The Chair: We will now go to Ms. Dabrusin. Ms. Julie Dabrusin (TorontoDanforth, Lib.): Hello from my community in east end Toronto. People talk about how a city the size of Toronto can be cold, but that's far from the truth in my community. I want to give a shout-out to our teachers, like Mr. Wong of Earl Grey Senior Public School, who delivered home-baked cookies and handwritten notes to all of his students, or Monsieur Steve, who's offering online French classes, or the teachers of Riverdale Collegiate, who paraded through our streets to celebrate our graduates. Our local Michael Garron Hospital put out a call for community members to sew masks and received over 60,000 masks, including those made by Lisa Tancre of Chartwell Avondale Retirement Residence. Michelle Beaton organized a front window scavenger hunt to entertain children and their families. Restaurants, even while facing adversity, have been generously donating food, like the members of the Leslieville BIA or Mezes. There are so many more stories of generosity that I could share, but I'm out of time. I thank everyone who has stepped up. We all appreciate all of their hard work. The Chair: We will now go to Ms. Sahota. Ms. Jag Sahota (Calgary Skyview, CPC): Mr. Chair, on Saturday night, Calgarians, particularly those in the northeast, in my riding of Calgary Skyview, witnessed a devastating storm, the likes of which I have not seen in my lifetime. Homes, vehicles, community buildings and structures suffered significant damage due to large hail, floods and high winds. People acted quickly to seek shelter. I'm so grateful that there have been no reports of personal injury or loss of life. I went around the community yesterday to survey the damage. It is extensive. My heart aches for those who have been impacted by the storm in an already incredibly difficult time, but we are resilient. We know that in the coming weeks there will be a lot of cleanup required, both to personal property and in the community. I know my constituents, and we will help one another get through this together. I will work hard to do everything I can to help rebuild this community. The Chair: Mr. Serr, you have the floor. Mr. Marc Serr (Nickel Belt, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to express my sincere gratitude to the people of West Nippissing who organized Pride activities to celebrate the LGBTQ community in June. This week, we are also celebrating National Public Service Week. I thank the public servants for their dedication to the Nickel Belt community and the Valley East and Rayside-Balfour areas. The Chair: Next is Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya (MarkhamUnionville, CPC): Mr. Chair, when COVID-19 began spreading across Ontario, Markham, like many other communities, was unprepared. Our front-line health care workers did not have enough personal protective equipment to do their jobs safely. When Markham residents heard about these shortages, my office was flooded with calls from people who had PPE and wanted to donate. Since then my office has been able to deliver tens of thousands of PPE supplies to front-line health care workers and five masks to each family in need. This pandemic has shown that no matter what the challenge is, the Markham community will overcome it. Today, I would like to thank the front-line health care workers who are doing incredible work. I would also like to thank all those who have helped in Markham's hour of need. The Chair: I understand we had a bit of a glitch there. I'm sorry. With the pause, we thought that was the end of it. Mr. Serr, I would ask you to continue. I understand you started to switch languages. Please continue. You have 30seconds. Mr. Marc Serr: Thank you. I'm switching to English now. Thank you to our nurses, doctors, pharmacists, cashiers, janitors. Thank you to various retail workers and first responders dealing with COVID-19. You keep our communities safe and healthy, and you feed us. Your dedication and sacrifice are greatly appreciated. As we start to see local businesses reopen, it is important for all of us to remember to follow best practices outlined by local public health. Our front-line workers deserve our respect. It is important for all of us to respect social distancing, to protect all workers and their families. Together we can remain strong and united as we continue to face this challenge together. The Chair: Again, my apologies for skipping over there, but now we'll to to Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod (KamloopsThompsonCariboo, CPC): Mr. Chair, in commemoration of Italian Heritage Month, I would like to pay tribute to the Colombo Lodge and Italian Cultural Centre in Kamloops, British Columbia. The Colombo Lodge was founded in 1914 and is an integral part of our community. Recently they began Colombo Cares take-home dinners with proceeds distributed to different non-profit organizations throughout the region. Last month they very generously gave away hundreds of dinners to Royal Inland Hospital staff and paramedics for their tireless work throughout the pandemic. In their own words they say, Colombo Lodge is very proud of the Italians that have made Kamloops their home. Community members of Italian ancestrypast and presenthave helped and continue to help Kamloops prosper as a giving, welcoming and inclusive community. Personally, I want to thank all members for their friendship and generosity over the years. Our community is forever grateful for their kindness. The Chair: We'll now proceed to Mr. Harris. Mr. Jack Harris (St. John's East, NDP): Mr. Chair, many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are facing a serious financial crisis. Most people with disabilities are waiting to be included in the Liberals'promised program. Fish plant workers will need support to avoid a disastrous year. Many small businesses don't qualify for programs. Municipalities need emergency help to meet the crisis. People are worried about what will happen when the CERB runs out in two weeks'time, and the coming tourism season looks very grim. The province itself is in serious financial crisis due to the pandemic and the decline in oil prices. The federal government must overhaul and enhance the fiscal stabilization program to help Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and other oil-producing provinces through this crisis. Both the province and the oil and gas industry players have committed to net zero emissions by 2050. This is a challenge and an opportunity to transition to a sustainable energy future, but it will require significant investment and support by government to keep the industry strong and make this a just transition for workers. Much has been done. Much more needs to be done. The Chair: Ms. Gaudreau, you have the floor. Ms. Marie-Hlne Gaudreau (LaurentidesLabelle, BQ): Mr. Chair, all 44elected municipal officials in the riding of LaurentidesLabelle and I have sent a letter to the government asking that cellular and high-speed Internet networks be made available to all. The crisis has accelerated the demonstration of the need for these networks in daily life. The territorial complexity of the Laurentians means that there are areas where the signal is weak, unstable or non-existent. There is an urgent and essential need to change the infrastructure of the current networks. Also, because of the lockdown, Internet failures are being felt, and they prevent distance learning, telemedicine and teleworking, among other things. How can our municipalities develop economically if they can't provide their community with adequate communication tools? We are therefore calling on the government to put the interests of its people first by investing massively right now in the construction of high-speed Internet and cellular infrastructure. The Chair: Mr. Waugh. Mr. Kevin Waugh (SaskatoonGrasswood, CPC): I rise today to pay tribute to Sir Winston Churchill, the former prime minister of Great Britain and one of the greatest leaders history has ever known. In what can only be called a lifetime of service, Churchill's contributions to the Commonwealth and to the world are without equal. During the Second World War he led the allied forces in Europe against the tyranny and fascism of Adolph Hitler and his Nazi regime. When our world was in its darkest hour, Churchill's leadership was a beacon of hope and freedom. I am reminded of something he once said, All the greatest things are simple, and many can be expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honour, duty, mercy, hope. Sir Winston Churchill himself embodied all of these great things and will forever be a symbol of freedom, democracy and hope. The Chair: Mr. Gerretsen. Mr. Mark Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands, Lib.): Mr. Chair, I would like to add my voice to the recognition and celebration of Pride Month, which is celebrated annually during June. Pride Month is important for Canadians because we can be proud of who we are and celebrate our diversity. This June is different from previous years as we cannot celebrate in person all together. However, I know the ongoing pandemic will not stop us from showing our love and support for the LGBTQ+ community. To celebrate Pride Month this year, my office distributed 3,000 pride maple leaf pins across the country; whoever asked received one. Although the majority was sent to constituents in my riding, over 500 pins were sent to the neighbouring ridings of LanarkFrontenacKingston, LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, and HastingsLennox and Addington. It warms my heart to see so many Canadians showing their support. Happy Pride, everyone. The Chair: We will now proceed to the questioning of ministers. Please note that we will suspend the proceedings twice to allow employees who provide support for the sitting to substitute for each other safely. Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell (Louis-Saint-Laurent, CPC): Mr. Chair, I am very pleased to take part in today's meeting of this parliamentary committee. Canada has been dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic for three months now. The situation now seems to be improving, although we must remain vigilant. Economically, business people and the entire Canadian economy depend on government decisions. My question is very simple: when will the economic update take place? Hon. Chrystia Freeland (Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): Mr. Chair, I thank the hon. member for his question. I agree with him that Canada and Canadians are doing an excellent and difficult job in the fight against coronavirus. As for the economy, our government is there for Canadians, for workers and for businesses, and it will continue to be. Mr. Grard Deltell: Canadians, business people and businesses want to know where the government is headed. When will the economic update take place? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, Canadians know that the government is there to support them. Eight The Chair: We return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Canadians and Quebeckers also know that the Government of Quebec will table its economic update this week. Why isn't the federal government doing the same? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I'm pleased to explain to hon. members and to Canadians what the government is doing for the economy The Chair: We return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, it is a real pleasure for me to explain to the minister and everybody in the House of Commons that today the Saskatchewan government will table its economic update. Why can't Ottawa do that? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I'm delighted to have the opportunity to share with Canadians what our government is doing to support workers, businesses and the economy. Eight million Canadians have received the CERB, essential support for Canadian workers and their families. The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, 11 days ago the Newfoundland government tabled its own economic update. We see governments acting correctly for their people, except for the Liberal government, which cannot table an economic update. When will the Liberal government table an economic update, which Canadians would like to see? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I am delighted to share with the member opposite and with Canadians what we are doing practically that has meaning for Canadians. Let me talk about what we are doing for Canadian businesses. Nearly 670,000 Canadian businesses have received support The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: In Canada, the Quebec government will table its economic update this week. The Saskatchewan government tabled its economic update today. The Newfoundland government has tabled its economic update. Everybody is working hard in Canada, and the business community would like to know where the Liberal government is going. The question is crystal clear. When will the Liberal government table an economic update? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, Canadian workers and Canadian businesses want to know that our government is here to support them. I have shared with this House our support for Canadian workers through the CERB. I've spoken about the CEBA, and let me point out that more than $26 billion of support has been given through that essential program. Let me talk about the wage subsidy. More than 2. 6 million The Chair: We'll return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, this is starting to get interesting; the minister is revealing some of these expenses. Could the minister tell us how much the government has spent in the last three months? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I will continue in French by explaining what our government is doing for Canadians and workers The Chair: Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, this is a little bit concerning for all Canadians, because this government cannot say when they will table the economic update, cannot identify how much money they have spent in the last three months and cannot say what is the deficit of Canada. Is somebody in this government running this country correctly? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, absolutely we are running this country, and we are supporting our economy. In fact, we appreciate that Canada currently is experiencing its greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression. That is why we have devoted nearly 11% of GDP to support Canadian workers and Canadian businesses. I want to assure Canadians The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Normandin. Ms. Normandin, you have the floor. Ms. Christine Normandin (Saint-Jean, BQ): Mr. Chair, there are times when Quebec and the provinces are not just two solitudes, but they get along and speak as one, such as when the time comes to tell the government to mind its own business. On reading section91 of the Constitution Act, 1982, which sets out the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal government, nowhere do I find that the federal government must meddle by attaching conditions to health transfers. It is Quebec and the provinces that hire the medical personnel, doctors, nurses and caretakers. It is Quebec and the provinces that are responsible for purchasing the necessary equipment. It is Quebec and the provinces that know what is happening on the ground and what their needs are. Will the government do the only thing within its authority, which is to take the cheque, sign it and put it in the mail? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I thank the hon. member for her question. We fully understand the importance of federal support for the provinces, especially in our national fight against the coronavirus. I agree with the hon. member that we must give financial support to the provinces, including Quebec absolutely. I would also like to point out the importance of the support of the Canadian Armed Forces, who are doing an important and excellent job in Quebec and Ontario today, right now. Ms. Christine Normandin: Mr. Chair, I am glad to see that there is recognition of the importance of transferring this money. My question is whether it can be transferred unconditionally; that's what I'm asking. There's a state of emergency. In the past, we have seen that it takes a long time to negotiate conditions with the federal government. We saw it in the case of the Quebec City tramway, and we are still seeing it now in the case of transfers for housing in Quebec, for which there is no agreement and, therefore, no transfer of money. Will the federal government send the money free of conditions? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the hon. member said in her first question that the only thing the federal government had to do on health care was to sign the cheques. I can't agree because, today, at this time, at the request of the Premier of Quebec, the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces are in Quebec today; they're there to save the lives of seniors The Chair: We now return to Ms. Normandin. Ms. Christine Normandin: It was indeed at Quebec's request. What I'm saying is that, at present, the provinces are unanimously asking that there be no conditions. It's urgent that the money be transferred. The federal government's job here is to sign the cheque and send it to the provinces. The government's job is also to make Parliament work. This is where there should be negotiations so that we can work, among other things, to send money to people living with disabilities, to make sure we fight CERB fraud and to make sure that court time limits are effective in the current crisis. Can the government focus on the issue in order to respect the provinces and transfer money for health care? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: I thank the hon. member for her question, Mr. Chair. I agree with the hon. member that the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces are in Quebec today at the request of the Province of Quebec. That said, I hope that the hon. member will agree with me that being there for Quebec's seniors, that saving the lives of Quebec's seniors, is much more than simply signing cheques. I am very proud of the work the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces are doing. I think we all should thank these people who are working for Canada, for Quebec, and who are doing an important and excellent job. Ms. Christine Normandin: Mr. Chair, I think the Deputy Prime Minister misunderstood me when I was talking about the importance of acting quickly. Negotiations between the government and the provinces take an awfully long time because the federal government decides to place conditions where there shouldn't be any. Right now, the only important thing is to transfer the money quickly so that it can be used in our hospitals and our long-term care facilities, where the need is desperate. Quebec and the provinces know exactly what their needs are. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I would like to point out the extent to which the federal government is there to support the provinces, including Quebec. We have increased funding to the provinces and territories by $500million to help them prepare for COVID-19 outbreaks. This funding is in addition to the $40billion that we already provide annually to the provinces and territories. That's a lot of money. It is strong endorsement The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh (Burnaby South, NDP): Mr. Chair, systemic racism is killing people. It's killing black people and it's killing indigenous people. Recently, Rodney Levi was another victim of systemic racism. He was killed in New Brunswick by the RCMP. To deal with systemic racism, we need systemic change. Will the Liberal government commit to systemic change so that not another life is ever taken again? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I thank the member opposite for the extremely important question, and I'll take this opportunity to acknowledge the work that he has done for many years fighting racism in Canada. Our government absolutely acknowledges that systemic racism exists in Canada. It exists in all of our institutions, including the police and the RCMP. I agree with the member opposite that now is the moment to fight this The Chair: Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, I thank the Deputy Prime Minister very much for the response, but there are some specific actions we need to take. There are movements. Black Lives Matter, as a movement, is calling for the defunding of police. What they're saying is we need to make better choices with how money is being spent. When someone is in need of a wellness check or a mental health check, money, financing and support should go to mental health workers and health care workers, not the police. Is the government prepared to fund and prioritize health care workers over the police? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the member quite rightly began his questions by speaking about systemic racism against indigenous people in Canada, and I would like to speak about that for a moment. I spoke to Perry Bellegarde this morning, because it is such a crucial issue. We can describe it as the original sin of our country. I absolutely agree that we need root and branch reform, including in how policing is done in Canada. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, will the Liberal government commit to a review of the use of force as outlined for the RCMP? Will the Liberals commit to that change? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister and the Minister of Public Safety had many conversations last week with the RCMP. We all accept that The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, will the government commit to ensuring that de-escalation receives priority? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Let me continue, Mr. Chair. Systemic racism exists in all of our federal institutions, including the RCMP. It's time to put an end to it. Let me just say The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, I'm not getting an answer. Will the Prime Minister or the Liberal government commit to something simple and ensure that at the federal level, racial profiling, street checks and carding are expressly prohibited? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, sadly, I can't agree that rooting out systemic racism is going to be simple, but I can agree that racial profiling is absolutely inappropriate. It is not something that we should The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Well, I'm going to try to get another commitment from the government, because they don't seem able to commit to something as clear as ending racial profiling. We know that millions of Canadians in a couple of weeks are going to be faced with the reality of their CERB ending. These families are worried about how they're going to put food on the table, because they can't return to a job. Will the Liberal government commit today so that those families will have some concrete support, yes or no? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, let me be clear, as I was in my previous answer, that our government clearly is opposed to racial profiling. This is a wrong practice and we're very clear about our position there. Now when it comes to the CERB, I absolutely share the concern of the member opposite. The Canadian economy is in its direst state since the Great Depression. We know that all the jobs have not yet come back. We know that Canadian workers, Canadian families, continue to need The Chair: We'll now pause for a short time to allow staff to change within the safety parameters for the COVID-19 virus, and as we resume, we will go to Ms. Harder. Ms. Rachael Harder (Lethbridge, CPC): Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister has mandated his ministers, and I quote, to govern in a positive, open and collaborative way. Ironically, as it stands, Parliament is currently closed for business. Opposition parties have little opportunity to hold the ruling party to account, private members'bills cannot be tabled and legislation cannot be debated. Can the Prime Minister, Mr. Trudeau himself, help us understand how all of this fits into his definition of so-called open government? The Honourable Pablo Rodriguez (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons): Well, Mr. Chair, we're here, right? We're here, and the opposition is asking questions. They have the equivalent of eight question periods instead of five to ask questions. They have more time than before, so I don't know why they're not happy about it. Ms. Rachael Harder: That's like when I'm asking for a full meal and your handing me a few jellybeans and saying, Why aren't you happy with that? Mr. Chair, here's the thing. It's like switching a light on and off when it's convenient for the Prime Minister and for the Liberal Party. That's what they want to do here. That's not Parliament. That's not democracy. When will Mr. Trudeau do the right thing, turn the lights on and get back to work for Canadians? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I'm really sorry to hear that my colleague's not working. I can assure you, Mr. Chair, on this side of the House, we're all actually working very hard and we're answering the questions from the opposition. Why? It's because it's extremely important. I sat there for seven years asking questions. I understand important Ms. Rachael Harder: The member opposite knows very well that he is misleading the Canadian public. This is not true Parliament. This is simply a special committee. Here's the thing. On the Liberal Party website, under the platform commitment, it says that Parliament works best when its members are free to do what they have been elected to do, and that is be the voice for their communities and hold the government to account. This is a Liberal document. Did the Prime Minister forget that strengthening Parliament was part of his 2019 platform commitment? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague for quoting our excellent platform. That was a very very good document. The thing is, I think we've reached a balance whereby MPs can come from different places, mostly around Ottawa, and ask questions; but also we can have colleagues from across the country asking questions. Why does my colleague think it is better to have only 35 MPs participating instead of 338? Ms. Rachael Harder: Does the Prime Minister value democracy, or does he still look up to China's basic dictatorship? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, we're answering all the questions from the opposition, not only from the people in this room, but we're answering The Chair: It's back to Ms. Harder now. Ms. Rachael Harder: I'll ask the question again. Does the Prime Minister still value the basic dictatorship of China over Canada's democracy? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I don't know where the colleague wants to go from here, Mr. Chair. I'd like to know from her why it is not important to her that her colleagues participate directly. Ms. Rachael Harder: Mr. Trudeau wrote to his ministers and said to them that they continue to raise the bar on openness, effectiveness and transparency. He went on to explain that This means. . . government that is open by default. We now have a parliament that is currently shut down. Mr. Trudeau has shut it down and has prevented us from being able to do to the good work that Canadians expect us to do. Is this Mr. Trudeau's idea of open by default? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, do they want to talk about shutting down Parliament? How about the time they prorogued Parliament twicenot only once, but twice? The Conservative government shut down Parliament twice. I was here. I was sitting on the other side of the aisle. It's quite the opposite now. We're taking all the questions. This place is open, and we're answering questions. The Chair: One moment, please. I haven't acknowledged you yet, Ms. Harder. We've stopped the time there. I want to remind honourable members that questions and answers are being given, and we want to hear both sides. Please keep the heckling down. Ms. Harder, please proceed. Ms. Rachael Harder: In 2014, the leader of the Liberal Party developed a policy resolution entitled Restoring Trust in Canada's Democracy. That's ironic, because right now, again, Parliament is currently shut down. We are prevented from being able to do the good work that we are expected to do. At the time, the Prime Minister said, Canadians want their Members of Parliament to be effective voices for their communities in Ottawa, and not merely mouthpieces in their communities for an all-too-powerful Prime Minister. Sadly, Mr. Trudeau has become the all-too-powerful prime minister that he once believed should not exist. Why did he change his mind? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, I'd like to know why my colleague wants to shut down the voices of her colleagues who could not speak and could not participate in this room. Mr. Chair, how would we vote on private members'bills, for example? As you know, it is not a government vote or a party vote; it's per row. You want to come back? Are you going to acceptMr. Chair, through youthat we have electronic voting, yes or no? The Chair: We'll go on to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, we know that the Minister of Foreign Affairs has champagne tastes and London flats, but it's his champagne mortgages that Canadians are concerned about. Specifically, why did the minister only disclose the complete extent of his personal debt to the Chinese government on June 4 of this year? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, as you know, since the minister entered politics, his two mortgages and other liabilities and assets have been fully disclosed to the Ethics Commissioner and placed on the online public registry. It's public, Mr. Chair. It's public. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Now it's public and it's terrible. When will the foreign affairs minister be here to answer these questions himself? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, it's always been public. We're in the middle of a pandemic here, trying to help Canadians, and the best they can do is ask questions about The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: When the minister owes over a million dollars to the Chinese government, people have a right to ask him questions. When will the Minister of Foreign Affairs show up? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: The minister shows up every day, Mr. Chair. He shows up and works for Canadians. Once again, those are public documents. Everything the minister did is public. I still don't know why they ask The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, he doesn't even have to come to the House. All he has to do is appear on the screen. Where is the minister? Why is he hiding? Why won't he answer questions about his personal debt to the Chinese government? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, if he goes online he's going to get the information. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, the minister is hiding. Let's ask some specific questions about their China policy. What is the impact on the decision-making? Three-quarters of Canadians don't want Huawei involved in our 5G network. Will the minister put the interests of Canadians ahead of the interests of his creditors and say no to Huawei? Hon. Navdeep Bains (Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry): Mr. Chair, when it comes to 5G deployment, we are right now currently undergoing a comprehensive review. We have been absolutely clear with allies and with Canadians that we never have and never will compromise Canadians'national interests. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, that is not an answer, and it is completely out of step with what our allies have already recognized. Reports are emerging of multiple deadly viruses exported from Winnipeg's microbiology laboratory to the Wuhan Institute of Virology right before scientists were expelled for policy breaches. In spite of that, scientific co-operation between Canadian institutions and the military-affiliated Wuhan Institute of Virology is continuing. Why hasn't the government put in place new guidelines to prevent the export of sensitive pathogens and information to China? Hon. Patty Hajdu (Minister of Health): Mr. Chair, he's right that in 2019 the National Microbiology Laboratory shared lab samples with the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The National Microbiology Laboratory routinely shares samples with other labs to help advance the international community's understanding of viruses and the research that is ongoing around those viruses. There are strict protocols in place for these transfers, and these samples were transported according to Canadian laws and regulations. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, I think Canadians would be concerned to hear that it's routine to transport viruses to Chinese military-affiliated labs. When Champagne was the parliamentary secretary for finance, the government decided to give hundreds of millions of dollars to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, bankrolling Chinese state-controlled development projects in Asia with weak standards in labour, human rights and environment. Will the minister put Canadian taxpayers ahead of his personal creditors and support a pullout from the Communist Party-controlled development bank? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Once again, Mr. Chair, my colleague is trying to connect the dots, and I don't know exactly where he is going from here, but everything is public. There's a thing called Google. He can go on it and check the information. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, the public can listen to this. I'm sure this exchange will also be available on Google, and the public can draw their own conclusions. We have failures on 5G, failures when it comes to the transport of deadly viruses and failures when it comes to giving over $400 million to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. It's clear that the Bank of China's investment in Minister Champagne is paying off. It's time for the minister to settle his debt with the Communist government and not settle it on the backs of Canadians. When will the minister be here in the House and answer questions about this mortgage? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: My colleague should be cautious with what he is saying in the House, Mr. Chair. This is serious stuff. He should be careful about what he says. The minister is actually working extremely hard for all Canadians and is doing his job correctly, Mr. Chair. We're talking about public information. Once again, let him go to Google and google it. That's it. The Chair: Now we'll go to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett: Canada's ambassador to the United Nations sent a letter last week to all member states of the UN promising that Canada would consider providing more funding for UNRRA, the same UNRRA that is a front for Hamas, which allows weapons of terror to be stored in schools and provides textbooks that call for the destruction of Israel. Do these Liberals have no shame when it comes to their quest for a seat on the UN Security Council? Hon. Mary Ng (Minister of Small Business, Export Promotion and International Trade): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to thank the honourable member for that question. We know that at this time Canada must show leadership in the face of global challenges. More than ever, Canada is playing a positive role by being a champion in diversity and inclusion, supporting the global fight against COVID-19, addressing climate change, leading peace and security efforts and helping the most vulnerable. A seat on the Security Council will allow Canada to be a strong voice for a fairer, more inclusive and prosperous The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett: Mr. Chair, I received a letter from Bob Anderson this week, who's advocating for his neighbours like Jean Grevelding, who owns a cottage at Butternut Bay. Like many people, Jean is an American who owns a property on our side of the border. These people are taxpaying members of our communities. These folks have plans in place to follow all Canadian quarantine rules. They're concerned about leaving their properties uncared for over the summer. Will folks like Jean be allowed to cross the border to check on their properties this summer? Hon. Bill Blair (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Of course, our priority is and always has been and always must be the protection of the health and safety of Canadians. That's why we put in place these restrictions for non-essential travel and have required, through the Public Health Agency of Canada, a 14-day quarantine. I don't know the specifics of the person for whom you advocate, but we want to make sure that if they come into Canada, it is for an essential purpose and that they do it safely and respect the quarantine that has been put in place. Mr. Michael Barrett: With nine branches throughout my riding, the Royal Canadian Legion offers a great deal to veterans and rural communities alike. They have been experiencing hardship and a loss of revenue, to the point where they may be forced to shut their doors. The Zone G2 commander and local mayors such as Roger Haley have reached out to me expressing their dire need. Will the government offer support to Legions across the country so they can continue to carry out their vital work for our veterans? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (Minister of Veterans Affairs): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Yes, we have done a lot to help support groups like the Legions. There is a $350-million emergency community support fund. If they're supplying any help to people regarding COVID, this fund is there. Indeed, we're doing everything we can to make sure that we help the Legions and other groups that do so much to help veterans right across the country. Mr. Michael Barrett: On May 21, the minister stated that her team was working as quickly as it could to fill the gaps in CEBA. It has now been three weeks, and many business owners, such as mortgage broker Corinna Smith-Gatcke, are still left in the lurch amid the delays, which are pushing businesses closer to shutting their doors for good. Will these businesses have access to CEBA before it's too late for them? Hon. Mary Ng: Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I thank the honourable member for that really important question on our Canadian small businesses. Those businesses can absolutely have access to the loan at their financial institution this Friday, and I would encourage them to go and see their bank or credit union. I want businesses to know that nothing is more important for us than making sure they get the support they need during this difficult time. Mr. Michael Barrett: The County Road 43 expansion project is critical for my riding and the region as a whole. This project will widen the road, increasing safety for the 18,000 motorists who travel the road every day. It's been 334 days since the provincial and local governments announced funding, but there has been nothing from this Liberal government. It's been 181 days since Minister McKenna told me her staff were reviewing the project. Today, there is still nothing, and for the last month the minister's team has not even found the time to respond to my request for an update. Will Minister McKenna finally stop with the delays and commit to funding this project today? Hon. Catherine McKenna (Minister of Infrastructure and Communities): Mr. Chair, as the member opposite knows, we work with provinces and territories to advance our infrastructure investments. We're making investments across the country. They are making a real difference in people's lives. We're always happy to work with members of Parliament, but they must also work with provinces and territories so that projects are advanced by them to our office. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall (YorktonMelville, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Through you, has Mr. MacAulay read ombudsman Dalton's May 2020 report, Financial Compensation for Canadian Veterans: A comparative analysis of benefit regimes? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I apologize, but I'll have to ask my honourable colleague to repeat the question. The Chair: Mrs. Wagantall, we'll freeze the time so that there's no extra time taken. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Thank you, Chair. My question was whether Mr. MacAulay has read ombudsman Dalton's May 2020 report, Financial Compensation for Canadian Veterans: A comparative analysis of benefit regimes. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I appreciate my honourable colleague's question. Of course, I appreciate Mr. Dalton's input and all that he has done for veterans. We've discussed it many times. I've done everything and worked with him in order to make sure that we bring the proper compensation to veterans The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: As a result of that study, are the financial outcomes Canada seeks to provide for ill and injured veterans now clearly defined within the Department of Veterans Affairs? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, as the member would know, I am to bring a report to the veterans affairs committee, and there are a number of things done in order to make sure that report is The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Then I would suggest that we get our committee up and going as it should be. Where are these financial directions published? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Well, of course, lockdown, but just under $90 million that the government put in supplementary estimates to make sure we address the backlog for Veterans Affairs. It's a major help The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Minister, are Canadian Armed Forces members provided with a copy of this document? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, my honourable colleague would have to ask the Canadian Armed Forces that question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: There are three different providing lifetime benefits for ill and injured veterans. In Ombudsman Dalton's recent report, did any one of these three provide the best compensation in all nine scenarios that were studied? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Of course, as she knows, there's been a lot of work done in order to make sure that we provide the proper compensation to veterans. We're working very hard, with a lot of help from Mr. Dalton, to make sure that the appropriate The Chair: We'll now continue with Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: In the undisclosed settlement of Sean Bruyea's legal case against Seamus O'Regan and the Liberal government, a joint statement says. . . Canadians, especially all Veterans and their families, are encouraged to enter the public debate about policies and programs that affect our Veterans and their families. Does Mr. MacAulay agree with this statement? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I can assure you that anybody is welcome to enter any discussion on compensation of veterans. We're always open to what we can do in order to make sure that we provide appropriate compensation. I don't think the term would be appropriate, but it would provide some compensation to veterans who truly deserve it. They defend our democracy The Chair: We'll go back to Ms. Wagantall. Oh, I'm sorry Ms. Andranne Larouche: Mr. Chair, I have a point of order. The interpretation hasn't worked for a few interventions. It's difficult to follow the exchange between the hon. member and the minister. The Chair: We're having a problem with the interpretation. Minister and Ms. Wagantall, you are joining us virtually. I'm wondering if you have the right language on at the bottom of your screen. We'll start with that for troubleshooting. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: I have English. The Chair: Very good. Minister MacAulay, what do you have? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I have English, Mr. Chair. The Chair: Very good. Then we'll check on our side. Ms. Larouche, did I understand correctly that the interpretation didn't work for both speakers? Ms. Andranne Larouche: The sound didn't allow the interpreters to do their job. It seemed to be a problem with the sound. The Chair: In that case, I would ask both members to maybe put their mike a little bit close to their mouth. We'll see how that works. I'm looking at the screen, and I notice the mike is a little bit far. Could we bend it in a little bit more? I appreciate that. Thank you for your patience. We'll give it another try. Ms. Wagantall, please go ahead. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: On a point of order, quite often while I'm trying to speak, there are lots of other voices in the background. The Chair: I would ask everyone to please be on mute, as well as for anyone in the chamber to please refrain from speaking loudly. Just whisper among yourselves if you have something to say. We'll take this one from the top. We have a minute and 45 seconds left. Ms. Wagantall, please proceed with your next question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: You said next question, so we're not going backwards, Chair? The Chair: Did we have an answer from Minister MacAulay? No? We'll go to Minister MacAulay to finish up the answer. We'll start at 27 seconds, freeze the clock and hear his answer. Then, because of all of the confusion, we'll start at one minute and 45 seconds when we get going again. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Should I repeat the question, sir? The Chair: Please do. The clock is frozen. After we go through the question and the answer, we'll start the clock again. Mr. Wagantall, please repeat the question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Thank you, Chair. In the undisclosed settlement to Sean Bruyea's legal case against Seamus O'Regan and the Liberal government, a joint statement says, Canadians, especially all Veterans and their families, are encouraged to enter the public debate about policies and programs that affect our Veterans and their families. Does Mr. MacAulay agree with this statement? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I appreciate my honourable colleague's question and concern. Of course I agree. Anybody is quite open to indicate whatever they wish in order to make sure we provide as appropriate a compensation as possible. You can never totally compensate veterans truly for what they deserve, but we want to make sure we provide the best compensation possible. That's what we will do and want to do. The Chair: Ms. Wagantall, we will start the clock again. You have one minute and 45 seconds remaining. Please proceed. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: If that's the case, is Minister MacAulay aware of the practice of red-flagging veterans'files? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I'm not aware. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Since the deputy minister has indicated that he runs the department, will the minister ask him for the names of veterans and the dates and the reasons that they are, or have been, red-flagged by VAC? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I would certainly ask any veteran or anybody who has a concern to contact my office. I will do anything I can to make sure that the veterans The Chair: We'll go back to Ms. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Do the most ill and injured still receive from the pension up to $300,000 less for life? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, as you know and as the Prime Minister indicated when the pension for life was put in place, it was stated that if anybody receives lessthe Prime Minister himself indicated it quite clearlythat must be adjusted. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: For veterans in similar circumstances, should the date of their application for compensation be a factor in determining whether they're treated equitably? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Yes, of course, the date is when the compensation would start. Of course, it's very important and very appropriate. The Chair: Now we will proceed to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd (Sturgeon RiverParkland, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Retired Major Mark Campbell in my riding of Sturgeon RiverParkland lost both legs in the line of duty in Afghanistan. He is an avid sport shooter, but understandably, due to his disability, he is very limited in the kinds of firearms he can use, and all of these firearms have now been banned under the Liberal OIC. My question to the Minister of Public Safety is this: Did their department do a legal analysis and consider the section 15 charter rights of disabled Canadians not to be discriminated against when they passed their OIC? Hon. Bill Blair: Yes, there was a very thorough analysis done by the justice department to ensure that the prohibitions we put in place were, in fact, charter compliant. Let me also say, Mr. Chair, how important it was that we prohibited weapons that were not designed for sporting purposes at all. In fact, they were designed for soldiers to use in combat. They have no place in a civil society. We have prohibited them, and we believeand this has been echoed by many people across the countrythat this will make Canadians safer. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, is the minister aware that the AR-15 is the most popular sporting rifle in Canada, and is he aware that disabled veterans like Major Mark Campbell are unable to participate in the sport of sport shooting because of his OIC? Hon. Bill Blair: I can assure the member that what I am aware of is that the AR-15 and other weapons like them have been used in mass killings in Canada on many occasions, such as at cole Polytechnique, at Dawson College, again at the Quebec mosque and in Moncton. The AR-15s in particular were also used at the terrible tragedy in places like Sandy Hook, where a bunch of kids were killed, so there is no place for The Chair: We will go to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, it has been months since the Liberals shut down this Parliament and months since the Minister of Finance should have presented a budget or at least an economic update to Canadians. Since then we have seen billions spent with little oversight and no plan. The minister says that he needs certainty before he can table a budget. Well, that didn't stop Stephen Harper and the Conservatives from tabling a budget in the depth of the last great recession. When are these Liberals finally going to take their job seriously and table an economic update? Hon. Mona Fortier (Minister of Middle Class Prosperity and Associate Minister of Finance): Mr. Chair, we're taking this very seriously. We're working for Canadians and bringing forward supports to make sure that businesses, workers and Canadians can put food on the table and pay their rent. We will continue to support Canadians, and when we have a clear projection to present, we will do that. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, the results are in, and businesses aren't happy with the so-called support programs from these Liberals. In fact, the oil and gas industry has been shut out of many of these economic programs. When is the government going to recognize that their business support plans have been an absolute failure with only a fraction of the billions promised being accessible to businesses? Hon. Seamus O'Regan (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Chair, our government has taken swift and immediate action to support our sector throughout this challenging time. We had the BCAP, which is critically important to providing liquidity to support the SMEs that make up 85% of the jobs in our sector. It has taken an enormous team effort. People are working around the clock to get money where it needs to be. We are helping hard-working Canadians, small businesses and large businesses right across the country, but in particular in our energy sector. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, I'm pleased to see the Minister of Natural Resources online. He tweeted recently to praise the Alberta Carbon Trunk Line and the North West Redwater Partnership refinery in my riding. Can the minister tell us what, if any, support they have given to the innovative carbon capture and sequestration technology in this country? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Mr. Chair, we see carbon capture and sequestration as an integral part of lowering emissions, making emissions more competitive and making our oil and gas industry more competitive. We're seeing where the investment dollars are going. They are going to jurisdictions that are committed to lowering emissions. Obviously, this government is committing to net zero. Mr. Dane Lloyd: I note that the minister couldn't name a single example of government support for carbon capture, utilization and sequestration technology. We have spent a lot of time talking about the COVID-19 pandemic, but Canadians are living with another horrific reality, that being the intensifying opioid overdose epidemic. Reports indicate that in the past four years, 14,000 Canadians have died, and the numbers during COVID-19 have been skyrocketing, with British Columbia seeing a 39% increase this year alone. I know this because I've lost a family member to a fentanyl overdose. When is the government going to take this scourge seriously and take action to save the lives of Canadians? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Mr. Chair, I share the member's deep sadness about the number of lives we've lost to opioid overdose. Our government has been steadily making it easier for people who live with substance use to access medications to treat substance use, such as prescription Suboxone and methadone. We have made it easier to rapidly establish safe injection sites in communities and have supported community-based projects that work with people who are using substances. We need to understand that this is a complex issue, and we need to support people to get the help they need. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes (AlgomaManitoulinKapuskasing, NDP) ): The hon. member for Thrse-DeBlainville. Ms. Louise Chabot (Thrse-De Blainville, BQ): MadamChair, I will come back to the bill introduced last week. As parliamentarians, we felt like we were watching a very bad play, as I imagine the public did. I say that it was theatre, even though it shouldn't be in this place. The government decided to stage a play and act alone and, unfortunately, there were several acts missing. A very important part of this bill was about supporting people with disabilities in this time of crisis. However, the government did not see fit to negotiate with the opposition parties, even though it is in a minority position. Despite this arrogance, the Bloc Qubcois proposed solutions. One of the things we proposed was to split the bill so that we could give this support to people with disabilities, but the Conservatives did not want to do that. We came back and asked for time to negotiate and give support to people with disabilities, but the government defeated the motion. We asked that the House be recalled today so that we could pass this part of the bill concerning support for people with disabilities, but we are still in the dark. Why are we abandoning people with disabilities? Hon. Ahmed Hussen (Minister of Families, Children and Social Development): I thank the hon. member for her question. We know this pandemic has deeply affected the lives and health of all Canadians and has disproportionately affected Canadians with disabilities in particular. From the very beginning, we've taken a disability-inclusive approach to our emergency response to ensure that Canadians with disabilities get the support they need. That is why we announced a one-time payment of $600 for persons with disabilities to address these expenses. This will go a long way toward helping Canadians with disabilities. We encourage and urge all parties in the opposition to support this measure. We're confident that this measure, along with other investments, will benefit Canadians with disabilities, and we hope to get the support of the other parties very soon. Ms. Louise Chabot: MadamChair, I remind you that this measure wasn't passed because we weren't allowed to do so. A measure to help people with disabilities has been put in an omnibus bill. We've tried here, in the House, to provide the means to give that support, so I ask again, can the government be counted on to give a response to people with disabilities? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, it was absolutely not an omnibus bill. It contained assistance for the disabled, of course, but it also contained assistance for our seasonal workers, as well as a number of other measures that the Bloc Qubcois opposed. They refused to debate and, when the question of splitting the bill came up, the Conservatives refused to do that. That is why there is no bill at the moment, and that is very unfortunate. Ms. Louise Chabot: It was a Bloc Qubcois proposal to split the bill. The government had not thought of it, but they found that it was a good idea. Let me return to the attack. This bill proposed changes to the wage subsidy program, it was supposed to make the CERB more flexible, it proposed fines for fraudsters and, since there was a little section about a benefit for the disabled, the government took it for granted that we would support it without any negotiations with the parties. However, we set one very important condition: that the Liberal Party must get its hands out of taxpayers'pockets in terms of the wage subsidy. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, as we listen to the Bloc Qubcois members, we might think that they invented peanut butter and apple pie. This bill contained a number of measures that all Quebeckers and all Canadians needed, but the Bloc Qubcois refused to debate it. No, we did not follow the Bloc Qubcois'example in splitting the bill; we had thought of it a long time previously. We have not been able to do that because of the Conservatives. Because of them, we cannot help those living with disabilities. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Ms. Chabot, you have 45seconds left. Ms. Louise Chabot: We asked on a number of occasions for the House to be able to sit starting today to pass the part of the bill dealing with those with disabilities. What is the status of that, MadamChair? We have not heard about it since. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, my colleague knows very well that things are not as simple as that. There are procedural mechanisms unique to the House. I hope that, one day, we will be able to pass this bill and be able to provide assistance for those living with disabilities. I hope that the Conservatives will change their minds and give us their support. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Don Valley East, Ms. Ratansi. Ms. Yasmin Ratansi (Don Valley East, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be sharing my time with the member for Surrey Centre. Since 2015 our government has been focused on ensuring its policies mitigate the effects of climate change. Several measures have been implemented for phasing out coal, making polluters pay, providing climate incentives, investing in green technologies and much more, which all together have created a climate plan that is doing more to cut pollution than any other in Canada's history. In my riding of Don Valley East, many innovative businesses have benefited from these investments and initiatives. One area of particular interest is our government's work to protect 25% of Canada's land and 25% of its oceans by 2025. Our natural environment is something that Canadians and my constituents care about deeply. Could the minister update this House on the new conservation projects announced on June 5, World Environment Day, and on how our government is protecting our environment? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, protecting nature is an important part of how we will address climate change and the very real challenges it presents. That's why on June 5, World Environment Day, our government announced over 60 conservation projects under development across Canada. These projects are funded through the Canada Nature Fund's target 1 challenge initiative. They'll conserve Canadian nature and biodiversity and protect species at risk, enhance ecological integrity and connectivity, and enhance the size of Canada's vast network of protected areas. Nearly half of these projects are indigenous-led, with the aim of creating indigenous-protected conserved areas. Madam Chair, projects like these move us closer to our goal of protecting 25% of Canada's lands and oceans by 2025. By working together in partnership with the provinces, territories, municipalities, indigenous peoples and Canadians, together we can protect our natural environment for generations to come. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Ms. Ratansi, since you have 25 seconds left, we will go to the honourable member for Surrey Centre. Mr. Randeep Sarai (Surrey Centre, Lib.): Madam Chair, there are many small and medium-sized businesses in my riding of Surrey Centre. Many have been impacted by COVID-19. They saw a decrease in business or needed to close their doors completely in order to adhere to public safety measures to manage the spread of COVID-19. These measures helped keep our most vulnerable citizens safe and ensured that our hospital and health care providers did not become overwhelmed with a sharp spike in cases. Thanks to our government's COVID-19 emergency response, many of these businesses have been able to keep their employees and access important liquidity through the Canada emergency business account, which provides loans to small businesses and non-profits, and the Canada emergency wage subsidy, which is helping businesses to keep and rehire their employees while their revenues are down by providing up to 75% of wages for up to 24 weeks. As we begin to reopen the economy and Canadians across the country return to the job market, those benefits will be even more important to help businesses and industries rehire their staff and make important adjustments to align with public health guidelines to gradually increase their operations. Can the minister please update the committee on how many Canadian businesses have taken advantage of CEBA and CEWS since applications for each have been opened? Hon. Mary Ng: Madam Chair, I want to begin by thanking the member for Surrey Centre for all the work he does to support his constituents and small businesses. Canadians across the country need to know our government has been working tirelessly and will continue to work tirelessly on their behalf. This is why we put in place the important programs to help them get through this crisis during this difficult time, programs such as the wage subsidy program. We know that in so many businesses the employees are often like extended family members. The wage subsidy has helped these businesses keep their employees on the payroll and are now helping in their rehiring as they slowly and safely restart. There are 348,000 businesses being helped with the wage subsidy program, and this means that 2. 6 million workers are being helped. Businesses are also being helped through the interest-free $40,000 loan they can access through CEBA to help stay afloat and pay their expenses during this crisis. I'm pleased to inform this House that to date more than 669,000 The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for St. John's East. Mr. Jack Harris: Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with my colleague, the member for LondonFanshawe. Madam Chair, with so many recent reports and videos of police using force, sometimes deadly force, and violence against indigenous and black people in Canada, I've called for the public safety committee to reconvene. If the members agree, will the minister come to the committee and provide concrete answers as to how the government intends to address racism inherent in Canada's law enforcement, and in particular the RCMP? Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I thank my colleague for the question. It's perhaps the most important one facing Canada today. Madam Chair, indigenous people, black Canadians and other racialized people are far too often experiencing systemic racism and disparate outcomes within the entire criminal justice system. In order to respond appropriately, I think it's necessary to begin by acknowledging the lived experience of people who've known bias and discrimination at the hands of the police and our courts and within our prisons. We remain committed to working with all racialized people and all of the members of this House to ensure that we work toward social justice for all Canadians, and I look forward to discussing the member's motion further with him. Mr. Jack Harris: Will the minister and the government commit to facilitating such a meeting of this committee virtually? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, the decisions of the committee are the committee's, so I'm sure that this will be a discussion within the committee, but if called, I will certainly be pleased to come with my officials to provide the committee with whatever support and information it needs to contribute to this very important discussion. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Harris, you have 40 seconds. Mr. Jack Harris: In light of what we've seen with Chief Adam in Fort McMurray and the RCMP accepting that the actions were reasonable, will the minister commit to a full review of the use of force by the RCMP, in particular the philosophy, tactics and training that is given to RCMP officers in dealing with the public? Hon. Bill Blair: I thank the member and I want to assure him, first of all, that this is work that is ongoing, not just in the RCMP but throughout the police community. May I also take this opportunity, Madam Chair, to say that I think all police training has to begin with one very important principle, and that's the preservation of all life and the respect for all Canadians. We also know the importance of de-escalation training. We're committed to continuing to work with indigenous communities, racialized communities and with police services and all participants in the criminal justice system to make sure that it is fair for all Canadians. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for LondonFanshawe, Ms. Mathyssen. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen (LondonFanshawe, NDP): Madam Chair, we need more justice for black, indigenous and racialized people in Canada. They can't be asked to keep waiting. This government recognizes that systemic racism exists but refuses to collect race-based data that would allow us to quantify and truly address this injustice. We need data to protect Canadians. When will this government do the right thing and start collecting race-based data? Hon. Bardish Chagger (Minister of Diversity and Inclusion and Youth): Madam Chair, our government agrees that it's important that we collect data, and that's exactly why, in the anti-racism secretariat and the anti-racism strategy, there is a commitment to have money go to Statistics Canada to collect race-based data. We look forward to working with all members to ensure it happens. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen: Madam Chair, we know that Statistics Canada will start to collect job numbers based on race. This will allow us to identify systemic racism where it is and where we need to ensure a fair and more equal job market for black, indigenous and racialized people in Canada. Why is this government refusing to follow suit so we can tackle systemic racism everywhere, in every sector? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I'd like to thank my honourable colleague for her question. She's absolutely correct in her assessment that we need to collect more data, reliable data, data that will help us deal with some of the challenges we're seeing with systemic discrimination, but, more broadly, we want to make sure that we continue to engage with an anti-racism strategy that will allow us to collect that disaggregated data. That is why we allocated $6. 2 million to that initiative through Statistics Canada, but we know we must do more and we will do more. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen: We know that all people are susceptible to catching COVID-19, but health authorities are clear that parts of cities like Montreal and Toronto have been more impacted than others. For black and racialized people living in these cities, this data is a matter of life and death. Will the government collect and share disaggregated data so we can identify and erase systemic racism, yes or no? Hon. Bardish Chagger: Madam Chair, making decisions based on science and evidence is essential for our government. We took that practice from day one. It is exactly the step we will take moving forward and that's why we are making those investments to ensure that data exists. We are working across all departments. My mandate letter is public. I look forward to continuing to work not only with all ministers, departments and agencies, but all allies and all parties to get this work done. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Blaney, the honourable member for BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, has the floor. Hon. Steven Blaney (BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, CPC): Thank you, MadamChair. Last week, my plumber told me that, each time Justin Trudeau comes down the steps to make announcements totalling several billion dollars, he feels like someone is rifling through his pockets. My question is simple and goes to the Minister of Finance: where is this money coming from? Hon. Mona Fortier: MadamChair, I would like to thank my honourable colleague for his question. Currently, the health and safety of Canadians are our top priorities. We have implemented an emergency economic plan to support Canadians, workers and companies. We will continue to support them during this crisis. Hon. Steven Blaney: The answer I would have liked is simple: we are borrowing the money and we are going to have to pay it back one day. That is another Liberal craze: they borrow money, they make campaign promises, and off they go. Under the Conservative government, the Chantier Davie in Lvis had 1,700workers for the supply ship Asterix. In the election campaign, the Liberals promised icebreakers. When are the Liberals going to award the icebreaker contracts to the Chantier Davie? Hon. David Lametti (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada): MadamChair, we are very proud of the Chantier Davie and we completely understand its role in the system. We are currently assessing those requests. We are going to establish the process for the polar ice-breaker, which is essential for the work of the Coast Guard in northern communities, and we are going to make sure that The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Blaney has the floor. Hon. Steven Blaney: The workers do not need words; they need contracts and jobs. The same is true for young people who want to work. There is money in the Canada summer jobs program: in my constituency alone, $150,000has been approved. Companies want young people to work and want to hire them. What is the minister waiting for in order to confirm those positions? In my constituency, and everywhere else in the country, our young people want to work. What is the government waiting for in order to send some cash to the Canada summer jobs program? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we are proud of the Canada summer jobs program. We are introducing flexibilities into the system to enable employers to be able to hire summer students. We recognize the importance of this program to provide both financial resources and necessary experience for young people. We believe in continuing to invest in the Canada summer jobs program. Hon. Steven Blaney: The workers, the young people and the employers have been waiting for weeks. The money is available; where is the announcement? MadamChair, our young people are not the only ones who want to work. There are also the temporary foreign workers. Let me use Jessie Gito as an example; he has been working at Plate2000 in Saint-Anselme for years. When the time came to renew his work permit, he found out that he has to have some biometric tests. But he cannot get them because the offices are closed. Is the minister going to allow Jessie Gito and the thousands of other temporary foreign workers who want to work to be able to do so until the government biometric testing centres reopen? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, it is important for the honourable member to recognize that we are in the early recovery stage of the pandemic. Employers are slowly reopening businesses. We will ensure that we support both our students and our temporary foreign workers to make sure we get the recovery right. We will continue to invest in the Canada summer jobs program. We've introduced flexibilities into the program to ensure that employers are able to take advantage of the program and give opportunities to young people. Hon. Steven Blaney: It is very simple. Jessie Gito is a foreign worker, who is in a company that provides an essential service. He needs a decision that will let him go to work, rather than staying home and doing nothing. Then, when the government's biometric testing centres are open again, he will gladly go to one. Young people want to work in agriculture as well, and the minister has told us that the government wants young people working and that their files will be processed as quickly as possible. She wants to create 700positions and she knows that people can fill in an application on a first-come first-served basis. Of those 700positions, how many have been confirmed to date? The good weather has arrived, the corn is starting to grow, and this is the time when farmers need the young workers. Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food): MadamChair, the program for young workers in agriculture is open. I also encourage agricultural producers to register for it. This is a program that is not only intended to provide summer jobs, but also to interest young people in making a career in agriculture. As I have said before, the department is processing files as quickly as possible. Each employer will have an answer very shortly. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will now take a short break. Okay, we are ready to start again. We will go to the honourable member for BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte. Mr. Doug Shipley (BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Over the course of the pandemic, has the government been using all avenues possible to source much-needed PPE in Canada? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, we have been very clear that we have a made-in-Canada initiative that has engaged companies across the country. Over 700 companies have retooled and scaled up their operations for personal protective equipment to help front-line health care workers. Mr. Doug Shipley: Madam Chair, I need to ask very quickly which ministry and minister are responsible for the sourcing of PPE in Canada. Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, this is a collective effort. I work with the Minister of Health and the minister for procurement, and we coordinate with the provinces and territories to make sure there are appropriate levels of PPE to help front-line health care workers and essential workers across the country. Mr. Doug Shipley: Thank you for that clarification. That will make this question all the more pertinent. My riding of BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte is the home of Southmedic Inc. Southmedic is a renowned medical supply business. For over 37 years, it has provided front-line health care workers with an extensive line of PPE and other essential products required when dealing with respiratory illnesses. This company specializes in respiratory illness equipment. Southmedic currently employs over 700 people, and it has been recognized as one of Canada's best-managed companies by Deloitte on numerous occasions. Since the beginning of the pandemic, both I and the member for BarrieInnisfil have been attempting to obtain some assistance for Southmedic from the federal government. Calls and emails were falling on deaf ears. In early May, I wrote a letter to Minister Anand outlining the situation. I received a letter back from the minister dated May 27 indicating that this issue of Southmedic falls under the mandate of the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada. I have heard nothing more. When will the federal government reach out and help this great Canadian company and therefore ensure that all front-line workers will have the proper PPE they require? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I'd like to thank my honourable colleague for his question. He knows full well that this is a very challenging time. That is why we had a call to action to engage Canadians right across the country. Since then, we've seen over 6,000 companies step up to offer solutions and ideas, and over 700 companies have retooled their efforts. I acknowledge that some companies are still engaging with the government, and we'll continue to explore all possible options to make sure we continue to procure the necessary levels of personal protective equipment to protect Canadians and to protect front-line health care workers. That has always been our priority. I want to thank the outstanding Canadian companies that have come forward and have helped us in this endeavour. We continue to look forward to working with them. Mr. Doug Shipley: Thank you for that answer. Just to follow up, there's no retooling required at this company. They could have been up and going very quickly. They just needed a little assistance at the beginning. Moving on to a different issue, while walking to my office this morning, I stopped at my local small family-run coffee shop and was discussing the current economic situation with the two owners of the establishment. They indicated they are having a very tough time surviving this economic downturn. The only thing keeping them hopeful is that soon the public service will start returning to work, and therefore their business will begin to return. Could the government please give us some indication as to what the plans are for returning the civil service back to work safely, and when? Hon. Jean-Yves Duclos (President of the Treasury Board): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm delighted to answer this question. This is a very important topic, but I'd like to take the opportunity first to thank our public servants, who have worked very hard in the last few weeks, both personally and professionally. In fact, today is a wonderful day to say that, because today is the start of National Public Service Week. That's one more reason to thank them for their dedicated work. They are not going to go back to work. They've been at work for the last few monthsin different circumstances, but they have been working very hard to deliver the services and the support Canadians need and deserve. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Next we'll go to the honourable member for SelkirkInterlakeEastman, Mr. Bezan. Mr. James Bezan (SelkirkInterlakeEastman, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. My questions are for the Minister of National Defence. First of all, I want to thank the great men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces for the fantastic job they're doing in Operation LASER, serving on the front lines battling COVID-19. Can the Minister of National Defence give the House an update on exactly where we are at with the number of Canadian Armed Forces members who have been infected with COVID-19? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan (Minister of National Defence): Madam Chair, I want to echo the member opposite's comments in thanking our Canadian Armed Forces members. Currently, we have 13 active cases in the Canadian Armed Forces, but in the long-term care facilities we currently have 50 cases. No member has been currently hospitalized. We have also conducted very thorough reviews of our protection protocols as well. Mr. James Bezan: Through you, Chair, Minister Sajjan, does that number of active cases include the active cases that are in long-term care facilities right now in Operation LASER? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, as I stated, the 50 cases are strictly from the long-term care facilities. The 13 cases I mentioned are not in the long-term care facilities. Just to give the actual clarification, no member has been currently hospitalized. Mr. James Bezan: In those numbers, Madam Chair, can Mr. Sajjan say how many of those cases in long-term care facilities are active and how many are recovered? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, I don't have the exact number. What I can say to break it down further is that in Quebec we currently have 36 and in Ontario we have 14. As well, 36 of the members have been out of isolation. I'll get more details and pass them on directly to the member, Madam Chair. Mr. James Bezan: Thank you, Minister. Madam Chair, I have a quick question while we're still talking about Operation LASER. The President of the Treasury Board has said, The Canadian Armed Forces will be present as long as their presence is needed in Quebec. This contradicts what Prime Minister Trudeau is saying, which is that we have a hard deadline of June 26 for the withdrawal of our troops for Operation LASER. That means taking our troops out of our long-term care facilities. Minister, is June 26 the hard date for the winding down of Operation LASER? Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I'm delighted to have the opportunity to clarify for the House. We've been in very extensive discussions with the Province of Quebec, with my counterpart Minister Guilbault, and we are working very diligently to ensure we have a sustained, appropriate response to the request from Quebec for assistance. That response will result in a transition from the currently deployed Canadian Armed Forces to the deployment of paid volunteers, trained personnel who will take on the important role of providing services to those Canadians who need our help in Quebec. Mr. James Bezan: I'll go back to the Minister of National Defence. The Department of National Defence auditors have called out the Liberal government for mismanagement over the $553-billion investment in our Canadian military through the defence policy. Only three people have been assigned to oversee the rollout of this money. This is a $553-billion investment in our armed forces, and only three people are managing it. Could the minister tell us how that is even possible? Is this the reason that over 100 projects are currently behind schedule? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, first of all, I want to highlight the unprecedented investment that we're making in defence. We have conducted internal reviews of our procurement. The report the member opposite is talking about is from the previous year. This is the ongoing work we're doing to make sure that we make procurement better. When it comes to the management of this, it's conducted by me and the minister of procurement. We are working toward making our procurement even better. We have already streamlined some aspects of our procurement and we'll continue to do more as well. Mr. James Bezan: Minister Sajjan, you've had this report since November of 2019. You've been rolling out this plan since 2017. Only three people are overseeing an expenditure of $553 billion. This is taxpayers'money. Are we going to see more cuts because you have been unable to actually roll out these dollars? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, I can assure you we're not going to be cutting. We'll be investing in our defence. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Before I go to the next speaker, I want to remind members that they are to address their questions and comments directly through the chair. We will go now to the honourable member for Fort McMurrayCold Lake, Mr. Yurdiga. Mr. David Yurdiga (Fort McMurrayCold Lake, CPC): Madam Chair, the Canada summer jobs program has many challenges. I've seen many indigenous communities in my riding rejected for funding even though they had received funding in previous years. Here are a few examples of communities that were rejected: Beaver Lake Cree Nation, Buffalo Lake Mtis Settlement and the Mtis Nation of Alberta, Region 1. The list goes on. Could the Prime Minister explain why so many indigenous communities have been denied funding from the Canada summer jobs program? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we recognize the important role that the Canada summer jobs program plays in supporting employers and young workers in our community across the country every year. We're working very hard to help employers adapt to the realities of the COVID-19 pandemic and are supporting young Canadians as they begin to look for summer employment. We are introducing increased flexibilities into the Canada summer jobs program to hire youth, while also providing more supports to employers that deliver essential services to Canadians. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, that didn't really answer my question. Why are so many indigenous communities left out of the Canada summer jobs program? This is very important to my community and to communities throughout the province. Will the government investigate why these communities were rejected? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that we, of course, value the important role that the Canada summer jobs program plays in all communities, including indigenous communities in Canada. I will certainly have an off-line conversation with the honourable member, if he so wishes, about a particular issue, but I can assure him that in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, we have had to assist employers to introduce flexibilities The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Yurdiga. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, in my riding, the City of Cold Lake has been in dispute with the federal government for many years over payment in lieu of taxes. My office has sent many letters over the years regarding the PILT dispute. Could the Minister of Public Services and Procurement give me a rough estimate of when I will receive a response from the minister's office to my first letter, from 2017, and my letters from 2018,2019 and 2020? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that I will go to the minister, and we will come back with an answer to his question. Mr. David Yurdiga: How much longer does the minister intend to perpetuate the ongoing PILT dispute, which is in excess of $11 million, with the City of Cold Lake? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, once again, I can assure the honourable member that I will speak with the minister and get an answer to his question. Mr. David Yurdiga: Well, do you know what? I've been writing letters to the department for many years. When you say you're going to get back to me, I really have a hard time believing that. Will the minister agree to follow the prior recommendations of the dispute advisory panel that were accepted by the minister? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that I will check with the minister and that she will return to the member in due course. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, the drug Trikafta has been proven to increase the quality of life for 90% of cystic fibrosis patients. Two weeks ago, my office sent a letter to the Minister of Health about the boy in my riding named Cael, who through the special access program is able to get Trikafta in Canada. I requested that the minister use her powers to fast-track Trikafta for commercial use, but I have yet to receive a response back. When will the minister make a decision on Trikafta? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, I'm glad to hear that Cael was able to access Trikafta through the special access program. In fact, that program is very helpful for people who are seeking access to medication that's not currently marketed in Canada. As the member opposite knows, Vertex has not applied to market Trikafta in Canada, but we look forward to their application, and I encourage him to write a letter to the manufacturer to also encourage them. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Vancouver Granville, Ms. Wilson-Raybould. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould (Vancouver Granville, Ind.): Thank you, Chair. I was very troubled to hear that a CBC radio host in the Yukon felt compelled to resign because, as an indigenous person, she could not speak her truth. While we know the Broadcasting Act states that the Canadian broadcasting system should reflect the linguistic duality and multicultural and multiracial nature of Canadian society and the special place of indigenous peoples, it would seem there are some challenges. Therefore, does the Minister of Heritage share the concern of some journalists that problems of systemic racism in Canada are still existing within the institution of the CBC, and will the government now acknowledge the need to recognize the jurisdiction of indigenous governments? Hon. Steven Guilbeault (Minister of Canadian Heritage): Thank you, Madame Chair; and I thank the member for this important question. As stated by the Prime Minister on numerous occasions, our government recognizes that systemic racism exists in Canada, and we have made a commitment to do everything we can to combat it in whichever organization of the Canadian government. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould: Thank you. When I was in the government, and as a minister, I learned the term red meat issues. I understand these issues to be ones that challenge societal norms, that are not politically expedient to address because they can lose you votes, even though addressing them is morally right and a smart thing to do. Mostly these are issues addressing inequality and the most marginalized in our society. In the justice system, examples include mandatory minimum penalties, defunding police, and even investing in restorative justice. Red-meat issues often become defining issues for society and for governments as the world changes. Surely now these issues are politically less of a consideration than the tragic reality of even more slain indigenous Canadians at the hands of police, or thousands of indigenous people still incarcerated or living in poverty. Will this government please finally commit to the necessary work originally promised in 2015 and repeal in the justice system the vast majority of mandatory minimum penalties, assuring the necessary discretion for judges, and meaningfully invest in restorative justice measures? Hon. David Lametti: Madame Chair, I thank the honourable member for her question, as well as for her work as Minister of Justice, and indeed my predecessor. This is an important time. This is a time when we recognize systemic racism. This is a time when we recognize systemic over-incarceration of indigenous peoples, of black peoples, in our criminal justice system. This is a time when we need to look at all potential options to reduce what is a shameful overrepresentation in our criminal justice system. Too often racialized peoples and indigenous peoples have experienced prejudice and systemic discrimination in our justice system, and that has to change. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould: I'll go on to another red meat issue. In British Columbia we are in the fifth year of the opioid overdose public health emergency crisis. Sadly, May marks the deadliest month of overdose-related deaths. We are halfway into the year and have currently passed 500 deaths caused by overdose. Many of the deaths are related to COVID-19 measures that have prevented people from accessing supervised consumption sites, so they are overdosing alone. While the provinces welcomed the federal backing of safe supply exemption back in March, it is to expire in September of 2020. Echoing the call of the chief coroner of B. C. and Dr. Henry, more is needed from the federal government, more action. Will the government provide the necessary supports to the province and help support safe supply initiatives in the provinces? Hon. Patty Hajdu: It's been a pleasure to work with the Province of British Columbia on innovative ways to work on the tragic situation of opioid overdose. I remain committed to working with the province and in fact any province that wants to work towards solutions that treat people who use substances with the dignity they deserve. Madam Chair, this is a complex issue. We're working closely with our partners to make sure that we can prevent more lives from being lost. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for South OkanaganWest Kootenay, Mr. Cannings. Mr. Richard Cannings (South OkanaganWest Kootenay, NDP): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with the member for SkeenaBulkley Valley. In my riding, Theo's in Penticton is a beloved restaurant. They've been serving great food for 40 years, but now they're struggling, because they don't qualify for the emergency wage subsidy. Why is that? The original owners retired last year and sold it to another operator. The new owner can't use a year-to-year comparison to apply for the wage subsidy because he didn't own the restaurant last spring. He is forced to use receipts from January and February, the darkest doldrums of the restaurant year, to compare with the results from May, traditionally one of their best months. Now he has to compete with other local restaurants that can access the subsidy. When will the government fix this inequity and let Theo's compete and survive? Hon. Mona Fortier: Madam Chair, the Canada emergency wage subsidy is supporting over 2. 5 million workers across the country. To help even more businesses support their workers and rehire people as they reopen, our government is extending the CEWS, and we will continue to extend the CEWS for an additional 12 weeks to August 29 to ensure that Canadian workers continue to have the support they need during these very difficult times. By extending eligibility, our government is ensuring that more Canadian workers in more sectors have the support they need. Mr. Richard Cannings: The owner just wants to be able to apply for the wage subsidy, and right now he cannot, and he will not be able to. Thousands of other businesses are hit that way as well. I'd like to move on to forestry. Canada's forest sector has been declared essential during this pandemic, but it's been hit hard after a very difficult 2019. Despite soft markets and thousands out of work, government support programs have left many Canadian forest product companies behind. In my riding, the pulp mill in Castlegar is closing for the month of July because local sawmills aren't producing enough wood chips. What is the government going to do to finally support Canadian forestry workers and communities? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The time is almost up, but I will allow for the answer from the honourable minister. Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Thank you, Madam Chair. We have supported and we will continue to support the forestry sector, including through regional development programs. In fact, in Quebec, partnering with Les Bois Francs DV Inc. , we have widened market access to our products and updated technology systems. In North Bay we've partnered with the Canadian Wood Council to promote the sector. In Vancouver we're working with FPInnovations to create the indigenous forest sector technical support program. We are supporting the forestry sector and its different needs region by region. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Now we go to the honourable member for SkeenaBulkley Valley, Mr. Bachrach. Mr. Taylor Bachrach (SkeenaBulkley Valley, NDP): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm going to pick up where my colleague left off, with B. C.'s forest industry. What we've seen in B. C. are multiple rounds of mill shutdowns and start-ups, and in some cases this has made it difficult for forestry workers to qualify for EI. My question to the minister is this: Will the minister work to make the EI program more flexible for forestry workers, similar to what this government has done for oil and gas workers? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, in the oil and gas sector we have focused on workers. That has been key in the inactive and orphan well program, which we are working on with the provincial governments of Saskatchewan, British Columbia and Alberta. The focus on workers has assured that success, and we will continue to focus on workers in all the industries, particularly our natural resource industry, as they go through this extraordinarily difficult time. Mr. Taylor Bachrach: Madam Chair, reforestation is a very important part of the forest industry in the riding I represent, and people were keenly interested to hear this government's plan to plant two billion trees in the next 10 years. That's a lot of trees. I'm wondering if the minister could tell us how many trees are going to be planted under this program by the end of this season. Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, this government is committed to two billion trees. We are working with forestry associations, the industry and with individual companies to ensure this tree-planting season will be one of the largest the country has ever seen. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The floor goes to the honourable member for Rivire-du-Nord. Mr. Rhal Fortin (Rivire-du-Nord, BQ): MadamChair, last week, the government introduced BillC-17 and the Minister of Justice sent us briefing notes in which he said that it was important to suspend a number of time limits and to extend others, and that the failure to do so could have important repercussions on Canadians, their families, their situations, their finances and their ability to exercise their rights. We in the Bloc Qubcois agree with that. When are we going to talk about it? Hon. David Lametti: MadamChair, the contents of BillC-17 are clearly very important. We have addressed the mandatory time limits in federal legislation as well as certain time limits that courts may not be able to handle. It is very important that we address this issue. That is why the law The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Fortin, you have the floor. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, we agree that it is important. I concur. The minister's briefing notes say that, among other things, when it comes to divorcewhich means children are involved people are waiting on custody rights, child support and visitation rights. The minister pointed out that the national security review would require consultations if no decision is made in the prescribed time frame. It could pose a national security risk. It is really a big deal. When are we going to debate it? Hon. David Lametti: MadamChair, I completely agree with my honourable colleague. The issue needs to be addressed. That is why it is in the bill. That is another reason to debate the bill. I beseech my colleagues opposite to debate it with us. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, what a coincidence, because I beseech my colleague opposite to debate it with us. That is what we are asking. Last week, the leader of the Bloc Qubcois asked the Liberal government to debate BillC-17 today. He did not get an answer. It does not seem to matter. Richard Wagner, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, who is hardly a dimwit or greenhorn, told us that the justice system needs to be modernized. As recently as this past Saturday in LaPresse, Justice Wagner said that it is essential that the Criminal Code be amended to address the backlog of court proceedings. When will the Liberal government opposite pull up its socks, do its job, govern the federation, sit down with the opposition and discuss the vital matters in BillC-17? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, if I were my colleague, I would be a little embarrassed, because the bill was sent to the Bloc Qubcois several days in advance. They received a technical note several days in advance. We were all available to take questions. When we asked for the support of the Bloc Qubcois and the other parties to debate itwe were not even asking them to vote in favour of the billthey refused. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, we never refused to debate it. Actually, we were the ones who asked to debate it. What exactly does debate it mean? We set some conditions. For example, we asked the Liberals to put the money back into the wage subsidy fund and to commit to dip into it no longer. Are we asking too much of our colleagues opposite? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Can my colleague explain to me what the emergency wage subsidy has to do with a bill about justice? This is an absolutely fundamental piece of legislation. We wanted to debate it, but they refused to do so. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, I would like nothing better than to explain it to him, but I must remind him that he is the leader of the party in power, the party that is supposed to govern the country. So I do not know why he is asking me that. My party proposed that we debate this today but we did not get an answer. Meanwhile, court time limits are running out and people are losing rights. I am thinking of families, child support, child custody, labour law disputes in Federal Court, marine transportation, interprovincial transportation, aviation, banks, and those with grievances waiting for a Federal Court ruling. The whole system, the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal, everything is on hold because nobody in the government wants to do their job. We want to discuss BillC-17. When can we talk about it? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, we have done our job. We have introduced the bill. We informed them in advance. We told them they could ask us any questions they wanted. We asked for a debate in the House. However, when we asked the Bloc Qubcois if they wanted to debate the bill, they said no, instead of doing what they usually do and saying yes. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for Essex, Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis (Essex, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. When the CERB runs out, many workers in my riding of Essex will not have sufficient hours to collect their EI benefits. In early July, the midnight shift at Chrysler will be eliminated. Because of the shutdown, a mom-to-be who had just returned to work in January, and several hundred of her fellow employees, may not have the 600 hours required for regular or EI parental benefits. Immediate action is needed. What is the government doing now to backstop these workers? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, the Canada emergency response benefit has been providing much-needed help to Canadian workers across the country who have stopped working due to COVID-19. We know that there is still a lot of uncertainty for many Canadian workers, and we know that many will be exhausting their benefits in the weeks to come. We will have more to share soon, as early as this week, on our continuing efforts to support Canadian workers and make sure that help is available during this The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Go ahead, Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Minister, for the answer. The EI system needs to be fixed. Even before the shutdown, the system was deeply flawed. Will this government commit to a complete review and overhaul of the EI system? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we have been there for Canadian workers. We will continue to make sure that we make the necessary investments in the EI delivery system and modernize it to continue to meet The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. Small businesses have been hit extremely hard by the COVID-19 shutdown. Many have already been forced into bankruptcy. Much uncertainty lies ahead. As the economy reopens, what is the government doing to help small businesses recover? Hon. Mary Ng: Madam Chair, today we are seeing small businesses that have been helped, whether it is getting access to the small business loan, which some are also using in the restart as they are safely restarting, or getting help with their payroll, helping them keep their employees The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. Employees are key to a small business's success. How will the government incentivize workers to return to their jobs when recalled? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister can give a brief answer. Hon. Mary Ng: The Canada emergency wage subsidy is an excellent program to help those employees stay employed and for those employers who are looking at rehiring them right now during this restart process. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair, many of my constituents are in a committed cross-border relationship and have not been able to see their partners in quite some time. The current restrictions are arbitrary. Denmark has found a fair resolution. Will Canada adopt the Danish model, and if not, why not? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, as we said from the outset, we've implemented restrictions at the U. S. border on non-essential travel with a single purpose in mind: to protect the health and safety of Canadians. As the member is aware, just last week we introduced new measures that allow people in family relationships to stay together as long as they commit to the necessary 14-day period of quarantine. We'll continue to work with families. Our intention is to keep people together, but mostly to keep people safe. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair, with regard to child care, as our economy continues to open, parents are facing a stark choice: Who will care for their children? What's the plan to provide access to child care so parents can confidently return to work? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we are of course committed to continuing to make the record investments that we've been making in child care. Since 2015 we've created over 40,000 affordable child care spaces. We're committed to creating an additional 250,000 before-school and after-school child care spaces. We will continue to invest in this sector because we understand that without investment The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. It sounds as though this government has a desire to force parents to choose between their job and care for their child. Can the government please respond to that quote? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, nothing could be further from the truth. We are committed to the child care sector. Our investments and our results prove the opposite of what the member is asserting. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I'm sorry. We're out of time. The committee now stands adjourned until tomorrow at noon.

A made-in-Canada initiative had engaged companies across Canada and they had retooled and scaled up their operations for personal protective equipment. This assisted front-line health care workers.

tr-gq-1220

tr-gq-1220_0

Summarize the whole meeting. The Chair (Hon. Anthony Rota (NipissingTimiskaming, Lib.) ): I call this meeting to order. Welcome to meeting number 22 of the House of Commons Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic. A reminder to all members that in order to avoid issues with sound, members participating in person should not also be connected to the video conference. For those joining via video conference, I would like to remind you that, when speaking, you should be on the same channel as the language you are speaking. As usual, please direct your remarks through the chair. I understand we don't have any ministerial announcements today, so we'll proceed to presenting petitions. I would like to remind members that any petition presented during a meeting of the special committee must have already been certified by the clerk of petitions. For members participating in person, we ask that they please come and drop the signed certificate off at the table once the petition is presented. The first petition will be presented by Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May (SaanichGulf Islands, GP): Mr. Chair, it's an honour to rise in meeting number 22 of the COVID-19 committee, otherwise known as something like the House of Commons. I'm here to present two petitions containing hundreds of signatures on the issue of the treatment of Falun Gong practitioners by the People's Republic of China, particularly the practice that's alleged of involuntary organ harvesting. The petitioners ask the Government of Canada to condemn this practice and to publicly call for an end to the persecution of Falun Gong in the People's Republic of China. The second petition is from residents throughout SaanichGulf Islands concerned about what was, at the time this petition was submitted, a future problem. It remains an issue, and I present it on behalf of petitioners who wish the Government of Canada not to put public funds into purchasing or maintaining the Trans Mountain pipeline or towards any expansion of the pipeline. The Chair: Next we'll go to Ms. Kwan. Ms. Jenny Kwan (Vancouver East, NDP): Mr. Chair, I rise to table two petitions. The first petition deals with the COVID-19 situation. The petitioners note the pandemic is having a devastating impact on many Canadians nationwide, especially those who have low to modest income, small business gig workers, freelancers, artists, film industry workers, non-salaried workers and individuals on fixed incomes such as seniors and those on disability. It further notes that rent, mortgage and utility payments are due at the end of each month, putting countless Canadians at risk of losing their housing. It is paramount there be safe self-isolation opportunities for all individuals in this country. To that end, the petitioners are calling for the government to immediately enact a nationwide rent freeze, eviction freeze, mortgage freeze and utility freeze, enforce mortgage deferrals for homeowners without penalty or interest charges from financial institutions and provide direct assistance in the form of a monthly, universal, direct payment of $2,000 per month for all, with an additional $250 per child immediately. The second petition deals with the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion. These petitioners join the hundreds of thousands of people who are opposed to the expansion. Trans Mountain, in building the pipeline, brings massive environmental and economic risk with no substantial benefit to British Columbia or to local residents. Approximately 40,000 barrels of oil have already leaked from existing Kinder Morgan pipelines, including two major spills in Burnaby since 2007. I might note, Mr. Chair, that just this past weekend there was yet another spill to the tune of 1,195 barrels here in British Columbia. There is no known scientific technology to clean up the bitumen when there is a spill, and the number of tankers would go from eight to 34 per month into the Burrard Inlet. It puts at risk many residential neighbourhoods and the traditional territories of at least 15 first nations. The Chair: May I interrupt for a moment, Ms. Kwan. I want to remind all members in the House that when presenting a petition, the idea is to be as concise as possible. Ms. Kwan, I'll let you wrap up, please. Ms. Jenny Kwan: Thank you, Mr. Chair. The petitioners are calling for the government to immediately act to prevent this new oil pipeline from proceeding through British Columbia. The Chair: Thank you. We'll now go to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood ParkFort Saskatchewan, CPC): Mr. Chair, I have four petitions to present today. The first petition reflects the outrage of my constituents at the ever-expanding order in council from the government banning more and more firearms. In particular, the petitioners highlight the failure of the government to act on the issue of illegal guns. The petitioners note that virtually all violent crimes committed in Canada, including the recent shooting in Nova Scotia, involve illegal firearms in the hands of those who are already not permitted to possess them. The petition has two asks. First of all, it asks that we reverse the order in council banning certain firearms, but also that we propose measures that will effectively address the illegal use of firearms by criminals while respecting the rights of law-abiding citizens. It also asks that we ensure that substantial changes to firearms laws in future actually be made by Parliament, not by the government acting in an unaccountable manner. The second petition deals with Bill C-8, which is the government's bill around conversion therapy. The petitioners support efforts to ban conversion therapy. They express concern about problems in the wording of the definition used in the legislation. They're asking the government to support amendments to fix the definition to address the issue of conversion therapy and ensure that the definition is correct and doesn't criminalize certain forms of counselling that individuals may voluntarily enter into. The third petition is regarding Bill S-204, a bill in the Senate that seeks to make it a criminal offence for a person to go abroad to receive an organ without consent, dealing especially with the horrific practice of forced organ harvesting and trafficking in China. The petitioners are supportive of Bill S-204 and want to see it move forward. The final petition is with respect to Bill C-7. There's been much discussion in this House about the need to do better in terms of long-term care. Rather than working to do better in long-term care, unfortunately we've seen the government removing vital safeguards in the area of euthanasia. I think our focus should be on assisting life rather than removing safeguards that are required in association with the euthanasia regime. The petitioners are particularly concerned about the government's plan to remove a 10-day reflection period that normally takes place. That period can already be waived under certain circumstances, but Bill C-7 proposes to remove it entirely as well as reduce the number of witnesses involved. The petitioners are quite concerned about what's going on in Bill C-7 and call for it to be stopped or amended. The Chair: Presenting petitions. We'll proceed to statements by members. We'll start off with Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly (NanaimoLadysmith, GP): Mr. Chair, we are in the midst of a global pandemic and an economic shock. Recent events have ripped open the wound of systemic racism in our country. Racialized and marginalized communities have been disproportionally affected by the pandemic. Thousands of seniors in long-term care facilities have died. It is clear that we need system change. In the past, governments have bailed out banks and corporations because they were too big to fail. It is time to bail out humanity and the planet. No one will be immune from the threat of climate change and mass extinction. Both are the result of the exploitation of the natural world in the name of the economy. Humans created the economy. We can choose to change it. We must protect our environment or perish. COVID-19 has demonstrated that together we can take courageous action for the common good. We need to do the same for the climate crisis, because humanity and our planet are too big to fail. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Spengemann. Mr. Sven Spengemann (MississaugaLakeshore, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, today marks World Elder Abuse Awareness Day. Underestimated and under-reported, elder abuse exists across the world. At risk of neglect and assault, many of the most vulnerable older persons reside in our long-term care facilities. They are the seniors who have built our country and shaped our communities, who have shown us resilience, courage and selflessness, who have made us stronger, and whose work and teachings continue to inspire us. They are parents and grandparents, brothers and sisters, friends and mentors. We have not been there for them in the same way they've been there for us throughout their lives. The Canadian Forces report, alongside the climbing disproportionate death toll in our long-term care facilities, has reconfirmed the ugly, indefensible reality of elder abuse and neglect in Canada. In my community, we mourn the deaths of 68 seniors from one long-term care facility alone, Camilla Care. We must make the same unwavering commitment to older persons as they have shown to us. We must protect and uphold their human rights. We must do better. The Chair: Before proceeding, I just want to bring up to the members in the background that we want to keep it as simple and as parliamentary as possible in keeping it neutral. We'll now move to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett (LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, CPC): During these trying times, the residents of LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes have risen to the challenge. They've made sacrifices and gone above and beyond to make the lives of their neighbours better and to keep our communities safe. It would be impossible to list everyone who has emerged as a community hero, but I'd like to highlight a few, like Lily, an eight-year-old from Elgin who raised funds for her local food bank by building and selling squirrel picnic tables, and Louise Boardman from Spencerville who's making masks for long-term care facilities and selling others in support of the Breast Cancer Action centre. The Knights of Columbus in Prescott raised funds and are distributing some $27,000 in support of charitable groups throughout the region. The Knights of Columbus in Kemptville are working overtime operating the local food bank. Who can forget our top-notch health care workers like Hannah and Mary at the Brockville COVID-19 testing centre? It is the people of LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes that make it so great. To everyone working to make a difference and to all of our essential workers, thank you. The Chair: Next is Mr. Anandasangaree. Mr. Gary Anandasangaree (ScarboroughRouge Park, Lib.): Mr. Chair, the Indian Act enshrined racism into Canadian law in 1876, and, through residential schools, the child welfare system, our legal system and our police, we criminalized and tore apart indigenous peoples. The deaths of Chantel Moore and Rodney Levi and the assault on Chief Allan Adam are recent examples of systemic racism within the RCMP. Sadly, the RCMP leadership has failed to acknowledge this reality and its root causes. These same systems negatively impact black Canadians. Anti-black racism has resulted in more young black men being jailed, children being streamed or excluded from schools and negative police interaction due to profiling. Black lives matter. No single Canadian is responsible for the prevalence of systemic racism; we all are. Collectively we build institutions that discriminate based on race. It is now time to reimagine and rework our institutions, starting with our police, to ensure that all Canadians can achieve their truest potential. The Chair: Ms. Larouche, you have the floor. Ms. Andranne Larouche (Shefford, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chair. June15 is World Elder Abuse Awareness Day. I want to remind members of the link between abuse and the problems of economic dependency among seniors. Improving their purchasing power means reducing the risk of them falling victim to abusive people. That's why the increase in the old age security benefit and the guaranteed income supplement must be extended beyond the pandemic. In three weeks, our seniors will receive their first cheque, when they should be receiving their second. A date must also be announced for the new horizons for seniors program, which helps several groups develop projects to break the isolation of seniors. In closing, I would like to mention the organization Justice alternative et mdiation that during the pandemic, along with other organizations in Shefford, has set up the project Une histoire pour la tienne, which also serves to mark this day. It's a virtual meeting between young people and seniors, allowing them to exchange some inspiring life experiences. Since age prejudice is very much present, I applaud this project, which aims to make us understand each other better and judge each other less. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Sangha. Mr. Ramesh Sangha (Brampton Centre, Lib.): Mr. Chair, in the time of this terrible crisis affecting all Canadians, when we are all thinking about how best to deal with it, let's all think about the people around us. Let's show our representation not only to those in the sector of sanctioned workers, but also to all those Canadians who day by day stand up and make a difference. Every day I am proud of the reactions of Canadians to this crisis. I want to acknowledge and celebrate all the contributions made by the people of Brampton Centre, all religious institutions, civil society and community organizations like Knights Table in my riding. We are all standing together to fight COVID-19. Let's continue working hard with that same spirit to get positive results out. Thank you very much. The Chair: I will proceed to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff (BruceGreyOwen Sound, CPC): Mr. Chair, whether graduating from elementary school, high school, Georgian College or graduating from colleges or universities across the country, I am proud of the accomplishments of all the graduates across BruceGreyOwen Sound. I would also like to congratulate and thank all the teachers and parents who have adapted to teaching online or from home and who have supported these graduates over the course of their academic careers. I'd like to extend special congratulations to Cameron Lovell, who just graduated from grade eight, as well as to Neebeesh and Neebin Elliott, originally from the Nawash unceded first nation on the Bruce Peninsula, who will be headed to Michigan State University, and to Jared Lumley from Owen Sound, who just graduated from my alma mater, the Royal Military College of Canada. The college motto of Truth, Duty, Valour is something all Canadians should aspire to live by. I wish all the best to these graduates on their next adventures. I and Canada cannot wait to see how their dreams and goals impact and change the world. I congratulate BruceGreyOwen Sound graduates. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Cormier. Mr. Serge Cormier (AcadieBathurst, Lib.): Today I pay tribute to RichardLosier, an entrepreneur, visionary and builder who died on June9,2020, surrounded by his family. Mr. Losier is a giant in the Acadian Peninsula business community. In1968, he co-founded St. Isidore Asphalte, a company that now has more than 200employees. He also launched many other businesses over the years. He was unifying and generous, a philanthropist who cared about young people and never missed an opportunity to improve their lives. I met Mr. Losier when I was 14years old, and I can say that he has been a positive influence in my life. Every time I met him, he gave me a lot of advice and encouragement, which I've never forgotten. Mr. Losier's legacy to his community is invaluable. His commitment remains an example for all of us to follow. Mr. Losier now joins his wife, Nolla. I offer my most sincere condolences to his children, Richard Jr. , Ronald, Nathalie, Caroline and Stphane, and to his family and friends. Rest in peace, Mr. Losier. You will be greatly missed. Thank you for everything you've done for our region. The Chair: We will now go to Ms. Dabrusin. Ms. Julie Dabrusin (TorontoDanforth, Lib.): Hello from my community in east end Toronto. People talk about how a city the size of Toronto can be cold, but that's far from the truth in my community. I want to give a shout-out to our teachers, like Mr. Wong of Earl Grey Senior Public School, who delivered home-baked cookies and handwritten notes to all of his students, or Monsieur Steve, who's offering online French classes, or the teachers of Riverdale Collegiate, who paraded through our streets to celebrate our graduates. Our local Michael Garron Hospital put out a call for community members to sew masks and received over 60,000 masks, including those made by Lisa Tancre of Chartwell Avondale Retirement Residence. Michelle Beaton organized a front window scavenger hunt to entertain children and their families. Restaurants, even while facing adversity, have been generously donating food, like the members of the Leslieville BIA or Mezes. There are so many more stories of generosity that I could share, but I'm out of time. I thank everyone who has stepped up. We all appreciate all of their hard work. The Chair: We will now go to Ms. Sahota. Ms. Jag Sahota (Calgary Skyview, CPC): Mr. Chair, on Saturday night, Calgarians, particularly those in the northeast, in my riding of Calgary Skyview, witnessed a devastating storm, the likes of which I have not seen in my lifetime. Homes, vehicles, community buildings and structures suffered significant damage due to large hail, floods and high winds. People acted quickly to seek shelter. I'm so grateful that there have been no reports of personal injury or loss of life. I went around the community yesterday to survey the damage. It is extensive. My heart aches for those who have been impacted by the storm in an already incredibly difficult time, but we are resilient. We know that in the coming weeks there will be a lot of cleanup required, both to personal property and in the community. I know my constituents, and we will help one another get through this together. I will work hard to do everything I can to help rebuild this community. The Chair: Mr. Serr, you have the floor. Mr. Marc Serr (Nickel Belt, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to express my sincere gratitude to the people of West Nippissing who organized Pride activities to celebrate the LGBTQ community in June. This week, we are also celebrating National Public Service Week. I thank the public servants for their dedication to the Nickel Belt community and the Valley East and Rayside-Balfour areas. The Chair: Next is Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya (MarkhamUnionville, CPC): Mr. Chair, when COVID-19 began spreading across Ontario, Markham, like many other communities, was unprepared. Our front-line health care workers did not have enough personal protective equipment to do their jobs safely. When Markham residents heard about these shortages, my office was flooded with calls from people who had PPE and wanted to donate. Since then my office has been able to deliver tens of thousands of PPE supplies to front-line health care workers and five masks to each family in need. This pandemic has shown that no matter what the challenge is, the Markham community will overcome it. Today, I would like to thank the front-line health care workers who are doing incredible work. I would also like to thank all those who have helped in Markham's hour of need. The Chair: I understand we had a bit of a glitch there. I'm sorry. With the pause, we thought that was the end of it. Mr. Serr, I would ask you to continue. I understand you started to switch languages. Please continue. You have 30seconds. Mr. Marc Serr: Thank you. I'm switching to English now. Thank you to our nurses, doctors, pharmacists, cashiers, janitors. Thank you to various retail workers and first responders dealing with COVID-19. You keep our communities safe and healthy, and you feed us. Your dedication and sacrifice are greatly appreciated. As we start to see local businesses reopen, it is important for all of us to remember to follow best practices outlined by local public health. Our front-line workers deserve our respect. It is important for all of us to respect social distancing, to protect all workers and their families. Together we can remain strong and united as we continue to face this challenge together. The Chair: Again, my apologies for skipping over there, but now we'll to to Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod (KamloopsThompsonCariboo, CPC): Mr. Chair, in commemoration of Italian Heritage Month, I would like to pay tribute to the Colombo Lodge and Italian Cultural Centre in Kamloops, British Columbia. The Colombo Lodge was founded in 1914 and is an integral part of our community. Recently they began Colombo Cares take-home dinners with proceeds distributed to different non-profit organizations throughout the region. Last month they very generously gave away hundreds of dinners to Royal Inland Hospital staff and paramedics for their tireless work throughout the pandemic. In their own words they say, Colombo Lodge is very proud of the Italians that have made Kamloops their home. Community members of Italian ancestrypast and presenthave helped and continue to help Kamloops prosper as a giving, welcoming and inclusive community. Personally, I want to thank all members for their friendship and generosity over the years. Our community is forever grateful for their kindness. The Chair: We'll now proceed to Mr. Harris. Mr. Jack Harris (St. John's East, NDP): Mr. Chair, many Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are facing a serious financial crisis. Most people with disabilities are waiting to be included in the Liberals'promised program. Fish plant workers will need support to avoid a disastrous year. Many small businesses don't qualify for programs. Municipalities need emergency help to meet the crisis. People are worried about what will happen when the CERB runs out in two weeks'time, and the coming tourism season looks very grim. The province itself is in serious financial crisis due to the pandemic and the decline in oil prices. The federal government must overhaul and enhance the fiscal stabilization program to help Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and other oil-producing provinces through this crisis. Both the province and the oil and gas industry players have committed to net zero emissions by 2050. This is a challenge and an opportunity to transition to a sustainable energy future, but it will require significant investment and support by government to keep the industry strong and make this a just transition for workers. Much has been done. Much more needs to be done. The Chair: Ms. Gaudreau, you have the floor. Ms. Marie-Hlne Gaudreau (LaurentidesLabelle, BQ): Mr. Chair, all 44elected municipal officials in the riding of LaurentidesLabelle and I have sent a letter to the government asking that cellular and high-speed Internet networks be made available to all. The crisis has accelerated the demonstration of the need for these networks in daily life. The territorial complexity of the Laurentians means that there are areas where the signal is weak, unstable or non-existent. There is an urgent and essential need to change the infrastructure of the current networks. Also, because of the lockdown, Internet failures are being felt, and they prevent distance learning, telemedicine and teleworking, among other things. How can our municipalities develop economically if they can't provide their community with adequate communication tools? We are therefore calling on the government to put the interests of its people first by investing massively right now in the construction of high-speed Internet and cellular infrastructure. The Chair: Mr. Waugh. Mr. Kevin Waugh (SaskatoonGrasswood, CPC): I rise today to pay tribute to Sir Winston Churchill, the former prime minister of Great Britain and one of the greatest leaders history has ever known. In what can only be called a lifetime of service, Churchill's contributions to the Commonwealth and to the world are without equal. During the Second World War he led the allied forces in Europe against the tyranny and fascism of Adolph Hitler and his Nazi regime. When our world was in its darkest hour, Churchill's leadership was a beacon of hope and freedom. I am reminded of something he once said, All the greatest things are simple, and many can be expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honour, duty, mercy, hope. Sir Winston Churchill himself embodied all of these great things and will forever be a symbol of freedom, democracy and hope. The Chair: Mr. Gerretsen. Mr. Mark Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands, Lib.): Mr. Chair, I would like to add my voice to the recognition and celebration of Pride Month, which is celebrated annually during June. Pride Month is important for Canadians because we can be proud of who we are and celebrate our diversity. This June is different from previous years as we cannot celebrate in person all together. However, I know the ongoing pandemic will not stop us from showing our love and support for the LGBTQ+ community. To celebrate Pride Month this year, my office distributed 3,000 pride maple leaf pins across the country; whoever asked received one. Although the majority was sent to constituents in my riding, over 500 pins were sent to the neighbouring ridings of LanarkFrontenacKingston, LeedsGrenvilleThousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, and HastingsLennox and Addington. It warms my heart to see so many Canadians showing their support. Happy Pride, everyone. The Chair: We will now proceed to the questioning of ministers. Please note that we will suspend the proceedings twice to allow employees who provide support for the sitting to substitute for each other safely. Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell (Louis-Saint-Laurent, CPC): Mr. Chair, I am very pleased to take part in today's meeting of this parliamentary committee. Canada has been dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic for three months now. The situation now seems to be improving, although we must remain vigilant. Economically, business people and the entire Canadian economy depend on government decisions. My question is very simple: when will the economic update take place? Hon. Chrystia Freeland (Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs): Mr. Chair, I thank the hon. member for his question. I agree with him that Canada and Canadians are doing an excellent and difficult job in the fight against coronavirus. As for the economy, our government is there for Canadians, for workers and for businesses, and it will continue to be. Mr. Grard Deltell: Canadians, business people and businesses want to know where the government is headed. When will the economic update take place? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, Canadians know that the government is there to support them. Eight The Chair: We return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Canadians and Quebeckers also know that the Government of Quebec will table its economic update this week. Why isn't the federal government doing the same? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I'm pleased to explain to hon. members and to Canadians what the government is doing for the economy The Chair: We return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, it is a real pleasure for me to explain to the minister and everybody in the House of Commons that today the Saskatchewan government will table its economic update. Why can't Ottawa do that? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I'm delighted to have the opportunity to share with Canadians what our government is doing to support workers, businesses and the economy. Eight million Canadians have received the CERB, essential support for Canadian workers and their families. The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, 11 days ago the Newfoundland government tabled its own economic update. We see governments acting correctly for their people, except for the Liberal government, which cannot table an economic update. When will the Liberal government table an economic update, which Canadians would like to see? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I am delighted to share with the member opposite and with Canadians what we are doing practically that has meaning for Canadians. Let me talk about what we are doing for Canadian businesses. Nearly 670,000 Canadian businesses have received support The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: In Canada, the Quebec government will table its economic update this week. The Saskatchewan government tabled its economic update today. The Newfoundland government has tabled its economic update. Everybody is working hard in Canada, and the business community would like to know where the Liberal government is going. The question is crystal clear. When will the Liberal government table an economic update? The Chair: The honourable Deputy Prime Minister. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, Canadian workers and Canadian businesses want to know that our government is here to support them. I have shared with this House our support for Canadian workers through the CERB. I've spoken about the CEBA, and let me point out that more than $26 billion of support has been given through that essential program. Let me talk about the wage subsidy. More than 2. 6 million The Chair: We'll return to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, this is starting to get interesting; the minister is revealing some of these expenses. Could the minister tell us how much the government has spent in the last three months? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I will continue in French by explaining what our government is doing for Canadians and workers The Chair: Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, this is a little bit concerning for all Canadians, because this government cannot say when they will table the economic update, cannot identify how much money they have spent in the last three months and cannot say what is the deficit of Canada. Is somebody in this government running this country correctly? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, absolutely we are running this country, and we are supporting our economy. In fact, we appreciate that Canada currently is experiencing its greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression. That is why we have devoted nearly 11% of GDP to support Canadian workers and Canadian businesses. I want to assure Canadians The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Normandin. Ms. Normandin, you have the floor. Ms. Christine Normandin (Saint-Jean, BQ): Mr. Chair, there are times when Quebec and the provinces are not just two solitudes, but they get along and speak as one, such as when the time comes to tell the government to mind its own business. On reading section91 of the Constitution Act, 1982, which sets out the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal government, nowhere do I find that the federal government must meddle by attaching conditions to health transfers. It is Quebec and the provinces that hire the medical personnel, doctors, nurses and caretakers. It is Quebec and the provinces that are responsible for purchasing the necessary equipment. It is Quebec and the provinces that know what is happening on the ground and what their needs are. Will the government do the only thing within its authority, which is to take the cheque, sign it and put it in the mail? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I thank the hon. member for her question. We fully understand the importance of federal support for the provinces, especially in our national fight against the coronavirus. I agree with the hon. member that we must give financial support to the provinces, including Quebec absolutely. I would also like to point out the importance of the support of the Canadian Armed Forces, who are doing an important and excellent job in Quebec and Ontario today, right now. Ms. Christine Normandin: Mr. Chair, I am glad to see that there is recognition of the importance of transferring this money. My question is whether it can be transferred unconditionally; that's what I'm asking. There's a state of emergency. In the past, we have seen that it takes a long time to negotiate conditions with the federal government. We saw it in the case of the Quebec City tramway, and we are still seeing it now in the case of transfers for housing in Quebec, for which there is no agreement and, therefore, no transfer of money. Will the federal government send the money free of conditions? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the hon. member said in her first question that the only thing the federal government had to do on health care was to sign the cheques. I can't agree because, today, at this time, at the request of the Premier of Quebec, the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces are in Quebec today; they're there to save the lives of seniors The Chair: We now return to Ms. Normandin. Ms. Christine Normandin: It was indeed at Quebec's request. What I'm saying is that, at present, the provinces are unanimously asking that there be no conditions. It's urgent that the money be transferred. The federal government's job here is to sign the cheque and send it to the provinces. The government's job is also to make Parliament work. This is where there should be negotiations so that we can work, among other things, to send money to people living with disabilities, to make sure we fight CERB fraud and to make sure that court time limits are effective in the current crisis. Can the government focus on the issue in order to respect the provinces and transfer money for health care? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: I thank the hon. member for her question, Mr. Chair. I agree with the hon. member that the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces are in Quebec today at the request of the Province of Quebec. That said, I hope that the hon. member will agree with me that being there for Quebec's seniors, that saving the lives of Quebec's seniors, is much more than simply signing cheques. I am very proud of the work the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces are doing. I think we all should thank these people who are working for Canada, for Quebec, and who are doing an important and excellent job. Ms. Christine Normandin: Mr. Chair, I think the Deputy Prime Minister misunderstood me when I was talking about the importance of acting quickly. Negotiations between the government and the provinces take an awfully long time because the federal government decides to place conditions where there shouldn't be any. Right now, the only important thing is to transfer the money quickly so that it can be used in our hospitals and our long-term care facilities, where the need is desperate. Quebec and the provinces know exactly what their needs are. Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I would like to point out the extent to which the federal government is there to support the provinces, including Quebec. We have increased funding to the provinces and territories by $500million to help them prepare for COVID-19 outbreaks. This funding is in addition to the $40billion that we already provide annually to the provinces and territories. That's a lot of money. It is strong endorsement The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh (Burnaby South, NDP): Mr. Chair, systemic racism is killing people. It's killing black people and it's killing indigenous people. Recently, Rodney Levi was another victim of systemic racism. He was killed in New Brunswick by the RCMP. To deal with systemic racism, we need systemic change. Will the Liberal government commit to systemic change so that not another life is ever taken again? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, I thank the member opposite for the extremely important question, and I'll take this opportunity to acknowledge the work that he has done for many years fighting racism in Canada. Our government absolutely acknowledges that systemic racism exists in Canada. It exists in all of our institutions, including the police and the RCMP. I agree with the member opposite that now is the moment to fight this The Chair: Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, I thank the Deputy Prime Minister very much for the response, but there are some specific actions we need to take. There are movements. Black Lives Matter, as a movement, is calling for the defunding of police. What they're saying is we need to make better choices with how money is being spent. When someone is in need of a wellness check or a mental health check, money, financing and support should go to mental health workers and health care workers, not the police. Is the government prepared to fund and prioritize health care workers over the police? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the member quite rightly began his questions by speaking about systemic racism against indigenous people in Canada, and I would like to speak about that for a moment. I spoke to Perry Bellegarde this morning, because it is such a crucial issue. We can describe it as the original sin of our country. I absolutely agree that we need root and branch reform, including in how policing is done in Canada. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, will the Liberal government commit to a review of the use of force as outlined for the RCMP? Will the Liberals commit to that change? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister and the Minister of Public Safety had many conversations last week with the RCMP. We all accept that The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, will the government commit to ensuring that de-escalation receives priority? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Let me continue, Mr. Chair. Systemic racism exists in all of our federal institutions, including the RCMP. It's time to put an end to it. Let me just say The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, I'm not getting an answer. Will the Prime Minister or the Liberal government commit to something simple and ensure that at the federal level, racial profiling, street checks and carding are expressly prohibited? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, sadly, I can't agree that rooting out systemic racism is going to be simple, but I can agree that racial profiling is absolutely inappropriate. It is not something that we should The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Well, I'm going to try to get another commitment from the government, because they don't seem able to commit to something as clear as ending racial profiling. We know that millions of Canadians in a couple of weeks are going to be faced with the reality of their CERB ending. These families are worried about how they're going to put food on the table, because they can't return to a job. Will the Liberal government commit today so that those families will have some concrete support, yes or no? Hon. Chrystia Freeland: Mr. Chair, let me be clear, as I was in my previous answer, that our government clearly is opposed to racial profiling. This is a wrong practice and we're very clear about our position there. Now when it comes to the CERB, I absolutely share the concern of the member opposite. The Canadian economy is in its direst state since the Great Depression. We know that all the jobs have not yet come back. We know that Canadian workers, Canadian families, continue to need The Chair: We'll now pause for a short time to allow staff to change within the safety parameters for the COVID-19 virus, and as we resume, we will go to Ms. Harder. Ms. Rachael Harder (Lethbridge, CPC): Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister has mandated his ministers, and I quote, to govern in a positive, open and collaborative way. Ironically, as it stands, Parliament is currently closed for business. Opposition parties have little opportunity to hold the ruling party to account, private members'bills cannot be tabled and legislation cannot be debated. Can the Prime Minister, Mr. Trudeau himself, help us understand how all of this fits into his definition of so-called open government? The Honourable Pablo Rodriguez (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons): Well, Mr. Chair, we're here, right? We're here, and the opposition is asking questions. They have the equivalent of eight question periods instead of five to ask questions. They have more time than before, so I don't know why they're not happy about it. Ms. Rachael Harder: That's like when I'm asking for a full meal and your handing me a few jellybeans and saying, Why aren't you happy with that? Mr. Chair, here's the thing. It's like switching a light on and off when it's convenient for the Prime Minister and for the Liberal Party. That's what they want to do here. That's not Parliament. That's not democracy. When will Mr. Trudeau do the right thing, turn the lights on and get back to work for Canadians? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I'm really sorry to hear that my colleague's not working. I can assure you, Mr. Chair, on this side of the House, we're all actually working very hard and we're answering the questions from the opposition. Why? It's because it's extremely important. I sat there for seven years asking questions. I understand important Ms. Rachael Harder: The member opposite knows very well that he is misleading the Canadian public. This is not true Parliament. This is simply a special committee. Here's the thing. On the Liberal Party website, under the platform commitment, it says that Parliament works best when its members are free to do what they have been elected to do, and that is be the voice for their communities and hold the government to account. This is a Liberal document. Did the Prime Minister forget that strengthening Parliament was part of his 2019 platform commitment? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague for quoting our excellent platform. That was a very very good document. The thing is, I think we've reached a balance whereby MPs can come from different places, mostly around Ottawa, and ask questions; but also we can have colleagues from across the country asking questions. Why does my colleague think it is better to have only 35 MPs participating instead of 338? Ms. Rachael Harder: Does the Prime Minister value democracy, or does he still look up to China's basic dictatorship? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, we're answering all the questions from the opposition, not only from the people in this room, but we're answering The Chair: It's back to Ms. Harder now. Ms. Rachael Harder: I'll ask the question again. Does the Prime Minister still value the basic dictatorship of China over Canada's democracy? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I don't know where the colleague wants to go from here, Mr. Chair. I'd like to know from her why it is not important to her that her colleagues participate directly. Ms. Rachael Harder: Mr. Trudeau wrote to his ministers and said to them that they continue to raise the bar on openness, effectiveness and transparency. He went on to explain that This means. . . government that is open by default. We now have a parliament that is currently shut down. Mr. Trudeau has shut it down and has prevented us from being able to do to the good work that Canadians expect us to do. Is this Mr. Trudeau's idea of open by default? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, do they want to talk about shutting down Parliament? How about the time they prorogued Parliament twicenot only once, but twice? The Conservative government shut down Parliament twice. I was here. I was sitting on the other side of the aisle. It's quite the opposite now. We're taking all the questions. This place is open, and we're answering questions. The Chair: One moment, please. I haven't acknowledged you yet, Ms. Harder. We've stopped the time there. I want to remind honourable members that questions and answers are being given, and we want to hear both sides. Please keep the heckling down. Ms. Harder, please proceed. Ms. Rachael Harder: In 2014, the leader of the Liberal Party developed a policy resolution entitled Restoring Trust in Canada's Democracy. That's ironic, because right now, again, Parliament is currently shut down. We are prevented from being able to do the good work that we are expected to do. At the time, the Prime Minister said, Canadians want their Members of Parliament to be effective voices for their communities in Ottawa, and not merely mouthpieces in their communities for an all-too-powerful Prime Minister. Sadly, Mr. Trudeau has become the all-too-powerful prime minister that he once believed should not exist. Why did he change his mind? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, I'd like to know why my colleague wants to shut down the voices of her colleagues who could not speak and could not participate in this room. Mr. Chair, how would we vote on private members'bills, for example? As you know, it is not a government vote or a party vote; it's per row. You want to come back? Are you going to acceptMr. Chair, through youthat we have electronic voting, yes or no? The Chair: We'll go on to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, we know that the Minister of Foreign Affairs has champagne tastes and London flats, but it's his champagne mortgages that Canadians are concerned about. Specifically, why did the minister only disclose the complete extent of his personal debt to the Chinese government on June 4 of this year? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, as you know, since the minister entered politics, his two mortgages and other liabilities and assets have been fully disclosed to the Ethics Commissioner and placed on the online public registry. It's public, Mr. Chair. It's public. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Now it's public and it's terrible. When will the foreign affairs minister be here to answer these questions himself? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, it's always been public. We're in the middle of a pandemic here, trying to help Canadians, and the best they can do is ask questions about The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: When the minister owes over a million dollars to the Chinese government, people have a right to ask him questions. When will the Minister of Foreign Affairs show up? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: The minister shows up every day, Mr. Chair. He shows up and works for Canadians. Once again, those are public documents. Everything the minister did is public. I still don't know why they ask The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, he doesn't even have to come to the House. All he has to do is appear on the screen. Where is the minister? Why is he hiding? Why won't he answer questions about his personal debt to the Chinese government? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, if he goes online he's going to get the information. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, the minister is hiding. Let's ask some specific questions about their China policy. What is the impact on the decision-making? Three-quarters of Canadians don't want Huawei involved in our 5G network. Will the minister put the interests of Canadians ahead of the interests of his creditors and say no to Huawei? Hon. Navdeep Bains (Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry): Mr. Chair, when it comes to 5G deployment, we are right now currently undergoing a comprehensive review. We have been absolutely clear with allies and with Canadians that we never have and never will compromise Canadians'national interests. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, that is not an answer, and it is completely out of step with what our allies have already recognized. Reports are emerging of multiple deadly viruses exported from Winnipeg's microbiology laboratory to the Wuhan Institute of Virology right before scientists were expelled for policy breaches. In spite of that, scientific co-operation between Canadian institutions and the military-affiliated Wuhan Institute of Virology is continuing. Why hasn't the government put in place new guidelines to prevent the export of sensitive pathogens and information to China? Hon. Patty Hajdu (Minister of Health): Mr. Chair, he's right that in 2019 the National Microbiology Laboratory shared lab samples with the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The National Microbiology Laboratory routinely shares samples with other labs to help advance the international community's understanding of viruses and the research that is ongoing around those viruses. There are strict protocols in place for these transfers, and these samples were transported according to Canadian laws and regulations. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, I think Canadians would be concerned to hear that it's routine to transport viruses to Chinese military-affiliated labs. When Champagne was the parliamentary secretary for finance, the government decided to give hundreds of millions of dollars to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, bankrolling Chinese state-controlled development projects in Asia with weak standards in labour, human rights and environment. Will the minister put Canadian taxpayers ahead of his personal creditors and support a pullout from the Communist Party-controlled development bank? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Once again, Mr. Chair, my colleague is trying to connect the dots, and I don't know exactly where he is going from here, but everything is public. There's a thing called Google. He can go on it and check the information. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, the public can listen to this. I'm sure this exchange will also be available on Google, and the public can draw their own conclusions. We have failures on 5G, failures when it comes to the transport of deadly viruses and failures when it comes to giving over $400 million to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. It's clear that the Bank of China's investment in Minister Champagne is paying off. It's time for the minister to settle his debt with the Communist government and not settle it on the backs of Canadians. When will the minister be here in the House and answer questions about this mortgage? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: My colleague should be cautious with what he is saying in the House, Mr. Chair. This is serious stuff. He should be careful about what he says. The minister is actually working extremely hard for all Canadians and is doing his job correctly, Mr. Chair. We're talking about public information. Once again, let him go to Google and google it. That's it. The Chair: Now we'll go to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett: Canada's ambassador to the United Nations sent a letter last week to all member states of the UN promising that Canada would consider providing more funding for UNRRA, the same UNRRA that is a front for Hamas, which allows weapons of terror to be stored in schools and provides textbooks that call for the destruction of Israel. Do these Liberals have no shame when it comes to their quest for a seat on the UN Security Council? Hon. Mary Ng (Minister of Small Business, Export Promotion and International Trade): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to thank the honourable member for that question. We know that at this time Canada must show leadership in the face of global challenges. More than ever, Canada is playing a positive role by being a champion in diversity and inclusion, supporting the global fight against COVID-19, addressing climate change, leading peace and security efforts and helping the most vulnerable. A seat on the Security Council will allow Canada to be a strong voice for a fairer, more inclusive and prosperous The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Barrett. Mr. Michael Barrett: Mr. Chair, I received a letter from Bob Anderson this week, who's advocating for his neighbours like Jean Grevelding, who owns a cottage at Butternut Bay. Like many people, Jean is an American who owns a property on our side of the border. These people are taxpaying members of our communities. These folks have plans in place to follow all Canadian quarantine rules. They're concerned about leaving their properties uncared for over the summer. Will folks like Jean be allowed to cross the border to check on their properties this summer? Hon. Bill Blair (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Of course, our priority is and always has been and always must be the protection of the health and safety of Canadians. That's why we put in place these restrictions for non-essential travel and have required, through the Public Health Agency of Canada, a 14-day quarantine. I don't know the specifics of the person for whom you advocate, but we want to make sure that if they come into Canada, it is for an essential purpose and that they do it safely and respect the quarantine that has been put in place. Mr. Michael Barrett: With nine branches throughout my riding, the Royal Canadian Legion offers a great deal to veterans and rural communities alike. They have been experiencing hardship and a loss of revenue, to the point where they may be forced to shut their doors. The Zone G2 commander and local mayors such as Roger Haley have reached out to me expressing their dire need. Will the government offer support to Legions across the country so they can continue to carry out their vital work for our veterans? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (Minister of Veterans Affairs): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Yes, we have done a lot to help support groups like the Legions. There is a $350-million emergency community support fund. If they're supplying any help to people regarding COVID, this fund is there. Indeed, we're doing everything we can to make sure that we help the Legions and other groups that do so much to help veterans right across the country. Mr. Michael Barrett: On May 21, the minister stated that her team was working as quickly as it could to fill the gaps in CEBA. It has now been three weeks, and many business owners, such as mortgage broker Corinna Smith-Gatcke, are still left in the lurch amid the delays, which are pushing businesses closer to shutting their doors for good. Will these businesses have access to CEBA before it's too late for them? Hon. Mary Ng: Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I thank the honourable member for that really important question on our Canadian small businesses. Those businesses can absolutely have access to the loan at their financial institution this Friday, and I would encourage them to go and see their bank or credit union. I want businesses to know that nothing is more important for us than making sure they get the support they need during this difficult time. Mr. Michael Barrett: The County Road 43 expansion project is critical for my riding and the region as a whole. This project will widen the road, increasing safety for the 18,000 motorists who travel the road every day. It's been 334 days since the provincial and local governments announced funding, but there has been nothing from this Liberal government. It's been 181 days since Minister McKenna told me her staff were reviewing the project. Today, there is still nothing, and for the last month the minister's team has not even found the time to respond to my request for an update. Will Minister McKenna finally stop with the delays and commit to funding this project today? Hon. Catherine McKenna (Minister of Infrastructure and Communities): Mr. Chair, as the member opposite knows, we work with provinces and territories to advance our infrastructure investments. We're making investments across the country. They are making a real difference in people's lives. We're always happy to work with members of Parliament, but they must also work with provinces and territories so that projects are advanced by them to our office. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall (YorktonMelville, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Through you, has Mr. MacAulay read ombudsman Dalton's May 2020 report, Financial Compensation for Canadian Veterans: A comparative analysis of benefit regimes? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I apologize, but I'll have to ask my honourable colleague to repeat the question. The Chair: Mrs. Wagantall, we'll freeze the time so that there's no extra time taken. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Thank you, Chair. My question was whether Mr. MacAulay has read ombudsman Dalton's May 2020 report, Financial Compensation for Canadian Veterans: A comparative analysis of benefit regimes. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I appreciate my honourable colleague's question. Of course, I appreciate Mr. Dalton's input and all that he has done for veterans. We've discussed it many times. I've done everything and worked with him in order to make sure that we bring the proper compensation to veterans The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: As a result of that study, are the financial outcomes Canada seeks to provide for ill and injured veterans now clearly defined within the Department of Veterans Affairs? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, as the member would know, I am to bring a report to the veterans affairs committee, and there are a number of things done in order to make sure that report is The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Then I would suggest that we get our committee up and going as it should be. Where are these financial directions published? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Well, of course, lockdown, but just under $90 million that the government put in supplementary estimates to make sure we address the backlog for Veterans Affairs. It's a major help The Chair: We'll go back to Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Minister, are Canadian Armed Forces members provided with a copy of this document? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, my honourable colleague would have to ask the Canadian Armed Forces that question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: There are three different providing lifetime benefits for ill and injured veterans. In Ombudsman Dalton's recent report, did any one of these three provide the best compensation in all nine scenarios that were studied? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Of course, as she knows, there's been a lot of work done in order to make sure that we provide the proper compensation to veterans. We're working very hard, with a lot of help from Mr. Dalton, to make sure that the appropriate The Chair: We'll now continue with Mrs. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: In the undisclosed settlement of Sean Bruyea's legal case against Seamus O'Regan and the Liberal government, a joint statement says. . . Canadians, especially all Veterans and their families, are encouraged to enter the public debate about policies and programs that affect our Veterans and their families. Does Mr. MacAulay agree with this statement? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I can assure you that anybody is welcome to enter any discussion on compensation of veterans. We're always open to what we can do in order to make sure that we provide appropriate compensation. I don't think the term would be appropriate, but it would provide some compensation to veterans who truly deserve it. They defend our democracy The Chair: We'll go back to Ms. Wagantall. Oh, I'm sorry Ms. Andranne Larouche: Mr. Chair, I have a point of order. The interpretation hasn't worked for a few interventions. It's difficult to follow the exchange between the hon. member and the minister. The Chair: We're having a problem with the interpretation. Minister and Ms. Wagantall, you are joining us virtually. I'm wondering if you have the right language on at the bottom of your screen. We'll start with that for troubleshooting. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: I have English. The Chair: Very good. Minister MacAulay, what do you have? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I have English, Mr. Chair. The Chair: Very good. Then we'll check on our side. Ms. Larouche, did I understand correctly that the interpretation didn't work for both speakers? Ms. Andranne Larouche: The sound didn't allow the interpreters to do their job. It seemed to be a problem with the sound. The Chair: In that case, I would ask both members to maybe put their mike a little bit close to their mouth. We'll see how that works. I'm looking at the screen, and I notice the mike is a little bit far. Could we bend it in a little bit more? I appreciate that. Thank you for your patience. We'll give it another try. Ms. Wagantall, please go ahead. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: On a point of order, quite often while I'm trying to speak, there are lots of other voices in the background. The Chair: I would ask everyone to please be on mute, as well as for anyone in the chamber to please refrain from speaking loudly. Just whisper among yourselves if you have something to say. We'll take this one from the top. We have a minute and 45 seconds left. Ms. Wagantall, please proceed with your next question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: You said next question, so we're not going backwards, Chair? The Chair: Did we have an answer from Minister MacAulay? No? We'll go to Minister MacAulay to finish up the answer. We'll start at 27 seconds, freeze the clock and hear his answer. Then, because of all of the confusion, we'll start at one minute and 45 seconds when we get going again. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Should I repeat the question, sir? The Chair: Please do. The clock is frozen. After we go through the question and the answer, we'll start the clock again. Mr. Wagantall, please repeat the question. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Thank you, Chair. In the undisclosed settlement to Sean Bruyea's legal case against Seamus O'Regan and the Liberal government, a joint statement says, Canadians, especially all Veterans and their families, are encouraged to enter the public debate about policies and programs that affect our Veterans and their families. Does Mr. MacAulay agree with this statement? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I appreciate my honourable colleague's question and concern. Of course I agree. Anybody is quite open to indicate whatever they wish in order to make sure we provide as appropriate a compensation as possible. You can never totally compensate veterans truly for what they deserve, but we want to make sure we provide the best compensation possible. That's what we will do and want to do. The Chair: Ms. Wagantall, we will start the clock again. You have one minute and 45 seconds remaining. Please proceed. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: If that's the case, is Minister MacAulay aware of the practice of red-flagging veterans'files? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I'm not aware. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Since the deputy minister has indicated that he runs the department, will the minister ask him for the names of veterans and the dates and the reasons that they are, or have been, red-flagged by VAC? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, I would certainly ask any veteran or anybody who has a concern to contact my office. I will do anything I can to make sure that the veterans The Chair: We'll go back to Ms. Wagantall. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: Do the most ill and injured still receive from the pension up to $300,000 less for life? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Mr. Chair, as you know and as the Prime Minister indicated when the pension for life was put in place, it was stated that if anybody receives lessthe Prime Minister himself indicated it quite clearlythat must be adjusted. Mrs. Cathay Wagantall: For veterans in similar circumstances, should the date of their application for compensation be a factor in determining whether they're treated equitably? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Yes, of course, the date is when the compensation would start. Of course, it's very important and very appropriate. The Chair: Now we will proceed to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd (Sturgeon RiverParkland, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Retired Major Mark Campbell in my riding of Sturgeon RiverParkland lost both legs in the line of duty in Afghanistan. He is an avid sport shooter, but understandably, due to his disability, he is very limited in the kinds of firearms he can use, and all of these firearms have now been banned under the Liberal OIC. My question to the Minister of Public Safety is this: Did their department do a legal analysis and consider the section 15 charter rights of disabled Canadians not to be discriminated against when they passed their OIC? Hon. Bill Blair: Yes, there was a very thorough analysis done by the justice department to ensure that the prohibitions we put in place were, in fact, charter compliant. Let me also say, Mr. Chair, how important it was that we prohibited weapons that were not designed for sporting purposes at all. In fact, they were designed for soldiers to use in combat. They have no place in a civil society. We have prohibited them, and we believeand this has been echoed by many people across the countrythat this will make Canadians safer. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, is the minister aware that the AR-15 is the most popular sporting rifle in Canada, and is he aware that disabled veterans like Major Mark Campbell are unable to participate in the sport of sport shooting because of his OIC? Hon. Bill Blair: I can assure the member that what I am aware of is that the AR-15 and other weapons like them have been used in mass killings in Canada on many occasions, such as at cole Polytechnique, at Dawson College, again at the Quebec mosque and in Moncton. The AR-15s in particular were also used at the terrible tragedy in places like Sandy Hook, where a bunch of kids were killed, so there is no place for The Chair: We will go to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, it has been months since the Liberals shut down this Parliament and months since the Minister of Finance should have presented a budget or at least an economic update to Canadians. Since then we have seen billions spent with little oversight and no plan. The minister says that he needs certainty before he can table a budget. Well, that didn't stop Stephen Harper and the Conservatives from tabling a budget in the depth of the last great recession. When are these Liberals finally going to take their job seriously and table an economic update? Hon. Mona Fortier (Minister of Middle Class Prosperity and Associate Minister of Finance): Mr. Chair, we're taking this very seriously. We're working for Canadians and bringing forward supports to make sure that businesses, workers and Canadians can put food on the table and pay their rent. We will continue to support Canadians, and when we have a clear projection to present, we will do that. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, the results are in, and businesses aren't happy with the so-called support programs from these Liberals. In fact, the oil and gas industry has been shut out of many of these economic programs. When is the government going to recognize that their business support plans have been an absolute failure with only a fraction of the billions promised being accessible to businesses? Hon. Seamus O'Regan (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Chair, our government has taken swift and immediate action to support our sector throughout this challenging time. We had the BCAP, which is critically important to providing liquidity to support the SMEs that make up 85% of the jobs in our sector. It has taken an enormous team effort. People are working around the clock to get money where it needs to be. We are helping hard-working Canadians, small businesses and large businesses right across the country, but in particular in our energy sector. Mr. Dane Lloyd: Mr. Chair, I'm pleased to see the Minister of Natural Resources online. He tweeted recently to praise the Alberta Carbon Trunk Line and the North West Redwater Partnership refinery in my riding. Can the minister tell us what, if any, support they have given to the innovative carbon capture and sequestration technology in this country? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Mr. Chair, we see carbon capture and sequestration as an integral part of lowering emissions, making emissions more competitive and making our oil and gas industry more competitive. We're seeing where the investment dollars are going. They are going to jurisdictions that are committed to lowering emissions. Obviously, this government is committing to net zero. Mr. Dane Lloyd: I note that the minister couldn't name a single example of government support for carbon capture, utilization and sequestration technology. We have spent a lot of time talking about the COVID-19 pandemic, but Canadians are living with another horrific reality, that being the intensifying opioid overdose epidemic. Reports indicate that in the past four years, 14,000 Canadians have died, and the numbers during COVID-19 have been skyrocketing, with British Columbia seeing a 39% increase this year alone. I know this because I've lost a family member to a fentanyl overdose. When is the government going to take this scourge seriously and take action to save the lives of Canadians? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Mr. Chair, I share the member's deep sadness about the number of lives we've lost to opioid overdose. Our government has been steadily making it easier for people who live with substance use to access medications to treat substance use, such as prescription Suboxone and methadone. We have made it easier to rapidly establish safe injection sites in communities and have supported community-based projects that work with people who are using substances. We need to understand that this is a complex issue, and we need to support people to get the help they need. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes (AlgomaManitoulinKapuskasing, NDP) ): The hon. member for Thrse-DeBlainville. Ms. Louise Chabot (Thrse-De Blainville, BQ): MadamChair, I will come back to the bill introduced last week. As parliamentarians, we felt like we were watching a very bad play, as I imagine the public did. I say that it was theatre, even though it shouldn't be in this place. The government decided to stage a play and act alone and, unfortunately, there were several acts missing. A very important part of this bill was about supporting people with disabilities in this time of crisis. However, the government did not see fit to negotiate with the opposition parties, even though it is in a minority position. Despite this arrogance, the Bloc Qubcois proposed solutions. One of the things we proposed was to split the bill so that we could give this support to people with disabilities, but the Conservatives did not want to do that. We came back and asked for time to negotiate and give support to people with disabilities, but the government defeated the motion. We asked that the House be recalled today so that we could pass this part of the bill concerning support for people with disabilities, but we are still in the dark. Why are we abandoning people with disabilities? Hon. Ahmed Hussen (Minister of Families, Children and Social Development): I thank the hon. member for her question. We know this pandemic has deeply affected the lives and health of all Canadians and has disproportionately affected Canadians with disabilities in particular. From the very beginning, we've taken a disability-inclusive approach to our emergency response to ensure that Canadians with disabilities get the support they need. That is why we announced a one-time payment of $600 for persons with disabilities to address these expenses. This will go a long way toward helping Canadians with disabilities. We encourage and urge all parties in the opposition to support this measure. We're confident that this measure, along with other investments, will benefit Canadians with disabilities, and we hope to get the support of the other parties very soon. Ms. Louise Chabot: MadamChair, I remind you that this measure wasn't passed because we weren't allowed to do so. A measure to help people with disabilities has been put in an omnibus bill. We've tried here, in the House, to provide the means to give that support, so I ask again, can the government be counted on to give a response to people with disabilities? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, it was absolutely not an omnibus bill. It contained assistance for the disabled, of course, but it also contained assistance for our seasonal workers, as well as a number of other measures that the Bloc Qubcois opposed. They refused to debate and, when the question of splitting the bill came up, the Conservatives refused to do that. That is why there is no bill at the moment, and that is very unfortunate. Ms. Louise Chabot: It was a Bloc Qubcois proposal to split the bill. The government had not thought of it, but they found that it was a good idea. Let me return to the attack. This bill proposed changes to the wage subsidy program, it was supposed to make the CERB more flexible, it proposed fines for fraudsters and, since there was a little section about a benefit for the disabled, the government took it for granted that we would support it without any negotiations with the parties. However, we set one very important condition: that the Liberal Party must get its hands out of taxpayers'pockets in terms of the wage subsidy. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, as we listen to the Bloc Qubcois members, we might think that they invented peanut butter and apple pie. This bill contained a number of measures that all Quebeckers and all Canadians needed, but the Bloc Qubcois refused to debate it. No, we did not follow the Bloc Qubcois'example in splitting the bill; we had thought of it a long time previously. We have not been able to do that because of the Conservatives. Because of them, we cannot help those living with disabilities. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Ms. Chabot, you have 45seconds left. Ms. Louise Chabot: We asked on a number of occasions for the House to be able to sit starting today to pass the part of the bill dealing with those with disabilities. What is the status of that, MadamChair? We have not heard about it since. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, my colleague knows very well that things are not as simple as that. There are procedural mechanisms unique to the House. I hope that, one day, we will be able to pass this bill and be able to provide assistance for those living with disabilities. I hope that the Conservatives will change their minds and give us their support. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Don Valley East, Ms. Ratansi. Ms. Yasmin Ratansi (Don Valley East, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be sharing my time with the member for Surrey Centre. Since 2015 our government has been focused on ensuring its policies mitigate the effects of climate change. Several measures have been implemented for phasing out coal, making polluters pay, providing climate incentives, investing in green technologies and much more, which all together have created a climate plan that is doing more to cut pollution than any other in Canada's history. In my riding of Don Valley East, many innovative businesses have benefited from these investments and initiatives. One area of particular interest is our government's work to protect 25% of Canada's land and 25% of its oceans by 2025. Our natural environment is something that Canadians and my constituents care about deeply. Could the minister update this House on the new conservation projects announced on June 5, World Environment Day, and on how our government is protecting our environment? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, protecting nature is an important part of how we will address climate change and the very real challenges it presents. That's why on June 5, World Environment Day, our government announced over 60 conservation projects under development across Canada. These projects are funded through the Canada Nature Fund's target 1 challenge initiative. They'll conserve Canadian nature and biodiversity and protect species at risk, enhance ecological integrity and connectivity, and enhance the size of Canada's vast network of protected areas. Nearly half of these projects are indigenous-led, with the aim of creating indigenous-protected conserved areas. Madam Chair, projects like these move us closer to our goal of protecting 25% of Canada's lands and oceans by 2025. By working together in partnership with the provinces, territories, municipalities, indigenous peoples and Canadians, together we can protect our natural environment for generations to come. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Ms. Ratansi, since you have 25 seconds left, we will go to the honourable member for Surrey Centre. Mr. Randeep Sarai (Surrey Centre, Lib.): Madam Chair, there are many small and medium-sized businesses in my riding of Surrey Centre. Many have been impacted by COVID-19. They saw a decrease in business or needed to close their doors completely in order to adhere to public safety measures to manage the spread of COVID-19. These measures helped keep our most vulnerable citizens safe and ensured that our hospital and health care providers did not become overwhelmed with a sharp spike in cases. Thanks to our government's COVID-19 emergency response, many of these businesses have been able to keep their employees and access important liquidity through the Canada emergency business account, which provides loans to small businesses and non-profits, and the Canada emergency wage subsidy, which is helping businesses to keep and rehire their employees while their revenues are down by providing up to 75% of wages for up to 24 weeks. As we begin to reopen the economy and Canadians across the country return to the job market, those benefits will be even more important to help businesses and industries rehire their staff and make important adjustments to align with public health guidelines to gradually increase their operations. Can the minister please update the committee on how many Canadian businesses have taken advantage of CEBA and CEWS since applications for each have been opened? Hon. Mary Ng: Madam Chair, I want to begin by thanking the member for Surrey Centre for all the work he does to support his constituents and small businesses. Canadians across the country need to know our government has been working tirelessly and will continue to work tirelessly on their behalf. This is why we put in place the important programs to help them get through this crisis during this difficult time, programs such as the wage subsidy program. We know that in so many businesses the employees are often like extended family members. The wage subsidy has helped these businesses keep their employees on the payroll and are now helping in their rehiring as they slowly and safely restart. There are 348,000 businesses being helped with the wage subsidy program, and this means that 2. 6 million workers are being helped. Businesses are also being helped through the interest-free $40,000 loan they can access through CEBA to help stay afloat and pay their expenses during this crisis. I'm pleased to inform this House that to date more than 669,000 The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for St. John's East. Mr. Jack Harris: Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with my colleague, the member for LondonFanshawe. Madam Chair, with so many recent reports and videos of police using force, sometimes deadly force, and violence against indigenous and black people in Canada, I've called for the public safety committee to reconvene. If the members agree, will the minister come to the committee and provide concrete answers as to how the government intends to address racism inherent in Canada's law enforcement, and in particular the RCMP? Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I thank my colleague for the question. It's perhaps the most important one facing Canada today. Madam Chair, indigenous people, black Canadians and other racialized people are far too often experiencing systemic racism and disparate outcomes within the entire criminal justice system. In order to respond appropriately, I think it's necessary to begin by acknowledging the lived experience of people who've known bias and discrimination at the hands of the police and our courts and within our prisons. We remain committed to working with all racialized people and all of the members of this House to ensure that we work toward social justice for all Canadians, and I look forward to discussing the member's motion further with him. Mr. Jack Harris: Will the minister and the government commit to facilitating such a meeting of this committee virtually? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, the decisions of the committee are the committee's, so I'm sure that this will be a discussion within the committee, but if called, I will certainly be pleased to come with my officials to provide the committee with whatever support and information it needs to contribute to this very important discussion. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Harris, you have 40 seconds. Mr. Jack Harris: In light of what we've seen with Chief Adam in Fort McMurray and the RCMP accepting that the actions were reasonable, will the minister commit to a full review of the use of force by the RCMP, in particular the philosophy, tactics and training that is given to RCMP officers in dealing with the public? Hon. Bill Blair: I thank the member and I want to assure him, first of all, that this is work that is ongoing, not just in the RCMP but throughout the police community. May I also take this opportunity, Madam Chair, to say that I think all police training has to begin with one very important principle, and that's the preservation of all life and the respect for all Canadians. We also know the importance of de-escalation training. We're committed to continuing to work with indigenous communities, racialized communities and with police services and all participants in the criminal justice system to make sure that it is fair for all Canadians. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for LondonFanshawe, Ms. Mathyssen. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen (LondonFanshawe, NDP): Madam Chair, we need more justice for black, indigenous and racialized people in Canada. They can't be asked to keep waiting. This government recognizes that systemic racism exists but refuses to collect race-based data that would allow us to quantify and truly address this injustice. We need data to protect Canadians. When will this government do the right thing and start collecting race-based data? Hon. Bardish Chagger (Minister of Diversity and Inclusion and Youth): Madam Chair, our government agrees that it's important that we collect data, and that's exactly why, in the anti-racism secretariat and the anti-racism strategy, there is a commitment to have money go to Statistics Canada to collect race-based data. We look forward to working with all members to ensure it happens. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen: Madam Chair, we know that Statistics Canada will start to collect job numbers based on race. This will allow us to identify systemic racism where it is and where we need to ensure a fair and more equal job market for black, indigenous and racialized people in Canada. Why is this government refusing to follow suit so we can tackle systemic racism everywhere, in every sector? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I'd like to thank my honourable colleague for her question. She's absolutely correct in her assessment that we need to collect more data, reliable data, data that will help us deal with some of the challenges we're seeing with systemic discrimination, but, more broadly, we want to make sure that we continue to engage with an anti-racism strategy that will allow us to collect that disaggregated data. That is why we allocated $6. 2 million to that initiative through Statistics Canada, but we know we must do more and we will do more. Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen: We know that all people are susceptible to catching COVID-19, but health authorities are clear that parts of cities like Montreal and Toronto have been more impacted than others. For black and racialized people living in these cities, this data is a matter of life and death. Will the government collect and share disaggregated data so we can identify and erase systemic racism, yes or no? Hon. Bardish Chagger: Madam Chair, making decisions based on science and evidence is essential for our government. We took that practice from day one. It is exactly the step we will take moving forward and that's why we are making those investments to ensure that data exists. We are working across all departments. My mandate letter is public. I look forward to continuing to work not only with all ministers, departments and agencies, but all allies and all parties to get this work done. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Blaney, the honourable member for BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, has the floor. Hon. Steven Blaney (BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, CPC): Thank you, MadamChair. Last week, my plumber told me that, each time Justin Trudeau comes down the steps to make announcements totalling several billion dollars, he feels like someone is rifling through his pockets. My question is simple and goes to the Minister of Finance: where is this money coming from? Hon. Mona Fortier: MadamChair, I would like to thank my honourable colleague for his question. Currently, the health and safety of Canadians are our top priorities. We have implemented an emergency economic plan to support Canadians, workers and companies. We will continue to support them during this crisis. Hon. Steven Blaney: The answer I would have liked is simple: we are borrowing the money and we are going to have to pay it back one day. That is another Liberal craze: they borrow money, they make campaign promises, and off they go. Under the Conservative government, the Chantier Davie in Lvis had 1,700workers for the supply ship Asterix. In the election campaign, the Liberals promised icebreakers. When are the Liberals going to award the icebreaker contracts to the Chantier Davie? Hon. David Lametti (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada): MadamChair, we are very proud of the Chantier Davie and we completely understand its role in the system. We are currently assessing those requests. We are going to establish the process for the polar ice-breaker, which is essential for the work of the Coast Guard in northern communities, and we are going to make sure that The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Blaney has the floor. Hon. Steven Blaney: The workers do not need words; they need contracts and jobs. The same is true for young people who want to work. There is money in the Canada summer jobs program: in my constituency alone, $150,000has been approved. Companies want young people to work and want to hire them. What is the minister waiting for in order to confirm those positions? In my constituency, and everywhere else in the country, our young people want to work. What is the government waiting for in order to send some cash to the Canada summer jobs program? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we are proud of the Canada summer jobs program. We are introducing flexibilities into the system to enable employers to be able to hire summer students. We recognize the importance of this program to provide both financial resources and necessary experience for young people. We believe in continuing to invest in the Canada summer jobs program. Hon. Steven Blaney: The workers, the young people and the employers have been waiting for weeks. The money is available; where is the announcement? MadamChair, our young people are not the only ones who want to work. There are also the temporary foreign workers. Let me use Jessie Gito as an example; he has been working at Plate2000 in Saint-Anselme for years. When the time came to renew his work permit, he found out that he has to have some biometric tests. But he cannot get them because the offices are closed. Is the minister going to allow Jessie Gito and the thousands of other temporary foreign workers who want to work to be able to do so until the government biometric testing centres reopen? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, it is important for the honourable member to recognize that we are in the early recovery stage of the pandemic. Employers are slowly reopening businesses. We will ensure that we support both our students and our temporary foreign workers to make sure we get the recovery right. We will continue to invest in the Canada summer jobs program. We've introduced flexibilities into the program to ensure that employers are able to take advantage of the program and give opportunities to young people. Hon. Steven Blaney: It is very simple. Jessie Gito is a foreign worker, who is in a company that provides an essential service. He needs a decision that will let him go to work, rather than staying home and doing nothing. Then, when the government's biometric testing centres are open again, he will gladly go to one. Young people want to work in agriculture as well, and the minister has told us that the government wants young people working and that their files will be processed as quickly as possible. She wants to create 700positions and she knows that people can fill in an application on a first-come first-served basis. Of those 700positions, how many have been confirmed to date? The good weather has arrived, the corn is starting to grow, and this is the time when farmers need the young workers. Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food): MadamChair, the program for young workers in agriculture is open. I also encourage agricultural producers to register for it. This is a program that is not only intended to provide summer jobs, but also to interest young people in making a career in agriculture. As I have said before, the department is processing files as quickly as possible. Each employer will have an answer very shortly. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will now take a short break. Okay, we are ready to start again. We will go to the honourable member for BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte. Mr. Doug Shipley (BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Over the course of the pandemic, has the government been using all avenues possible to source much-needed PPE in Canada? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, we have been very clear that we have a made-in-Canada initiative that has engaged companies across the country. Over 700 companies have retooled and scaled up their operations for personal protective equipment to help front-line health care workers. Mr. Doug Shipley: Madam Chair, I need to ask very quickly which ministry and minister are responsible for the sourcing of PPE in Canada. Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, this is a collective effort. I work with the Minister of Health and the minister for procurement, and we coordinate with the provinces and territories to make sure there are appropriate levels of PPE to help front-line health care workers and essential workers across the country. Mr. Doug Shipley: Thank you for that clarification. That will make this question all the more pertinent. My riding of BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte is the home of Southmedic Inc. Southmedic is a renowned medical supply business. For over 37 years, it has provided front-line health care workers with an extensive line of PPE and other essential products required when dealing with respiratory illnesses. This company specializes in respiratory illness equipment. Southmedic currently employs over 700 people, and it has been recognized as one of Canada's best-managed companies by Deloitte on numerous occasions. Since the beginning of the pandemic, both I and the member for BarrieInnisfil have been attempting to obtain some assistance for Southmedic from the federal government. Calls and emails were falling on deaf ears. In early May, I wrote a letter to Minister Anand outlining the situation. I received a letter back from the minister dated May 27 indicating that this issue of Southmedic falls under the mandate of the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada. I have heard nothing more. When will the federal government reach out and help this great Canadian company and therefore ensure that all front-line workers will have the proper PPE they require? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I'd like to thank my honourable colleague for his question. He knows full well that this is a very challenging time. That is why we had a call to action to engage Canadians right across the country. Since then, we've seen over 6,000 companies step up to offer solutions and ideas, and over 700 companies have retooled their efforts. I acknowledge that some companies are still engaging with the government, and we'll continue to explore all possible options to make sure we continue to procure the necessary levels of personal protective equipment to protect Canadians and to protect front-line health care workers. That has always been our priority. I want to thank the outstanding Canadian companies that have come forward and have helped us in this endeavour. We continue to look forward to working with them. Mr. Doug Shipley: Thank you for that answer. Just to follow up, there's no retooling required at this company. They could have been up and going very quickly. They just needed a little assistance at the beginning. Moving on to a different issue, while walking to my office this morning, I stopped at my local small family-run coffee shop and was discussing the current economic situation with the two owners of the establishment. They indicated they are having a very tough time surviving this economic downturn. The only thing keeping them hopeful is that soon the public service will start returning to work, and therefore their business will begin to return. Could the government please give us some indication as to what the plans are for returning the civil service back to work safely, and when? Hon. Jean-Yves Duclos (President of the Treasury Board): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm delighted to answer this question. This is a very important topic, but I'd like to take the opportunity first to thank our public servants, who have worked very hard in the last few weeks, both personally and professionally. In fact, today is a wonderful day to say that, because today is the start of National Public Service Week. That's one more reason to thank them for their dedicated work. They are not going to go back to work. They've been at work for the last few monthsin different circumstances, but they have been working very hard to deliver the services and the support Canadians need and deserve. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Next we'll go to the honourable member for SelkirkInterlakeEastman, Mr. Bezan. Mr. James Bezan (SelkirkInterlakeEastman, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. My questions are for the Minister of National Defence. First of all, I want to thank the great men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces for the fantastic job they're doing in Operation LASER, serving on the front lines battling COVID-19. Can the Minister of National Defence give the House an update on exactly where we are at with the number of Canadian Armed Forces members who have been infected with COVID-19? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan (Minister of National Defence): Madam Chair, I want to echo the member opposite's comments in thanking our Canadian Armed Forces members. Currently, we have 13 active cases in the Canadian Armed Forces, but in the long-term care facilities we currently have 50 cases. No member has been currently hospitalized. We have also conducted very thorough reviews of our protection protocols as well. Mr. James Bezan: Through you, Chair, Minister Sajjan, does that number of active cases include the active cases that are in long-term care facilities right now in Operation LASER? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, as I stated, the 50 cases are strictly from the long-term care facilities. The 13 cases I mentioned are not in the long-term care facilities. Just to give the actual clarification, no member has been currently hospitalized. Mr. James Bezan: In those numbers, Madam Chair, can Mr. Sajjan say how many of those cases in long-term care facilities are active and how many are recovered? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, I don't have the exact number. What I can say to break it down further is that in Quebec we currently have 36 and in Ontario we have 14. As well, 36 of the members have been out of isolation. I'll get more details and pass them on directly to the member, Madam Chair. Mr. James Bezan: Thank you, Minister. Madam Chair, I have a quick question while we're still talking about Operation LASER. The President of the Treasury Board has said, The Canadian Armed Forces will be present as long as their presence is needed in Quebec. This contradicts what Prime Minister Trudeau is saying, which is that we have a hard deadline of June 26 for the withdrawal of our troops for Operation LASER. That means taking our troops out of our long-term care facilities. Minister, is June 26 the hard date for the winding down of Operation LASER? Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I'm delighted to have the opportunity to clarify for the House. We've been in very extensive discussions with the Province of Quebec, with my counterpart Minister Guilbault, and we are working very diligently to ensure we have a sustained, appropriate response to the request from Quebec for assistance. That response will result in a transition from the currently deployed Canadian Armed Forces to the deployment of paid volunteers, trained personnel who will take on the important role of providing services to those Canadians who need our help in Quebec. Mr. James Bezan: I'll go back to the Minister of National Defence. The Department of National Defence auditors have called out the Liberal government for mismanagement over the $553-billion investment in our Canadian military through the defence policy. Only three people have been assigned to oversee the rollout of this money. This is a $553-billion investment in our armed forces, and only three people are managing it. Could the minister tell us how that is even possible? Is this the reason that over 100 projects are currently behind schedule? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, first of all, I want to highlight the unprecedented investment that we're making in defence. We have conducted internal reviews of our procurement. The report the member opposite is talking about is from the previous year. This is the ongoing work we're doing to make sure that we make procurement better. When it comes to the management of this, it's conducted by me and the minister of procurement. We are working toward making our procurement even better. We have already streamlined some aspects of our procurement and we'll continue to do more as well. Mr. James Bezan: Minister Sajjan, you've had this report since November of 2019. You've been rolling out this plan since 2017. Only three people are overseeing an expenditure of $553 billion. This is taxpayers'money. Are we going to see more cuts because you have been unable to actually roll out these dollars? Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan: Madam Chair, I can assure you we're not going to be cutting. We'll be investing in our defence. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Before I go to the next speaker, I want to remind members that they are to address their questions and comments directly through the chair. We will go now to the honourable member for Fort McMurrayCold Lake, Mr. Yurdiga. Mr. David Yurdiga (Fort McMurrayCold Lake, CPC): Madam Chair, the Canada summer jobs program has many challenges. I've seen many indigenous communities in my riding rejected for funding even though they had received funding in previous years. Here are a few examples of communities that were rejected: Beaver Lake Cree Nation, Buffalo Lake Mtis Settlement and the Mtis Nation of Alberta, Region 1. The list goes on. Could the Prime Minister explain why so many indigenous communities have been denied funding from the Canada summer jobs program? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we recognize the important role that the Canada summer jobs program plays in supporting employers and young workers in our community across the country every year. We're working very hard to help employers adapt to the realities of the COVID-19 pandemic and are supporting young Canadians as they begin to look for summer employment. We are introducing increased flexibilities into the Canada summer jobs program to hire youth, while also providing more supports to employers that deliver essential services to Canadians. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, that didn't really answer my question. Why are so many indigenous communities left out of the Canada summer jobs program? This is very important to my community and to communities throughout the province. Will the government investigate why these communities were rejected? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that we, of course, value the important role that the Canada summer jobs program plays in all communities, including indigenous communities in Canada. I will certainly have an off-line conversation with the honourable member, if he so wishes, about a particular issue, but I can assure him that in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, we have had to assist employers to introduce flexibilities The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Yurdiga. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, in my riding, the City of Cold Lake has been in dispute with the federal government for many years over payment in lieu of taxes. My office has sent many letters over the years regarding the PILT dispute. Could the Minister of Public Services and Procurement give me a rough estimate of when I will receive a response from the minister's office to my first letter, from 2017, and my letters from 2018,2019 and 2020? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that I will go to the minister, and we will come back with an answer to his question. Mr. David Yurdiga: How much longer does the minister intend to perpetuate the ongoing PILT dispute, which is in excess of $11 million, with the City of Cold Lake? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, once again, I can assure the honourable member that I will speak with the minister and get an answer to his question. Mr. David Yurdiga: Well, do you know what? I've been writing letters to the department for many years. When you say you're going to get back to me, I really have a hard time believing that. Will the minister agree to follow the prior recommendations of the dispute advisory panel that were accepted by the minister? Hon. David Lametti: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that I will check with the minister and that she will return to the member in due course. Mr. David Yurdiga: Madam Chair, the drug Trikafta has been proven to increase the quality of life for 90% of cystic fibrosis patients. Two weeks ago, my office sent a letter to the Minister of Health about the boy in my riding named Cael, who through the special access program is able to get Trikafta in Canada. I requested that the minister use her powers to fast-track Trikafta for commercial use, but I have yet to receive a response back. When will the minister make a decision on Trikafta? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, I'm glad to hear that Cael was able to access Trikafta through the special access program. In fact, that program is very helpful for people who are seeking access to medication that's not currently marketed in Canada. As the member opposite knows, Vertex has not applied to market Trikafta in Canada, but we look forward to their application, and I encourage him to write a letter to the manufacturer to also encourage them. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Vancouver Granville, Ms. Wilson-Raybould. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould (Vancouver Granville, Ind.): Thank you, Chair. I was very troubled to hear that a CBC radio host in the Yukon felt compelled to resign because, as an indigenous person, she could not speak her truth. While we know the Broadcasting Act states that the Canadian broadcasting system should reflect the linguistic duality and multicultural and multiracial nature of Canadian society and the special place of indigenous peoples, it would seem there are some challenges. Therefore, does the Minister of Heritage share the concern of some journalists that problems of systemic racism in Canada are still existing within the institution of the CBC, and will the government now acknowledge the need to recognize the jurisdiction of indigenous governments? Hon. Steven Guilbeault (Minister of Canadian Heritage): Thank you, Madame Chair; and I thank the member for this important question. As stated by the Prime Minister on numerous occasions, our government recognizes that systemic racism exists in Canada, and we have made a commitment to do everything we can to combat it in whichever organization of the Canadian government. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould: Thank you. When I was in the government, and as a minister, I learned the term red meat issues. I understand these issues to be ones that challenge societal norms, that are not politically expedient to address because they can lose you votes, even though addressing them is morally right and a smart thing to do. Mostly these are issues addressing inequality and the most marginalized in our society. In the justice system, examples include mandatory minimum penalties, defunding police, and even investing in restorative justice. Red-meat issues often become defining issues for society and for governments as the world changes. Surely now these issues are politically less of a consideration than the tragic reality of even more slain indigenous Canadians at the hands of police, or thousands of indigenous people still incarcerated or living in poverty. Will this government please finally commit to the necessary work originally promised in 2015 and repeal in the justice system the vast majority of mandatory minimum penalties, assuring the necessary discretion for judges, and meaningfully invest in restorative justice measures? Hon. David Lametti: Madame Chair, I thank the honourable member for her question, as well as for her work as Minister of Justice, and indeed my predecessor. This is an important time. This is a time when we recognize systemic racism. This is a time when we recognize systemic over-incarceration of indigenous peoples, of black peoples, in our criminal justice system. This is a time when we need to look at all potential options to reduce what is a shameful overrepresentation in our criminal justice system. Too often racialized peoples and indigenous peoples have experienced prejudice and systemic discrimination in our justice system, and that has to change. Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould: I'll go on to another red meat issue. In British Columbia we are in the fifth year of the opioid overdose public health emergency crisis. Sadly, May marks the deadliest month of overdose-related deaths. We are halfway into the year and have currently passed 500 deaths caused by overdose. Many of the deaths are related to COVID-19 measures that have prevented people from accessing supervised consumption sites, so they are overdosing alone. While the provinces welcomed the federal backing of safe supply exemption back in March, it is to expire in September of 2020. Echoing the call of the chief coroner of B. C. and Dr. Henry, more is needed from the federal government, more action. Will the government provide the necessary supports to the province and help support safe supply initiatives in the provinces? Hon. Patty Hajdu: It's been a pleasure to work with the Province of British Columbia on innovative ways to work on the tragic situation of opioid overdose. I remain committed to working with the province and in fact any province that wants to work towards solutions that treat people who use substances with the dignity they deserve. Madam Chair, this is a complex issue. We're working closely with our partners to make sure that we can prevent more lives from being lost. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for South OkanaganWest Kootenay, Mr. Cannings. Mr. Richard Cannings (South OkanaganWest Kootenay, NDP): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with the member for SkeenaBulkley Valley. In my riding, Theo's in Penticton is a beloved restaurant. They've been serving great food for 40 years, but now they're struggling, because they don't qualify for the emergency wage subsidy. Why is that? The original owners retired last year and sold it to another operator. The new owner can't use a year-to-year comparison to apply for the wage subsidy because he didn't own the restaurant last spring. He is forced to use receipts from January and February, the darkest doldrums of the restaurant year, to compare with the results from May, traditionally one of their best months. Now he has to compete with other local restaurants that can access the subsidy. When will the government fix this inequity and let Theo's compete and survive? Hon. Mona Fortier: Madam Chair, the Canada emergency wage subsidy is supporting over 2. 5 million workers across the country. To help even more businesses support their workers and rehire people as they reopen, our government is extending the CEWS, and we will continue to extend the CEWS for an additional 12 weeks to August 29 to ensure that Canadian workers continue to have the support they need during these very difficult times. By extending eligibility, our government is ensuring that more Canadian workers in more sectors have the support they need. Mr. Richard Cannings: The owner just wants to be able to apply for the wage subsidy, and right now he cannot, and he will not be able to. Thousands of other businesses are hit that way as well. I'd like to move on to forestry. Canada's forest sector has been declared essential during this pandemic, but it's been hit hard after a very difficult 2019. Despite soft markets and thousands out of work, government support programs have left many Canadian forest product companies behind. In my riding, the pulp mill in Castlegar is closing for the month of July because local sawmills aren't producing enough wood chips. What is the government going to do to finally support Canadian forestry workers and communities? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The time is almost up, but I will allow for the answer from the honourable minister. Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Thank you, Madam Chair. We have supported and we will continue to support the forestry sector, including through regional development programs. In fact, in Quebec, partnering with Les Bois Francs DV Inc. , we have widened market access to our products and updated technology systems. In North Bay we've partnered with the Canadian Wood Council to promote the sector. In Vancouver we're working with FPInnovations to create the indigenous forest sector technical support program. We are supporting the forestry sector and its different needs region by region. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Now we go to the honourable member for SkeenaBulkley Valley, Mr. Bachrach. Mr. Taylor Bachrach (SkeenaBulkley Valley, NDP): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm going to pick up where my colleague left off, with B. C.'s forest industry. What we've seen in B. C. are multiple rounds of mill shutdowns and start-ups, and in some cases this has made it difficult for forestry workers to qualify for EI. My question to the minister is this: Will the minister work to make the EI program more flexible for forestry workers, similar to what this government has done for oil and gas workers? Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, in the oil and gas sector we have focused on workers. That has been key in the inactive and orphan well program, which we are working on with the provincial governments of Saskatchewan, British Columbia and Alberta. The focus on workers has assured that success, and we will continue to focus on workers in all the industries, particularly our natural resource industry, as they go through this extraordinarily difficult time. Mr. Taylor Bachrach: Madam Chair, reforestation is a very important part of the forest industry in the riding I represent, and people were keenly interested to hear this government's plan to plant two billion trees in the next 10 years. That's a lot of trees. I'm wondering if the minister could tell us how many trees are going to be planted under this program by the end of this season. Hon. Seamus O'Regan: Madam Chair, this government is committed to two billion trees. We are working with forestry associations, the industry and with individual companies to ensure this tree-planting season will be one of the largest the country has ever seen. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The floor goes to the honourable member for Rivire-du-Nord. Mr. Rhal Fortin (Rivire-du-Nord, BQ): MadamChair, last week, the government introduced BillC-17 and the Minister of Justice sent us briefing notes in which he said that it was important to suspend a number of time limits and to extend others, and that the failure to do so could have important repercussions on Canadians, their families, their situations, their finances and their ability to exercise their rights. We in the Bloc Qubcois agree with that. When are we going to talk about it? Hon. David Lametti: MadamChair, the contents of BillC-17 are clearly very important. We have addressed the mandatory time limits in federal legislation as well as certain time limits that courts may not be able to handle. It is very important that we address this issue. That is why the law The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Fortin, you have the floor. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, we agree that it is important. I concur. The minister's briefing notes say that, among other things, when it comes to divorcewhich means children are involved people are waiting on custody rights, child support and visitation rights. The minister pointed out that the national security review would require consultations if no decision is made in the prescribed time frame. It could pose a national security risk. It is really a big deal. When are we going to debate it? Hon. David Lametti: MadamChair, I completely agree with my honourable colleague. The issue needs to be addressed. That is why it is in the bill. That is another reason to debate the bill. I beseech my colleagues opposite to debate it with us. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, what a coincidence, because I beseech my colleague opposite to debate it with us. That is what we are asking. Last week, the leader of the Bloc Qubcois asked the Liberal government to debate BillC-17 today. He did not get an answer. It does not seem to matter. Richard Wagner, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, who is hardly a dimwit or greenhorn, told us that the justice system needs to be modernized. As recently as this past Saturday in LaPresse, Justice Wagner said that it is essential that the Criminal Code be amended to address the backlog of court proceedings. When will the Liberal government opposite pull up its socks, do its job, govern the federation, sit down with the opposition and discuss the vital matters in BillC-17? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, if I were my colleague, I would be a little embarrassed, because the bill was sent to the Bloc Qubcois several days in advance. They received a technical note several days in advance. We were all available to take questions. When we asked for the support of the Bloc Qubcois and the other parties to debate itwe were not even asking them to vote in favour of the billthey refused. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, we never refused to debate it. Actually, we were the ones who asked to debate it. What exactly does debate it mean? We set some conditions. For example, we asked the Liberals to put the money back into the wage subsidy fund and to commit to dip into it no longer. Are we asking too much of our colleagues opposite? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Can my colleague explain to me what the emergency wage subsidy has to do with a bill about justice? This is an absolutely fundamental piece of legislation. We wanted to debate it, but they refused to do so. Mr. Rhal Fortin: MadamChair, I would like nothing better than to explain it to him, but I must remind him that he is the leader of the party in power, the party that is supposed to govern the country. So I do not know why he is asking me that. My party proposed that we debate this today but we did not get an answer. Meanwhile, court time limits are running out and people are losing rights. I am thinking of families, child support, child custody, labour law disputes in Federal Court, marine transportation, interprovincial transportation, aviation, banks, and those with grievances waiting for a Federal Court ruling. The whole system, the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal, everything is on hold because nobody in the government wants to do their job. We want to discuss BillC-17. When can we talk about it? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: MadamChair, we have done our job. We have introduced the bill. We informed them in advance. We told them they could ask us any questions they wanted. We asked for a debate in the House. However, when we asked the Bloc Qubcois if they wanted to debate the bill, they said no, instead of doing what they usually do and saying yes. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for Essex, Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis (Essex, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. When the CERB runs out, many workers in my riding of Essex will not have sufficient hours to collect their EI benefits. In early July, the midnight shift at Chrysler will be eliminated. Because of the shutdown, a mom-to-be who had just returned to work in January, and several hundred of her fellow employees, may not have the 600 hours required for regular or EI parental benefits. Immediate action is needed. What is the government doing now to backstop these workers? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, the Canada emergency response benefit has been providing much-needed help to Canadian workers across the country who have stopped working due to COVID-19. We know that there is still a lot of uncertainty for many Canadian workers, and we know that many will be exhausting their benefits in the weeks to come. We will have more to share soon, as early as this week, on our continuing efforts to support Canadian workers and make sure that help is available during this The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Go ahead, Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Minister, for the answer. The EI system needs to be fixed. Even before the shutdown, the system was deeply flawed. Will this government commit to a complete review and overhaul of the EI system? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we have been there for Canadian workers. We will continue to make sure that we make the necessary investments in the EI delivery system and modernize it to continue to meet The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. Small businesses have been hit extremely hard by the COVID-19 shutdown. Many have already been forced into bankruptcy. Much uncertainty lies ahead. As the economy reopens, what is the government doing to help small businesses recover? Hon. Mary Ng: Madam Chair, today we are seeing small businesses that have been helped, whether it is getting access to the small business loan, which some are also using in the restart as they are safely restarting, or getting help with their payroll, helping them keep their employees The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. Employees are key to a small business's success. How will the government incentivize workers to return to their jobs when recalled? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister can give a brief answer. Hon. Mary Ng: The Canada emergency wage subsidy is an excellent program to help those employees stay employed and for those employers who are looking at rehiring them right now during this restart process. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair, many of my constituents are in a committed cross-border relationship and have not been able to see their partners in quite some time. The current restrictions are arbitrary. Denmark has found a fair resolution. Will Canada adopt the Danish model, and if not, why not? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, as we said from the outset, we've implemented restrictions at the U. S. border on non-essential travel with a single purpose in mind: to protect the health and safety of Canadians. As the member is aware, just last week we introduced new measures that allow people in family relationships to stay together as long as they commit to the necessary 14-day period of quarantine. We'll continue to work with families. Our intention is to keep people together, but mostly to keep people safe. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair, with regard to child care, as our economy continues to open, parents are facing a stark choice: Who will care for their children? What's the plan to provide access to child care so parents can confidently return to work? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, we are of course committed to continuing to make the record investments that we've been making in child care. Since 2015 we've created over 40,000 affordable child care spaces. We're committed to creating an additional 250,000 before-school and after-school child care spaces. We will continue to invest in this sector because we understand that without investment The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Lewis. Mr. Chris Lewis: Thank you, Madam Chair. It sounds as though this government has a desire to force parents to choose between their job and care for their child. Can the government please respond to that quote? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, nothing could be further from the truth. We are committed to the child care sector. Our investments and our results prove the opposite of what the member is asserting. Mr. Chris Lewis: Madam Chair The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I'm sorry. We're out of time. The committee now stands adjourned until tomorrow at noon.

This was meeting number 22 of the House of Commons Special Committee on the COVD-19 Pandemic. Firstly, members were given the chance to present their petitions. Secondly, the meeting proceeded to statements by some members. The third part, the major section, was the questioning of ministers. These questions were closely related to the Canadian government and society during the pandemic period. To be more specific, they included economic updates, systemic racism, the impact of international affairs, financial issues, the situation of veterans and the disabled, and employment and work situation nationwide.

tr-sq-1221

tr-sq-1221_0

Summarize the discussion about market potentials for the new remote controls. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um {vocalsound} minutes from the last meeting which were essentially that we uh had decided on roles for each of you, however, um there are some changes that I've got from on high User Interface: Okay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: that um are a bit uh {disfmarker} well w what I didn't actually realise it was that the uh {vocalsound} this is for a specific television. User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: So the all in one idea goes out the window. And {vocalsound} they require that the uh User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: actually I'll get to that at the end {gap} point number four, um we'll get what you've got and then we can see what we can adapt from it. So um, presentations, were you {disfmarker} anybody got, raring to go? Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. Project Manager: Raring to go? Okay. Good stuff. Mm. Marketing: Um. So how {disfmarker} Project Manager: Oh I need to plug you in. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: S {gap} Project Manager: Just about. User Interface: Wow. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: It's a inspired design. Marketing: {gap} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Sh do you want me to hold it? Project Manager: Uh there we go, just screw'em on in. Gonna have to swap them round so {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} So, after that? Project Manager: now, it was function F_ eight. Marketing: F_ eight. {vocalsound} f oh sorry F_ eight. Project Manager: That's the wee blue one. Blue one F_ eight. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: Should do it, good one. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. Uh, me again, Rajan the Marketing Expert. Uh, as we have decided in the last meeting that I have to find out, sorry, yeah sure. Project Manager: Hold on, sorry. {gap} and if you just click that it'll go ahead, one at a time. Marketing: Yeah, yeah. Uh actually, sorry I have to see the other {gap}, sorry. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Sorry, uh. Marketing: Yeah, thank you. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Uh, yes, I have to look at the uh market potential for this product, uh, like consumer likings and everything, what is the potential for this product and are we able to achieve our a net profit or our aims or not? Then {disfmarker} Project Manager: P press F_ five to start it first. Marketing: Sorry. Okay. Yeah, I can, okay. Industrial Designer: Hmm. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Jesus. Marketing: Uh then uh the methodology I adopted to find out all this was market survey. A a detailed market survey on consumers was done to find out their likings and dislikings, what they prefer what they not prefer, w what problems they do encounter in all this type of things. And what we got was, we found that {disfmarker} if you {disfmarker} uh, what they th what problems they are having with different uh remote controls available in the market. Seventy five percent of users they do find it that the remote controls available in the market are ugly. They are not so good looking. So, we have to put stress on this, uh we have to take care of this fact also like our design, uh should be appropriate, should be good looking for the consumers. And yes that's wi uh this will definitely, this can definitely put uh uh enhance our sales. Uh and even uh the good thing about this is that eighty percent of users they are willing to pay high uh pay more for this uh good looking remote controls also. So even if the available market goes for the available {disfmarker} uh even if the market goes for the available remote control is less even then we can sell it at twenty five Euros, which maybe which may seem quite high but if our looks are are if the re remote control we design have a good better uh better look uh designs, then we can hope that consumers will prefer these g remote controls. Project Manager: Excellent. Marketing: Then {disfmarker} {gap} And the second thing, some some companies they think that they should have more and more functions of the users uh or in their remote controls, but rather than those having more functions in the remote controls we should emphasise what actually consumer want, what they operate, rather than making it too complicated. Because mostly it has been found that fifty percent of the users they use only ten percent of the buttons, so there is no point of having ninety percent buttons making the remote controls too bulky, too complicated too expensive a because I think I believe that technology is useful only if uh the consumers they want to use it. Otherwise there is no point of having all this type of things. So this will not only reduce the cost of our remote controls but it will increase our profit also. So we have to take care of this fact also. Then. Uh it was function I want to go to. Project Manager: Oh you wanna go back? Just escape. Marketing: Uh, escape, okay thank you. Then if we look at this slide, Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: uh these are in your shared documents, you can see, Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: like {disfmarker} Uh, sorry. User Interface: So, sorry {disfmarker} I was just gonna say, what was the question for this? Or is {disfmarker} are you coming on to that? Marketing: Ah t look all the market potential, what uh how we should design consu our remote controls, what they should be there so as to en enhance our profit, enhance our sales. User Interface: Okay. So these percentages are are what? Marketing: Yeah, these are different age group persons like uh sorry, I can open it in another way. Project Manager: Okay. Speech recognition. Marketing: Uh, yes. If we look at the costs whether the consumers they are willing to uh pay more for speech recognition in a remote control or not, we can find that they up to a thirty five years age group we have a very good disliking for this uh this uh point, like for speech recognition in a remote control. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: So we can emphasise on this point also like, because it will definitely enhance our sales in this ag in this particular age group from uh fifteen to thirty five, User Interface: Hmm. Marketing: and I uh and I think that most of the users of the rem uh T_V_ are belong to this age group. So we should look {disfmarker} Project Manager: Hmm. We're als we we're looking at who buys it as well. {gap} Marketing: Yeah. We can look at that that factor also, so yes. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Uh, which I think the twenty five to thirty five is uh usual, sort of. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Mm, mm. Marketing: So, and {disfmarker} {gap} Project Manager: {gap} Marketing: {vocalsound} And then {disfmarker} Project Manager: Fifteen to twe Marketing: Yes. I think so. Uh if we look at this data how how uh h how what are the problems the consumers are facing with the existing remote controls in the market. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: They find that thirt uh thirty five percent uh thirty four percent of the consumers they find too difficult to operate a remote control. So it should be in such a way that it should be easy to learn how to operate these remote controls and we should provide pl uh spe uh proper manuals for its use also so as that people {disfmarker} consumers could easily learn. They need not to have any, much technical knowledge to see uh to know how to operate these remote controls. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: So this is also a very goo uh major factor to loo uh take into consideration to enhance our profits and sales. So um this is all about Project Manager: Okay. {vocalsound} Marketing: uh market potential by me. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Uh, yes, th thank you. Project Manager: Okay, thank you. Um, {vocalsound} follow on with Helen? Yeah please. User Interface: Yep, sure, that's cool, um {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah we have to take that {gap} out. Project Manager: Oh, so we do yeah. Marketing: Sorry. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Fun and games. Marketing: Sorry. Project Manager: Don't know if the cable's gonna be long enough. Marketing: Uh sorry, I have {gap}. {vocalsound} Project Manager: I think I just kicked over whatever it runs on underneath as well. Marketing: Brian, this one also I {gap}. Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Thank you very much Brian. User Interface: I can turn my computer quickly if that's okay. Marketing: If you want me to help, yeah. User Interface: Um, yep. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Okay, and then what do I press, F_ eight? Marketing: Uh F_ eight. Function F_ eight. Project Manager: Function F_ eight. User Interface: Oh right. Marketing: Mm s. User Interface: Okay, cool. Marketing: It's not coming. Function F_ eight, okay. User Interface: Oh. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. No signal. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Computer. Project Manager: Hmm. Marketing: Computer adjusting, yeah. Project Manager: There you go. User Interface: Okay. Cool. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Okay and then how do I press the the big one, to get it on to the big {disfmarker} Project Manager: Uh F_ five. User Interface: F_ five and I press that again to get it off as well do I? Marketing: Escape. Project Manager: Um, F_ five and escape'll bring it back and just uh the left button for advancing. User Interface: Okay, so um I'm the interface design designer, User Interface Designer sorry, uh I'm concerned with um w what effect the apparatus should have on the user and um I'm I'm also {disfmarker} I want to point out that our motto, put the fashion in electronics, Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: so obviously we as a company we want to make our products trendy and fashionable, it's a big concern of ours. Okay, and how do I press n just the next button? Project Manager: Uh just a left uh User Interface: The arrow? Okay. Project Manager: left mouse button. User Interface: So um I looked at existing designs and also um the information that Raj gave us was very useful about what people like, what people dislike. Um and what people {disfmarker} fashionable, because we said people between twenty five and thirty five were the main um buyers of of our T_V_ I think. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Okay. User Interface: So um what they like and what they find fashionable. Project Manager:'Kay. User Interface: {vocalsound} And ergonomics, we said um, I don't know I haven't actually been able to do any of this myself, Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: but um maybe that comes up, I don't know. Project Manager: That can come under Arlo as well. User Interface: And the findings, well the basic {disfmarker} that was the basic function to send messages to the television set. Project Manager: Uh. User Interface: That's what people want to do. Um, so they need to be included, um, but I've got some pictures here of some leading ones. I don't know how to get to them, Project Manager: Uh if you if you escape then you can see your bar. User Interface: {vocalsound} do I press F_ five is it? {gap} escape? Oh okay, cool. I haven't got my glasses on so I hope it's this one. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh okay. User Interface: These are two leading um remote controls at the moment. Project Manager:'Kay. User Interface: You know they're grey, they've I mean this one's got loads of buttons, it's hard to tell from here what they actually do, Project Manager: {gap} {vocalsound} User Interface: and they don't look very exciting at all. Um, personally I prefer this one just because it's looks easier use, it's a bit more sleek with more of this silver stuff, Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: um, but there you go, that's what we're up against, Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: and I think we can do much better than that. Project Manager: {vocalsound} We hope so. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Of course. {vocalsound} User Interface: Um hang on. F_ five, Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: okay, sorry. Personal preferences. Um, well I think we need to l I think the ergonomics is quite um important, um Project Manager: {gap} Yeah, particularly if we've uh there was a bit in Raj's about R_S_I_ and things as well. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Uh-huh. And um I thought not too edgy and like a box, more kind of hand-held more um {vocalsound} not as uh computery and Project Manager: Organic {vocalsound}. User Interface: or organic, yeah, more organic shape I think. {vocalsound} Um simple designs, like the last one we just saw, not too many buttons and as Raj pointed out, only ten percent {disfmarker} fifty percent of people only use ten percent of the buttons, Marketing: {gap} Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: so I think what we can miss out on the buttons we can make up for in design and and how nice it looks. Project Manager: Sales, {gap}. Okay. User Interface: Um, hand-held and portable I think is portamint is important because T_F_T_ have just um released um I think is it a a remote control for presentations or uh and a big seven inch big screen, anyway, so um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah it's like a, yeah. {vocalsound} It's {gap}. {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, no seven inches isn't that big but um anyway um so hand-held and portable and uh m I thought about other functions for T_V_ but as you pointed out people don't actually want that, Project Manager: Right. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: And also the company want to keep it stuck to the T_V_ for uh to keep down the production time. User Interface: so maybe we forget about that. It's for one T_V_ oh right okay, sure. And so the last thing I thought w which I quickly mentioned in the other one was maybe a bit of a gimmick to set us apart from other people, like glow-in-the-dark Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Exactly. Yeah. User Interface: um which {vocalsound} does already e exist but it's not very widely used I don't think. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Easy finder with the a whistle function or something, Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: or rechargeable station because it's a pain when you run out of batteries. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: And I think that, yep, that's it. Project Manager: That's cool. Industrial Designer: So uh, I noticed your talk about speech recognition and whistling, User Interface: Okay? Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: and uh I was just curious to know, have we done any research into how many people can whistle? Um, or if {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: is that a function we want in the remote? Project Manager: Um, do you have trouble whistling? User Interface: Um, I haven't been able to {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I don't, but I I know a lot of people do right. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Really? Industrial Designer: Yeah it just Project Manager: Ooh. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {disfmarker} I mean it has to be a certain kind of whistle too, right? Project Manager: Yeah, I suppose that's true. User Interface: Mm-hmm, yeah Project Manager: Well I suppo uh you could y you could have the User Interface: or some sort of voice {disfmarker} Project Manager: you could have the basically um instead of a whistle if it's got the voice recognition you could have it just, you know, where are you? {gap}. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} That's costly though. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Um a much easier thing is just any loud noise like clapping um, shouting, you know, Project Manager: Hmm. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: uh and then, what would the response be? It beeps back at you or something? Project Manager: Sounds good. User Interface: Yeah, something. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Well, uh let me set this up. So I plug it in, press F_ five? Function F_ five? Project Manager: Function F_ eight for the um the uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Or function F_ eight? Okay. User Interface: Oh you need to twiddle the thingamibobsy thing. Industrial Designer: Okay. I think it's {vocalsound} uh just to lock it in. It's got it. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Okay. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Um. {vocalsound} So as the Industrial Designer my job is to take an input from you guys, User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: um so it's good you went first, Project Manager: Alright. Industrial Designer: and I jotted down some notes as to what are the b needs and uh what kind of novel features we can add to differentiate our product from the others. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Let's remember that. Industrial Designer: Um so Raj told us that uh consumers are willing to spend more for fancy products, and um he also mentioned that uh the current products don't always match users'operating behaviour. Um, a lot of the buttons aren't used, and uh {vocalsound} he mentioned that they're not fun to use. And uh a novel feature which uh we just brought up was this this automatic speech recognition feature or noise detection feature for when you lose the remote, Project Manager: {gap} Industrial Designer: there could be a little microphone on it, and any noise over a certain threshold um it'll pick up as a a distress signal um from you and it'll beep back and say you know oh here I am or something of this sort. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. But sure surely that would have to be um sort of specific rather than above a threshold'cause if you had a loud movie on you're likely to get it beeping back at you. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Oh yeah, yeah, that's true. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Well maybe you could have a um hmm {vocalsound} tha that would be a consideration to take into account yes. Um. Project Manager: Sorry I didn't mean to derail you there. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yeah well tha that's uh for later down the road um, and then as for the user interface it should be trendy, um {vocalsound} and not computery, User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: right, so more low tech and not too many buttons. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: So I took these all into consideration and also I have some limitations from the boss. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Right um, and practical limitations which I kinda threw out the window. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: And so I did a little research and unfortunately all I had to work on was our uh our corporate archives of the great products we've made before, User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: which include, you know, um space craft, coffee makers, and bullet trains {disfmarker} Or uh or a high speed train. Project Manager: Ah is that what that is? {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Right and having personally worked with all these products uh I have a great deal of experience with uh with industrial design of these. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well that's cool. If you if you can build space craft you'll have no problem with a remote control, yeah. Industrial Designer: Right. So, User Interface: Yeah sure. Industrial Designer: I figured, just put'em all together. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: You got a a caffeine powered space shuttle train transport to your T_V_, and um User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: as for the user interface problem, you know, too many buttons. Give it one button User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: and and it's a {disfmarker} you know, for the the cowboy in all of us {gap} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {disfmarker} I I'm not quite sure what the the function is there but {disfmarker} Project Manager: Right okay. {vocalsound} User Interface: Well I like that design. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yeah it's a g I mean you could have a you know a {disfmarker} Project Manager: Is that just switches on the speech recognition and it's entirely speech operated, is it? Industrial Designer: Right. So I think I I missed the budget thing, Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: it was fifty million Euros? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: And we gotta sell twenty five of them? Right. {vocalsound} Okay. {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, not a problem. Marketing: Fifty million was uh prof Project Manager: Ah now it's fif fifty million Euros we've gotta uh we've g {vocalsound} Marketing: As a profit. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Oh okay, so I I mixed those numbers. Project Manager: gotta make profit, so we're making that at twelve and a half Euros a time. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Okay. Well I guess more realistically then, we need a product that's got some kinda nifty outer casing, cheap plastic uh, you know, um that should be just like uh a tenth of the price maybe or less. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: An energy source which'd probably just be uh your regular batteries {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: um, we don't wanna have it {disfmarker} Project Manager: Would it be possible to have the rechargeable idea? Is that is that gonna mark up a lot? Industrial Designer: Uh. User Interface: Or a little base station or something, {gap}. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah, yeah, we could do that too. Um, I hadn't thought of that. Yeah. User Interface: {vocalsound} That might cost more though,'cause obviously with batteries we don't need to provide, well we provide the first batteries, but it's more, it's {disfmarker} that's cheaper to just provide batteries. Project Manager: Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: Right. Project Manager: I mean if you think about these base stations now it's essentially just a a lead with a sort of self connecting brake in it, User Interface: A battery in it, kinda. Project Manager: so I don't think it'd up up the price that much. Industrial Designer: Right, so so {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: the unirs the user interface User Interface: {vocalsound} Okay. Industrial Designer: uh the canonical user interface for these would be just a bunch of buttons, but since we're a cutting edge company, we uh of course will have alternatives like uh speech recognition, whistling recognition and rocket power Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: behind our product. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Um and lastly the transmission interface is uh, just some engineering thing you don't have to worry about. Project Manager: Okay. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Um so here's you know, a great schematic that my uh apprentice designer gave me. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Um as you can see the the remote control have parts and those parts look like that and um {vocalsound} you know it's got a little operating procedure that looks something like that. {vocalsound} And I suppose you all know how it works because we've all used it and we wouldn't be in a company designing remote controls if we didn't know what they were so {disfmarker} uh personal preferences, I think uh programmable options which um just require a small amount of memory, uh non volatile memory, just um so the user can put in their favourite channels and maybe their preferred volume settings so that when they turn it on it's not blasting. User Interface: Mm. Mm that's a good idea actually I like the programmable options. Marketing: Yeah, me too. Industrial Designer: Oh okay. And the uh, the bells and whistles that we mentioned you know, they take more budgeting, um more technical uh expenditure of effort Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: and it's also much more likely to not work if if we add these bells and whistles. Project Manager: Right. User Interface: Mm'kay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: That's all I got. Project Manager:'Kay, thank you very much, um I'll take that back. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Ooh that's tight. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Right, also so um a notice I got not very long before the meeting, so didn't manage to forward it on to you, it is {disfmarker} let's see, I'll find it myself, um {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Ta Industrial Designer: Okay, I don't think we need to screw it in. Project Manager: nah. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Just push it. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: We had that um to dis-include teletext um because it's become outdated, and everybody uses the internet anyway. Um, {vocalsound} dunno what Oracle would have to say with that but never mind. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Um it's only for the television, which I'm presuming means it's for a specific television, User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: and um instead of colours and sorta colour options, they want corporate colour and slogan somehow implemented in the new design. User Interface: Corporate colour. Project Manager: Yellow. User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: Yellow. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} I presume. Um, everything, all their sort of uh you know the uh corporate website and everything's yellow. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: And the logo uh the sort of slogan we put the fa fashion in electronics uh {disfmarker} I don't know exactly how sort of incorpor I mean, I guess if you're going for a sort of globular shape you could kind of have it working its way round it or something. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Uh, where am I? {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay, so, we have to decide on which functions we're going to actually have. User Interface:'Kay. Project Manager: Uh, {vocalsound} now, we had as listed options we had Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: speech recognition potentially, flat screen interface, L_C_D_ interface um we also want to limit the number of buttons so we'll pretty much take that one as read. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Project Manager: We'll use the the basic functions for a television. No teletext. Um {vocalsound} okay hold on. User Interface: Although the the danger with that is, it could look a bit cheap. Project Manager: Not enough buttons you mean? User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: So sorta strike a balance between a a few and a {disfmarker} User Interface: Well {disfmarker} Project Manager: or it looks like we're just cutting on the um {disfmarker} User Interface: Mm. On the number of buttons, kind of functions and stuff. Project Manager: I do however have this from over my head, that they don't want teletext on it. User Interface: Mm-hmm, okay. Okay, cool. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh maybe Raj you could find out what people would think about that, or maybe they'll send Marketing: About cost. Project Manager: some information about that, about um what people, whether people would require um teletext in a remote {disfmarker} teletext option in a remote control. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: {gap} {vocalsound} Okay um {gap}. So uh I take it your position Arlo is that the bells and whistles we've gotta come up with the {disfmarker} a gimmick but not too complicated a gimmick. Industrial Designer: Yeah yeah. Project Manager: Um so I mean a a the sort of inkling I'm getting from little bits of um web chatter that I'm getting sent is that they're quite interested in a T_F_T_ display, interactive display. However that does sound a bit like the more complicated design that rav uh sorry Raj um {vocalsound} said people didn't like. Although I guess if there's a sort of {disfmarker} User Interface: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Project Manager: If you think about standard interfaces that people use already, sort of Windows-style drop down menus or whatever, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: I think maybe that's a bit, going a bit far User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: but you know like in a basic sense that you could have your basic selection of buttons, and if you hit a sort of menu at the top you have um {vocalsound} it goes to a different selection of buttons, so it sorta keeps it simple. User Interface: Yeah. Okay. Project Manager: Um glow in the dark, is that sort of with a light inside it or is it sort of glow in the dark material? User Interface: Um {disfmarker} Marketing: Uh. User Interface: Glow in the dark material I was thinking. Project Manager: Okay. So {disfmarker} Marketing: I {disfmarker} User Interface: Um, so I I guess that would be cheaper than a light I think. Marketing: Uh may I say something about {gap}? Project Manager: Yeah. Yeah. Marketing: Uh actually I think it's really really very important point uh as if we look at the market because people mor fifty percent people they find that the remote controls are often lost somewhere in the remote, in the room. But {disfmarker} User Interface: Often lost s was that, Marketing: yeah are lost Project Manager: Lost, yeah. User Interface: yeah. Marketing: and means they forget where they have kept the remote control last time. But if we add speech recognition as well as glow in the dark then both these factors will help their locating the remote control, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Marketing: like if they come and speak something at the remote control uh replies to something something and it glows in the dark. Both these factors uh both these points will help them to locate the where they have kept this remote control, Project Manager: That's cool. User Interface: Mm-hmm, Marketing: and this will definitely enhance our uh market sales, Project Manager: That's cool. User Interface: mm-hmm. Marketing: so we should take it into consideration also. Project Manager: Okay, cool. Industrial Designer: Well hmm. Project Manager: Um speech recognition I take it {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Oh it's {disfmarker} Project Manager: I don't, I've {disfmarker} I know of no products um that use speech recognition well. Industrial Designer: They're act there there was a remote control that came out two years ago that had a {disfmarker} some basic speech recognition on it. You could programme it with your channels and then you say you know like uh B_B_C_ one and it goes to that channel. Project Manager: Really? Industrial Designer: Yeah, it didn't work very well though because of this noise interference problem. They mentioned you know if the television says you are listening to B_B_C_ one {gap}. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Yeah, or a yeah an advert an advert for B_B_C_ two on B_B_C_ one'll switch the channel for you kinda thing. User Interface: {gap} Industrial Designer: Right, right, and so there was a lot of this, you'd be watching the T_V_ and then all of a sudden it'd it'd pick up a noise and turn it off or you know or turn the volume off or something, Project Manager: {vocalsound} Mm. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: but if you can work around that that noise problem {disfmarker} User Interface:'Kay. Project Manager: Uh-huh. User Interface: Well what about {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: this might get a bit too expensive actually, but what about um something that's built into the T_V_ um that you can press and it'll send out a little signal you know like the ones that we can't hear or {vocalsound} something Project Manager: Ah, that's a good idea. Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: um that that will activate the remote control starts to beep. Industrial Designer: Right. Project Manager: So like a kind of backwards remote from the telly. {vocalsound} User Interface: If you find if y Industrial Designer: Right and then it would do just you know, uh subtractive kind of cancellation of the noise. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: What you could do then would be you have uh {vocalsound} a remote controlled by the T_V_ speaker, or not a remo I'm sorry, a microphone by the T_V_ speaker and a transmitter there that sends back to your remote,'cause you can't um expect uh the the television manufacturers to to put that feature into their T_V_s. User Interface: Mm. Yeah, that's the only thing, yeah. Industrial Designer: But yeah, then you have like the little se separate module by the T_V_ speaker Project Manager: That we should just stick on, yeah. Industrial Designer: which {disfmarker} User Interface: That comes with our remote control. Industrial Designer: Right, and then the remote control would know um what's being produced by the television. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: And that's a sort of basic R_F_ kind of frequency so it'll be cheap. Industrial Designer: Right, right. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Right, right. Um. {vocalsound} Yeah that's certainly possible then an another thing was about this losing the remote and trying to find it again. If you do have this sorta speech interface to it, you don't even need to find it. You just say you know, um whatever you whatever you want the remote for, you know to change the channel or to uh turn the T_V_ on and off, you just shout your command to it and it would do it for you if it's within you know, within hearing range. And uh you know it could be somewhere in the room y that you've no idea where it is and it would still do its job. Project Manager: Uh-huh. User Interface: That could also be built into the T_V_ though, which might make our remote control a bit obsolete. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: Well, hopefully we're uh we're ahead of the curve. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} It might do us out of a job. User Interface: Yeah, okay. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um {disfmarker} Okay. {vocalsound} I like the whole sort of remote feedback thing. Um so I think rather than {disfmarker} and that also kind of takes out the speech recognition in terms of the interference of it not working very well and things like that, User Interface: Mm. Industrial Designer: Hmm. Project Manager: so I th User Interface: And the expense. Project Manager: yeah and expense and the time. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So I think if we're going to go {disfmarker} well I mean like the thing about the {disfmarker} there's the problem with the T_F_T_ or the L_C_D_ kind of thing is if you're also wanting the the kind of uh organic globby sort of feeling to it then you might have trouble incorporating the screen. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Um, but I guess not I thin we'll just we'll just pretend that's not a problem. Um {vocalsound} {vocalsound} uh {vocalsound} and how are you about the glow in the dark material? Is that {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Um. User Interface: Maybe not even all of it'cause we said um colours and fashion w were important so maybe um just like a little l line that's kind of around the outside and then you can make the rest a different colour. Industrial Designer: Mm. Project Manager: Contrast contra well. Industrial Designer: Yeah, no th the material's cheap but it's just uh the the glow in the dark material needs some light to charge it you know, and then uh if you're, if you're sitting in the dark for too long it uh it won't glow any more. Project Manager: Yeah, okay. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So if it's dow it's d uh yeah. Or if it's down under the couch cushions Industrial Designer: Right. Project Manager: um which is where I usually find mine. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Right. Project Manager: Um {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Okay, well we can use {disfmarker} we can still use the glow in the dark as a gimmick essentially, User Interface: Yeah, Project Manager: um if we're gonna have to {disfmarker} User Interface:'cause what I thought, main {disfmarker} Project Manager: if we're gonna have the logo on as well, bright yellow logo in our our um slogan. User Interface: Slogan, yeah. Project Manager: Uh then you know they're gonna be fairly brightly coloured anyway, and we can have sort of a a a trimming as well, of the glow in the dark material, just as gimmickyness. User Interface: Right. Mm-hmm.'Cause yeah, that w more than finding it, that was more like you know if you're watching a film in the dark, you can um still see the remote control. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Alright, so n sorta if if if we're gon if we're gonna go with the idea of um {vocalsound} uh of feedback, sort of remote finder, then that kinda stuffs that one out then. User Interface: That was more of a a gimmick. Project Manager: Do you think? User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Uh it makes it fairly unnecessary then. User Interface: Yeah, unnecessary. Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Um, okay so scratch that. Uh so we've got do we want to go with the T_F_T_ idea or the {disfmarker} is that far too expensive? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Um yeah we're getting a lot of features now, I I think {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Well I mean I think I think the sort of find the finder things I mean it's uh I could probably write the circuit diagram for that myself. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Well, I think a consideration too is that these uh remotes get abused a lot, you know they get thrown around, User Interface: Mm. Industrial Designer: there's a good chance the the T_F_T_ screen would break or uh get damaged. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: They're pretty fragile. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: So is that one of our definite requirements that they wa that it needs a T_F_T_ screen? Project Manager: Um no, I mean {gap} that was going on ravs uh Raj's sort of um marketing research I guess. Um {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Uh {disfmarker} So we'll stick with sort of programmability um for the buttons that we do have. Um. {gap} So that's sort of included in your sub-module kind of stuff, um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah mm. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh {vocalsound} you were finding out about teletext. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: If you could find out that uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Totally, it takes cheap speech recognition, she {disfmarker} they wi Project Manager: Um I think we're gonna scratch the speech recognition as a bit of a Industrial Designer: Oh. Project Manager: um expensive, User Interface: Yeah you think so? Industrial Designer: Oh no it's it's much cheaper than the T_F_T_, it's just a microphone and some some integrated circuits. Project Manager: no? Oh right, okay. Industrial Designer: And it'd it'd be a small vocabulary speech recognition system, Project Manager: Is it not the circuits that cost {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: like a {disfmarker} Project Manager: Oh right, okay. Industrial Designer: {gap} Project Manager: Uh well that kind of takes back the R_F_ {vocalsound} the R_F_ remote sort of idea as well. User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um. {vocalsound} Five minutes. Okay. Decisions. Uh, votes, let's vote. Who wants T_F_T_? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: No-one does. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Excellent, so we'll go with speech recognition, yeah? Industrial Designer: Okay. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Mm-hmm, that's cool. Project Manager: Um, speech recognition, limited buttons, organic design. And what else was I thinking of that I haven't written down and therefore fallen out my head, User Interface: Um Project Manager: programmability. Marketing: Glow in dark. Project Manager: Uh {disfmarker} User Interface: if it's not too expensive s I think it's a good gimmick. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh o okay. Industrial Designer: Yeah. {gap} Project Manager: And also, integrating the, remember to integrate the logo and the s slogan. {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay, so. Um can you put all these reports in the project documents folder if they're not already in there as well. So, it just helps me summarize them. Industrial Designer: Yeah yeah. Marketing: Here? Sure. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: And um I'll put any {disfmarker} {gap} I'm I'm putting anything I do in there anyway, so uh {disfmarker} User Interface: And where is it sorry? Project Manager: Uh pro uh project documents. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} So it should be when you save Project Manager: On A_M_I_ scenario controller. Industrial Designer: on your desktop, so it goes save as, or {disfmarker} User Interface: Oh {gap}. Marketing: Uh it is in shared documents? Industrial Designer: And then uh hit that little folder up thing again. Project Manager: Where am I? Marketing: Projoct uh projector. Industrial Designer: Again. Project Manager: Project documents, yeah, it's on your desktop as well. Industrial Designer: All the way to the top, yeah that's up to desktop. Right and then project documents. User Interface: Okay, cool. Marketing: Hmm. It is not giving anything. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Shared documents. Project Manager: And I will tr {gap} getting strings of um information, I'll try and forward any specific to anybody in particular, as soon as I get them now, rather than {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {gap} Project Manager: I was about to sort of tell you about the changes before the meeting, and then the meeting turned up, so {disfmarker} {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: Mm. Did you get my email? Okay. Project Manager: I did {gap}. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Just making sure. Project Manager: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: So {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} What I thought as well about the material is um maybe not this kind of material, but maybe more like um this kind of rubbery material, it's a bit more bouncy, like you said they get chucked around a lot. Um, a bit more {vocalsound} durable and that can also be ergonomic Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: and it kind of feels a bit different from all the other remote controls. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. User Interface: The rubber rather than {disfmarker} Project Manager: More sort of um flesh-like than plasticky sort of. User Interface: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Wow. Marketing: Um but we have to take care like {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: But we have to take care of our children also if they {disfmarker} {vocalsound} means if children catch hold of your or if they chew it it shouldn't be too harmful. So, whatever material we use it should be {disfmarker} yeah. Project Manager: Oh no, ethics, {vocalsound} that's gonna cost us money. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: So {vocalsound} we have to safety point of view also, we have to take care. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay, safety. Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: Oh I think wi with the more organic shape of it it won't be as {disfmarker} it won't as have many sharp corners as that, so that's something good, um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: I dunno, I mean {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: We could go comp yeah. Project Manager: It sme {vocalsound} smells good for children. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: We could go completely out of the box and make the thing a big red ball foam ball. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: And it's got the thing on the inside. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: And there's no buttons at all, it's always on, and just yell at it, and it works. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} That sounds, User Interface: That's a good idea. Industrial Designer: And then ch children will love it. {vocalsound} Project Manager: yeah it's gonna have to be it's gonna be have a big yellow foam ball, yeah, sorry. User Interface: {vocalsound} Interesting. Industrial Designer: Oh yellow, yellow ball. Right. User Interface: Yeah, d with the colour, um does it have to be all yellow, do you know? Project Manager: Please God no. Um. Well, I wouldn't th I mean, User Interface: No. Project Manager: my reaction to an all-yellow remote control wouldn't be anything other than horror, so I think just having it User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Small logo with the like a small yellow strip or y yellow {gap} with the logo in it. Project Manager: surrounding the logo. User Interface: Having a little bit. Okay cool. Mm mm. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Mm-hmm, okay. Project Manager: And I'll see if I can argue with boss about putting the {disfmarker} User Interface: Cool. Project Manager: what was it? We put {vocalsound} we put fashion into {disfmarker} Whoops, it's not working. Can't believe I've forgotten it {gap}. We put the fashion in electronics. {vocalsound} I bet that'll catch on well. User Interface: Oh yeah, that's a good one that. Yeah so. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay, any last Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Twelve thirty. Project Manager: worries, queries? Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} S s {vocalsound} Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: I know what you're thinking. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay then, lunchtime, yay. Marketing: That's good. Project Manager: Okay, that felt a bit more like a {disfmarker} something with order and and reason to it than the last one. Marketing: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Project Manager: This is quite fun actually. User Interface: Wow. Industrial Designer: Mm. User Interface: Has anybo oh. Project Manager: I really don't {disfmarker} User Interface: Has anybody pressed okay, it vibrates. It's pretty cool. Project Manager: Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: Yep. Marketing: Check here. Project Manager: Wow you've {gap} your first page. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Yeah I've been using up the pages. Project Manager: I was just writing really big. {vocalsound} {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, got small writing. I don't wanna waste it. Project Manager: I've finished the meeting now. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Another questionnaire. Project Manager: Oh, everybody needs k questionnaire. Marketing: {vocalsound}

According to Marketing, seventy-five percent of the users found the remote controls which were available now in the market were ugly. Eighty percent of the users reported having the willingness to pay high for good-looking remote controls. Thirty-four percent of the consumers considered their remote controls were too difficult to operate. What's more, some companies believed that they shall have more functions in their remote controls. However, rather than having more functions and making it complicated, they shall emphasize what actually customers wanted and what they operated. All of these market potentials were required to be taken into consideration in order to enhance profits and sales.

tr-sq-1222

tr-sq-1222_0

How did the research on market potentials contribute to the project? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um {vocalsound} minutes from the last meeting which were essentially that we uh had decided on roles for each of you, however, um there are some changes that I've got from on high User Interface: Okay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: that um are a bit uh {disfmarker} well w what I didn't actually realise it was that the uh {vocalsound} this is for a specific television. User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: So the all in one idea goes out the window. And {vocalsound} they require that the uh User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: actually I'll get to that at the end {gap} point number four, um we'll get what you've got and then we can see what we can adapt from it. So um, presentations, were you {disfmarker} anybody got, raring to go? Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. Project Manager: Raring to go? Okay. Good stuff. Mm. Marketing: Um. So how {disfmarker} Project Manager: Oh I need to plug you in. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: S {gap} Project Manager: Just about. User Interface: Wow. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: It's a inspired design. Marketing: {gap} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Sh do you want me to hold it? Project Manager: Uh there we go, just screw'em on in. Gonna have to swap them round so {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} So, after that? Project Manager: now, it was function F_ eight. Marketing: F_ eight. {vocalsound} f oh sorry F_ eight. Project Manager: That's the wee blue one. Blue one F_ eight. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: Should do it, good one. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. Uh, me again, Rajan the Marketing Expert. Uh, as we have decided in the last meeting that I have to find out, sorry, yeah sure. Project Manager: Hold on, sorry. {gap} and if you just click that it'll go ahead, one at a time. Marketing: Yeah, yeah. Uh actually, sorry I have to see the other {gap}, sorry. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Sorry, uh. Marketing: Yeah, thank you. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Uh, yes, I have to look at the uh market potential for this product, uh, like consumer likings and everything, what is the potential for this product and are we able to achieve our a net profit or our aims or not? Then {disfmarker} Project Manager: P press F_ five to start it first. Marketing: Sorry. Okay. Yeah, I can, okay. Industrial Designer: Hmm. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Jesus. Marketing: Uh then uh the methodology I adopted to find out all this was market survey. A a detailed market survey on consumers was done to find out their likings and dislikings, what they prefer what they not prefer, w what problems they do encounter in all this type of things. And what we got was, we found that {disfmarker} if you {disfmarker} uh, what they th what problems they are having with different uh remote controls available in the market. Seventy five percent of users they do find it that the remote controls available in the market are ugly. They are not so good looking. So, we have to put stress on this, uh we have to take care of this fact also like our design, uh should be appropriate, should be good looking for the consumers. And yes that's wi uh this will definitely, this can definitely put uh uh enhance our sales. Uh and even uh the good thing about this is that eighty percent of users they are willing to pay high uh pay more for this uh good looking remote controls also. So even if the available market goes for the available {disfmarker} uh even if the market goes for the available remote control is less even then we can sell it at twenty five Euros, which maybe which may seem quite high but if our looks are are if the re remote control we design have a good better uh better look uh designs, then we can hope that consumers will prefer these g remote controls. Project Manager: Excellent. Marketing: Then {disfmarker} {gap} And the second thing, some some companies they think that they should have more and more functions of the users uh or in their remote controls, but rather than those having more functions in the remote controls we should emphasise what actually consumer want, what they operate, rather than making it too complicated. Because mostly it has been found that fifty percent of the users they use only ten percent of the buttons, so there is no point of having ninety percent buttons making the remote controls too bulky, too complicated too expensive a because I think I believe that technology is useful only if uh the consumers they want to use it. Otherwise there is no point of having all this type of things. So this will not only reduce the cost of our remote controls but it will increase our profit also. So we have to take care of this fact also. Then. Uh it was function I want to go to. Project Manager: Oh you wanna go back? Just escape. Marketing: Uh, escape, okay thank you. Then if we look at this slide, Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: uh these are in your shared documents, you can see, Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: like {disfmarker} Uh, sorry. User Interface: So, sorry {disfmarker} I was just gonna say, what was the question for this? Or is {disfmarker} are you coming on to that? Marketing: Ah t look all the market potential, what uh how we should design consu our remote controls, what they should be there so as to en enhance our profit, enhance our sales. User Interface: Okay. So these percentages are are what? Marketing: Yeah, these are different age group persons like uh sorry, I can open it in another way. Project Manager: Okay. Speech recognition. Marketing: Uh, yes. If we look at the costs whether the consumers they are willing to uh pay more for speech recognition in a remote control or not, we can find that they up to a thirty five years age group we have a very good disliking for this uh this uh point, like for speech recognition in a remote control. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: So we can emphasise on this point also like, because it will definitely enhance our sales in this ag in this particular age group from uh fifteen to thirty five, User Interface: Hmm. Marketing: and I uh and I think that most of the users of the rem uh T_V_ are belong to this age group. So we should look {disfmarker} Project Manager: Hmm. We're als we we're looking at who buys it as well. {gap} Marketing: Yeah. We can look at that that factor also, so yes. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Uh, which I think the twenty five to thirty five is uh usual, sort of. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Mm, mm. Marketing: So, and {disfmarker} {gap} Project Manager: {gap} Marketing: {vocalsound} And then {disfmarker} Project Manager: Fifteen to twe Marketing: Yes. I think so. Uh if we look at this data how how uh h how what are the problems the consumers are facing with the existing remote controls in the market. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: They find that thirt uh thirty five percent uh thirty four percent of the consumers they find too difficult to operate a remote control. So it should be in such a way that it should be easy to learn how to operate these remote controls and we should provide pl uh spe uh proper manuals for its use also so as that people {disfmarker} consumers could easily learn. They need not to have any, much technical knowledge to see uh to know how to operate these remote controls. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: So this is also a very goo uh major factor to loo uh take into consideration to enhance our profits and sales. So um this is all about Project Manager: Okay. {vocalsound} Marketing: uh market potential by me. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Uh, yes, th thank you. Project Manager: Okay, thank you. Um, {vocalsound} follow on with Helen? Yeah please. User Interface: Yep, sure, that's cool, um {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah we have to take that {gap} out. Project Manager: Oh, so we do yeah. Marketing: Sorry. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Fun and games. Marketing: Sorry. Project Manager: Don't know if the cable's gonna be long enough. Marketing: Uh sorry, I have {gap}. {vocalsound} Project Manager: I think I just kicked over whatever it runs on underneath as well. Marketing: Brian, this one also I {gap}. Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Thank you very much Brian. User Interface: I can turn my computer quickly if that's okay. Marketing: If you want me to help, yeah. User Interface: Um, yep. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Okay, and then what do I press, F_ eight? Marketing: Uh F_ eight. Function F_ eight. Project Manager: Function F_ eight. User Interface: Oh right. Marketing: Mm s. User Interface: Okay, cool. Marketing: It's not coming. Function F_ eight, okay. User Interface: Oh. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. No signal. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Computer. Project Manager: Hmm. Marketing: Computer adjusting, yeah. Project Manager: There you go. User Interface: Okay. Cool. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Okay and then how do I press the the big one, to get it on to the big {disfmarker} Project Manager: Uh F_ five. User Interface: F_ five and I press that again to get it off as well do I? Marketing: Escape. Project Manager: Um, F_ five and escape'll bring it back and just uh the left button for advancing. User Interface: Okay, so um I'm the interface design designer, User Interface Designer sorry, uh I'm concerned with um w what effect the apparatus should have on the user and um I'm I'm also {disfmarker} I want to point out that our motto, put the fashion in electronics, Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: so obviously we as a company we want to make our products trendy and fashionable, it's a big concern of ours. Okay, and how do I press n just the next button? Project Manager: Uh just a left uh User Interface: The arrow? Okay. Project Manager: left mouse button. User Interface: So um I looked at existing designs and also um the information that Raj gave us was very useful about what people like, what people dislike. Um and what people {disfmarker} fashionable, because we said people between twenty five and thirty five were the main um buyers of of our T_V_ I think. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Okay. User Interface: So um what they like and what they find fashionable. Project Manager:'Kay. User Interface: {vocalsound} And ergonomics, we said um, I don't know I haven't actually been able to do any of this myself, Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: but um maybe that comes up, I don't know. Project Manager: That can come under Arlo as well. User Interface: And the findings, well the basic {disfmarker} that was the basic function to send messages to the television set. Project Manager: Uh. User Interface: That's what people want to do. Um, so they need to be included, um, but I've got some pictures here of some leading ones. I don't know how to get to them, Project Manager: Uh if you if you escape then you can see your bar. User Interface: {vocalsound} do I press F_ five is it? {gap} escape? Oh okay, cool. I haven't got my glasses on so I hope it's this one. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh okay. User Interface: These are two leading um remote controls at the moment. Project Manager:'Kay. User Interface: You know they're grey, they've I mean this one's got loads of buttons, it's hard to tell from here what they actually do, Project Manager: {gap} {vocalsound} User Interface: and they don't look very exciting at all. Um, personally I prefer this one just because it's looks easier use, it's a bit more sleek with more of this silver stuff, Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: um, but there you go, that's what we're up against, Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: and I think we can do much better than that. Project Manager: {vocalsound} We hope so. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Of course. {vocalsound} User Interface: Um hang on. F_ five, Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: okay, sorry. Personal preferences. Um, well I think we need to l I think the ergonomics is quite um important, um Project Manager: {gap} Yeah, particularly if we've uh there was a bit in Raj's about R_S_I_ and things as well. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Uh-huh. And um I thought not too edgy and like a box, more kind of hand-held more um {vocalsound} not as uh computery and Project Manager: Organic {vocalsound}. User Interface: or organic, yeah, more organic shape I think. {vocalsound} Um simple designs, like the last one we just saw, not too many buttons and as Raj pointed out, only ten percent {disfmarker} fifty percent of people only use ten percent of the buttons, Marketing: {gap} Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: so I think what we can miss out on the buttons we can make up for in design and and how nice it looks. Project Manager: Sales, {gap}. Okay. User Interface: Um, hand-held and portable I think is portamint is important because T_F_T_ have just um released um I think is it a a remote control for presentations or uh and a big seven inch big screen, anyway, so um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah it's like a, yeah. {vocalsound} It's {gap}. {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, no seven inches isn't that big but um anyway um so hand-held and portable and uh m I thought about other functions for T_V_ but as you pointed out people don't actually want that, Project Manager: Right. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: And also the company want to keep it stuck to the T_V_ for uh to keep down the production time. User Interface: so maybe we forget about that. It's for one T_V_ oh right okay, sure. And so the last thing I thought w which I quickly mentioned in the other one was maybe a bit of a gimmick to set us apart from other people, like glow-in-the-dark Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Exactly. Yeah. User Interface: um which {vocalsound} does already e exist but it's not very widely used I don't think. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Easy finder with the a whistle function or something, Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: or rechargeable station because it's a pain when you run out of batteries. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: And I think that, yep, that's it. Project Manager: That's cool. Industrial Designer: So uh, I noticed your talk about speech recognition and whistling, User Interface: Okay? Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: and uh I was just curious to know, have we done any research into how many people can whistle? Um, or if {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: is that a function we want in the remote? Project Manager: Um, do you have trouble whistling? User Interface: Um, I haven't been able to {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I don't, but I I know a lot of people do right. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Really? Industrial Designer: Yeah it just Project Manager: Ooh. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {disfmarker} I mean it has to be a certain kind of whistle too, right? Project Manager: Yeah, I suppose that's true. User Interface: Mm-hmm, yeah Project Manager: Well I suppo uh you could y you could have the User Interface: or some sort of voice {disfmarker} Project Manager: you could have the basically um instead of a whistle if it's got the voice recognition you could have it just, you know, where are you? {gap}. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} That's costly though. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Um a much easier thing is just any loud noise like clapping um, shouting, you know, Project Manager: Hmm. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: uh and then, what would the response be? It beeps back at you or something? Project Manager: Sounds good. User Interface: Yeah, something. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Well, uh let me set this up. So I plug it in, press F_ five? Function F_ five? Project Manager: Function F_ eight for the um the uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Or function F_ eight? Okay. User Interface: Oh you need to twiddle the thingamibobsy thing. Industrial Designer: Okay. I think it's {vocalsound} uh just to lock it in. It's got it. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Okay. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Um. {vocalsound} So as the Industrial Designer my job is to take an input from you guys, User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: um so it's good you went first, Project Manager: Alright. Industrial Designer: and I jotted down some notes as to what are the b needs and uh what kind of novel features we can add to differentiate our product from the others. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Let's remember that. Industrial Designer: Um so Raj told us that uh consumers are willing to spend more for fancy products, and um he also mentioned that uh the current products don't always match users'operating behaviour. Um, a lot of the buttons aren't used, and uh {vocalsound} he mentioned that they're not fun to use. And uh a novel feature which uh we just brought up was this this automatic speech recognition feature or noise detection feature for when you lose the remote, Project Manager: {gap} Industrial Designer: there could be a little microphone on it, and any noise over a certain threshold um it'll pick up as a a distress signal um from you and it'll beep back and say you know oh here I am or something of this sort. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. But sure surely that would have to be um sort of specific rather than above a threshold'cause if you had a loud movie on you're likely to get it beeping back at you. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Oh yeah, yeah, that's true. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Well maybe you could have a um hmm {vocalsound} tha that would be a consideration to take into account yes. Um. Project Manager: Sorry I didn't mean to derail you there. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yeah well tha that's uh for later down the road um, and then as for the user interface it should be trendy, um {vocalsound} and not computery, User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: right, so more low tech and not too many buttons. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: So I took these all into consideration and also I have some limitations from the boss. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Right um, and practical limitations which I kinda threw out the window. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: And so I did a little research and unfortunately all I had to work on was our uh our corporate archives of the great products we've made before, User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: which include, you know, um space craft, coffee makers, and bullet trains {disfmarker} Or uh or a high speed train. Project Manager: Ah is that what that is? {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Right and having personally worked with all these products uh I have a great deal of experience with uh with industrial design of these. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well that's cool. If you if you can build space craft you'll have no problem with a remote control, yeah. Industrial Designer: Right. So, User Interface: Yeah sure. Industrial Designer: I figured, just put'em all together. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: You got a a caffeine powered space shuttle train transport to your T_V_, and um User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: as for the user interface problem, you know, too many buttons. Give it one button User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: and and it's a {disfmarker} you know, for the the cowboy in all of us {gap} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {disfmarker} I I'm not quite sure what the the function is there but {disfmarker} Project Manager: Right okay. {vocalsound} User Interface: Well I like that design. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yeah it's a g I mean you could have a you know a {disfmarker} Project Manager: Is that just switches on the speech recognition and it's entirely speech operated, is it? Industrial Designer: Right. So I think I I missed the budget thing, Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: it was fifty million Euros? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: And we gotta sell twenty five of them? Right. {vocalsound} Okay. {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, not a problem. Marketing: Fifty million was uh prof Project Manager: Ah now it's fif fifty million Euros we've gotta uh we've g {vocalsound} Marketing: As a profit. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Oh okay, so I I mixed those numbers. Project Manager: gotta make profit, so we're making that at twelve and a half Euros a time. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Okay. Well I guess more realistically then, we need a product that's got some kinda nifty outer casing, cheap plastic uh, you know, um that should be just like uh a tenth of the price maybe or less. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: An energy source which'd probably just be uh your regular batteries {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: um, we don't wanna have it {disfmarker} Project Manager: Would it be possible to have the rechargeable idea? Is that is that gonna mark up a lot? Industrial Designer: Uh. User Interface: Or a little base station or something, {gap}. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah, yeah, we could do that too. Um, I hadn't thought of that. Yeah. User Interface: {vocalsound} That might cost more though,'cause obviously with batteries we don't need to provide, well we provide the first batteries, but it's more, it's {disfmarker} that's cheaper to just provide batteries. Project Manager: Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: Right. Project Manager: I mean if you think about these base stations now it's essentially just a a lead with a sort of self connecting brake in it, User Interface: A battery in it, kinda. Project Manager: so I don't think it'd up up the price that much. Industrial Designer: Right, so so {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: the unirs the user interface User Interface: {vocalsound} Okay. Industrial Designer: uh the canonical user interface for these would be just a bunch of buttons, but since we're a cutting edge company, we uh of course will have alternatives like uh speech recognition, whistling recognition and rocket power Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: behind our product. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Um and lastly the transmission interface is uh, just some engineering thing you don't have to worry about. Project Manager: Okay. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Um so here's you know, a great schematic that my uh apprentice designer gave me. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Um as you can see the the remote control have parts and those parts look like that and um {vocalsound} you know it's got a little operating procedure that looks something like that. {vocalsound} And I suppose you all know how it works because we've all used it and we wouldn't be in a company designing remote controls if we didn't know what they were so {disfmarker} uh personal preferences, I think uh programmable options which um just require a small amount of memory, uh non volatile memory, just um so the user can put in their favourite channels and maybe their preferred volume settings so that when they turn it on it's not blasting. User Interface: Mm. Mm that's a good idea actually I like the programmable options. Marketing: Yeah, me too. Industrial Designer: Oh okay. And the uh, the bells and whistles that we mentioned you know, they take more budgeting, um more technical uh expenditure of effort Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: and it's also much more likely to not work if if we add these bells and whistles. Project Manager: Right. User Interface: Mm'kay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: That's all I got. Project Manager:'Kay, thank you very much, um I'll take that back. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Ooh that's tight. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Right, also so um a notice I got not very long before the meeting, so didn't manage to forward it on to you, it is {disfmarker} let's see, I'll find it myself, um {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Ta Industrial Designer: Okay, I don't think we need to screw it in. Project Manager: nah. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Just push it. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: We had that um to dis-include teletext um because it's become outdated, and everybody uses the internet anyway. Um, {vocalsound} dunno what Oracle would have to say with that but never mind. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Um it's only for the television, which I'm presuming means it's for a specific television, User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: and um instead of colours and sorta colour options, they want corporate colour and slogan somehow implemented in the new design. User Interface: Corporate colour. Project Manager: Yellow. User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: Yellow. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} I presume. Um, everything, all their sort of uh you know the uh corporate website and everything's yellow. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: And the logo uh the sort of slogan we put the fa fashion in electronics uh {disfmarker} I don't know exactly how sort of incorpor I mean, I guess if you're going for a sort of globular shape you could kind of have it working its way round it or something. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Uh, where am I? {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay, so, we have to decide on which functions we're going to actually have. User Interface:'Kay. Project Manager: Uh, {vocalsound} now, we had as listed options we had Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: speech recognition potentially, flat screen interface, L_C_D_ interface um we also want to limit the number of buttons so we'll pretty much take that one as read. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Project Manager: We'll use the the basic functions for a television. No teletext. Um {vocalsound} okay hold on. User Interface: Although the the danger with that is, it could look a bit cheap. Project Manager: Not enough buttons you mean? User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: So sorta strike a balance between a a few and a {disfmarker} User Interface: Well {disfmarker} Project Manager: or it looks like we're just cutting on the um {disfmarker} User Interface: Mm. On the number of buttons, kind of functions and stuff. Project Manager: I do however have this from over my head, that they don't want teletext on it. User Interface: Mm-hmm, okay. Okay, cool. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh maybe Raj you could find out what people would think about that, or maybe they'll send Marketing: About cost. Project Manager: some information about that, about um what people, whether people would require um teletext in a remote {disfmarker} teletext option in a remote control. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: {gap} {vocalsound} Okay um {gap}. So uh I take it your position Arlo is that the bells and whistles we've gotta come up with the {disfmarker} a gimmick but not too complicated a gimmick. Industrial Designer: Yeah yeah. Project Manager: Um so I mean a a the sort of inkling I'm getting from little bits of um web chatter that I'm getting sent is that they're quite interested in a T_F_T_ display, interactive display. However that does sound a bit like the more complicated design that rav uh sorry Raj um {vocalsound} said people didn't like. Although I guess if there's a sort of {disfmarker} User Interface: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Project Manager: If you think about standard interfaces that people use already, sort of Windows-style drop down menus or whatever, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: I think maybe that's a bit, going a bit far User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: but you know like in a basic sense that you could have your basic selection of buttons, and if you hit a sort of menu at the top you have um {vocalsound} it goes to a different selection of buttons, so it sorta keeps it simple. User Interface: Yeah. Okay. Project Manager: Um glow in the dark, is that sort of with a light inside it or is it sort of glow in the dark material? User Interface: Um {disfmarker} Marketing: Uh. User Interface: Glow in the dark material I was thinking. Project Manager: Okay. So {disfmarker} Marketing: I {disfmarker} User Interface: Um, so I I guess that would be cheaper than a light I think. Marketing: Uh may I say something about {gap}? Project Manager: Yeah. Yeah. Marketing: Uh actually I think it's really really very important point uh as if we look at the market because people mor fifty percent people they find that the remote controls are often lost somewhere in the remote, in the room. But {disfmarker} User Interface: Often lost s was that, Marketing: yeah are lost Project Manager: Lost, yeah. User Interface: yeah. Marketing: and means they forget where they have kept the remote control last time. But if we add speech recognition as well as glow in the dark then both these factors will help their locating the remote control, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Marketing: like if they come and speak something at the remote control uh replies to something something and it glows in the dark. Both these factors uh both these points will help them to locate the where they have kept this remote control, Project Manager: That's cool. User Interface: Mm-hmm, Marketing: and this will definitely enhance our uh market sales, Project Manager: That's cool. User Interface: mm-hmm. Marketing: so we should take it into consideration also. Project Manager: Okay, cool. Industrial Designer: Well hmm. Project Manager: Um speech recognition I take it {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Oh it's {disfmarker} Project Manager: I don't, I've {disfmarker} I know of no products um that use speech recognition well. Industrial Designer: They're act there there was a remote control that came out two years ago that had a {disfmarker} some basic speech recognition on it. You could programme it with your channels and then you say you know like uh B_B_C_ one and it goes to that channel. Project Manager: Really? Industrial Designer: Yeah, it didn't work very well though because of this noise interference problem. They mentioned you know if the television says you are listening to B_B_C_ one {gap}. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Yeah, or a yeah an advert an advert for B_B_C_ two on B_B_C_ one'll switch the channel for you kinda thing. User Interface: {gap} Industrial Designer: Right, right, and so there was a lot of this, you'd be watching the T_V_ and then all of a sudden it'd it'd pick up a noise and turn it off or you know or turn the volume off or something, Project Manager: {vocalsound} Mm. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: but if you can work around that that noise problem {disfmarker} User Interface:'Kay. Project Manager: Uh-huh. User Interface: Well what about {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: this might get a bit too expensive actually, but what about um something that's built into the T_V_ um that you can press and it'll send out a little signal you know like the ones that we can't hear or {vocalsound} something Project Manager: Ah, that's a good idea. Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: um that that will activate the remote control starts to beep. Industrial Designer: Right. Project Manager: So like a kind of backwards remote from the telly. {vocalsound} User Interface: If you find if y Industrial Designer: Right and then it would do just you know, uh subtractive kind of cancellation of the noise. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: What you could do then would be you have uh {vocalsound} a remote controlled by the T_V_ speaker, or not a remo I'm sorry, a microphone by the T_V_ speaker and a transmitter there that sends back to your remote,'cause you can't um expect uh the the television manufacturers to to put that feature into their T_V_s. User Interface: Mm. Yeah, that's the only thing, yeah. Industrial Designer: But yeah, then you have like the little se separate module by the T_V_ speaker Project Manager: That we should just stick on, yeah. Industrial Designer: which {disfmarker} User Interface: That comes with our remote control. Industrial Designer: Right, and then the remote control would know um what's being produced by the television. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: And that's a sort of basic R_F_ kind of frequency so it'll be cheap. Industrial Designer: Right, right. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Right, right. Um. {vocalsound} Yeah that's certainly possible then an another thing was about this losing the remote and trying to find it again. If you do have this sorta speech interface to it, you don't even need to find it. You just say you know, um whatever you whatever you want the remote for, you know to change the channel or to uh turn the T_V_ on and off, you just shout your command to it and it would do it for you if it's within you know, within hearing range. And uh you know it could be somewhere in the room y that you've no idea where it is and it would still do its job. Project Manager: Uh-huh. User Interface: That could also be built into the T_V_ though, which might make our remote control a bit obsolete. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: Well, hopefully we're uh we're ahead of the curve. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} It might do us out of a job. User Interface: Yeah, okay. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um {disfmarker} Okay. {vocalsound} I like the whole sort of remote feedback thing. Um so I think rather than {disfmarker} and that also kind of takes out the speech recognition in terms of the interference of it not working very well and things like that, User Interface: Mm. Industrial Designer: Hmm. Project Manager: so I th User Interface: And the expense. Project Manager: yeah and expense and the time. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So I think if we're going to go {disfmarker} well I mean like the thing about the {disfmarker} there's the problem with the T_F_T_ or the L_C_D_ kind of thing is if you're also wanting the the kind of uh organic globby sort of feeling to it then you might have trouble incorporating the screen. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Um, but I guess not I thin we'll just we'll just pretend that's not a problem. Um {vocalsound} {vocalsound} uh {vocalsound} and how are you about the glow in the dark material? Is that {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Um. User Interface: Maybe not even all of it'cause we said um colours and fashion w were important so maybe um just like a little l line that's kind of around the outside and then you can make the rest a different colour. Industrial Designer: Mm. Project Manager: Contrast contra well. Industrial Designer: Yeah, no th the material's cheap but it's just uh the the glow in the dark material needs some light to charge it you know, and then uh if you're, if you're sitting in the dark for too long it uh it won't glow any more. Project Manager: Yeah, okay. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So if it's dow it's d uh yeah. Or if it's down under the couch cushions Industrial Designer: Right. Project Manager: um which is where I usually find mine. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Right. Project Manager: Um {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Okay, well we can use {disfmarker} we can still use the glow in the dark as a gimmick essentially, User Interface: Yeah, Project Manager: um if we're gonna have to {disfmarker} User Interface:'cause what I thought, main {disfmarker} Project Manager: if we're gonna have the logo on as well, bright yellow logo in our our um slogan. User Interface: Slogan, yeah. Project Manager: Uh then you know they're gonna be fairly brightly coloured anyway, and we can have sort of a a a trimming as well, of the glow in the dark material, just as gimmickyness. User Interface: Right. Mm-hmm.'Cause yeah, that w more than finding it, that was more like you know if you're watching a film in the dark, you can um still see the remote control. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Alright, so n sorta if if if we're gon if we're gonna go with the idea of um {vocalsound} uh of feedback, sort of remote finder, then that kinda stuffs that one out then. User Interface: That was more of a a gimmick. Project Manager: Do you think? User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Uh it makes it fairly unnecessary then. User Interface: Yeah, unnecessary. Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Um, okay so scratch that. Uh so we've got do we want to go with the T_F_T_ idea or the {disfmarker} is that far too expensive? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Um yeah we're getting a lot of features now, I I think {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Well I mean I think I think the sort of find the finder things I mean it's uh I could probably write the circuit diagram for that myself. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Well, I think a consideration too is that these uh remotes get abused a lot, you know they get thrown around, User Interface: Mm. Industrial Designer: there's a good chance the the T_F_T_ screen would break or uh get damaged. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: They're pretty fragile. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: So is that one of our definite requirements that they wa that it needs a T_F_T_ screen? Project Manager: Um no, I mean {gap} that was going on ravs uh Raj's sort of um marketing research I guess. Um {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Uh {disfmarker} So we'll stick with sort of programmability um for the buttons that we do have. Um. {gap} So that's sort of included in your sub-module kind of stuff, um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah mm. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh {vocalsound} you were finding out about teletext. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: If you could find out that uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Totally, it takes cheap speech recognition, she {disfmarker} they wi Project Manager: Um I think we're gonna scratch the speech recognition as a bit of a Industrial Designer: Oh. Project Manager: um expensive, User Interface: Yeah you think so? Industrial Designer: Oh no it's it's much cheaper than the T_F_T_, it's just a microphone and some some integrated circuits. Project Manager: no? Oh right, okay. Industrial Designer: And it'd it'd be a small vocabulary speech recognition system, Project Manager: Is it not the circuits that cost {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: like a {disfmarker} Project Manager: Oh right, okay. Industrial Designer: {gap} Project Manager: Uh well that kind of takes back the R_F_ {vocalsound} the R_F_ remote sort of idea as well. User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um. {vocalsound} Five minutes. Okay. Decisions. Uh, votes, let's vote. Who wants T_F_T_? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: No-one does. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Excellent, so we'll go with speech recognition, yeah? Industrial Designer: Okay. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Mm-hmm, that's cool. Project Manager: Um, speech recognition, limited buttons, organic design. And what else was I thinking of that I haven't written down and therefore fallen out my head, User Interface: Um Project Manager: programmability. Marketing: Glow in dark. Project Manager: Uh {disfmarker} User Interface: if it's not too expensive s I think it's a good gimmick. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh o okay. Industrial Designer: Yeah. {gap} Project Manager: And also, integrating the, remember to integrate the logo and the s slogan. {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay, so. Um can you put all these reports in the project documents folder if they're not already in there as well. So, it just helps me summarize them. Industrial Designer: Yeah yeah. Marketing: Here? Sure. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: And um I'll put any {disfmarker} {gap} I'm I'm putting anything I do in there anyway, so uh {disfmarker} User Interface: And where is it sorry? Project Manager: Uh pro uh project documents. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} So it should be when you save Project Manager: On A_M_I_ scenario controller. Industrial Designer: on your desktop, so it goes save as, or {disfmarker} User Interface: Oh {gap}. Marketing: Uh it is in shared documents? Industrial Designer: And then uh hit that little folder up thing again. Project Manager: Where am I? Marketing: Projoct uh projector. Industrial Designer: Again. Project Manager: Project documents, yeah, it's on your desktop as well. Industrial Designer: All the way to the top, yeah that's up to desktop. Right and then project documents. User Interface: Okay, cool. Marketing: Hmm. It is not giving anything. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Shared documents. Project Manager: And I will tr {gap} getting strings of um information, I'll try and forward any specific to anybody in particular, as soon as I get them now, rather than {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {gap} Project Manager: I was about to sort of tell you about the changes before the meeting, and then the meeting turned up, so {disfmarker} {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: Mm. Did you get my email? Okay. Project Manager: I did {gap}. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Just making sure. Project Manager: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: So {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} What I thought as well about the material is um maybe not this kind of material, but maybe more like um this kind of rubbery material, it's a bit more bouncy, like you said they get chucked around a lot. Um, a bit more {vocalsound} durable and that can also be ergonomic Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: and it kind of feels a bit different from all the other remote controls. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. User Interface: The rubber rather than {disfmarker} Project Manager: More sort of um flesh-like than plasticky sort of. User Interface: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Wow. Marketing: Um but we have to take care like {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: But we have to take care of our children also if they {disfmarker} {vocalsound} means if children catch hold of your or if they chew it it shouldn't be too harmful. So, whatever material we use it should be {disfmarker} yeah. Project Manager: Oh no, ethics, {vocalsound} that's gonna cost us money. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: So {vocalsound} we have to safety point of view also, we have to take care. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay, safety. Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: Oh I think wi with the more organic shape of it it won't be as {disfmarker} it won't as have many sharp corners as that, so that's something good, um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: I dunno, I mean {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: We could go comp yeah. Project Manager: It sme {vocalsound} smells good for children. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: We could go completely out of the box and make the thing a big red ball foam ball. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: And it's got the thing on the inside. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: And there's no buttons at all, it's always on, and just yell at it, and it works. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} That sounds, User Interface: That's a good idea. Industrial Designer: And then ch children will love it. {vocalsound} Project Manager: yeah it's gonna have to be it's gonna be have a big yellow foam ball, yeah, sorry. User Interface: {vocalsound} Interesting. Industrial Designer: Oh yellow, yellow ball. Right. User Interface: Yeah, d with the colour, um does it have to be all yellow, do you know? Project Manager: Please God no. Um. Well, I wouldn't th I mean, User Interface: No. Project Manager: my reaction to an all-yellow remote control wouldn't be anything other than horror, so I think just having it User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Small logo with the like a small yellow strip or y yellow {gap} with the logo in it. Project Manager: surrounding the logo. User Interface: Having a little bit. Okay cool. Mm mm. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Mm-hmm, okay. Project Manager: And I'll see if I can argue with boss about putting the {disfmarker} User Interface: Cool. Project Manager: what was it? We put {vocalsound} we put fashion into {disfmarker} Whoops, it's not working. Can't believe I've forgotten it {gap}. We put the fashion in electronics. {vocalsound} I bet that'll catch on well. User Interface: Oh yeah, that's a good one that. Yeah so. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay, any last Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Twelve thirty. Project Manager: worries, queries? Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} S s {vocalsound} Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: I know what you're thinking. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay then, lunchtime, yay. Marketing: That's good. Project Manager: Okay, that felt a bit more like a {disfmarker} something with order and and reason to it than the last one. Marketing: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Project Manager: This is quite fun actually. User Interface: Wow. Industrial Designer: Mm. User Interface: Has anybo oh. Project Manager: I really don't {disfmarker} User Interface: Has anybody pressed okay, it vibrates. It's pretty cool. Project Manager: Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: Yep. Marketing: Check here. Project Manager: Wow you've {gap} your first page. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Yeah I've been using up the pages. Project Manager: I was just writing really big. {vocalsound} {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, got small writing. I don't wanna waste it. Project Manager: I've finished the meeting now. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Another questionnaire. Project Manager: Oh, everybody needs k questionnaire. Marketing: {vocalsound}

On the whole, the results of the market potentials helped the team know the status quo and form some general ideas about the functions required by the market. First of all, the team realized the requirement for beautiful products, thus aiming to design good-looking and appropriate TV remote controls in order to enhance the sales. Second, since about one-third of the consumers reported to have difficulties in using their remotes, the team then agreed to reduce the numbers of buttons. Lastly, they decided to add speech recognition to their products because people from fifteen to thirty (the age group contained most of the consumers) enjoyed this function very much.

tr-sq-1223

tr-sq-1223_0

What were the advantages of reducing the buttons on remotes when discussing the market potentials for the new remotes? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um {vocalsound} minutes from the last meeting which were essentially that we uh had decided on roles for each of you, however, um there are some changes that I've got from on high User Interface: Okay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: that um are a bit uh {disfmarker} well w what I didn't actually realise it was that the uh {vocalsound} this is for a specific television. User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: So the all in one idea goes out the window. And {vocalsound} they require that the uh User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: actually I'll get to that at the end {gap} point number four, um we'll get what you've got and then we can see what we can adapt from it. So um, presentations, were you {disfmarker} anybody got, raring to go? Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. Project Manager: Raring to go? Okay. Good stuff. Mm. Marketing: Um. So how {disfmarker} Project Manager: Oh I need to plug you in. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: S {gap} Project Manager: Just about. User Interface: Wow. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: It's a inspired design. Marketing: {gap} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Sh do you want me to hold it? Project Manager: Uh there we go, just screw'em on in. Gonna have to swap them round so {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} So, after that? Project Manager: now, it was function F_ eight. Marketing: F_ eight. {vocalsound} f oh sorry F_ eight. Project Manager: That's the wee blue one. Blue one F_ eight. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: Should do it, good one. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. Uh, me again, Rajan the Marketing Expert. Uh, as we have decided in the last meeting that I have to find out, sorry, yeah sure. Project Manager: Hold on, sorry. {gap} and if you just click that it'll go ahead, one at a time. Marketing: Yeah, yeah. Uh actually, sorry I have to see the other {gap}, sorry. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Sorry, uh. Marketing: Yeah, thank you. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Uh, yes, I have to look at the uh market potential for this product, uh, like consumer likings and everything, what is the potential for this product and are we able to achieve our a net profit or our aims or not? Then {disfmarker} Project Manager: P press F_ five to start it first. Marketing: Sorry. Okay. Yeah, I can, okay. Industrial Designer: Hmm. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Jesus. Marketing: Uh then uh the methodology I adopted to find out all this was market survey. A a detailed market survey on consumers was done to find out their likings and dislikings, what they prefer what they not prefer, w what problems they do encounter in all this type of things. And what we got was, we found that {disfmarker} if you {disfmarker} uh, what they th what problems they are having with different uh remote controls available in the market. Seventy five percent of users they do find it that the remote controls available in the market are ugly. They are not so good looking. So, we have to put stress on this, uh we have to take care of this fact also like our design, uh should be appropriate, should be good looking for the consumers. And yes that's wi uh this will definitely, this can definitely put uh uh enhance our sales. Uh and even uh the good thing about this is that eighty percent of users they are willing to pay high uh pay more for this uh good looking remote controls also. So even if the available market goes for the available {disfmarker} uh even if the market goes for the available remote control is less even then we can sell it at twenty five Euros, which maybe which may seem quite high but if our looks are are if the re remote control we design have a good better uh better look uh designs, then we can hope that consumers will prefer these g remote controls. Project Manager: Excellent. Marketing: Then {disfmarker} {gap} And the second thing, some some companies they think that they should have more and more functions of the users uh or in their remote controls, but rather than those having more functions in the remote controls we should emphasise what actually consumer want, what they operate, rather than making it too complicated. Because mostly it has been found that fifty percent of the users they use only ten percent of the buttons, so there is no point of having ninety percent buttons making the remote controls too bulky, too complicated too expensive a because I think I believe that technology is useful only if uh the consumers they want to use it. Otherwise there is no point of having all this type of things. So this will not only reduce the cost of our remote controls but it will increase our profit also. So we have to take care of this fact also. Then. Uh it was function I want to go to. Project Manager: Oh you wanna go back? Just escape. Marketing: Uh, escape, okay thank you. Then if we look at this slide, Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: uh these are in your shared documents, you can see, Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: like {disfmarker} Uh, sorry. User Interface: So, sorry {disfmarker} I was just gonna say, what was the question for this? Or is {disfmarker} are you coming on to that? Marketing: Ah t look all the market potential, what uh how we should design consu our remote controls, what they should be there so as to en enhance our profit, enhance our sales. User Interface: Okay. So these percentages are are what? Marketing: Yeah, these are different age group persons like uh sorry, I can open it in another way. Project Manager: Okay. Speech recognition. Marketing: Uh, yes. If we look at the costs whether the consumers they are willing to uh pay more for speech recognition in a remote control or not, we can find that they up to a thirty five years age group we have a very good disliking for this uh this uh point, like for speech recognition in a remote control. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: So we can emphasise on this point also like, because it will definitely enhance our sales in this ag in this particular age group from uh fifteen to thirty five, User Interface: Hmm. Marketing: and I uh and I think that most of the users of the rem uh T_V_ are belong to this age group. So we should look {disfmarker} Project Manager: Hmm. We're als we we're looking at who buys it as well. {gap} Marketing: Yeah. We can look at that that factor also, so yes. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Uh, which I think the twenty five to thirty five is uh usual, sort of. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Mm, mm. Marketing: So, and {disfmarker} {gap} Project Manager: {gap} Marketing: {vocalsound} And then {disfmarker} Project Manager: Fifteen to twe Marketing: Yes. I think so. Uh if we look at this data how how uh h how what are the problems the consumers are facing with the existing remote controls in the market. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: They find that thirt uh thirty five percent uh thirty four percent of the consumers they find too difficult to operate a remote control. So it should be in such a way that it should be easy to learn how to operate these remote controls and we should provide pl uh spe uh proper manuals for its use also so as that people {disfmarker} consumers could easily learn. They need not to have any, much technical knowledge to see uh to know how to operate these remote controls. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: So this is also a very goo uh major factor to loo uh take into consideration to enhance our profits and sales. So um this is all about Project Manager: Okay. {vocalsound} Marketing: uh market potential by me. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Uh, yes, th thank you. Project Manager: Okay, thank you. Um, {vocalsound} follow on with Helen? Yeah please. User Interface: Yep, sure, that's cool, um {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah we have to take that {gap} out. Project Manager: Oh, so we do yeah. Marketing: Sorry. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Fun and games. Marketing: Sorry. Project Manager: Don't know if the cable's gonna be long enough. Marketing: Uh sorry, I have {gap}. {vocalsound} Project Manager: I think I just kicked over whatever it runs on underneath as well. Marketing: Brian, this one also I {gap}. Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Thank you very much Brian. User Interface: I can turn my computer quickly if that's okay. Marketing: If you want me to help, yeah. User Interface: Um, yep. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Okay, and then what do I press, F_ eight? Marketing: Uh F_ eight. Function F_ eight. Project Manager: Function F_ eight. User Interface: Oh right. Marketing: Mm s. User Interface: Okay, cool. Marketing: It's not coming. Function F_ eight, okay. User Interface: Oh. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. No signal. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Computer. Project Manager: Hmm. Marketing: Computer adjusting, yeah. Project Manager: There you go. User Interface: Okay. Cool. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Okay and then how do I press the the big one, to get it on to the big {disfmarker} Project Manager: Uh F_ five. User Interface: F_ five and I press that again to get it off as well do I? Marketing: Escape. Project Manager: Um, F_ five and escape'll bring it back and just uh the left button for advancing. User Interface: Okay, so um I'm the interface design designer, User Interface Designer sorry, uh I'm concerned with um w what effect the apparatus should have on the user and um I'm I'm also {disfmarker} I want to point out that our motto, put the fashion in electronics, Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: so obviously we as a company we want to make our products trendy and fashionable, it's a big concern of ours. Okay, and how do I press n just the next button? Project Manager: Uh just a left uh User Interface: The arrow? Okay. Project Manager: left mouse button. User Interface: So um I looked at existing designs and also um the information that Raj gave us was very useful about what people like, what people dislike. Um and what people {disfmarker} fashionable, because we said people between twenty five and thirty five were the main um buyers of of our T_V_ I think. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Okay. User Interface: So um what they like and what they find fashionable. Project Manager:'Kay. User Interface: {vocalsound} And ergonomics, we said um, I don't know I haven't actually been able to do any of this myself, Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: but um maybe that comes up, I don't know. Project Manager: That can come under Arlo as well. User Interface: And the findings, well the basic {disfmarker} that was the basic function to send messages to the television set. Project Manager: Uh. User Interface: That's what people want to do. Um, so they need to be included, um, but I've got some pictures here of some leading ones. I don't know how to get to them, Project Manager: Uh if you if you escape then you can see your bar. User Interface: {vocalsound} do I press F_ five is it? {gap} escape? Oh okay, cool. I haven't got my glasses on so I hope it's this one. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh okay. User Interface: These are two leading um remote controls at the moment. Project Manager:'Kay. User Interface: You know they're grey, they've I mean this one's got loads of buttons, it's hard to tell from here what they actually do, Project Manager: {gap} {vocalsound} User Interface: and they don't look very exciting at all. Um, personally I prefer this one just because it's looks easier use, it's a bit more sleek with more of this silver stuff, Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: um, but there you go, that's what we're up against, Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: and I think we can do much better than that. Project Manager: {vocalsound} We hope so. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Of course. {vocalsound} User Interface: Um hang on. F_ five, Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: okay, sorry. Personal preferences. Um, well I think we need to l I think the ergonomics is quite um important, um Project Manager: {gap} Yeah, particularly if we've uh there was a bit in Raj's about R_S_I_ and things as well. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Uh-huh. And um I thought not too edgy and like a box, more kind of hand-held more um {vocalsound} not as uh computery and Project Manager: Organic {vocalsound}. User Interface: or organic, yeah, more organic shape I think. {vocalsound} Um simple designs, like the last one we just saw, not too many buttons and as Raj pointed out, only ten percent {disfmarker} fifty percent of people only use ten percent of the buttons, Marketing: {gap} Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: so I think what we can miss out on the buttons we can make up for in design and and how nice it looks. Project Manager: Sales, {gap}. Okay. User Interface: Um, hand-held and portable I think is portamint is important because T_F_T_ have just um released um I think is it a a remote control for presentations or uh and a big seven inch big screen, anyway, so um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah it's like a, yeah. {vocalsound} It's {gap}. {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, no seven inches isn't that big but um anyway um so hand-held and portable and uh m I thought about other functions for T_V_ but as you pointed out people don't actually want that, Project Manager: Right. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: And also the company want to keep it stuck to the T_V_ for uh to keep down the production time. User Interface: so maybe we forget about that. It's for one T_V_ oh right okay, sure. And so the last thing I thought w which I quickly mentioned in the other one was maybe a bit of a gimmick to set us apart from other people, like glow-in-the-dark Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Exactly. Yeah. User Interface: um which {vocalsound} does already e exist but it's not very widely used I don't think. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Easy finder with the a whistle function or something, Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: or rechargeable station because it's a pain when you run out of batteries. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: And I think that, yep, that's it. Project Manager: That's cool. Industrial Designer: So uh, I noticed your talk about speech recognition and whistling, User Interface: Okay? Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: and uh I was just curious to know, have we done any research into how many people can whistle? Um, or if {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: is that a function we want in the remote? Project Manager: Um, do you have trouble whistling? User Interface: Um, I haven't been able to {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I don't, but I I know a lot of people do right. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Really? Industrial Designer: Yeah it just Project Manager: Ooh. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {disfmarker} I mean it has to be a certain kind of whistle too, right? Project Manager: Yeah, I suppose that's true. User Interface: Mm-hmm, yeah Project Manager: Well I suppo uh you could y you could have the User Interface: or some sort of voice {disfmarker} Project Manager: you could have the basically um instead of a whistle if it's got the voice recognition you could have it just, you know, where are you? {gap}. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} That's costly though. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Um a much easier thing is just any loud noise like clapping um, shouting, you know, Project Manager: Hmm. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: uh and then, what would the response be? It beeps back at you or something? Project Manager: Sounds good. User Interface: Yeah, something. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Well, uh let me set this up. So I plug it in, press F_ five? Function F_ five? Project Manager: Function F_ eight for the um the uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Or function F_ eight? Okay. User Interface: Oh you need to twiddle the thingamibobsy thing. Industrial Designer: Okay. I think it's {vocalsound} uh just to lock it in. It's got it. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Okay. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Um. {vocalsound} So as the Industrial Designer my job is to take an input from you guys, User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: um so it's good you went first, Project Manager: Alright. Industrial Designer: and I jotted down some notes as to what are the b needs and uh what kind of novel features we can add to differentiate our product from the others. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Let's remember that. Industrial Designer: Um so Raj told us that uh consumers are willing to spend more for fancy products, and um he also mentioned that uh the current products don't always match users'operating behaviour. Um, a lot of the buttons aren't used, and uh {vocalsound} he mentioned that they're not fun to use. And uh a novel feature which uh we just brought up was this this automatic speech recognition feature or noise detection feature for when you lose the remote, Project Manager: {gap} Industrial Designer: there could be a little microphone on it, and any noise over a certain threshold um it'll pick up as a a distress signal um from you and it'll beep back and say you know oh here I am or something of this sort. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. But sure surely that would have to be um sort of specific rather than above a threshold'cause if you had a loud movie on you're likely to get it beeping back at you. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Oh yeah, yeah, that's true. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Well maybe you could have a um hmm {vocalsound} tha that would be a consideration to take into account yes. Um. Project Manager: Sorry I didn't mean to derail you there. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yeah well tha that's uh for later down the road um, and then as for the user interface it should be trendy, um {vocalsound} and not computery, User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: right, so more low tech and not too many buttons. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: So I took these all into consideration and also I have some limitations from the boss. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Right um, and practical limitations which I kinda threw out the window. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: And so I did a little research and unfortunately all I had to work on was our uh our corporate archives of the great products we've made before, User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: which include, you know, um space craft, coffee makers, and bullet trains {disfmarker} Or uh or a high speed train. Project Manager: Ah is that what that is? {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Right and having personally worked with all these products uh I have a great deal of experience with uh with industrial design of these. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well that's cool. If you if you can build space craft you'll have no problem with a remote control, yeah. Industrial Designer: Right. So, User Interface: Yeah sure. Industrial Designer: I figured, just put'em all together. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: You got a a caffeine powered space shuttle train transport to your T_V_, and um User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: as for the user interface problem, you know, too many buttons. Give it one button User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: and and it's a {disfmarker} you know, for the the cowboy in all of us {gap} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {disfmarker} I I'm not quite sure what the the function is there but {disfmarker} Project Manager: Right okay. {vocalsound} User Interface: Well I like that design. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yeah it's a g I mean you could have a you know a {disfmarker} Project Manager: Is that just switches on the speech recognition and it's entirely speech operated, is it? Industrial Designer: Right. So I think I I missed the budget thing, Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: it was fifty million Euros? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: And we gotta sell twenty five of them? Right. {vocalsound} Okay. {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, not a problem. Marketing: Fifty million was uh prof Project Manager: Ah now it's fif fifty million Euros we've gotta uh we've g {vocalsound} Marketing: As a profit. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Oh okay, so I I mixed those numbers. Project Manager: gotta make profit, so we're making that at twelve and a half Euros a time. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Okay. Well I guess more realistically then, we need a product that's got some kinda nifty outer casing, cheap plastic uh, you know, um that should be just like uh a tenth of the price maybe or less. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: An energy source which'd probably just be uh your regular batteries {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: um, we don't wanna have it {disfmarker} Project Manager: Would it be possible to have the rechargeable idea? Is that is that gonna mark up a lot? Industrial Designer: Uh. User Interface: Or a little base station or something, {gap}. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah, yeah, we could do that too. Um, I hadn't thought of that. Yeah. User Interface: {vocalsound} That might cost more though,'cause obviously with batteries we don't need to provide, well we provide the first batteries, but it's more, it's {disfmarker} that's cheaper to just provide batteries. Project Manager: Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: Right. Project Manager: I mean if you think about these base stations now it's essentially just a a lead with a sort of self connecting brake in it, User Interface: A battery in it, kinda. Project Manager: so I don't think it'd up up the price that much. Industrial Designer: Right, so so {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: the unirs the user interface User Interface: {vocalsound} Okay. Industrial Designer: uh the canonical user interface for these would be just a bunch of buttons, but since we're a cutting edge company, we uh of course will have alternatives like uh speech recognition, whistling recognition and rocket power Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: behind our product. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Um and lastly the transmission interface is uh, just some engineering thing you don't have to worry about. Project Manager: Okay. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Um so here's you know, a great schematic that my uh apprentice designer gave me. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Um as you can see the the remote control have parts and those parts look like that and um {vocalsound} you know it's got a little operating procedure that looks something like that. {vocalsound} And I suppose you all know how it works because we've all used it and we wouldn't be in a company designing remote controls if we didn't know what they were so {disfmarker} uh personal preferences, I think uh programmable options which um just require a small amount of memory, uh non volatile memory, just um so the user can put in their favourite channels and maybe their preferred volume settings so that when they turn it on it's not blasting. User Interface: Mm. Mm that's a good idea actually I like the programmable options. Marketing: Yeah, me too. Industrial Designer: Oh okay. And the uh, the bells and whistles that we mentioned you know, they take more budgeting, um more technical uh expenditure of effort Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: and it's also much more likely to not work if if we add these bells and whistles. Project Manager: Right. User Interface: Mm'kay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: That's all I got. Project Manager:'Kay, thank you very much, um I'll take that back. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Ooh that's tight. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Right, also so um a notice I got not very long before the meeting, so didn't manage to forward it on to you, it is {disfmarker} let's see, I'll find it myself, um {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Ta Industrial Designer: Okay, I don't think we need to screw it in. Project Manager: nah. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Just push it. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: We had that um to dis-include teletext um because it's become outdated, and everybody uses the internet anyway. Um, {vocalsound} dunno what Oracle would have to say with that but never mind. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Um it's only for the television, which I'm presuming means it's for a specific television, User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: and um instead of colours and sorta colour options, they want corporate colour and slogan somehow implemented in the new design. User Interface: Corporate colour. Project Manager: Yellow. User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: Yellow. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} I presume. Um, everything, all their sort of uh you know the uh corporate website and everything's yellow. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: And the logo uh the sort of slogan we put the fa fashion in electronics uh {disfmarker} I don't know exactly how sort of incorpor I mean, I guess if you're going for a sort of globular shape you could kind of have it working its way round it or something. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Uh, where am I? {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay, so, we have to decide on which functions we're going to actually have. User Interface:'Kay. Project Manager: Uh, {vocalsound} now, we had as listed options we had Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: speech recognition potentially, flat screen interface, L_C_D_ interface um we also want to limit the number of buttons so we'll pretty much take that one as read. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Project Manager: We'll use the the basic functions for a television. No teletext. Um {vocalsound} okay hold on. User Interface: Although the the danger with that is, it could look a bit cheap. Project Manager: Not enough buttons you mean? User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: So sorta strike a balance between a a few and a {disfmarker} User Interface: Well {disfmarker} Project Manager: or it looks like we're just cutting on the um {disfmarker} User Interface: Mm. On the number of buttons, kind of functions and stuff. Project Manager: I do however have this from over my head, that they don't want teletext on it. User Interface: Mm-hmm, okay. Okay, cool. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh maybe Raj you could find out what people would think about that, or maybe they'll send Marketing: About cost. Project Manager: some information about that, about um what people, whether people would require um teletext in a remote {disfmarker} teletext option in a remote control. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: {gap} {vocalsound} Okay um {gap}. So uh I take it your position Arlo is that the bells and whistles we've gotta come up with the {disfmarker} a gimmick but not too complicated a gimmick. Industrial Designer: Yeah yeah. Project Manager: Um so I mean a a the sort of inkling I'm getting from little bits of um web chatter that I'm getting sent is that they're quite interested in a T_F_T_ display, interactive display. However that does sound a bit like the more complicated design that rav uh sorry Raj um {vocalsound} said people didn't like. Although I guess if there's a sort of {disfmarker} User Interface: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Project Manager: If you think about standard interfaces that people use already, sort of Windows-style drop down menus or whatever, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: I think maybe that's a bit, going a bit far User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: but you know like in a basic sense that you could have your basic selection of buttons, and if you hit a sort of menu at the top you have um {vocalsound} it goes to a different selection of buttons, so it sorta keeps it simple. User Interface: Yeah. Okay. Project Manager: Um glow in the dark, is that sort of with a light inside it or is it sort of glow in the dark material? User Interface: Um {disfmarker} Marketing: Uh. User Interface: Glow in the dark material I was thinking. Project Manager: Okay. So {disfmarker} Marketing: I {disfmarker} User Interface: Um, so I I guess that would be cheaper than a light I think. Marketing: Uh may I say something about {gap}? Project Manager: Yeah. Yeah. Marketing: Uh actually I think it's really really very important point uh as if we look at the market because people mor fifty percent people they find that the remote controls are often lost somewhere in the remote, in the room. But {disfmarker} User Interface: Often lost s was that, Marketing: yeah are lost Project Manager: Lost, yeah. User Interface: yeah. Marketing: and means they forget where they have kept the remote control last time. But if we add speech recognition as well as glow in the dark then both these factors will help their locating the remote control, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Marketing: like if they come and speak something at the remote control uh replies to something something and it glows in the dark. Both these factors uh both these points will help them to locate the where they have kept this remote control, Project Manager: That's cool. User Interface: Mm-hmm, Marketing: and this will definitely enhance our uh market sales, Project Manager: That's cool. User Interface: mm-hmm. Marketing: so we should take it into consideration also. Project Manager: Okay, cool. Industrial Designer: Well hmm. Project Manager: Um speech recognition I take it {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Oh it's {disfmarker} Project Manager: I don't, I've {disfmarker} I know of no products um that use speech recognition well. Industrial Designer: They're act there there was a remote control that came out two years ago that had a {disfmarker} some basic speech recognition on it. You could programme it with your channels and then you say you know like uh B_B_C_ one and it goes to that channel. Project Manager: Really? Industrial Designer: Yeah, it didn't work very well though because of this noise interference problem. They mentioned you know if the television says you are listening to B_B_C_ one {gap}. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Yeah, or a yeah an advert an advert for B_B_C_ two on B_B_C_ one'll switch the channel for you kinda thing. User Interface: {gap} Industrial Designer: Right, right, and so there was a lot of this, you'd be watching the T_V_ and then all of a sudden it'd it'd pick up a noise and turn it off or you know or turn the volume off or something, Project Manager: {vocalsound} Mm. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: but if you can work around that that noise problem {disfmarker} User Interface:'Kay. Project Manager: Uh-huh. User Interface: Well what about {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: this might get a bit too expensive actually, but what about um something that's built into the T_V_ um that you can press and it'll send out a little signal you know like the ones that we can't hear or {vocalsound} something Project Manager: Ah, that's a good idea. Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: um that that will activate the remote control starts to beep. Industrial Designer: Right. Project Manager: So like a kind of backwards remote from the telly. {vocalsound} User Interface: If you find if y Industrial Designer: Right and then it would do just you know, uh subtractive kind of cancellation of the noise. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: What you could do then would be you have uh {vocalsound} a remote controlled by the T_V_ speaker, or not a remo I'm sorry, a microphone by the T_V_ speaker and a transmitter there that sends back to your remote,'cause you can't um expect uh the the television manufacturers to to put that feature into their T_V_s. User Interface: Mm. Yeah, that's the only thing, yeah. Industrial Designer: But yeah, then you have like the little se separate module by the T_V_ speaker Project Manager: That we should just stick on, yeah. Industrial Designer: which {disfmarker} User Interface: That comes with our remote control. Industrial Designer: Right, and then the remote control would know um what's being produced by the television. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: And that's a sort of basic R_F_ kind of frequency so it'll be cheap. Industrial Designer: Right, right. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Right, right. Um. {vocalsound} Yeah that's certainly possible then an another thing was about this losing the remote and trying to find it again. If you do have this sorta speech interface to it, you don't even need to find it. You just say you know, um whatever you whatever you want the remote for, you know to change the channel or to uh turn the T_V_ on and off, you just shout your command to it and it would do it for you if it's within you know, within hearing range. And uh you know it could be somewhere in the room y that you've no idea where it is and it would still do its job. Project Manager: Uh-huh. User Interface: That could also be built into the T_V_ though, which might make our remote control a bit obsolete. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: Well, hopefully we're uh we're ahead of the curve. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} It might do us out of a job. User Interface: Yeah, okay. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um {disfmarker} Okay. {vocalsound} I like the whole sort of remote feedback thing. Um so I think rather than {disfmarker} and that also kind of takes out the speech recognition in terms of the interference of it not working very well and things like that, User Interface: Mm. Industrial Designer: Hmm. Project Manager: so I th User Interface: And the expense. Project Manager: yeah and expense and the time. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So I think if we're going to go {disfmarker} well I mean like the thing about the {disfmarker} there's the problem with the T_F_T_ or the L_C_D_ kind of thing is if you're also wanting the the kind of uh organic globby sort of feeling to it then you might have trouble incorporating the screen. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Um, but I guess not I thin we'll just we'll just pretend that's not a problem. Um {vocalsound} {vocalsound} uh {vocalsound} and how are you about the glow in the dark material? Is that {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Um. User Interface: Maybe not even all of it'cause we said um colours and fashion w were important so maybe um just like a little l line that's kind of around the outside and then you can make the rest a different colour. Industrial Designer: Mm. Project Manager: Contrast contra well. Industrial Designer: Yeah, no th the material's cheap but it's just uh the the glow in the dark material needs some light to charge it you know, and then uh if you're, if you're sitting in the dark for too long it uh it won't glow any more. Project Manager: Yeah, okay. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So if it's dow it's d uh yeah. Or if it's down under the couch cushions Industrial Designer: Right. Project Manager: um which is where I usually find mine. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Right. Project Manager: Um {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Okay, well we can use {disfmarker} we can still use the glow in the dark as a gimmick essentially, User Interface: Yeah, Project Manager: um if we're gonna have to {disfmarker} User Interface:'cause what I thought, main {disfmarker} Project Manager: if we're gonna have the logo on as well, bright yellow logo in our our um slogan. User Interface: Slogan, yeah. Project Manager: Uh then you know they're gonna be fairly brightly coloured anyway, and we can have sort of a a a trimming as well, of the glow in the dark material, just as gimmickyness. User Interface: Right. Mm-hmm.'Cause yeah, that w more than finding it, that was more like you know if you're watching a film in the dark, you can um still see the remote control. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Alright, so n sorta if if if we're gon if we're gonna go with the idea of um {vocalsound} uh of feedback, sort of remote finder, then that kinda stuffs that one out then. User Interface: That was more of a a gimmick. Project Manager: Do you think? User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Uh it makes it fairly unnecessary then. User Interface: Yeah, unnecessary. Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Um, okay so scratch that. Uh so we've got do we want to go with the T_F_T_ idea or the {disfmarker} is that far too expensive? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Um yeah we're getting a lot of features now, I I think {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Well I mean I think I think the sort of find the finder things I mean it's uh I could probably write the circuit diagram for that myself. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Well, I think a consideration too is that these uh remotes get abused a lot, you know they get thrown around, User Interface: Mm. Industrial Designer: there's a good chance the the T_F_T_ screen would break or uh get damaged. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: They're pretty fragile. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: So is that one of our definite requirements that they wa that it needs a T_F_T_ screen? Project Manager: Um no, I mean {gap} that was going on ravs uh Raj's sort of um marketing research I guess. Um {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Uh {disfmarker} So we'll stick with sort of programmability um for the buttons that we do have. Um. {gap} So that's sort of included in your sub-module kind of stuff, um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah mm. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh {vocalsound} you were finding out about teletext. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: If you could find out that uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Totally, it takes cheap speech recognition, she {disfmarker} they wi Project Manager: Um I think we're gonna scratch the speech recognition as a bit of a Industrial Designer: Oh. Project Manager: um expensive, User Interface: Yeah you think so? Industrial Designer: Oh no it's it's much cheaper than the T_F_T_, it's just a microphone and some some integrated circuits. Project Manager: no? Oh right, okay. Industrial Designer: And it'd it'd be a small vocabulary speech recognition system, Project Manager: Is it not the circuits that cost {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: like a {disfmarker} Project Manager: Oh right, okay. Industrial Designer: {gap} Project Manager: Uh well that kind of takes back the R_F_ {vocalsound} the R_F_ remote sort of idea as well. User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um. {vocalsound} Five minutes. Okay. Decisions. Uh, votes, let's vote. Who wants T_F_T_? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: No-one does. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Excellent, so we'll go with speech recognition, yeah? Industrial Designer: Okay. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Mm-hmm, that's cool. Project Manager: Um, speech recognition, limited buttons, organic design. And what else was I thinking of that I haven't written down and therefore fallen out my head, User Interface: Um Project Manager: programmability. Marketing: Glow in dark. Project Manager: Uh {disfmarker} User Interface: if it's not too expensive s I think it's a good gimmick. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh o okay. Industrial Designer: Yeah. {gap} Project Manager: And also, integrating the, remember to integrate the logo and the s slogan. {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay, so. Um can you put all these reports in the project documents folder if they're not already in there as well. So, it just helps me summarize them. Industrial Designer: Yeah yeah. Marketing: Here? Sure. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: And um I'll put any {disfmarker} {gap} I'm I'm putting anything I do in there anyway, so uh {disfmarker} User Interface: And where is it sorry? Project Manager: Uh pro uh project documents. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} So it should be when you save Project Manager: On A_M_I_ scenario controller. Industrial Designer: on your desktop, so it goes save as, or {disfmarker} User Interface: Oh {gap}. Marketing: Uh it is in shared documents? Industrial Designer: And then uh hit that little folder up thing again. Project Manager: Where am I? Marketing: Projoct uh projector. Industrial Designer: Again. Project Manager: Project documents, yeah, it's on your desktop as well. Industrial Designer: All the way to the top, yeah that's up to desktop. Right and then project documents. User Interface: Okay, cool. Marketing: Hmm. It is not giving anything. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Shared documents. Project Manager: And I will tr {gap} getting strings of um information, I'll try and forward any specific to anybody in particular, as soon as I get them now, rather than {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {gap} Project Manager: I was about to sort of tell you about the changes before the meeting, and then the meeting turned up, so {disfmarker} {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: Mm. Did you get my email? Okay. Project Manager: I did {gap}. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Just making sure. Project Manager: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: So {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} What I thought as well about the material is um maybe not this kind of material, but maybe more like um this kind of rubbery material, it's a bit more bouncy, like you said they get chucked around a lot. Um, a bit more {vocalsound} durable and that can also be ergonomic Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: and it kind of feels a bit different from all the other remote controls. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. User Interface: The rubber rather than {disfmarker} Project Manager: More sort of um flesh-like than plasticky sort of. User Interface: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Wow. Marketing: Um but we have to take care like {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: But we have to take care of our children also if they {disfmarker} {vocalsound} means if children catch hold of your or if they chew it it shouldn't be too harmful. So, whatever material we use it should be {disfmarker} yeah. Project Manager: Oh no, ethics, {vocalsound} that's gonna cost us money. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: So {vocalsound} we have to safety point of view also, we have to take care. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay, safety. Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: Oh I think wi with the more organic shape of it it won't be as {disfmarker} it won't as have many sharp corners as that, so that's something good, um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: I dunno, I mean {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: We could go comp yeah. Project Manager: It sme {vocalsound} smells good for children. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: We could go completely out of the box and make the thing a big red ball foam ball. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: And it's got the thing on the inside. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: And there's no buttons at all, it's always on, and just yell at it, and it works. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} That sounds, User Interface: That's a good idea. Industrial Designer: And then ch children will love it. {vocalsound} Project Manager: yeah it's gonna have to be it's gonna be have a big yellow foam ball, yeah, sorry. User Interface: {vocalsound} Interesting. Industrial Designer: Oh yellow, yellow ball. Right. User Interface: Yeah, d with the colour, um does it have to be all yellow, do you know? Project Manager: Please God no. Um. Well, I wouldn't th I mean, User Interface: No. Project Manager: my reaction to an all-yellow remote control wouldn't be anything other than horror, so I think just having it User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Small logo with the like a small yellow strip or y yellow {gap} with the logo in it. Project Manager: surrounding the logo. User Interface: Having a little bit. Okay cool. Mm mm. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Mm-hmm, okay. Project Manager: And I'll see if I can argue with boss about putting the {disfmarker} User Interface: Cool. Project Manager: what was it? We put {vocalsound} we put fashion into {disfmarker} Whoops, it's not working. Can't believe I've forgotten it {gap}. We put the fashion in electronics. {vocalsound} I bet that'll catch on well. User Interface: Oh yeah, that's a good one that. Yeah so. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay, any last Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Twelve thirty. Project Manager: worries, queries? Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} S s {vocalsound} Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: I know what you're thinking. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay then, lunchtime, yay. Marketing: That's good. Project Manager: Okay, that felt a bit more like a {disfmarker} something with order and and reason to it than the last one. Marketing: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Project Manager: This is quite fun actually. User Interface: Wow. Industrial Designer: Mm. User Interface: Has anybo oh. Project Manager: I really don't {disfmarker} User Interface: Has anybody pressed okay, it vibrates. It's pretty cool. Project Manager: Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: Yep. Marketing: Check here. Project Manager: Wow you've {gap} your first page. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Yeah I've been using up the pages. Project Manager: I was just writing really big. {vocalsound} {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, got small writing. I don't wanna waste it. Project Manager: I've finished the meeting now. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Another questionnaire. Project Manager: Oh, everybody needs k questionnaire. Marketing: {vocalsound}

Altogether, there were three advantages. The first was the simplicity of use. In the market, lots of remotes had many buttons because companies believed that more buttons they added, the more their consumers would appreciate. However, the fact was that many people didn't know how to use these buttons at all. The redundant buttons only increased the difficulties for people to use. The second was the decrease in cost since fewer buttons were needed. The last was the increase in sales and profits.

tr-sq-1224

tr-sq-1224_0

Summarize the discussion about the functions that the new remote controls would have. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um {vocalsound} minutes from the last meeting which were essentially that we uh had decided on roles for each of you, however, um there are some changes that I've got from on high User Interface: Okay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: that um are a bit uh {disfmarker} well w what I didn't actually realise it was that the uh {vocalsound} this is for a specific television. User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: So the all in one idea goes out the window. And {vocalsound} they require that the uh User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: actually I'll get to that at the end {gap} point number four, um we'll get what you've got and then we can see what we can adapt from it. So um, presentations, were you {disfmarker} anybody got, raring to go? Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. Project Manager: Raring to go? Okay. Good stuff. Mm. Marketing: Um. So how {disfmarker} Project Manager: Oh I need to plug you in. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: S {gap} Project Manager: Just about. User Interface: Wow. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: It's a inspired design. Marketing: {gap} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Sh do you want me to hold it? Project Manager: Uh there we go, just screw'em on in. Gonna have to swap them round so {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} So, after that? Project Manager: now, it was function F_ eight. Marketing: F_ eight. {vocalsound} f oh sorry F_ eight. Project Manager: That's the wee blue one. Blue one F_ eight. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: Should do it, good one. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. Uh, me again, Rajan the Marketing Expert. Uh, as we have decided in the last meeting that I have to find out, sorry, yeah sure. Project Manager: Hold on, sorry. {gap} and if you just click that it'll go ahead, one at a time. Marketing: Yeah, yeah. Uh actually, sorry I have to see the other {gap}, sorry. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Sorry, uh. Marketing: Yeah, thank you. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Uh, yes, I have to look at the uh market potential for this product, uh, like consumer likings and everything, what is the potential for this product and are we able to achieve our a net profit or our aims or not? Then {disfmarker} Project Manager: P press F_ five to start it first. Marketing: Sorry. Okay. Yeah, I can, okay. Industrial Designer: Hmm. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Jesus. Marketing: Uh then uh the methodology I adopted to find out all this was market survey. A a detailed market survey on consumers was done to find out their likings and dislikings, what they prefer what they not prefer, w what problems they do encounter in all this type of things. And what we got was, we found that {disfmarker} if you {disfmarker} uh, what they th what problems they are having with different uh remote controls available in the market. Seventy five percent of users they do find it that the remote controls available in the market are ugly. They are not so good looking. So, we have to put stress on this, uh we have to take care of this fact also like our design, uh should be appropriate, should be good looking for the consumers. And yes that's wi uh this will definitely, this can definitely put uh uh enhance our sales. Uh and even uh the good thing about this is that eighty percent of users they are willing to pay high uh pay more for this uh good looking remote controls also. So even if the available market goes for the available {disfmarker} uh even if the market goes for the available remote control is less even then we can sell it at twenty five Euros, which maybe which may seem quite high but if our looks are are if the re remote control we design have a good better uh better look uh designs, then we can hope that consumers will prefer these g remote controls. Project Manager: Excellent. Marketing: Then {disfmarker} {gap} And the second thing, some some companies they think that they should have more and more functions of the users uh or in their remote controls, but rather than those having more functions in the remote controls we should emphasise what actually consumer want, what they operate, rather than making it too complicated. Because mostly it has been found that fifty percent of the users they use only ten percent of the buttons, so there is no point of having ninety percent buttons making the remote controls too bulky, too complicated too expensive a because I think I believe that technology is useful only if uh the consumers they want to use it. Otherwise there is no point of having all this type of things. So this will not only reduce the cost of our remote controls but it will increase our profit also. So we have to take care of this fact also. Then. Uh it was function I want to go to. Project Manager: Oh you wanna go back? Just escape. Marketing: Uh, escape, okay thank you. Then if we look at this slide, Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: uh these are in your shared documents, you can see, Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: like {disfmarker} Uh, sorry. User Interface: So, sorry {disfmarker} I was just gonna say, what was the question for this? Or is {disfmarker} are you coming on to that? Marketing: Ah t look all the market potential, what uh how we should design consu our remote controls, what they should be there so as to en enhance our profit, enhance our sales. User Interface: Okay. So these percentages are are what? Marketing: Yeah, these are different age group persons like uh sorry, I can open it in another way. Project Manager: Okay. Speech recognition. Marketing: Uh, yes. If we look at the costs whether the consumers they are willing to uh pay more for speech recognition in a remote control or not, we can find that they up to a thirty five years age group we have a very good disliking for this uh this uh point, like for speech recognition in a remote control. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: So we can emphasise on this point also like, because it will definitely enhance our sales in this ag in this particular age group from uh fifteen to thirty five, User Interface: Hmm. Marketing: and I uh and I think that most of the users of the rem uh T_V_ are belong to this age group. So we should look {disfmarker} Project Manager: Hmm. We're als we we're looking at who buys it as well. {gap} Marketing: Yeah. We can look at that that factor also, so yes. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Uh, which I think the twenty five to thirty five is uh usual, sort of. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Mm, mm. Marketing: So, and {disfmarker} {gap} Project Manager: {gap} Marketing: {vocalsound} And then {disfmarker} Project Manager: Fifteen to twe Marketing: Yes. I think so. Uh if we look at this data how how uh h how what are the problems the consumers are facing with the existing remote controls in the market. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: They find that thirt uh thirty five percent uh thirty four percent of the consumers they find too difficult to operate a remote control. So it should be in such a way that it should be easy to learn how to operate these remote controls and we should provide pl uh spe uh proper manuals for its use also so as that people {disfmarker} consumers could easily learn. They need not to have any, much technical knowledge to see uh to know how to operate these remote controls. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: So this is also a very goo uh major factor to loo uh take into consideration to enhance our profits and sales. So um this is all about Project Manager: Okay. {vocalsound} Marketing: uh market potential by me. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Uh, yes, th thank you. Project Manager: Okay, thank you. Um, {vocalsound} follow on with Helen? Yeah please. User Interface: Yep, sure, that's cool, um {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah we have to take that {gap} out. Project Manager: Oh, so we do yeah. Marketing: Sorry. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Fun and games. Marketing: Sorry. Project Manager: Don't know if the cable's gonna be long enough. Marketing: Uh sorry, I have {gap}. {vocalsound} Project Manager: I think I just kicked over whatever it runs on underneath as well. Marketing: Brian, this one also I {gap}. Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Thank you very much Brian. User Interface: I can turn my computer quickly if that's okay. Marketing: If you want me to help, yeah. User Interface: Um, yep. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Okay, and then what do I press, F_ eight? Marketing: Uh F_ eight. Function F_ eight. Project Manager: Function F_ eight. User Interface: Oh right. Marketing: Mm s. User Interface: Okay, cool. Marketing: It's not coming. Function F_ eight, okay. User Interface: Oh. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. No signal. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Computer. Project Manager: Hmm. Marketing: Computer adjusting, yeah. Project Manager: There you go. User Interface: Okay. Cool. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Okay and then how do I press the the big one, to get it on to the big {disfmarker} Project Manager: Uh F_ five. User Interface: F_ five and I press that again to get it off as well do I? Marketing: Escape. Project Manager: Um, F_ five and escape'll bring it back and just uh the left button for advancing. User Interface: Okay, so um I'm the interface design designer, User Interface Designer sorry, uh I'm concerned with um w what effect the apparatus should have on the user and um I'm I'm also {disfmarker} I want to point out that our motto, put the fashion in electronics, Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: so obviously we as a company we want to make our products trendy and fashionable, it's a big concern of ours. Okay, and how do I press n just the next button? Project Manager: Uh just a left uh User Interface: The arrow? Okay. Project Manager: left mouse button. User Interface: So um I looked at existing designs and also um the information that Raj gave us was very useful about what people like, what people dislike. Um and what people {disfmarker} fashionable, because we said people between twenty five and thirty five were the main um buyers of of our T_V_ I think. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Okay. User Interface: So um what they like and what they find fashionable. Project Manager:'Kay. User Interface: {vocalsound} And ergonomics, we said um, I don't know I haven't actually been able to do any of this myself, Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: but um maybe that comes up, I don't know. Project Manager: That can come under Arlo as well. User Interface: And the findings, well the basic {disfmarker} that was the basic function to send messages to the television set. Project Manager: Uh. User Interface: That's what people want to do. Um, so they need to be included, um, but I've got some pictures here of some leading ones. I don't know how to get to them, Project Manager: Uh if you if you escape then you can see your bar. User Interface: {vocalsound} do I press F_ five is it? {gap} escape? Oh okay, cool. I haven't got my glasses on so I hope it's this one. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh okay. User Interface: These are two leading um remote controls at the moment. Project Manager:'Kay. User Interface: You know they're grey, they've I mean this one's got loads of buttons, it's hard to tell from here what they actually do, Project Manager: {gap} {vocalsound} User Interface: and they don't look very exciting at all. Um, personally I prefer this one just because it's looks easier use, it's a bit more sleek with more of this silver stuff, Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: um, but there you go, that's what we're up against, Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: and I think we can do much better than that. Project Manager: {vocalsound} We hope so. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Of course. {vocalsound} User Interface: Um hang on. F_ five, Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: okay, sorry. Personal preferences. Um, well I think we need to l I think the ergonomics is quite um important, um Project Manager: {gap} Yeah, particularly if we've uh there was a bit in Raj's about R_S_I_ and things as well. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Uh-huh. And um I thought not too edgy and like a box, more kind of hand-held more um {vocalsound} not as uh computery and Project Manager: Organic {vocalsound}. User Interface: or organic, yeah, more organic shape I think. {vocalsound} Um simple designs, like the last one we just saw, not too many buttons and as Raj pointed out, only ten percent {disfmarker} fifty percent of people only use ten percent of the buttons, Marketing: {gap} Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: so I think what we can miss out on the buttons we can make up for in design and and how nice it looks. Project Manager: Sales, {gap}. Okay. User Interface: Um, hand-held and portable I think is portamint is important because T_F_T_ have just um released um I think is it a a remote control for presentations or uh and a big seven inch big screen, anyway, so um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah it's like a, yeah. {vocalsound} It's {gap}. {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, no seven inches isn't that big but um anyway um so hand-held and portable and uh m I thought about other functions for T_V_ but as you pointed out people don't actually want that, Project Manager: Right. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: And also the company want to keep it stuck to the T_V_ for uh to keep down the production time. User Interface: so maybe we forget about that. It's for one T_V_ oh right okay, sure. And so the last thing I thought w which I quickly mentioned in the other one was maybe a bit of a gimmick to set us apart from other people, like glow-in-the-dark Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Exactly. Yeah. User Interface: um which {vocalsound} does already e exist but it's not very widely used I don't think. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Easy finder with the a whistle function or something, Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: or rechargeable station because it's a pain when you run out of batteries. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: And I think that, yep, that's it. Project Manager: That's cool. Industrial Designer: So uh, I noticed your talk about speech recognition and whistling, User Interface: Okay? Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: and uh I was just curious to know, have we done any research into how many people can whistle? Um, or if {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: is that a function we want in the remote? Project Manager: Um, do you have trouble whistling? User Interface: Um, I haven't been able to {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I don't, but I I know a lot of people do right. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Really? Industrial Designer: Yeah it just Project Manager: Ooh. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {disfmarker} I mean it has to be a certain kind of whistle too, right? Project Manager: Yeah, I suppose that's true. User Interface: Mm-hmm, yeah Project Manager: Well I suppo uh you could y you could have the User Interface: or some sort of voice {disfmarker} Project Manager: you could have the basically um instead of a whistle if it's got the voice recognition you could have it just, you know, where are you? {gap}. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} That's costly though. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Um a much easier thing is just any loud noise like clapping um, shouting, you know, Project Manager: Hmm. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: uh and then, what would the response be? It beeps back at you or something? Project Manager: Sounds good. User Interface: Yeah, something. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Well, uh let me set this up. So I plug it in, press F_ five? Function F_ five? Project Manager: Function F_ eight for the um the uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Or function F_ eight? Okay. User Interface: Oh you need to twiddle the thingamibobsy thing. Industrial Designer: Okay. I think it's {vocalsound} uh just to lock it in. It's got it. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Okay. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Um. {vocalsound} So as the Industrial Designer my job is to take an input from you guys, User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: um so it's good you went first, Project Manager: Alright. Industrial Designer: and I jotted down some notes as to what are the b needs and uh what kind of novel features we can add to differentiate our product from the others. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Let's remember that. Industrial Designer: Um so Raj told us that uh consumers are willing to spend more for fancy products, and um he also mentioned that uh the current products don't always match users'operating behaviour. Um, a lot of the buttons aren't used, and uh {vocalsound} he mentioned that they're not fun to use. And uh a novel feature which uh we just brought up was this this automatic speech recognition feature or noise detection feature for when you lose the remote, Project Manager: {gap} Industrial Designer: there could be a little microphone on it, and any noise over a certain threshold um it'll pick up as a a distress signal um from you and it'll beep back and say you know oh here I am or something of this sort. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. But sure surely that would have to be um sort of specific rather than above a threshold'cause if you had a loud movie on you're likely to get it beeping back at you. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Oh yeah, yeah, that's true. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Well maybe you could have a um hmm {vocalsound} tha that would be a consideration to take into account yes. Um. Project Manager: Sorry I didn't mean to derail you there. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yeah well tha that's uh for later down the road um, and then as for the user interface it should be trendy, um {vocalsound} and not computery, User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: right, so more low tech and not too many buttons. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: So I took these all into consideration and also I have some limitations from the boss. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Right um, and practical limitations which I kinda threw out the window. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: And so I did a little research and unfortunately all I had to work on was our uh our corporate archives of the great products we've made before, User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: which include, you know, um space craft, coffee makers, and bullet trains {disfmarker} Or uh or a high speed train. Project Manager: Ah is that what that is? {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Right and having personally worked with all these products uh I have a great deal of experience with uh with industrial design of these. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well that's cool. If you if you can build space craft you'll have no problem with a remote control, yeah. Industrial Designer: Right. So, User Interface: Yeah sure. Industrial Designer: I figured, just put'em all together. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: You got a a caffeine powered space shuttle train transport to your T_V_, and um User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: as for the user interface problem, you know, too many buttons. Give it one button User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: and and it's a {disfmarker} you know, for the the cowboy in all of us {gap} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {disfmarker} I I'm not quite sure what the the function is there but {disfmarker} Project Manager: Right okay. {vocalsound} User Interface: Well I like that design. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yeah it's a g I mean you could have a you know a {disfmarker} Project Manager: Is that just switches on the speech recognition and it's entirely speech operated, is it? Industrial Designer: Right. So I think I I missed the budget thing, Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: it was fifty million Euros? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: And we gotta sell twenty five of them? Right. {vocalsound} Okay. {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, not a problem. Marketing: Fifty million was uh prof Project Manager: Ah now it's fif fifty million Euros we've gotta uh we've g {vocalsound} Marketing: As a profit. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Oh okay, so I I mixed those numbers. Project Manager: gotta make profit, so we're making that at twelve and a half Euros a time. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Okay. Well I guess more realistically then, we need a product that's got some kinda nifty outer casing, cheap plastic uh, you know, um that should be just like uh a tenth of the price maybe or less. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: An energy source which'd probably just be uh your regular batteries {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: um, we don't wanna have it {disfmarker} Project Manager: Would it be possible to have the rechargeable idea? Is that is that gonna mark up a lot? Industrial Designer: Uh. User Interface: Or a little base station or something, {gap}. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah, yeah, we could do that too. Um, I hadn't thought of that. Yeah. User Interface: {vocalsound} That might cost more though,'cause obviously with batteries we don't need to provide, well we provide the first batteries, but it's more, it's {disfmarker} that's cheaper to just provide batteries. Project Manager: Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: Right. Project Manager: I mean if you think about these base stations now it's essentially just a a lead with a sort of self connecting brake in it, User Interface: A battery in it, kinda. Project Manager: so I don't think it'd up up the price that much. Industrial Designer: Right, so so {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: the unirs the user interface User Interface: {vocalsound} Okay. Industrial Designer: uh the canonical user interface for these would be just a bunch of buttons, but since we're a cutting edge company, we uh of course will have alternatives like uh speech recognition, whistling recognition and rocket power Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: behind our product. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Um and lastly the transmission interface is uh, just some engineering thing you don't have to worry about. Project Manager: Okay. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Um so here's you know, a great schematic that my uh apprentice designer gave me. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Um as you can see the the remote control have parts and those parts look like that and um {vocalsound} you know it's got a little operating procedure that looks something like that. {vocalsound} And I suppose you all know how it works because we've all used it and we wouldn't be in a company designing remote controls if we didn't know what they were so {disfmarker} uh personal preferences, I think uh programmable options which um just require a small amount of memory, uh non volatile memory, just um so the user can put in their favourite channels and maybe their preferred volume settings so that when they turn it on it's not blasting. User Interface: Mm. Mm that's a good idea actually I like the programmable options. Marketing: Yeah, me too. Industrial Designer: Oh okay. And the uh, the bells and whistles that we mentioned you know, they take more budgeting, um more technical uh expenditure of effort Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: and it's also much more likely to not work if if we add these bells and whistles. Project Manager: Right. User Interface: Mm'kay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: That's all I got. Project Manager:'Kay, thank you very much, um I'll take that back. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Ooh that's tight. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Right, also so um a notice I got not very long before the meeting, so didn't manage to forward it on to you, it is {disfmarker} let's see, I'll find it myself, um {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Ta Industrial Designer: Okay, I don't think we need to screw it in. Project Manager: nah. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Just push it. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: We had that um to dis-include teletext um because it's become outdated, and everybody uses the internet anyway. Um, {vocalsound} dunno what Oracle would have to say with that but never mind. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Um it's only for the television, which I'm presuming means it's for a specific television, User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: and um instead of colours and sorta colour options, they want corporate colour and slogan somehow implemented in the new design. User Interface: Corporate colour. Project Manager: Yellow. User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: Yellow. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} I presume. Um, everything, all their sort of uh you know the uh corporate website and everything's yellow. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: And the logo uh the sort of slogan we put the fa fashion in electronics uh {disfmarker} I don't know exactly how sort of incorpor I mean, I guess if you're going for a sort of globular shape you could kind of have it working its way round it or something. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Uh, where am I? {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay, so, we have to decide on which functions we're going to actually have. User Interface:'Kay. Project Manager: Uh, {vocalsound} now, we had as listed options we had Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: speech recognition potentially, flat screen interface, L_C_D_ interface um we also want to limit the number of buttons so we'll pretty much take that one as read. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Project Manager: We'll use the the basic functions for a television. No teletext. Um {vocalsound} okay hold on. User Interface: Although the the danger with that is, it could look a bit cheap. Project Manager: Not enough buttons you mean? User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: So sorta strike a balance between a a few and a {disfmarker} User Interface: Well {disfmarker} Project Manager: or it looks like we're just cutting on the um {disfmarker} User Interface: Mm. On the number of buttons, kind of functions and stuff. Project Manager: I do however have this from over my head, that they don't want teletext on it. User Interface: Mm-hmm, okay. Okay, cool. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh maybe Raj you could find out what people would think about that, or maybe they'll send Marketing: About cost. Project Manager: some information about that, about um what people, whether people would require um teletext in a remote {disfmarker} teletext option in a remote control. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: {gap} {vocalsound} Okay um {gap}. So uh I take it your position Arlo is that the bells and whistles we've gotta come up with the {disfmarker} a gimmick but not too complicated a gimmick. Industrial Designer: Yeah yeah. Project Manager: Um so I mean a a the sort of inkling I'm getting from little bits of um web chatter that I'm getting sent is that they're quite interested in a T_F_T_ display, interactive display. However that does sound a bit like the more complicated design that rav uh sorry Raj um {vocalsound} said people didn't like. Although I guess if there's a sort of {disfmarker} User Interface: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Project Manager: If you think about standard interfaces that people use already, sort of Windows-style drop down menus or whatever, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: I think maybe that's a bit, going a bit far User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: but you know like in a basic sense that you could have your basic selection of buttons, and if you hit a sort of menu at the top you have um {vocalsound} it goes to a different selection of buttons, so it sorta keeps it simple. User Interface: Yeah. Okay. Project Manager: Um glow in the dark, is that sort of with a light inside it or is it sort of glow in the dark material? User Interface: Um {disfmarker} Marketing: Uh. User Interface: Glow in the dark material I was thinking. Project Manager: Okay. So {disfmarker} Marketing: I {disfmarker} User Interface: Um, so I I guess that would be cheaper than a light I think. Marketing: Uh may I say something about {gap}? Project Manager: Yeah. Yeah. Marketing: Uh actually I think it's really really very important point uh as if we look at the market because people mor fifty percent people they find that the remote controls are often lost somewhere in the remote, in the room. But {disfmarker} User Interface: Often lost s was that, Marketing: yeah are lost Project Manager: Lost, yeah. User Interface: yeah. Marketing: and means they forget where they have kept the remote control last time. But if we add speech recognition as well as glow in the dark then both these factors will help their locating the remote control, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Marketing: like if they come and speak something at the remote control uh replies to something something and it glows in the dark. Both these factors uh both these points will help them to locate the where they have kept this remote control, Project Manager: That's cool. User Interface: Mm-hmm, Marketing: and this will definitely enhance our uh market sales, Project Manager: That's cool. User Interface: mm-hmm. Marketing: so we should take it into consideration also. Project Manager: Okay, cool. Industrial Designer: Well hmm. Project Manager: Um speech recognition I take it {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Oh it's {disfmarker} Project Manager: I don't, I've {disfmarker} I know of no products um that use speech recognition well. Industrial Designer: They're act there there was a remote control that came out two years ago that had a {disfmarker} some basic speech recognition on it. You could programme it with your channels and then you say you know like uh B_B_C_ one and it goes to that channel. Project Manager: Really? Industrial Designer: Yeah, it didn't work very well though because of this noise interference problem. They mentioned you know if the television says you are listening to B_B_C_ one {gap}. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Yeah, or a yeah an advert an advert for B_B_C_ two on B_B_C_ one'll switch the channel for you kinda thing. User Interface: {gap} Industrial Designer: Right, right, and so there was a lot of this, you'd be watching the T_V_ and then all of a sudden it'd it'd pick up a noise and turn it off or you know or turn the volume off or something, Project Manager: {vocalsound} Mm. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: but if you can work around that that noise problem {disfmarker} User Interface:'Kay. Project Manager: Uh-huh. User Interface: Well what about {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: this might get a bit too expensive actually, but what about um something that's built into the T_V_ um that you can press and it'll send out a little signal you know like the ones that we can't hear or {vocalsound} something Project Manager: Ah, that's a good idea. Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: um that that will activate the remote control starts to beep. Industrial Designer: Right. Project Manager: So like a kind of backwards remote from the telly. {vocalsound} User Interface: If you find if y Industrial Designer: Right and then it would do just you know, uh subtractive kind of cancellation of the noise. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: What you could do then would be you have uh {vocalsound} a remote controlled by the T_V_ speaker, or not a remo I'm sorry, a microphone by the T_V_ speaker and a transmitter there that sends back to your remote,'cause you can't um expect uh the the television manufacturers to to put that feature into their T_V_s. User Interface: Mm. Yeah, that's the only thing, yeah. Industrial Designer: But yeah, then you have like the little se separate module by the T_V_ speaker Project Manager: That we should just stick on, yeah. Industrial Designer: which {disfmarker} User Interface: That comes with our remote control. Industrial Designer: Right, and then the remote control would know um what's being produced by the television. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: And that's a sort of basic R_F_ kind of frequency so it'll be cheap. Industrial Designer: Right, right. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Right, right. Um. {vocalsound} Yeah that's certainly possible then an another thing was about this losing the remote and trying to find it again. If you do have this sorta speech interface to it, you don't even need to find it. You just say you know, um whatever you whatever you want the remote for, you know to change the channel or to uh turn the T_V_ on and off, you just shout your command to it and it would do it for you if it's within you know, within hearing range. And uh you know it could be somewhere in the room y that you've no idea where it is and it would still do its job. Project Manager: Uh-huh. User Interface: That could also be built into the T_V_ though, which might make our remote control a bit obsolete. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: Well, hopefully we're uh we're ahead of the curve. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} It might do us out of a job. User Interface: Yeah, okay. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um {disfmarker} Okay. {vocalsound} I like the whole sort of remote feedback thing. Um so I think rather than {disfmarker} and that also kind of takes out the speech recognition in terms of the interference of it not working very well and things like that, User Interface: Mm. Industrial Designer: Hmm. Project Manager: so I th User Interface: And the expense. Project Manager: yeah and expense and the time. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So I think if we're going to go {disfmarker} well I mean like the thing about the {disfmarker} there's the problem with the T_F_T_ or the L_C_D_ kind of thing is if you're also wanting the the kind of uh organic globby sort of feeling to it then you might have trouble incorporating the screen. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Um, but I guess not I thin we'll just we'll just pretend that's not a problem. Um {vocalsound} {vocalsound} uh {vocalsound} and how are you about the glow in the dark material? Is that {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Um. User Interface: Maybe not even all of it'cause we said um colours and fashion w were important so maybe um just like a little l line that's kind of around the outside and then you can make the rest a different colour. Industrial Designer: Mm. Project Manager: Contrast contra well. Industrial Designer: Yeah, no th the material's cheap but it's just uh the the glow in the dark material needs some light to charge it you know, and then uh if you're, if you're sitting in the dark for too long it uh it won't glow any more. Project Manager: Yeah, okay. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So if it's dow it's d uh yeah. Or if it's down under the couch cushions Industrial Designer: Right. Project Manager: um which is where I usually find mine. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Right. Project Manager: Um {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Okay, well we can use {disfmarker} we can still use the glow in the dark as a gimmick essentially, User Interface: Yeah, Project Manager: um if we're gonna have to {disfmarker} User Interface:'cause what I thought, main {disfmarker} Project Manager: if we're gonna have the logo on as well, bright yellow logo in our our um slogan. User Interface: Slogan, yeah. Project Manager: Uh then you know they're gonna be fairly brightly coloured anyway, and we can have sort of a a a trimming as well, of the glow in the dark material, just as gimmickyness. User Interface: Right. Mm-hmm.'Cause yeah, that w more than finding it, that was more like you know if you're watching a film in the dark, you can um still see the remote control. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Alright, so n sorta if if if we're gon if we're gonna go with the idea of um {vocalsound} uh of feedback, sort of remote finder, then that kinda stuffs that one out then. User Interface: That was more of a a gimmick. Project Manager: Do you think? User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Uh it makes it fairly unnecessary then. User Interface: Yeah, unnecessary. Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Um, okay so scratch that. Uh so we've got do we want to go with the T_F_T_ idea or the {disfmarker} is that far too expensive? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Um yeah we're getting a lot of features now, I I think {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Well I mean I think I think the sort of find the finder things I mean it's uh I could probably write the circuit diagram for that myself. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Well, I think a consideration too is that these uh remotes get abused a lot, you know they get thrown around, User Interface: Mm. Industrial Designer: there's a good chance the the T_F_T_ screen would break or uh get damaged. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: They're pretty fragile. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: So is that one of our definite requirements that they wa that it needs a T_F_T_ screen? Project Manager: Um no, I mean {gap} that was going on ravs uh Raj's sort of um marketing research I guess. Um {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Uh {disfmarker} So we'll stick with sort of programmability um for the buttons that we do have. Um. {gap} So that's sort of included in your sub-module kind of stuff, um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah mm. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh {vocalsound} you were finding out about teletext. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: If you could find out that uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Totally, it takes cheap speech recognition, she {disfmarker} they wi Project Manager: Um I think we're gonna scratch the speech recognition as a bit of a Industrial Designer: Oh. Project Manager: um expensive, User Interface: Yeah you think so? Industrial Designer: Oh no it's it's much cheaper than the T_F_T_, it's just a microphone and some some integrated circuits. Project Manager: no? Oh right, okay. Industrial Designer: And it'd it'd be a small vocabulary speech recognition system, Project Manager: Is it not the circuits that cost {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: like a {disfmarker} Project Manager: Oh right, okay. Industrial Designer: {gap} Project Manager: Uh well that kind of takes back the R_F_ {vocalsound} the R_F_ remote sort of idea as well. User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um. {vocalsound} Five minutes. Okay. Decisions. Uh, votes, let's vote. Who wants T_F_T_? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: No-one does. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Excellent, so we'll go with speech recognition, yeah? Industrial Designer: Okay. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Mm-hmm, that's cool. Project Manager: Um, speech recognition, limited buttons, organic design. And what else was I thinking of that I haven't written down and therefore fallen out my head, User Interface: Um Project Manager: programmability. Marketing: Glow in dark. Project Manager: Uh {disfmarker} User Interface: if it's not too expensive s I think it's a good gimmick. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh o okay. Industrial Designer: Yeah. {gap} Project Manager: And also, integrating the, remember to integrate the logo and the s slogan. {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay, so. Um can you put all these reports in the project documents folder if they're not already in there as well. So, it just helps me summarize them. Industrial Designer: Yeah yeah. Marketing: Here? Sure. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: And um I'll put any {disfmarker} {gap} I'm I'm putting anything I do in there anyway, so uh {disfmarker} User Interface: And where is it sorry? Project Manager: Uh pro uh project documents. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} So it should be when you save Project Manager: On A_M_I_ scenario controller. Industrial Designer: on your desktop, so it goes save as, or {disfmarker} User Interface: Oh {gap}. Marketing: Uh it is in shared documents? Industrial Designer: And then uh hit that little folder up thing again. Project Manager: Where am I? Marketing: Projoct uh projector. Industrial Designer: Again. Project Manager: Project documents, yeah, it's on your desktop as well. Industrial Designer: All the way to the top, yeah that's up to desktop. Right and then project documents. User Interface: Okay, cool. Marketing: Hmm. It is not giving anything. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Shared documents. Project Manager: And I will tr {gap} getting strings of um information, I'll try and forward any specific to anybody in particular, as soon as I get them now, rather than {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {gap} Project Manager: I was about to sort of tell you about the changes before the meeting, and then the meeting turned up, so {disfmarker} {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: Mm. Did you get my email? Okay. Project Manager: I did {gap}. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Just making sure. Project Manager: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: So {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} What I thought as well about the material is um maybe not this kind of material, but maybe more like um this kind of rubbery material, it's a bit more bouncy, like you said they get chucked around a lot. Um, a bit more {vocalsound} durable and that can also be ergonomic Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: and it kind of feels a bit different from all the other remote controls. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. User Interface: The rubber rather than {disfmarker} Project Manager: More sort of um flesh-like than plasticky sort of. User Interface: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Wow. Marketing: Um but we have to take care like {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: But we have to take care of our children also if they {disfmarker} {vocalsound} means if children catch hold of your or if they chew it it shouldn't be too harmful. So, whatever material we use it should be {disfmarker} yeah. Project Manager: Oh no, ethics, {vocalsound} that's gonna cost us money. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: So {vocalsound} we have to safety point of view also, we have to take care. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay, safety. Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: Oh I think wi with the more organic shape of it it won't be as {disfmarker} it won't as have many sharp corners as that, so that's something good, um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: I dunno, I mean {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: We could go comp yeah. Project Manager: It sme {vocalsound} smells good for children. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: We could go completely out of the box and make the thing a big red ball foam ball. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: And it's got the thing on the inside. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: And there's no buttons at all, it's always on, and just yell at it, and it works. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} That sounds, User Interface: That's a good idea. Industrial Designer: And then ch children will love it. {vocalsound} Project Manager: yeah it's gonna have to be it's gonna be have a big yellow foam ball, yeah, sorry. User Interface: {vocalsound} Interesting. Industrial Designer: Oh yellow, yellow ball. Right. User Interface: Yeah, d with the colour, um does it have to be all yellow, do you know? Project Manager: Please God no. Um. Well, I wouldn't th I mean, User Interface: No. Project Manager: my reaction to an all-yellow remote control wouldn't be anything other than horror, so I think just having it User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Small logo with the like a small yellow strip or y yellow {gap} with the logo in it. Project Manager: surrounding the logo. User Interface: Having a little bit. Okay cool. Mm mm. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Mm-hmm, okay. Project Manager: And I'll see if I can argue with boss about putting the {disfmarker} User Interface: Cool. Project Manager: what was it? We put {vocalsound} we put fashion into {disfmarker} Whoops, it's not working. Can't believe I've forgotten it {gap}. We put the fashion in electronics. {vocalsound} I bet that'll catch on well. User Interface: Oh yeah, that's a good one that. Yeah so. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay, any last Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Twelve thirty. Project Manager: worries, queries? Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} S s {vocalsound} Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: I know what you're thinking. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay then, lunchtime, yay. Marketing: That's good. Project Manager: Okay, that felt a bit more like a {disfmarker} something with order and and reason to it than the last one. Marketing: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Project Manager: This is quite fun actually. User Interface: Wow. Industrial Designer: Mm. User Interface: Has anybo oh. Project Manager: I really don't {disfmarker} User Interface: Has anybody pressed okay, it vibrates. It's pretty cool. Project Manager: Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: Yep. Marketing: Check here. Project Manager: Wow you've {gap} your first page. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Yeah I've been using up the pages. Project Manager: I was just writing really big. {vocalsound} {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, got small writing. I don't wanna waste it. Project Manager: I've finished the meeting now. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Another questionnaire. Project Manager: Oh, everybody needs k questionnaire. Marketing: {vocalsound}

After a thorough discussion, the team finally reached a consensus that the new design would have seven functions. First, the new remotes would dis-include teletext because that was obsolete. Second, they wanted to integrate the corporate colour and slogan in the new design. Third, speech recognition would be included. Fourth, the new remotes could glow in the dark. Fifth, there would be limited buttons on the remotes. Sixth, the design was organic. Seventh, the new remotes would be with programmability.

tr-sq-1225

tr-sq-1225_0

What's the conclusion of the discussion about the function of" glow in dark" ? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um {vocalsound} minutes from the last meeting which were essentially that we uh had decided on roles for each of you, however, um there are some changes that I've got from on high User Interface: Okay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: that um are a bit uh {disfmarker} well w what I didn't actually realise it was that the uh {vocalsound} this is for a specific television. User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: So the all in one idea goes out the window. And {vocalsound} they require that the uh User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: actually I'll get to that at the end {gap} point number four, um we'll get what you've got and then we can see what we can adapt from it. So um, presentations, were you {disfmarker} anybody got, raring to go? Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. Project Manager: Raring to go? Okay. Good stuff. Mm. Marketing: Um. So how {disfmarker} Project Manager: Oh I need to plug you in. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: S {gap} Project Manager: Just about. User Interface: Wow. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: It's a inspired design. Marketing: {gap} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Sh do you want me to hold it? Project Manager: Uh there we go, just screw'em on in. Gonna have to swap them round so {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} So, after that? Project Manager: now, it was function F_ eight. Marketing: F_ eight. {vocalsound} f oh sorry F_ eight. Project Manager: That's the wee blue one. Blue one F_ eight. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: Should do it, good one. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. Uh, me again, Rajan the Marketing Expert. Uh, as we have decided in the last meeting that I have to find out, sorry, yeah sure. Project Manager: Hold on, sorry. {gap} and if you just click that it'll go ahead, one at a time. Marketing: Yeah, yeah. Uh actually, sorry I have to see the other {gap}, sorry. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Sorry, uh. Marketing: Yeah, thank you. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Uh, yes, I have to look at the uh market potential for this product, uh, like consumer likings and everything, what is the potential for this product and are we able to achieve our a net profit or our aims or not? Then {disfmarker} Project Manager: P press F_ five to start it first. Marketing: Sorry. Okay. Yeah, I can, okay. Industrial Designer: Hmm. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Jesus. Marketing: Uh then uh the methodology I adopted to find out all this was market survey. A a detailed market survey on consumers was done to find out their likings and dislikings, what they prefer what they not prefer, w what problems they do encounter in all this type of things. And what we got was, we found that {disfmarker} if you {disfmarker} uh, what they th what problems they are having with different uh remote controls available in the market. Seventy five percent of users they do find it that the remote controls available in the market are ugly. They are not so good looking. So, we have to put stress on this, uh we have to take care of this fact also like our design, uh should be appropriate, should be good looking for the consumers. And yes that's wi uh this will definitely, this can definitely put uh uh enhance our sales. Uh and even uh the good thing about this is that eighty percent of users they are willing to pay high uh pay more for this uh good looking remote controls also. So even if the available market goes for the available {disfmarker} uh even if the market goes for the available remote control is less even then we can sell it at twenty five Euros, which maybe which may seem quite high but if our looks are are if the re remote control we design have a good better uh better look uh designs, then we can hope that consumers will prefer these g remote controls. Project Manager: Excellent. Marketing: Then {disfmarker} {gap} And the second thing, some some companies they think that they should have more and more functions of the users uh or in their remote controls, but rather than those having more functions in the remote controls we should emphasise what actually consumer want, what they operate, rather than making it too complicated. Because mostly it has been found that fifty percent of the users they use only ten percent of the buttons, so there is no point of having ninety percent buttons making the remote controls too bulky, too complicated too expensive a because I think I believe that technology is useful only if uh the consumers they want to use it. Otherwise there is no point of having all this type of things. So this will not only reduce the cost of our remote controls but it will increase our profit also. So we have to take care of this fact also. Then. Uh it was function I want to go to. Project Manager: Oh you wanna go back? Just escape. Marketing: Uh, escape, okay thank you. Then if we look at this slide, Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: uh these are in your shared documents, you can see, Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: like {disfmarker} Uh, sorry. User Interface: So, sorry {disfmarker} I was just gonna say, what was the question for this? Or is {disfmarker} are you coming on to that? Marketing: Ah t look all the market potential, what uh how we should design consu our remote controls, what they should be there so as to en enhance our profit, enhance our sales. User Interface: Okay. So these percentages are are what? Marketing: Yeah, these are different age group persons like uh sorry, I can open it in another way. Project Manager: Okay. Speech recognition. Marketing: Uh, yes. If we look at the costs whether the consumers they are willing to uh pay more for speech recognition in a remote control or not, we can find that they up to a thirty five years age group we have a very good disliking for this uh this uh point, like for speech recognition in a remote control. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: So we can emphasise on this point also like, because it will definitely enhance our sales in this ag in this particular age group from uh fifteen to thirty five, User Interface: Hmm. Marketing: and I uh and I think that most of the users of the rem uh T_V_ are belong to this age group. So we should look {disfmarker} Project Manager: Hmm. We're als we we're looking at who buys it as well. {gap} Marketing: Yeah. We can look at that that factor also, so yes. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Uh, which I think the twenty five to thirty five is uh usual, sort of. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Mm, mm. Marketing: So, and {disfmarker} {gap} Project Manager: {gap} Marketing: {vocalsound} And then {disfmarker} Project Manager: Fifteen to twe Marketing: Yes. I think so. Uh if we look at this data how how uh h how what are the problems the consumers are facing with the existing remote controls in the market. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: They find that thirt uh thirty five percent uh thirty four percent of the consumers they find too difficult to operate a remote control. So it should be in such a way that it should be easy to learn how to operate these remote controls and we should provide pl uh spe uh proper manuals for its use also so as that people {disfmarker} consumers could easily learn. They need not to have any, much technical knowledge to see uh to know how to operate these remote controls. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: So this is also a very goo uh major factor to loo uh take into consideration to enhance our profits and sales. So um this is all about Project Manager: Okay. {vocalsound} Marketing: uh market potential by me. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Uh, yes, th thank you. Project Manager: Okay, thank you. Um, {vocalsound} follow on with Helen? Yeah please. User Interface: Yep, sure, that's cool, um {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah we have to take that {gap} out. Project Manager: Oh, so we do yeah. Marketing: Sorry. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Fun and games. Marketing: Sorry. Project Manager: Don't know if the cable's gonna be long enough. Marketing: Uh sorry, I have {gap}. {vocalsound} Project Manager: I think I just kicked over whatever it runs on underneath as well. Marketing: Brian, this one also I {gap}. Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Thank you very much Brian. User Interface: I can turn my computer quickly if that's okay. Marketing: If you want me to help, yeah. User Interface: Um, yep. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Okay, and then what do I press, F_ eight? Marketing: Uh F_ eight. Function F_ eight. Project Manager: Function F_ eight. User Interface: Oh right. Marketing: Mm s. User Interface: Okay, cool. Marketing: It's not coming. Function F_ eight, okay. User Interface: Oh. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. No signal. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Computer. Project Manager: Hmm. Marketing: Computer adjusting, yeah. Project Manager: There you go. User Interface: Okay. Cool. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Okay and then how do I press the the big one, to get it on to the big {disfmarker} Project Manager: Uh F_ five. User Interface: F_ five and I press that again to get it off as well do I? Marketing: Escape. Project Manager: Um, F_ five and escape'll bring it back and just uh the left button for advancing. User Interface: Okay, so um I'm the interface design designer, User Interface Designer sorry, uh I'm concerned with um w what effect the apparatus should have on the user and um I'm I'm also {disfmarker} I want to point out that our motto, put the fashion in electronics, Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: so obviously we as a company we want to make our products trendy and fashionable, it's a big concern of ours. Okay, and how do I press n just the next button? Project Manager: Uh just a left uh User Interface: The arrow? Okay. Project Manager: left mouse button. User Interface: So um I looked at existing designs and also um the information that Raj gave us was very useful about what people like, what people dislike. Um and what people {disfmarker} fashionable, because we said people between twenty five and thirty five were the main um buyers of of our T_V_ I think. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Okay. User Interface: So um what they like and what they find fashionable. Project Manager:'Kay. User Interface: {vocalsound} And ergonomics, we said um, I don't know I haven't actually been able to do any of this myself, Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: but um maybe that comes up, I don't know. Project Manager: That can come under Arlo as well. User Interface: And the findings, well the basic {disfmarker} that was the basic function to send messages to the television set. Project Manager: Uh. User Interface: That's what people want to do. Um, so they need to be included, um, but I've got some pictures here of some leading ones. I don't know how to get to them, Project Manager: Uh if you if you escape then you can see your bar. User Interface: {vocalsound} do I press F_ five is it? {gap} escape? Oh okay, cool. I haven't got my glasses on so I hope it's this one. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh okay. User Interface: These are two leading um remote controls at the moment. Project Manager:'Kay. User Interface: You know they're grey, they've I mean this one's got loads of buttons, it's hard to tell from here what they actually do, Project Manager: {gap} {vocalsound} User Interface: and they don't look very exciting at all. Um, personally I prefer this one just because it's looks easier use, it's a bit more sleek with more of this silver stuff, Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: um, but there you go, that's what we're up against, Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: and I think we can do much better than that. Project Manager: {vocalsound} We hope so. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Of course. {vocalsound} User Interface: Um hang on. F_ five, Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: okay, sorry. Personal preferences. Um, well I think we need to l I think the ergonomics is quite um important, um Project Manager: {gap} Yeah, particularly if we've uh there was a bit in Raj's about R_S_I_ and things as well. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Uh-huh. And um I thought not too edgy and like a box, more kind of hand-held more um {vocalsound} not as uh computery and Project Manager: Organic {vocalsound}. User Interface: or organic, yeah, more organic shape I think. {vocalsound} Um simple designs, like the last one we just saw, not too many buttons and as Raj pointed out, only ten percent {disfmarker} fifty percent of people only use ten percent of the buttons, Marketing: {gap} Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: so I think what we can miss out on the buttons we can make up for in design and and how nice it looks. Project Manager: Sales, {gap}. Okay. User Interface: Um, hand-held and portable I think is portamint is important because T_F_T_ have just um released um I think is it a a remote control for presentations or uh and a big seven inch big screen, anyway, so um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah it's like a, yeah. {vocalsound} It's {gap}. {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, no seven inches isn't that big but um anyway um so hand-held and portable and uh m I thought about other functions for T_V_ but as you pointed out people don't actually want that, Project Manager: Right. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: And also the company want to keep it stuck to the T_V_ for uh to keep down the production time. User Interface: so maybe we forget about that. It's for one T_V_ oh right okay, sure. And so the last thing I thought w which I quickly mentioned in the other one was maybe a bit of a gimmick to set us apart from other people, like glow-in-the-dark Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Exactly. Yeah. User Interface: um which {vocalsound} does already e exist but it's not very widely used I don't think. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Easy finder with the a whistle function or something, Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: or rechargeable station because it's a pain when you run out of batteries. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: And I think that, yep, that's it. Project Manager: That's cool. Industrial Designer: So uh, I noticed your talk about speech recognition and whistling, User Interface: Okay? Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: and uh I was just curious to know, have we done any research into how many people can whistle? Um, or if {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: is that a function we want in the remote? Project Manager: Um, do you have trouble whistling? User Interface: Um, I haven't been able to {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I don't, but I I know a lot of people do right. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Really? Industrial Designer: Yeah it just Project Manager: Ooh. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {disfmarker} I mean it has to be a certain kind of whistle too, right? Project Manager: Yeah, I suppose that's true. User Interface: Mm-hmm, yeah Project Manager: Well I suppo uh you could y you could have the User Interface: or some sort of voice {disfmarker} Project Manager: you could have the basically um instead of a whistle if it's got the voice recognition you could have it just, you know, where are you? {gap}. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} That's costly though. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Um a much easier thing is just any loud noise like clapping um, shouting, you know, Project Manager: Hmm. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: uh and then, what would the response be? It beeps back at you or something? Project Manager: Sounds good. User Interface: Yeah, something. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Well, uh let me set this up. So I plug it in, press F_ five? Function F_ five? Project Manager: Function F_ eight for the um the uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Or function F_ eight? Okay. User Interface: Oh you need to twiddle the thingamibobsy thing. Industrial Designer: Okay. I think it's {vocalsound} uh just to lock it in. It's got it. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Okay. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Um. {vocalsound} So as the Industrial Designer my job is to take an input from you guys, User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: um so it's good you went first, Project Manager: Alright. Industrial Designer: and I jotted down some notes as to what are the b needs and uh what kind of novel features we can add to differentiate our product from the others. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Let's remember that. Industrial Designer: Um so Raj told us that uh consumers are willing to spend more for fancy products, and um he also mentioned that uh the current products don't always match users'operating behaviour. Um, a lot of the buttons aren't used, and uh {vocalsound} he mentioned that they're not fun to use. And uh a novel feature which uh we just brought up was this this automatic speech recognition feature or noise detection feature for when you lose the remote, Project Manager: {gap} Industrial Designer: there could be a little microphone on it, and any noise over a certain threshold um it'll pick up as a a distress signal um from you and it'll beep back and say you know oh here I am or something of this sort. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. But sure surely that would have to be um sort of specific rather than above a threshold'cause if you had a loud movie on you're likely to get it beeping back at you. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Oh yeah, yeah, that's true. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Well maybe you could have a um hmm {vocalsound} tha that would be a consideration to take into account yes. Um. Project Manager: Sorry I didn't mean to derail you there. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yeah well tha that's uh for later down the road um, and then as for the user interface it should be trendy, um {vocalsound} and not computery, User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: right, so more low tech and not too many buttons. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: So I took these all into consideration and also I have some limitations from the boss. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Right um, and practical limitations which I kinda threw out the window. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: And so I did a little research and unfortunately all I had to work on was our uh our corporate archives of the great products we've made before, User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: which include, you know, um space craft, coffee makers, and bullet trains {disfmarker} Or uh or a high speed train. Project Manager: Ah is that what that is? {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Right and having personally worked with all these products uh I have a great deal of experience with uh with industrial design of these. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well that's cool. If you if you can build space craft you'll have no problem with a remote control, yeah. Industrial Designer: Right. So, User Interface: Yeah sure. Industrial Designer: I figured, just put'em all together. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: You got a a caffeine powered space shuttle train transport to your T_V_, and um User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: as for the user interface problem, you know, too many buttons. Give it one button User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: and and it's a {disfmarker} you know, for the the cowboy in all of us {gap} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {disfmarker} I I'm not quite sure what the the function is there but {disfmarker} Project Manager: Right okay. {vocalsound} User Interface: Well I like that design. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yeah it's a g I mean you could have a you know a {disfmarker} Project Manager: Is that just switches on the speech recognition and it's entirely speech operated, is it? Industrial Designer: Right. So I think I I missed the budget thing, Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: it was fifty million Euros? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: And we gotta sell twenty five of them? Right. {vocalsound} Okay. {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, not a problem. Marketing: Fifty million was uh prof Project Manager: Ah now it's fif fifty million Euros we've gotta uh we've g {vocalsound} Marketing: As a profit. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Oh okay, so I I mixed those numbers. Project Manager: gotta make profit, so we're making that at twelve and a half Euros a time. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Okay. Well I guess more realistically then, we need a product that's got some kinda nifty outer casing, cheap plastic uh, you know, um that should be just like uh a tenth of the price maybe or less. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: An energy source which'd probably just be uh your regular batteries {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: um, we don't wanna have it {disfmarker} Project Manager: Would it be possible to have the rechargeable idea? Is that is that gonna mark up a lot? Industrial Designer: Uh. User Interface: Or a little base station or something, {gap}. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah, yeah, we could do that too. Um, I hadn't thought of that. Yeah. User Interface: {vocalsound} That might cost more though,'cause obviously with batteries we don't need to provide, well we provide the first batteries, but it's more, it's {disfmarker} that's cheaper to just provide batteries. Project Manager: Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: Right. Project Manager: I mean if you think about these base stations now it's essentially just a a lead with a sort of self connecting brake in it, User Interface: A battery in it, kinda. Project Manager: so I don't think it'd up up the price that much. Industrial Designer: Right, so so {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: the unirs the user interface User Interface: {vocalsound} Okay. Industrial Designer: uh the canonical user interface for these would be just a bunch of buttons, but since we're a cutting edge company, we uh of course will have alternatives like uh speech recognition, whistling recognition and rocket power Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: behind our product. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Um and lastly the transmission interface is uh, just some engineering thing you don't have to worry about. Project Manager: Okay. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Um so here's you know, a great schematic that my uh apprentice designer gave me. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Um as you can see the the remote control have parts and those parts look like that and um {vocalsound} you know it's got a little operating procedure that looks something like that. {vocalsound} And I suppose you all know how it works because we've all used it and we wouldn't be in a company designing remote controls if we didn't know what they were so {disfmarker} uh personal preferences, I think uh programmable options which um just require a small amount of memory, uh non volatile memory, just um so the user can put in their favourite channels and maybe their preferred volume settings so that when they turn it on it's not blasting. User Interface: Mm. Mm that's a good idea actually I like the programmable options. Marketing: Yeah, me too. Industrial Designer: Oh okay. And the uh, the bells and whistles that we mentioned you know, they take more budgeting, um more technical uh expenditure of effort Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: and it's also much more likely to not work if if we add these bells and whistles. Project Manager: Right. User Interface: Mm'kay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: That's all I got. Project Manager:'Kay, thank you very much, um I'll take that back. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Ooh that's tight. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Right, also so um a notice I got not very long before the meeting, so didn't manage to forward it on to you, it is {disfmarker} let's see, I'll find it myself, um {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Ta Industrial Designer: Okay, I don't think we need to screw it in. Project Manager: nah. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Just push it. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: We had that um to dis-include teletext um because it's become outdated, and everybody uses the internet anyway. Um, {vocalsound} dunno what Oracle would have to say with that but never mind. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Um it's only for the television, which I'm presuming means it's for a specific television, User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: and um instead of colours and sorta colour options, they want corporate colour and slogan somehow implemented in the new design. User Interface: Corporate colour. Project Manager: Yellow. User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: Yellow. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} I presume. Um, everything, all their sort of uh you know the uh corporate website and everything's yellow. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: And the logo uh the sort of slogan we put the fa fashion in electronics uh {disfmarker} I don't know exactly how sort of incorpor I mean, I guess if you're going for a sort of globular shape you could kind of have it working its way round it or something. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Uh, where am I? {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay, so, we have to decide on which functions we're going to actually have. User Interface:'Kay. Project Manager: Uh, {vocalsound} now, we had as listed options we had Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: speech recognition potentially, flat screen interface, L_C_D_ interface um we also want to limit the number of buttons so we'll pretty much take that one as read. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Project Manager: We'll use the the basic functions for a television. No teletext. Um {vocalsound} okay hold on. User Interface: Although the the danger with that is, it could look a bit cheap. Project Manager: Not enough buttons you mean? User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: So sorta strike a balance between a a few and a {disfmarker} User Interface: Well {disfmarker} Project Manager: or it looks like we're just cutting on the um {disfmarker} User Interface: Mm. On the number of buttons, kind of functions and stuff. Project Manager: I do however have this from over my head, that they don't want teletext on it. User Interface: Mm-hmm, okay. Okay, cool. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh maybe Raj you could find out what people would think about that, or maybe they'll send Marketing: About cost. Project Manager: some information about that, about um what people, whether people would require um teletext in a remote {disfmarker} teletext option in a remote control. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: {gap} {vocalsound} Okay um {gap}. So uh I take it your position Arlo is that the bells and whistles we've gotta come up with the {disfmarker} a gimmick but not too complicated a gimmick. Industrial Designer: Yeah yeah. Project Manager: Um so I mean a a the sort of inkling I'm getting from little bits of um web chatter that I'm getting sent is that they're quite interested in a T_F_T_ display, interactive display. However that does sound a bit like the more complicated design that rav uh sorry Raj um {vocalsound} said people didn't like. Although I guess if there's a sort of {disfmarker} User Interface: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Project Manager: If you think about standard interfaces that people use already, sort of Windows-style drop down menus or whatever, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: I think maybe that's a bit, going a bit far User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: but you know like in a basic sense that you could have your basic selection of buttons, and if you hit a sort of menu at the top you have um {vocalsound} it goes to a different selection of buttons, so it sorta keeps it simple. User Interface: Yeah. Okay. Project Manager: Um glow in the dark, is that sort of with a light inside it or is it sort of glow in the dark material? User Interface: Um {disfmarker} Marketing: Uh. User Interface: Glow in the dark material I was thinking. Project Manager: Okay. So {disfmarker} Marketing: I {disfmarker} User Interface: Um, so I I guess that would be cheaper than a light I think. Marketing: Uh may I say something about {gap}? Project Manager: Yeah. Yeah. Marketing: Uh actually I think it's really really very important point uh as if we look at the market because people mor fifty percent people they find that the remote controls are often lost somewhere in the remote, in the room. But {disfmarker} User Interface: Often lost s was that, Marketing: yeah are lost Project Manager: Lost, yeah. User Interface: yeah. Marketing: and means they forget where they have kept the remote control last time. But if we add speech recognition as well as glow in the dark then both these factors will help their locating the remote control, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Marketing: like if they come and speak something at the remote control uh replies to something something and it glows in the dark. Both these factors uh both these points will help them to locate the where they have kept this remote control, Project Manager: That's cool. User Interface: Mm-hmm, Marketing: and this will definitely enhance our uh market sales, Project Manager: That's cool. User Interface: mm-hmm. Marketing: so we should take it into consideration also. Project Manager: Okay, cool. Industrial Designer: Well hmm. Project Manager: Um speech recognition I take it {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Oh it's {disfmarker} Project Manager: I don't, I've {disfmarker} I know of no products um that use speech recognition well. Industrial Designer: They're act there there was a remote control that came out two years ago that had a {disfmarker} some basic speech recognition on it. You could programme it with your channels and then you say you know like uh B_B_C_ one and it goes to that channel. Project Manager: Really? Industrial Designer: Yeah, it didn't work very well though because of this noise interference problem. They mentioned you know if the television says you are listening to B_B_C_ one {gap}. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Yeah, or a yeah an advert an advert for B_B_C_ two on B_B_C_ one'll switch the channel for you kinda thing. User Interface: {gap} Industrial Designer: Right, right, and so there was a lot of this, you'd be watching the T_V_ and then all of a sudden it'd it'd pick up a noise and turn it off or you know or turn the volume off or something, Project Manager: {vocalsound} Mm. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: but if you can work around that that noise problem {disfmarker} User Interface:'Kay. Project Manager: Uh-huh. User Interface: Well what about {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: this might get a bit too expensive actually, but what about um something that's built into the T_V_ um that you can press and it'll send out a little signal you know like the ones that we can't hear or {vocalsound} something Project Manager: Ah, that's a good idea. Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: um that that will activate the remote control starts to beep. Industrial Designer: Right. Project Manager: So like a kind of backwards remote from the telly. {vocalsound} User Interface: If you find if y Industrial Designer: Right and then it would do just you know, uh subtractive kind of cancellation of the noise. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: What you could do then would be you have uh {vocalsound} a remote controlled by the T_V_ speaker, or not a remo I'm sorry, a microphone by the T_V_ speaker and a transmitter there that sends back to your remote,'cause you can't um expect uh the the television manufacturers to to put that feature into their T_V_s. User Interface: Mm. Yeah, that's the only thing, yeah. Industrial Designer: But yeah, then you have like the little se separate module by the T_V_ speaker Project Manager: That we should just stick on, yeah. Industrial Designer: which {disfmarker} User Interface: That comes with our remote control. Industrial Designer: Right, and then the remote control would know um what's being produced by the television. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: And that's a sort of basic R_F_ kind of frequency so it'll be cheap. Industrial Designer: Right, right. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Right, right. Um. {vocalsound} Yeah that's certainly possible then an another thing was about this losing the remote and trying to find it again. If you do have this sorta speech interface to it, you don't even need to find it. You just say you know, um whatever you whatever you want the remote for, you know to change the channel or to uh turn the T_V_ on and off, you just shout your command to it and it would do it for you if it's within you know, within hearing range. And uh you know it could be somewhere in the room y that you've no idea where it is and it would still do its job. Project Manager: Uh-huh. User Interface: That could also be built into the T_V_ though, which might make our remote control a bit obsolete. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: Well, hopefully we're uh we're ahead of the curve. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} It might do us out of a job. User Interface: Yeah, okay. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um {disfmarker} Okay. {vocalsound} I like the whole sort of remote feedback thing. Um so I think rather than {disfmarker} and that also kind of takes out the speech recognition in terms of the interference of it not working very well and things like that, User Interface: Mm. Industrial Designer: Hmm. Project Manager: so I th User Interface: And the expense. Project Manager: yeah and expense and the time. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So I think if we're going to go {disfmarker} well I mean like the thing about the {disfmarker} there's the problem with the T_F_T_ or the L_C_D_ kind of thing is if you're also wanting the the kind of uh organic globby sort of feeling to it then you might have trouble incorporating the screen. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Um, but I guess not I thin we'll just we'll just pretend that's not a problem. Um {vocalsound} {vocalsound} uh {vocalsound} and how are you about the glow in the dark material? Is that {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Um. User Interface: Maybe not even all of it'cause we said um colours and fashion w were important so maybe um just like a little l line that's kind of around the outside and then you can make the rest a different colour. Industrial Designer: Mm. Project Manager: Contrast contra well. Industrial Designer: Yeah, no th the material's cheap but it's just uh the the glow in the dark material needs some light to charge it you know, and then uh if you're, if you're sitting in the dark for too long it uh it won't glow any more. Project Manager: Yeah, okay. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So if it's dow it's d uh yeah. Or if it's down under the couch cushions Industrial Designer: Right. Project Manager: um which is where I usually find mine. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Right. Project Manager: Um {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Okay, well we can use {disfmarker} we can still use the glow in the dark as a gimmick essentially, User Interface: Yeah, Project Manager: um if we're gonna have to {disfmarker} User Interface:'cause what I thought, main {disfmarker} Project Manager: if we're gonna have the logo on as well, bright yellow logo in our our um slogan. User Interface: Slogan, yeah. Project Manager: Uh then you know they're gonna be fairly brightly coloured anyway, and we can have sort of a a a trimming as well, of the glow in the dark material, just as gimmickyness. User Interface: Right. Mm-hmm.'Cause yeah, that w more than finding it, that was more like you know if you're watching a film in the dark, you can um still see the remote control. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Alright, so n sorta if if if we're gon if we're gonna go with the idea of um {vocalsound} uh of feedback, sort of remote finder, then that kinda stuffs that one out then. User Interface: That was more of a a gimmick. Project Manager: Do you think? User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Uh it makes it fairly unnecessary then. User Interface: Yeah, unnecessary. Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Um, okay so scratch that. Uh so we've got do we want to go with the T_F_T_ idea or the {disfmarker} is that far too expensive? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Um yeah we're getting a lot of features now, I I think {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Well I mean I think I think the sort of find the finder things I mean it's uh I could probably write the circuit diagram for that myself. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Well, I think a consideration too is that these uh remotes get abused a lot, you know they get thrown around, User Interface: Mm. Industrial Designer: there's a good chance the the T_F_T_ screen would break or uh get damaged. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: They're pretty fragile. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: So is that one of our definite requirements that they wa that it needs a T_F_T_ screen? Project Manager: Um no, I mean {gap} that was going on ravs uh Raj's sort of um marketing research I guess. Um {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Uh {disfmarker} So we'll stick with sort of programmability um for the buttons that we do have. Um. {gap} So that's sort of included in your sub-module kind of stuff, um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah mm. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh {vocalsound} you were finding out about teletext. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: If you could find out that uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Totally, it takes cheap speech recognition, she {disfmarker} they wi Project Manager: Um I think we're gonna scratch the speech recognition as a bit of a Industrial Designer: Oh. Project Manager: um expensive, User Interface: Yeah you think so? Industrial Designer: Oh no it's it's much cheaper than the T_F_T_, it's just a microphone and some some integrated circuits. Project Manager: no? Oh right, okay. Industrial Designer: And it'd it'd be a small vocabulary speech recognition system, Project Manager: Is it not the circuits that cost {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: like a {disfmarker} Project Manager: Oh right, okay. Industrial Designer: {gap} Project Manager: Uh well that kind of takes back the R_F_ {vocalsound} the R_F_ remote sort of idea as well. User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um. {vocalsound} Five minutes. Okay. Decisions. Uh, votes, let's vote. Who wants T_F_T_? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: No-one does. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Excellent, so we'll go with speech recognition, yeah? Industrial Designer: Okay. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Mm-hmm, that's cool. Project Manager: Um, speech recognition, limited buttons, organic design. And what else was I thinking of that I haven't written down and therefore fallen out my head, User Interface: Um Project Manager: programmability. Marketing: Glow in dark. Project Manager: Uh {disfmarker} User Interface: if it's not too expensive s I think it's a good gimmick. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh o okay. Industrial Designer: Yeah. {gap} Project Manager: And also, integrating the, remember to integrate the logo and the s slogan. {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay, so. Um can you put all these reports in the project documents folder if they're not already in there as well. So, it just helps me summarize them. Industrial Designer: Yeah yeah. Marketing: Here? Sure. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: And um I'll put any {disfmarker} {gap} I'm I'm putting anything I do in there anyway, so uh {disfmarker} User Interface: And where is it sorry? Project Manager: Uh pro uh project documents. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} So it should be when you save Project Manager: On A_M_I_ scenario controller. Industrial Designer: on your desktop, so it goes save as, or {disfmarker} User Interface: Oh {gap}. Marketing: Uh it is in shared documents? Industrial Designer: And then uh hit that little folder up thing again. Project Manager: Where am I? Marketing: Projoct uh projector. Industrial Designer: Again. Project Manager: Project documents, yeah, it's on your desktop as well. Industrial Designer: All the way to the top, yeah that's up to desktop. Right and then project documents. User Interface: Okay, cool. Marketing: Hmm. It is not giving anything. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Shared documents. Project Manager: And I will tr {gap} getting strings of um information, I'll try and forward any specific to anybody in particular, as soon as I get them now, rather than {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {gap} Project Manager: I was about to sort of tell you about the changes before the meeting, and then the meeting turned up, so {disfmarker} {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: Mm. Did you get my email? Okay. Project Manager: I did {gap}. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Just making sure. Project Manager: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: So {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} What I thought as well about the material is um maybe not this kind of material, but maybe more like um this kind of rubbery material, it's a bit more bouncy, like you said they get chucked around a lot. Um, a bit more {vocalsound} durable and that can also be ergonomic Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: and it kind of feels a bit different from all the other remote controls. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. User Interface: The rubber rather than {disfmarker} Project Manager: More sort of um flesh-like than plasticky sort of. User Interface: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Wow. Marketing: Um but we have to take care like {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: But we have to take care of our children also if they {disfmarker} {vocalsound} means if children catch hold of your or if they chew it it shouldn't be too harmful. So, whatever material we use it should be {disfmarker} yeah. Project Manager: Oh no, ethics, {vocalsound} that's gonna cost us money. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: So {vocalsound} we have to safety point of view also, we have to take care. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay, safety. Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: Oh I think wi with the more organic shape of it it won't be as {disfmarker} it won't as have many sharp corners as that, so that's something good, um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: I dunno, I mean {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: We could go comp yeah. Project Manager: It sme {vocalsound} smells good for children. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: We could go completely out of the box and make the thing a big red ball foam ball. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: And it's got the thing on the inside. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: And there's no buttons at all, it's always on, and just yell at it, and it works. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} That sounds, User Interface: That's a good idea. Industrial Designer: And then ch children will love it. {vocalsound} Project Manager: yeah it's gonna have to be it's gonna be have a big yellow foam ball, yeah, sorry. User Interface: {vocalsound} Interesting. Industrial Designer: Oh yellow, yellow ball. Right. User Interface: Yeah, d with the colour, um does it have to be all yellow, do you know? Project Manager: Please God no. Um. Well, I wouldn't th I mean, User Interface: No. Project Manager: my reaction to an all-yellow remote control wouldn't be anything other than horror, so I think just having it User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Small logo with the like a small yellow strip or y yellow {gap} with the logo in it. Project Manager: surrounding the logo. User Interface: Having a little bit. Okay cool. Mm mm. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Mm-hmm, okay. Project Manager: And I'll see if I can argue with boss about putting the {disfmarker} User Interface: Cool. Project Manager: what was it? We put {vocalsound} we put fashion into {disfmarker} Whoops, it's not working. Can't believe I've forgotten it {gap}. We put the fashion in electronics. {vocalsound} I bet that'll catch on well. User Interface: Oh yeah, that's a good one that. Yeah so. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay, any last Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Twelve thirty. Project Manager: worries, queries? Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} S s {vocalsound} Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: I know what you're thinking. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay then, lunchtime, yay. Marketing: That's good. Project Manager: Okay, that felt a bit more like a {disfmarker} something with order and and reason to it than the last one. Marketing: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Project Manager: This is quite fun actually. User Interface: Wow. Industrial Designer: Mm. User Interface: Has anybo oh. Project Manager: I really don't {disfmarker} User Interface: Has anybody pressed okay, it vibrates. It's pretty cool. Project Manager: Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: Yep. Marketing: Check here. Project Manager: Wow you've {gap} your first page. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Yeah I've been using up the pages. Project Manager: I was just writing really big. {vocalsound} {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, got small writing. I don't wanna waste it. Project Manager: I've finished the meeting now. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Another questionnaire. Project Manager: Oh, everybody needs k questionnaire. Marketing: {vocalsound}

Although there were two options: a light inside the remotes and glow in the dark material, the team finally agreed to choose the later one because it was much cheaper. Besides, it was believed that combined with speech recognition, it would be easy for people to locate their remote controls, thus enhancing the overall market sales.

tr-sq-1226

tr-sq-1226_0

What were the difficulties in applying speech recognition in the new remote controls? Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um {vocalsound} minutes from the last meeting which were essentially that we uh had decided on roles for each of you, however, um there are some changes that I've got from on high User Interface: Okay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: that um are a bit uh {disfmarker} well w what I didn't actually realise it was that the uh {vocalsound} this is for a specific television. User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: So the all in one idea goes out the window. And {vocalsound} they require that the uh User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: actually I'll get to that at the end {gap} point number four, um we'll get what you've got and then we can see what we can adapt from it. So um, presentations, were you {disfmarker} anybody got, raring to go? Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. Project Manager: Raring to go? Okay. Good stuff. Mm. Marketing: Um. So how {disfmarker} Project Manager: Oh I need to plug you in. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: S {gap} Project Manager: Just about. User Interface: Wow. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: It's a inspired design. Marketing: {gap} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Sh do you want me to hold it? Project Manager: Uh there we go, just screw'em on in. Gonna have to swap them round so {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} So, after that? Project Manager: now, it was function F_ eight. Marketing: F_ eight. {vocalsound} f oh sorry F_ eight. Project Manager: That's the wee blue one. Blue one F_ eight. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: Should do it, good one. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. Uh, me again, Rajan the Marketing Expert. Uh, as we have decided in the last meeting that I have to find out, sorry, yeah sure. Project Manager: Hold on, sorry. {gap} and if you just click that it'll go ahead, one at a time. Marketing: Yeah, yeah. Uh actually, sorry I have to see the other {gap}, sorry. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Sorry, uh. Marketing: Yeah, thank you. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Uh, yes, I have to look at the uh market potential for this product, uh, like consumer likings and everything, what is the potential for this product and are we able to achieve our a net profit or our aims or not? Then {disfmarker} Project Manager: P press F_ five to start it first. Marketing: Sorry. Okay. Yeah, I can, okay. Industrial Designer: Hmm. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Jesus. Marketing: Uh then uh the methodology I adopted to find out all this was market survey. A a detailed market survey on consumers was done to find out their likings and dislikings, what they prefer what they not prefer, w what problems they do encounter in all this type of things. And what we got was, we found that {disfmarker} if you {disfmarker} uh, what they th what problems they are having with different uh remote controls available in the market. Seventy five percent of users they do find it that the remote controls available in the market are ugly. They are not so good looking. So, we have to put stress on this, uh we have to take care of this fact also like our design, uh should be appropriate, should be good looking for the consumers. And yes that's wi uh this will definitely, this can definitely put uh uh enhance our sales. Uh and even uh the good thing about this is that eighty percent of users they are willing to pay high uh pay more for this uh good looking remote controls also. So even if the available market goes for the available {disfmarker} uh even if the market goes for the available remote control is less even then we can sell it at twenty five Euros, which maybe which may seem quite high but if our looks are are if the re remote control we design have a good better uh better look uh designs, then we can hope that consumers will prefer these g remote controls. Project Manager: Excellent. Marketing: Then {disfmarker} {gap} And the second thing, some some companies they think that they should have more and more functions of the users uh or in their remote controls, but rather than those having more functions in the remote controls we should emphasise what actually consumer want, what they operate, rather than making it too complicated. Because mostly it has been found that fifty percent of the users they use only ten percent of the buttons, so there is no point of having ninety percent buttons making the remote controls too bulky, too complicated too expensive a because I think I believe that technology is useful only if uh the consumers they want to use it. Otherwise there is no point of having all this type of things. So this will not only reduce the cost of our remote controls but it will increase our profit also. So we have to take care of this fact also. Then. Uh it was function I want to go to. Project Manager: Oh you wanna go back? Just escape. Marketing: Uh, escape, okay thank you. Then if we look at this slide, Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: uh these are in your shared documents, you can see, Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: like {disfmarker} Uh, sorry. User Interface: So, sorry {disfmarker} I was just gonna say, what was the question for this? Or is {disfmarker} are you coming on to that? Marketing: Ah t look all the market potential, what uh how we should design consu our remote controls, what they should be there so as to en enhance our profit, enhance our sales. User Interface: Okay. So these percentages are are what? Marketing: Yeah, these are different age group persons like uh sorry, I can open it in another way. Project Manager: Okay. Speech recognition. Marketing: Uh, yes. If we look at the costs whether the consumers they are willing to uh pay more for speech recognition in a remote control or not, we can find that they up to a thirty five years age group we have a very good disliking for this uh this uh point, like for speech recognition in a remote control. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: So we can emphasise on this point also like, because it will definitely enhance our sales in this ag in this particular age group from uh fifteen to thirty five, User Interface: Hmm. Marketing: and I uh and I think that most of the users of the rem uh T_V_ are belong to this age group. So we should look {disfmarker} Project Manager: Hmm. We're als we we're looking at who buys it as well. {gap} Marketing: Yeah. We can look at that that factor also, so yes. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Uh, which I think the twenty five to thirty five is uh usual, sort of. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Mm, mm. Marketing: So, and {disfmarker} {gap} Project Manager: {gap} Marketing: {vocalsound} And then {disfmarker} Project Manager: Fifteen to twe Marketing: Yes. I think so. Uh if we look at this data how how uh h how what are the problems the consumers are facing with the existing remote controls in the market. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: They find that thirt uh thirty five percent uh thirty four percent of the consumers they find too difficult to operate a remote control. So it should be in such a way that it should be easy to learn how to operate these remote controls and we should provide pl uh spe uh proper manuals for its use also so as that people {disfmarker} consumers could easily learn. They need not to have any, much technical knowledge to see uh to know how to operate these remote controls. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: So this is also a very goo uh major factor to loo uh take into consideration to enhance our profits and sales. So um this is all about Project Manager: Okay. {vocalsound} Marketing: uh market potential by me. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Uh, yes, th thank you. Project Manager: Okay, thank you. Um, {vocalsound} follow on with Helen? Yeah please. User Interface: Yep, sure, that's cool, um {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah we have to take that {gap} out. Project Manager: Oh, so we do yeah. Marketing: Sorry. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Fun and games. Marketing: Sorry. Project Manager: Don't know if the cable's gonna be long enough. Marketing: Uh sorry, I have {gap}. {vocalsound} Project Manager: I think I just kicked over whatever it runs on underneath as well. Marketing: Brian, this one also I {gap}. Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Thank you very much Brian. User Interface: I can turn my computer quickly if that's okay. Marketing: If you want me to help, yeah. User Interface: Um, yep. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Okay, and then what do I press, F_ eight? Marketing: Uh F_ eight. Function F_ eight. Project Manager: Function F_ eight. User Interface: Oh right. Marketing: Mm s. User Interface: Okay, cool. Marketing: It's not coming. Function F_ eight, okay. User Interface: Oh. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. No signal. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Computer. Project Manager: Hmm. Marketing: Computer adjusting, yeah. Project Manager: There you go. User Interface: Okay. Cool. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Okay and then how do I press the the big one, to get it on to the big {disfmarker} Project Manager: Uh F_ five. User Interface: F_ five and I press that again to get it off as well do I? Marketing: Escape. Project Manager: Um, F_ five and escape'll bring it back and just uh the left button for advancing. User Interface: Okay, so um I'm the interface design designer, User Interface Designer sorry, uh I'm concerned with um w what effect the apparatus should have on the user and um I'm I'm also {disfmarker} I want to point out that our motto, put the fashion in electronics, Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: so obviously we as a company we want to make our products trendy and fashionable, it's a big concern of ours. Okay, and how do I press n just the next button? Project Manager: Uh just a left uh User Interface: The arrow? Okay. Project Manager: left mouse button. User Interface: So um I looked at existing designs and also um the information that Raj gave us was very useful about what people like, what people dislike. Um and what people {disfmarker} fashionable, because we said people between twenty five and thirty five were the main um buyers of of our T_V_ I think. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Okay. User Interface: So um what they like and what they find fashionable. Project Manager:'Kay. User Interface: {vocalsound} And ergonomics, we said um, I don't know I haven't actually been able to do any of this myself, Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: but um maybe that comes up, I don't know. Project Manager: That can come under Arlo as well. User Interface: And the findings, well the basic {disfmarker} that was the basic function to send messages to the television set. Project Manager: Uh. User Interface: That's what people want to do. Um, so they need to be included, um, but I've got some pictures here of some leading ones. I don't know how to get to them, Project Manager: Uh if you if you escape then you can see your bar. User Interface: {vocalsound} do I press F_ five is it? {gap} escape? Oh okay, cool. I haven't got my glasses on so I hope it's this one. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh okay. User Interface: These are two leading um remote controls at the moment. Project Manager:'Kay. User Interface: You know they're grey, they've I mean this one's got loads of buttons, it's hard to tell from here what they actually do, Project Manager: {gap} {vocalsound} User Interface: and they don't look very exciting at all. Um, personally I prefer this one just because it's looks easier use, it's a bit more sleek with more of this silver stuff, Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: um, but there you go, that's what we're up against, Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: and I think we can do much better than that. Project Manager: {vocalsound} We hope so. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Of course. {vocalsound} User Interface: Um hang on. F_ five, Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: okay, sorry. Personal preferences. Um, well I think we need to l I think the ergonomics is quite um important, um Project Manager: {gap} Yeah, particularly if we've uh there was a bit in Raj's about R_S_I_ and things as well. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Uh-huh. And um I thought not too edgy and like a box, more kind of hand-held more um {vocalsound} not as uh computery and Project Manager: Organic {vocalsound}. User Interface: or organic, yeah, more organic shape I think. {vocalsound} Um simple designs, like the last one we just saw, not too many buttons and as Raj pointed out, only ten percent {disfmarker} fifty percent of people only use ten percent of the buttons, Marketing: {gap} Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: so I think what we can miss out on the buttons we can make up for in design and and how nice it looks. Project Manager: Sales, {gap}. Okay. User Interface: Um, hand-held and portable I think is portamint is important because T_F_T_ have just um released um I think is it a a remote control for presentations or uh and a big seven inch big screen, anyway, so um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah it's like a, yeah. {vocalsound} It's {gap}. {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, no seven inches isn't that big but um anyway um so hand-held and portable and uh m I thought about other functions for T_V_ but as you pointed out people don't actually want that, Project Manager: Right. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: And also the company want to keep it stuck to the T_V_ for uh to keep down the production time. User Interface: so maybe we forget about that. It's for one T_V_ oh right okay, sure. And so the last thing I thought w which I quickly mentioned in the other one was maybe a bit of a gimmick to set us apart from other people, like glow-in-the-dark Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Exactly. Yeah. User Interface: um which {vocalsound} does already e exist but it's not very widely used I don't think. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Easy finder with the a whistle function or something, Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: or rechargeable station because it's a pain when you run out of batteries. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: And I think that, yep, that's it. Project Manager: That's cool. Industrial Designer: So uh, I noticed your talk about speech recognition and whistling, User Interface: Okay? Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: and uh I was just curious to know, have we done any research into how many people can whistle? Um, or if {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: is that a function we want in the remote? Project Manager: Um, do you have trouble whistling? User Interface: Um, I haven't been able to {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I don't, but I I know a lot of people do right. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Really? Industrial Designer: Yeah it just Project Manager: Ooh. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {disfmarker} I mean it has to be a certain kind of whistle too, right? Project Manager: Yeah, I suppose that's true. User Interface: Mm-hmm, yeah Project Manager: Well I suppo uh you could y you could have the User Interface: or some sort of voice {disfmarker} Project Manager: you could have the basically um instead of a whistle if it's got the voice recognition you could have it just, you know, where are you? {gap}. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} That's costly though. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Um a much easier thing is just any loud noise like clapping um, shouting, you know, Project Manager: Hmm. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: uh and then, what would the response be? It beeps back at you or something? Project Manager: Sounds good. User Interface: Yeah, something. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Well, uh let me set this up. So I plug it in, press F_ five? Function F_ five? Project Manager: Function F_ eight for the um the uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Or function F_ eight? Okay. User Interface: Oh you need to twiddle the thingamibobsy thing. Industrial Designer: Okay. I think it's {vocalsound} uh just to lock it in. It's got it. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Okay. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Um. {vocalsound} So as the Industrial Designer my job is to take an input from you guys, User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: um so it's good you went first, Project Manager: Alright. Industrial Designer: and I jotted down some notes as to what are the b needs and uh what kind of novel features we can add to differentiate our product from the others. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Let's remember that. Industrial Designer: Um so Raj told us that uh consumers are willing to spend more for fancy products, and um he also mentioned that uh the current products don't always match users'operating behaviour. Um, a lot of the buttons aren't used, and uh {vocalsound} he mentioned that they're not fun to use. And uh a novel feature which uh we just brought up was this this automatic speech recognition feature or noise detection feature for when you lose the remote, Project Manager: {gap} Industrial Designer: there could be a little microphone on it, and any noise over a certain threshold um it'll pick up as a a distress signal um from you and it'll beep back and say you know oh here I am or something of this sort. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. But sure surely that would have to be um sort of specific rather than above a threshold'cause if you had a loud movie on you're likely to get it beeping back at you. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Oh yeah, yeah, that's true. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Well maybe you could have a um hmm {vocalsound} tha that would be a consideration to take into account yes. Um. Project Manager: Sorry I didn't mean to derail you there. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yeah well tha that's uh for later down the road um, and then as for the user interface it should be trendy, um {vocalsound} and not computery, User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: right, so more low tech and not too many buttons. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: So I took these all into consideration and also I have some limitations from the boss. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Right um, and practical limitations which I kinda threw out the window. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: And so I did a little research and unfortunately all I had to work on was our uh our corporate archives of the great products we've made before, User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: which include, you know, um space craft, coffee makers, and bullet trains {disfmarker} Or uh or a high speed train. Project Manager: Ah is that what that is? {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Right and having personally worked with all these products uh I have a great deal of experience with uh with industrial design of these. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well that's cool. If you if you can build space craft you'll have no problem with a remote control, yeah. Industrial Designer: Right. So, User Interface: Yeah sure. Industrial Designer: I figured, just put'em all together. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: You got a a caffeine powered space shuttle train transport to your T_V_, and um User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: as for the user interface problem, you know, too many buttons. Give it one button User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: and and it's a {disfmarker} you know, for the the cowboy in all of us {gap} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {disfmarker} I I'm not quite sure what the the function is there but {disfmarker} Project Manager: Right okay. {vocalsound} User Interface: Well I like that design. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yeah it's a g I mean you could have a you know a {disfmarker} Project Manager: Is that just switches on the speech recognition and it's entirely speech operated, is it? Industrial Designer: Right. So I think I I missed the budget thing, Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: it was fifty million Euros? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: And we gotta sell twenty five of them? Right. {vocalsound} Okay. {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, not a problem. Marketing: Fifty million was uh prof Project Manager: Ah now it's fif fifty million Euros we've gotta uh we've g {vocalsound} Marketing: As a profit. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Oh okay, so I I mixed those numbers. Project Manager: gotta make profit, so we're making that at twelve and a half Euros a time. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Okay. Well I guess more realistically then, we need a product that's got some kinda nifty outer casing, cheap plastic uh, you know, um that should be just like uh a tenth of the price maybe or less. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: An energy source which'd probably just be uh your regular batteries {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: um, we don't wanna have it {disfmarker} Project Manager: Would it be possible to have the rechargeable idea? Is that is that gonna mark up a lot? Industrial Designer: Uh. User Interface: Or a little base station or something, {gap}. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah, yeah, we could do that too. Um, I hadn't thought of that. Yeah. User Interface: {vocalsound} That might cost more though,'cause obviously with batteries we don't need to provide, well we provide the first batteries, but it's more, it's {disfmarker} that's cheaper to just provide batteries. Project Manager: Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: Right. Project Manager: I mean if you think about these base stations now it's essentially just a a lead with a sort of self connecting brake in it, User Interface: A battery in it, kinda. Project Manager: so I don't think it'd up up the price that much. Industrial Designer: Right, so so {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: the unirs the user interface User Interface: {vocalsound} Okay. Industrial Designer: uh the canonical user interface for these would be just a bunch of buttons, but since we're a cutting edge company, we uh of course will have alternatives like uh speech recognition, whistling recognition and rocket power Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: behind our product. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Um and lastly the transmission interface is uh, just some engineering thing you don't have to worry about. Project Manager: Okay. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Um so here's you know, a great schematic that my uh apprentice designer gave me. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Um as you can see the the remote control have parts and those parts look like that and um {vocalsound} you know it's got a little operating procedure that looks something like that. {vocalsound} And I suppose you all know how it works because we've all used it and we wouldn't be in a company designing remote controls if we didn't know what they were so {disfmarker} uh personal preferences, I think uh programmable options which um just require a small amount of memory, uh non volatile memory, just um so the user can put in their favourite channels and maybe their preferred volume settings so that when they turn it on it's not blasting. User Interface: Mm. Mm that's a good idea actually I like the programmable options. Marketing: Yeah, me too. Industrial Designer: Oh okay. And the uh, the bells and whistles that we mentioned you know, they take more budgeting, um more technical uh expenditure of effort Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: and it's also much more likely to not work if if we add these bells and whistles. Project Manager: Right. User Interface: Mm'kay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: That's all I got. Project Manager:'Kay, thank you very much, um I'll take that back. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Ooh that's tight. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Right, also so um a notice I got not very long before the meeting, so didn't manage to forward it on to you, it is {disfmarker} let's see, I'll find it myself, um {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Ta Industrial Designer: Okay, I don't think we need to screw it in. Project Manager: nah. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Just push it. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: We had that um to dis-include teletext um because it's become outdated, and everybody uses the internet anyway. Um, {vocalsound} dunno what Oracle would have to say with that but never mind. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Um it's only for the television, which I'm presuming means it's for a specific television, User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: and um instead of colours and sorta colour options, they want corporate colour and slogan somehow implemented in the new design. User Interface: Corporate colour. Project Manager: Yellow. User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: Yellow. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} I presume. Um, everything, all their sort of uh you know the uh corporate website and everything's yellow. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: And the logo uh the sort of slogan we put the fa fashion in electronics uh {disfmarker} I don't know exactly how sort of incorpor I mean, I guess if you're going for a sort of globular shape you could kind of have it working its way round it or something. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Uh, where am I? {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay, so, we have to decide on which functions we're going to actually have. User Interface:'Kay. Project Manager: Uh, {vocalsound} now, we had as listed options we had Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: speech recognition potentially, flat screen interface, L_C_D_ interface um we also want to limit the number of buttons so we'll pretty much take that one as read. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Project Manager: We'll use the the basic functions for a television. No teletext. Um {vocalsound} okay hold on. User Interface: Although the the danger with that is, it could look a bit cheap. Project Manager: Not enough buttons you mean? User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: So sorta strike a balance between a a few and a {disfmarker} User Interface: Well {disfmarker} Project Manager: or it looks like we're just cutting on the um {disfmarker} User Interface: Mm. On the number of buttons, kind of functions and stuff. Project Manager: I do however have this from over my head, that they don't want teletext on it. User Interface: Mm-hmm, okay. Okay, cool. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh maybe Raj you could find out what people would think about that, or maybe they'll send Marketing: About cost. Project Manager: some information about that, about um what people, whether people would require um teletext in a remote {disfmarker} teletext option in a remote control. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: {gap} {vocalsound} Okay um {gap}. So uh I take it your position Arlo is that the bells and whistles we've gotta come up with the {disfmarker} a gimmick but not too complicated a gimmick. Industrial Designer: Yeah yeah. Project Manager: Um so I mean a a the sort of inkling I'm getting from little bits of um web chatter that I'm getting sent is that they're quite interested in a T_F_T_ display, interactive display. However that does sound a bit like the more complicated design that rav uh sorry Raj um {vocalsound} said people didn't like. Although I guess if there's a sort of {disfmarker} User Interface: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Project Manager: If you think about standard interfaces that people use already, sort of Windows-style drop down menus or whatever, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: I think maybe that's a bit, going a bit far User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: but you know like in a basic sense that you could have your basic selection of buttons, and if you hit a sort of menu at the top you have um {vocalsound} it goes to a different selection of buttons, so it sorta keeps it simple. User Interface: Yeah. Okay. Project Manager: Um glow in the dark, is that sort of with a light inside it or is it sort of glow in the dark material? User Interface: Um {disfmarker} Marketing: Uh. User Interface: Glow in the dark material I was thinking. Project Manager: Okay. So {disfmarker} Marketing: I {disfmarker} User Interface: Um, so I I guess that would be cheaper than a light I think. Marketing: Uh may I say something about {gap}? Project Manager: Yeah. Yeah. Marketing: Uh actually I think it's really really very important point uh as if we look at the market because people mor fifty percent people they find that the remote controls are often lost somewhere in the remote, in the room. But {disfmarker} User Interface: Often lost s was that, Marketing: yeah are lost Project Manager: Lost, yeah. User Interface: yeah. Marketing: and means they forget where they have kept the remote control last time. But if we add speech recognition as well as glow in the dark then both these factors will help their locating the remote control, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Marketing: like if they come and speak something at the remote control uh replies to something something and it glows in the dark. Both these factors uh both these points will help them to locate the where they have kept this remote control, Project Manager: That's cool. User Interface: Mm-hmm, Marketing: and this will definitely enhance our uh market sales, Project Manager: That's cool. User Interface: mm-hmm. Marketing: so we should take it into consideration also. Project Manager: Okay, cool. Industrial Designer: Well hmm. Project Manager: Um speech recognition I take it {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Oh it's {disfmarker} Project Manager: I don't, I've {disfmarker} I know of no products um that use speech recognition well. Industrial Designer: They're act there there was a remote control that came out two years ago that had a {disfmarker} some basic speech recognition on it. You could programme it with your channels and then you say you know like uh B_B_C_ one and it goes to that channel. Project Manager: Really? Industrial Designer: Yeah, it didn't work very well though because of this noise interference problem. They mentioned you know if the television says you are listening to B_B_C_ one {gap}. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Yeah, or a yeah an advert an advert for B_B_C_ two on B_B_C_ one'll switch the channel for you kinda thing. User Interface: {gap} Industrial Designer: Right, right, and so there was a lot of this, you'd be watching the T_V_ and then all of a sudden it'd it'd pick up a noise and turn it off or you know or turn the volume off or something, Project Manager: {vocalsound} Mm. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: but if you can work around that that noise problem {disfmarker} User Interface:'Kay. Project Manager: Uh-huh. User Interface: Well what about {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: this might get a bit too expensive actually, but what about um something that's built into the T_V_ um that you can press and it'll send out a little signal you know like the ones that we can't hear or {vocalsound} something Project Manager: Ah, that's a good idea. Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: um that that will activate the remote control starts to beep. Industrial Designer: Right. Project Manager: So like a kind of backwards remote from the telly. {vocalsound} User Interface: If you find if y Industrial Designer: Right and then it would do just you know, uh subtractive kind of cancellation of the noise. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: What you could do then would be you have uh {vocalsound} a remote controlled by the T_V_ speaker, or not a remo I'm sorry, a microphone by the T_V_ speaker and a transmitter there that sends back to your remote,'cause you can't um expect uh the the television manufacturers to to put that feature into their T_V_s. User Interface: Mm. Yeah, that's the only thing, yeah. Industrial Designer: But yeah, then you have like the little se separate module by the T_V_ speaker Project Manager: That we should just stick on, yeah. Industrial Designer: which {disfmarker} User Interface: That comes with our remote control. Industrial Designer: Right, and then the remote control would know um what's being produced by the television. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: And that's a sort of basic R_F_ kind of frequency so it'll be cheap. Industrial Designer: Right, right. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Right, right. Um. {vocalsound} Yeah that's certainly possible then an another thing was about this losing the remote and trying to find it again. If you do have this sorta speech interface to it, you don't even need to find it. You just say you know, um whatever you whatever you want the remote for, you know to change the channel or to uh turn the T_V_ on and off, you just shout your command to it and it would do it for you if it's within you know, within hearing range. And uh you know it could be somewhere in the room y that you've no idea where it is and it would still do its job. Project Manager: Uh-huh. User Interface: That could also be built into the T_V_ though, which might make our remote control a bit obsolete. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: Well, hopefully we're uh we're ahead of the curve. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} It might do us out of a job. User Interface: Yeah, okay. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um {disfmarker} Okay. {vocalsound} I like the whole sort of remote feedback thing. Um so I think rather than {disfmarker} and that also kind of takes out the speech recognition in terms of the interference of it not working very well and things like that, User Interface: Mm. Industrial Designer: Hmm. Project Manager: so I th User Interface: And the expense. Project Manager: yeah and expense and the time. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So I think if we're going to go {disfmarker} well I mean like the thing about the {disfmarker} there's the problem with the T_F_T_ or the L_C_D_ kind of thing is if you're also wanting the the kind of uh organic globby sort of feeling to it then you might have trouble incorporating the screen. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Um, but I guess not I thin we'll just we'll just pretend that's not a problem. Um {vocalsound} {vocalsound} uh {vocalsound} and how are you about the glow in the dark material? Is that {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Um. User Interface: Maybe not even all of it'cause we said um colours and fashion w were important so maybe um just like a little l line that's kind of around the outside and then you can make the rest a different colour. Industrial Designer: Mm. Project Manager: Contrast contra well. Industrial Designer: Yeah, no th the material's cheap but it's just uh the the glow in the dark material needs some light to charge it you know, and then uh if you're, if you're sitting in the dark for too long it uh it won't glow any more. Project Manager: Yeah, okay. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So if it's dow it's d uh yeah. Or if it's down under the couch cushions Industrial Designer: Right. Project Manager: um which is where I usually find mine. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Right. Project Manager: Um {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Okay, well we can use {disfmarker} we can still use the glow in the dark as a gimmick essentially, User Interface: Yeah, Project Manager: um if we're gonna have to {disfmarker} User Interface:'cause what I thought, main {disfmarker} Project Manager: if we're gonna have the logo on as well, bright yellow logo in our our um slogan. User Interface: Slogan, yeah. Project Manager: Uh then you know they're gonna be fairly brightly coloured anyway, and we can have sort of a a a trimming as well, of the glow in the dark material, just as gimmickyness. User Interface: Right. Mm-hmm.'Cause yeah, that w more than finding it, that was more like you know if you're watching a film in the dark, you can um still see the remote control. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Alright, so n sorta if if if we're gon if we're gonna go with the idea of um {vocalsound} uh of feedback, sort of remote finder, then that kinda stuffs that one out then. User Interface: That was more of a a gimmick. Project Manager: Do you think? User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Uh it makes it fairly unnecessary then. User Interface: Yeah, unnecessary. Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Um, okay so scratch that. Uh so we've got do we want to go with the T_F_T_ idea or the {disfmarker} is that far too expensive? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Um yeah we're getting a lot of features now, I I think {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Well I mean I think I think the sort of find the finder things I mean it's uh I could probably write the circuit diagram for that myself. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Well, I think a consideration too is that these uh remotes get abused a lot, you know they get thrown around, User Interface: Mm. Industrial Designer: there's a good chance the the T_F_T_ screen would break or uh get damaged. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: They're pretty fragile. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: So is that one of our definite requirements that they wa that it needs a T_F_T_ screen? Project Manager: Um no, I mean {gap} that was going on ravs uh Raj's sort of um marketing research I guess. Um {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Uh {disfmarker} So we'll stick with sort of programmability um for the buttons that we do have. Um. {gap} So that's sort of included in your sub-module kind of stuff, um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah mm. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh {vocalsound} you were finding out about teletext. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: If you could find out that uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Totally, it takes cheap speech recognition, she {disfmarker} they wi Project Manager: Um I think we're gonna scratch the speech recognition as a bit of a Industrial Designer: Oh. Project Manager: um expensive, User Interface: Yeah you think so? Industrial Designer: Oh no it's it's much cheaper than the T_F_T_, it's just a microphone and some some integrated circuits. Project Manager: no? Oh right, okay. Industrial Designer: And it'd it'd be a small vocabulary speech recognition system, Project Manager: Is it not the circuits that cost {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: like a {disfmarker} Project Manager: Oh right, okay. Industrial Designer: {gap} Project Manager: Uh well that kind of takes back the R_F_ {vocalsound} the R_F_ remote sort of idea as well. User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um. {vocalsound} Five minutes. Okay. Decisions. Uh, votes, let's vote. Who wants T_F_T_? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: No-one does. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Excellent, so we'll go with speech recognition, yeah? Industrial Designer: Okay. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Mm-hmm, that's cool. Project Manager: Um, speech recognition, limited buttons, organic design. And what else was I thinking of that I haven't written down and therefore fallen out my head, User Interface: Um Project Manager: programmability. Marketing: Glow in dark. Project Manager: Uh {disfmarker} User Interface: if it's not too expensive s I think it's a good gimmick. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh o okay. Industrial Designer: Yeah. {gap} Project Manager: And also, integrating the, remember to integrate the logo and the s slogan. {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay, so. Um can you put all these reports in the project documents folder if they're not already in there as well. So, it just helps me summarize them. Industrial Designer: Yeah yeah. Marketing: Here? Sure. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: And um I'll put any {disfmarker} {gap} I'm I'm putting anything I do in there anyway, so uh {disfmarker} User Interface: And where is it sorry? Project Manager: Uh pro uh project documents. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} So it should be when you save Project Manager: On A_M_I_ scenario controller. Industrial Designer: on your desktop, so it goes save as, or {disfmarker} User Interface: Oh {gap}. Marketing: Uh it is in shared documents? Industrial Designer: And then uh hit that little folder up thing again. Project Manager: Where am I? Marketing: Projoct uh projector. Industrial Designer: Again. Project Manager: Project documents, yeah, it's on your desktop as well. Industrial Designer: All the way to the top, yeah that's up to desktop. Right and then project documents. User Interface: Okay, cool. Marketing: Hmm. It is not giving anything. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Shared documents. Project Manager: And I will tr {gap} getting strings of um information, I'll try and forward any specific to anybody in particular, as soon as I get them now, rather than {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {gap} Project Manager: I was about to sort of tell you about the changes before the meeting, and then the meeting turned up, so {disfmarker} {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: Mm. Did you get my email? Okay. Project Manager: I did {gap}. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Just making sure. Project Manager: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: So {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} What I thought as well about the material is um maybe not this kind of material, but maybe more like um this kind of rubbery material, it's a bit more bouncy, like you said they get chucked around a lot. Um, a bit more {vocalsound} durable and that can also be ergonomic Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: and it kind of feels a bit different from all the other remote controls. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. User Interface: The rubber rather than {disfmarker} Project Manager: More sort of um flesh-like than plasticky sort of. User Interface: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Wow. Marketing: Um but we have to take care like {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: But we have to take care of our children also if they {disfmarker} {vocalsound} means if children catch hold of your or if they chew it it shouldn't be too harmful. So, whatever material we use it should be {disfmarker} yeah. Project Manager: Oh no, ethics, {vocalsound} that's gonna cost us money. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: So {vocalsound} we have to safety point of view also, we have to take care. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay, safety. Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: Oh I think wi with the more organic shape of it it won't be as {disfmarker} it won't as have many sharp corners as that, so that's something good, um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: I dunno, I mean {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: We could go comp yeah. Project Manager: It sme {vocalsound} smells good for children. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: We could go completely out of the box and make the thing a big red ball foam ball. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: And it's got the thing on the inside. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: And there's no buttons at all, it's always on, and just yell at it, and it works. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} That sounds, User Interface: That's a good idea. Industrial Designer: And then ch children will love it. {vocalsound} Project Manager: yeah it's gonna have to be it's gonna be have a big yellow foam ball, yeah, sorry. User Interface: {vocalsound} Interesting. Industrial Designer: Oh yellow, yellow ball. Right. User Interface: Yeah, d with the colour, um does it have to be all yellow, do you know? Project Manager: Please God no. Um. Well, I wouldn't th I mean, User Interface: No. Project Manager: my reaction to an all-yellow remote control wouldn't be anything other than horror, so I think just having it User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Small logo with the like a small yellow strip or y yellow {gap} with the logo in it. Project Manager: surrounding the logo. User Interface: Having a little bit. Okay cool. Mm mm. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Mm-hmm, okay. Project Manager: And I'll see if I can argue with boss about putting the {disfmarker} User Interface: Cool. Project Manager: what was it? We put {vocalsound} we put fashion into {disfmarker} Whoops, it's not working. Can't believe I've forgotten it {gap}. We put the fashion in electronics. {vocalsound} I bet that'll catch on well. User Interface: Oh yeah, that's a good one that. Yeah so. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay, any last Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Twelve thirty. Project Manager: worries, queries? Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} S s {vocalsound} Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: I know what you're thinking. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay then, lunchtime, yay. Marketing: That's good. Project Manager: Okay, that felt a bit more like a {disfmarker} something with order and and reason to it than the last one. Marketing: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Project Manager: This is quite fun actually. User Interface: Wow. Industrial Designer: Mm. User Interface: Has anybo oh. Project Manager: I really don't {disfmarker} User Interface: Has anybody pressed okay, it vibrates. It's pretty cool. Project Manager: Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: Yep. Marketing: Check here. Project Manager: Wow you've {gap} your first page. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Yeah I've been using up the pages. Project Manager: I was just writing really big. {vocalsound} {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, got small writing. I don't wanna waste it. Project Manager: I've finished the meeting now. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Another questionnaire. Project Manager: Oh, everybody needs k questionnaire. Marketing: {vocalsound}

According to the Project Manager, it was hard to have speech recognition in remotes and no products in the market now used this function well. There was mainly one reason: the noise interference problem, which was too expensive to solve. Luckily, the User Interface came up with an idea to have something built into the TV that people could press and then it would send out a little signal. The Industrial Designer agreed and proposed to have a microphone by the TV speaker and a transmitter there to send back to their remotes. Such design was subtractive cancellation of the noise.

tr-gq-1227

tr-gq-1227_0

Summarize the whole meeting. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um {vocalsound} minutes from the last meeting which were essentially that we uh had decided on roles for each of you, however, um there are some changes that I've got from on high User Interface: Okay. {vocalsound} Project Manager: that um are a bit uh {disfmarker} well w what I didn't actually realise it was that the uh {vocalsound} this is for a specific television. User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: So the all in one idea goes out the window. And {vocalsound} they require that the uh User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: actually I'll get to that at the end {gap} point number four, um we'll get what you've got and then we can see what we can adapt from it. So um, presentations, were you {disfmarker} anybody got, raring to go? Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. Project Manager: Raring to go? Okay. Good stuff. Mm. Marketing: Um. So how {disfmarker} Project Manager: Oh I need to plug you in. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: S {gap} Project Manager: Just about. User Interface: Wow. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: It's a inspired design. Marketing: {gap} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: Sh do you want me to hold it? Project Manager: Uh there we go, just screw'em on in. Gonna have to swap them round so {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} So, after that? Project Manager: now, it was function F_ eight. Marketing: F_ eight. {vocalsound} f oh sorry F_ eight. Project Manager: That's the wee blue one. Blue one F_ eight. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: Should do it, good one. Marketing: Yeah. Yeah. Uh, me again, Rajan the Marketing Expert. Uh, as we have decided in the last meeting that I have to find out, sorry, yeah sure. Project Manager: Hold on, sorry. {gap} and if you just click that it'll go ahead, one at a time. Marketing: Yeah, yeah. Uh actually, sorry I have to see the other {gap}, sorry. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Sorry, uh. Marketing: Yeah, thank you. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Uh, yes, I have to look at the uh market potential for this product, uh, like consumer likings and everything, what is the potential for this product and are we able to achieve our a net profit or our aims or not? Then {disfmarker} Project Manager: P press F_ five to start it first. Marketing: Sorry. Okay. Yeah, I can, okay. Industrial Designer: Hmm. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Jesus. Marketing: Uh then uh the methodology I adopted to find out all this was market survey. A a detailed market survey on consumers was done to find out their likings and dislikings, what they prefer what they not prefer, w what problems they do encounter in all this type of things. And what we got was, we found that {disfmarker} if you {disfmarker} uh, what they th what problems they are having with different uh remote controls available in the market. Seventy five percent of users they do find it that the remote controls available in the market are ugly. They are not so good looking. So, we have to put stress on this, uh we have to take care of this fact also like our design, uh should be appropriate, should be good looking for the consumers. And yes that's wi uh this will definitely, this can definitely put uh uh enhance our sales. Uh and even uh the good thing about this is that eighty percent of users they are willing to pay high uh pay more for this uh good looking remote controls also. So even if the available market goes for the available {disfmarker} uh even if the market goes for the available remote control is less even then we can sell it at twenty five Euros, which maybe which may seem quite high but if our looks are are if the re remote control we design have a good better uh better look uh designs, then we can hope that consumers will prefer these g remote controls. Project Manager: Excellent. Marketing: Then {disfmarker} {gap} And the second thing, some some companies they think that they should have more and more functions of the users uh or in their remote controls, but rather than those having more functions in the remote controls we should emphasise what actually consumer want, what they operate, rather than making it too complicated. Because mostly it has been found that fifty percent of the users they use only ten percent of the buttons, so there is no point of having ninety percent buttons making the remote controls too bulky, too complicated too expensive a because I think I believe that technology is useful only if uh the consumers they want to use it. Otherwise there is no point of having all this type of things. So this will not only reduce the cost of our remote controls but it will increase our profit also. So we have to take care of this fact also. Then. Uh it was function I want to go to. Project Manager: Oh you wanna go back? Just escape. Marketing: Uh, escape, okay thank you. Then if we look at this slide, Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: uh these are in your shared documents, you can see, Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: like {disfmarker} Uh, sorry. User Interface: So, sorry {disfmarker} I was just gonna say, what was the question for this? Or is {disfmarker} are you coming on to that? Marketing: Ah t look all the market potential, what uh how we should design consu our remote controls, what they should be there so as to en enhance our profit, enhance our sales. User Interface: Okay. So these percentages are are what? Marketing: Yeah, these are different age group persons like uh sorry, I can open it in another way. Project Manager: Okay. Speech recognition. Marketing: Uh, yes. If we look at the costs whether the consumers they are willing to uh pay more for speech recognition in a remote control or not, we can find that they up to a thirty five years age group we have a very good disliking for this uh this uh point, like for speech recognition in a remote control. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: So we can emphasise on this point also like, because it will definitely enhance our sales in this ag in this particular age group from uh fifteen to thirty five, User Interface: Hmm. Marketing: and I uh and I think that most of the users of the rem uh T_V_ are belong to this age group. So we should look {disfmarker} Project Manager: Hmm. We're als we we're looking at who buys it as well. {gap} Marketing: Yeah. We can look at that that factor also, so yes. {vocalsound} Project Manager: Uh, which I think the twenty five to thirty five is uh usual, sort of. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Mm, mm. Marketing: So, and {disfmarker} {gap} Project Manager: {gap} Marketing: {vocalsound} And then {disfmarker} Project Manager: Fifteen to twe Marketing: Yes. I think so. Uh if we look at this data how how uh h how what are the problems the consumers are facing with the existing remote controls in the market. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: They find that thirt uh thirty five percent uh thirty four percent of the consumers they find too difficult to operate a remote control. So it should be in such a way that it should be easy to learn how to operate these remote controls and we should provide pl uh spe uh proper manuals for its use also so as that people {disfmarker} consumers could easily learn. They need not to have any, much technical knowledge to see uh to know how to operate these remote controls. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: So this is also a very goo uh major factor to loo uh take into consideration to enhance our profits and sales. So um this is all about Project Manager: Okay. {vocalsound} Marketing: uh market potential by me. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Uh, yes, th thank you. Project Manager: Okay, thank you. Um, {vocalsound} follow on with Helen? Yeah please. User Interface: Yep, sure, that's cool, um {disfmarker} Marketing: Yeah we have to take that {gap} out. Project Manager: Oh, so we do yeah. Marketing: Sorry. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Fun and games. Marketing: Sorry. Project Manager: Don't know if the cable's gonna be long enough. Marketing: Uh sorry, I have {gap}. {vocalsound} Project Manager: I think I just kicked over whatever it runs on underneath as well. Marketing: Brian, this one also I {gap}. Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Marketing: Thank you very much Brian. User Interface: I can turn my computer quickly if that's okay. Marketing: If you want me to help, yeah. User Interface: Um, yep. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Okay, and then what do I press, F_ eight? Marketing: Uh F_ eight. Function F_ eight. Project Manager: Function F_ eight. User Interface: Oh right. Marketing: Mm s. User Interface: Okay, cool. Marketing: It's not coming. Function F_ eight, okay. User Interface: Oh. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. No signal. {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} Computer. Project Manager: Hmm. Marketing: Computer adjusting, yeah. Project Manager: There you go. User Interface: Okay. Cool. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Okay and then how do I press the the big one, to get it on to the big {disfmarker} Project Manager: Uh F_ five. User Interface: F_ five and I press that again to get it off as well do I? Marketing: Escape. Project Manager: Um, F_ five and escape'll bring it back and just uh the left button for advancing. User Interface: Okay, so um I'm the interface design designer, User Interface Designer sorry, uh I'm concerned with um w what effect the apparatus should have on the user and um I'm I'm also {disfmarker} I want to point out that our motto, put the fashion in electronics, Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: so obviously we as a company we want to make our products trendy and fashionable, it's a big concern of ours. Okay, and how do I press n just the next button? Project Manager: Uh just a left uh User Interface: The arrow? Okay. Project Manager: left mouse button. User Interface: So um I looked at existing designs and also um the information that Raj gave us was very useful about what people like, what people dislike. Um and what people {disfmarker} fashionable, because we said people between twenty five and thirty five were the main um buyers of of our T_V_ I think. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Okay. User Interface: So um what they like and what they find fashionable. Project Manager:'Kay. User Interface: {vocalsound} And ergonomics, we said um, I don't know I haven't actually been able to do any of this myself, Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: but um maybe that comes up, I don't know. Project Manager: That can come under Arlo as well. User Interface: And the findings, well the basic {disfmarker} that was the basic function to send messages to the television set. Project Manager: Uh. User Interface: That's what people want to do. Um, so they need to be included, um, but I've got some pictures here of some leading ones. I don't know how to get to them, Project Manager: Uh if you if you escape then you can see your bar. User Interface: {vocalsound} do I press F_ five is it? {gap} escape? Oh okay, cool. I haven't got my glasses on so I hope it's this one. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh okay. User Interface: These are two leading um remote controls at the moment. Project Manager:'Kay. User Interface: You know they're grey, they've I mean this one's got loads of buttons, it's hard to tell from here what they actually do, Project Manager: {gap} {vocalsound} User Interface: and they don't look very exciting at all. Um, personally I prefer this one just because it's looks easier use, it's a bit more sleek with more of this silver stuff, Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: um, but there you go, that's what we're up against, Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: and I think we can do much better than that. Project Manager: {vocalsound} We hope so. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Of course. {vocalsound} User Interface: Um hang on. F_ five, Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: okay, sorry. Personal preferences. Um, well I think we need to l I think the ergonomics is quite um important, um Project Manager: {gap} Yeah, particularly if we've uh there was a bit in Raj's about R_S_I_ and things as well. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Uh-huh. And um I thought not too edgy and like a box, more kind of hand-held more um {vocalsound} not as uh computery and Project Manager: Organic {vocalsound}. User Interface: or organic, yeah, more organic shape I think. {vocalsound} Um simple designs, like the last one we just saw, not too many buttons and as Raj pointed out, only ten percent {disfmarker} fifty percent of people only use ten percent of the buttons, Marketing: {gap} Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: so I think what we can miss out on the buttons we can make up for in design and and how nice it looks. Project Manager: Sales, {gap}. Okay. User Interface: Um, hand-held and portable I think is portamint is important because T_F_T_ have just um released um I think is it a a remote control for presentations or uh and a big seven inch big screen, anyway, so um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah it's like a, yeah. {vocalsound} It's {gap}. {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, no seven inches isn't that big but um anyway um so hand-held and portable and uh m I thought about other functions for T_V_ but as you pointed out people don't actually want that, Project Manager: Right. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: And also the company want to keep it stuck to the T_V_ for uh to keep down the production time. User Interface: so maybe we forget about that. It's for one T_V_ oh right okay, sure. And so the last thing I thought w which I quickly mentioned in the other one was maybe a bit of a gimmick to set us apart from other people, like glow-in-the-dark Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Exactly. Yeah. User Interface: um which {vocalsound} does already e exist but it's not very widely used I don't think. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Easy finder with the a whistle function or something, Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: or rechargeable station because it's a pain when you run out of batteries. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: And I think that, yep, that's it. Project Manager: That's cool. Industrial Designer: So uh, I noticed your talk about speech recognition and whistling, User Interface: Okay? Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: and uh I was just curious to know, have we done any research into how many people can whistle? Um, or if {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: is that a function we want in the remote? Project Manager: Um, do you have trouble whistling? User Interface: Um, I haven't been able to {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: I don't, but I I know a lot of people do right. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Really? Industrial Designer: Yeah it just Project Manager: Ooh. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {disfmarker} I mean it has to be a certain kind of whistle too, right? Project Manager: Yeah, I suppose that's true. User Interface: Mm-hmm, yeah Project Manager: Well I suppo uh you could y you could have the User Interface: or some sort of voice {disfmarker} Project Manager: you could have the basically um instead of a whistle if it's got the voice recognition you could have it just, you know, where are you? {gap}. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} That's costly though. User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Um a much easier thing is just any loud noise like clapping um, shouting, you know, Project Manager: Hmm. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: uh and then, what would the response be? It beeps back at you or something? Project Manager: Sounds good. User Interface: Yeah, something. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Okay. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Well, uh let me set this up. So I plug it in, press F_ five? Function F_ five? Project Manager: Function F_ eight for the um the uh {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Or function F_ eight? Okay. User Interface: Oh you need to twiddle the thingamibobsy thing. Industrial Designer: Okay. I think it's {vocalsound} uh just to lock it in. It's got it. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Okay. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Um. {vocalsound} So as the Industrial Designer my job is to take an input from you guys, User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: um so it's good you went first, Project Manager: Alright. Industrial Designer: and I jotted down some notes as to what are the b needs and uh what kind of novel features we can add to differentiate our product from the others. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Let's remember that. Industrial Designer: Um so Raj told us that uh consumers are willing to spend more for fancy products, and um he also mentioned that uh the current products don't always match users'operating behaviour. Um, a lot of the buttons aren't used, and uh {vocalsound} he mentioned that they're not fun to use. And uh a novel feature which uh we just brought up was this this automatic speech recognition feature or noise detection feature for when you lose the remote, Project Manager: {gap} Industrial Designer: there could be a little microphone on it, and any noise over a certain threshold um it'll pick up as a a distress signal um from you and it'll beep back and say you know oh here I am or something of this sort. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. But sure surely that would have to be um sort of specific rather than above a threshold'cause if you had a loud movie on you're likely to get it beeping back at you. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Oh yeah, yeah, that's true. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Well maybe you could have a um hmm {vocalsound} tha that would be a consideration to take into account yes. Um. Project Manager: Sorry I didn't mean to derail you there. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yeah well tha that's uh for later down the road um, and then as for the user interface it should be trendy, um {vocalsound} and not computery, User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: right, so more low tech and not too many buttons. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: So I took these all into consideration and also I have some limitations from the boss. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Right um, and practical limitations which I kinda threw out the window. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: And so I did a little research and unfortunately all I had to work on was our uh our corporate archives of the great products we've made before, User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: which include, you know, um space craft, coffee makers, and bullet trains {disfmarker} Or uh or a high speed train. Project Manager: Ah is that what that is? {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Right and having personally worked with all these products uh I have a great deal of experience with uh with industrial design of these. User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Well that's cool. If you if you can build space craft you'll have no problem with a remote control, yeah. Industrial Designer: Right. So, User Interface: Yeah sure. Industrial Designer: I figured, just put'em all together. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: You got a a caffeine powered space shuttle train transport to your T_V_, and um User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Hmm. Industrial Designer: as for the user interface problem, you know, too many buttons. Give it one button User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: and and it's a {disfmarker} you know, for the the cowboy in all of us {gap} Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {disfmarker} I I'm not quite sure what the the function is there but {disfmarker} Project Manager: Right okay. {vocalsound} User Interface: Well I like that design. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Yeah it's a g I mean you could have a you know a {disfmarker} Project Manager: Is that just switches on the speech recognition and it's entirely speech operated, is it? Industrial Designer: Right. So I think I I missed the budget thing, Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: it was fifty million Euros? User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: And we gotta sell twenty five of them? Right. {vocalsound} Okay. {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, not a problem. Marketing: Fifty million was uh prof Project Manager: Ah now it's fif fifty million Euros we've gotta uh we've g {vocalsound} Marketing: As a profit. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Oh okay, so I I mixed those numbers. Project Manager: gotta make profit, so we're making that at twelve and a half Euros a time. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Okay. Well I guess more realistically then, we need a product that's got some kinda nifty outer casing, cheap plastic uh, you know, um that should be just like uh a tenth of the price maybe or less. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: An energy source which'd probably just be uh your regular batteries {vocalsound} Project Manager: Okay. Industrial Designer: um, we don't wanna have it {disfmarker} Project Manager: Would it be possible to have the rechargeable idea? Is that is that gonna mark up a lot? Industrial Designer: Uh. User Interface: Or a little base station or something, {gap}. Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah, yeah, we could do that too. Um, I hadn't thought of that. Yeah. User Interface: {vocalsound} That might cost more though,'cause obviously with batteries we don't need to provide, well we provide the first batteries, but it's more, it's {disfmarker} that's cheaper to just provide batteries. Project Manager: Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: Right. Project Manager: I mean if you think about these base stations now it's essentially just a a lead with a sort of self connecting brake in it, User Interface: A battery in it, kinda. Project Manager: so I don't think it'd up up the price that much. Industrial Designer: Right, so so {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: the unirs the user interface User Interface: {vocalsound} Okay. Industrial Designer: uh the canonical user interface for these would be just a bunch of buttons, but since we're a cutting edge company, we uh of course will have alternatives like uh speech recognition, whistling recognition and rocket power Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: behind our product. User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Um and lastly the transmission interface is uh, just some engineering thing you don't have to worry about. Project Manager: Okay. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Um so here's you know, a great schematic that my uh apprentice designer gave me. Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Um as you can see the the remote control have parts and those parts look like that and um {vocalsound} you know it's got a little operating procedure that looks something like that. {vocalsound} And I suppose you all know how it works because we've all used it and we wouldn't be in a company designing remote controls if we didn't know what they were so {disfmarker} uh personal preferences, I think uh programmable options which um just require a small amount of memory, uh non volatile memory, just um so the user can put in their favourite channels and maybe their preferred volume settings so that when they turn it on it's not blasting. User Interface: Mm. Mm that's a good idea actually I like the programmable options. Marketing: Yeah, me too. Industrial Designer: Oh okay. And the uh, the bells and whistles that we mentioned you know, they take more budgeting, um more technical uh expenditure of effort Project Manager: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: and it's also much more likely to not work if if we add these bells and whistles. Project Manager: Right. User Interface: Mm'kay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Yeah. Industrial Designer: That's all I got. Project Manager:'Kay, thank you very much, um I'll take that back. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Ooh that's tight. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Right, also so um a notice I got not very long before the meeting, so didn't manage to forward it on to you, it is {disfmarker} let's see, I'll find it myself, um {disfmarker} {vocalsound} Ta Industrial Designer: Okay, I don't think we need to screw it in. Project Manager: nah. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Just push it. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: We had that um to dis-include teletext um because it's become outdated, and everybody uses the internet anyway. Um, {vocalsound} dunno what Oracle would have to say with that but never mind. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Um it's only for the television, which I'm presuming means it's for a specific television, User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: and um instead of colours and sorta colour options, they want corporate colour and slogan somehow implemented in the new design. User Interface: Corporate colour. Project Manager: Yellow. User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: Yellow. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} I presume. Um, everything, all their sort of uh you know the uh corporate website and everything's yellow. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: And the logo uh the sort of slogan we put the fa fashion in electronics uh {disfmarker} I don't know exactly how sort of incorpor I mean, I guess if you're going for a sort of globular shape you could kind of have it working its way round it or something. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: Uh, where am I? {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay, so, we have to decide on which functions we're going to actually have. User Interface:'Kay. Project Manager: Uh, {vocalsound} now, we had as listed options we had Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: speech recognition potentially, flat screen interface, L_C_D_ interface um we also want to limit the number of buttons so we'll pretty much take that one as read. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Project Manager: We'll use the the basic functions for a television. No teletext. Um {vocalsound} okay hold on. User Interface: Although the the danger with that is, it could look a bit cheap. Project Manager: Not enough buttons you mean? User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: So sorta strike a balance between a a few and a {disfmarker} User Interface: Well {disfmarker} Project Manager: or it looks like we're just cutting on the um {disfmarker} User Interface: Mm. On the number of buttons, kind of functions and stuff. Project Manager: I do however have this from over my head, that they don't want teletext on it. User Interface: Mm-hmm, okay. Okay, cool. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh maybe Raj you could find out what people would think about that, or maybe they'll send Marketing: About cost. Project Manager: some information about that, about um what people, whether people would require um teletext in a remote {disfmarker} teletext option in a remote control. Marketing: Okay. Project Manager: {gap} {vocalsound} Okay um {gap}. So uh I take it your position Arlo is that the bells and whistles we've gotta come up with the {disfmarker} a gimmick but not too complicated a gimmick. Industrial Designer: Yeah yeah. Project Manager: Um so I mean a a the sort of inkling I'm getting from little bits of um web chatter that I'm getting sent is that they're quite interested in a T_F_T_ display, interactive display. However that does sound a bit like the more complicated design that rav uh sorry Raj um {vocalsound} said people didn't like. Although I guess if there's a sort of {disfmarker} User Interface: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Project Manager: If you think about standard interfaces that people use already, sort of Windows-style drop down menus or whatever, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: I think maybe that's a bit, going a bit far User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: but you know like in a basic sense that you could have your basic selection of buttons, and if you hit a sort of menu at the top you have um {vocalsound} it goes to a different selection of buttons, so it sorta keeps it simple. User Interface: Yeah. Okay. Project Manager: Um glow in the dark, is that sort of with a light inside it or is it sort of glow in the dark material? User Interface: Um {disfmarker} Marketing: Uh. User Interface: Glow in the dark material I was thinking. Project Manager: Okay. So {disfmarker} Marketing: I {disfmarker} User Interface: Um, so I I guess that would be cheaper than a light I think. Marketing: Uh may I say something about {gap}? Project Manager: Yeah. Yeah. Marketing: Uh actually I think it's really really very important point uh as if we look at the market because people mor fifty percent people they find that the remote controls are often lost somewhere in the remote, in the room. But {disfmarker} User Interface: Often lost s was that, Marketing: yeah are lost Project Manager: Lost, yeah. User Interface: yeah. Marketing: and means they forget where they have kept the remote control last time. But if we add speech recognition as well as glow in the dark then both these factors will help their locating the remote control, User Interface: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Marketing: like if they come and speak something at the remote control uh replies to something something and it glows in the dark. Both these factors uh both these points will help them to locate the where they have kept this remote control, Project Manager: That's cool. User Interface: Mm-hmm, Marketing: and this will definitely enhance our uh market sales, Project Manager: That's cool. User Interface: mm-hmm. Marketing: so we should take it into consideration also. Project Manager: Okay, cool. Industrial Designer: Well hmm. Project Manager: Um speech recognition I take it {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: Oh it's {disfmarker} Project Manager: I don't, I've {disfmarker} I know of no products um that use speech recognition well. Industrial Designer: They're act there there was a remote control that came out two years ago that had a {disfmarker} some basic speech recognition on it. You could programme it with your channels and then you say you know like uh B_B_C_ one and it goes to that channel. Project Manager: Really? Industrial Designer: Yeah, it didn't work very well though because of this noise interference problem. They mentioned you know if the television says you are listening to B_B_C_ one {gap}. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Yeah, or a yeah an advert an advert for B_B_C_ two on B_B_C_ one'll switch the channel for you kinda thing. User Interface: {gap} Industrial Designer: Right, right, and so there was a lot of this, you'd be watching the T_V_ and then all of a sudden it'd it'd pick up a noise and turn it off or you know or turn the volume off or something, Project Manager: {vocalsound} Mm. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: but if you can work around that that noise problem {disfmarker} User Interface:'Kay. Project Manager: Uh-huh. User Interface: Well what about {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: this might get a bit too expensive actually, but what about um something that's built into the T_V_ um that you can press and it'll send out a little signal you know like the ones that we can't hear or {vocalsound} something Project Manager: Ah, that's a good idea. Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: um that that will activate the remote control starts to beep. Industrial Designer: Right. Project Manager: So like a kind of backwards remote from the telly. {vocalsound} User Interface: If you find if y Industrial Designer: Right and then it would do just you know, uh subtractive kind of cancellation of the noise. User Interface: Yeah. Industrial Designer: What you could do then would be you have uh {vocalsound} a remote controlled by the T_V_ speaker, or not a remo I'm sorry, a microphone by the T_V_ speaker and a transmitter there that sends back to your remote,'cause you can't um expect uh the the television manufacturers to to put that feature into their T_V_s. User Interface: Mm. Yeah, that's the only thing, yeah. Industrial Designer: But yeah, then you have like the little se separate module by the T_V_ speaker Project Manager: That we should just stick on, yeah. Industrial Designer: which {disfmarker} User Interface: That comes with our remote control. Industrial Designer: Right, and then the remote control would know um what's being produced by the television. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Yeah. Project Manager: And that's a sort of basic R_F_ kind of frequency so it'll be cheap. Industrial Designer: Right, right. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Right, right. Um. {vocalsound} Yeah that's certainly possible then an another thing was about this losing the remote and trying to find it again. If you do have this sorta speech interface to it, you don't even need to find it. You just say you know, um whatever you whatever you want the remote for, you know to change the channel or to uh turn the T_V_ on and off, you just shout your command to it and it would do it for you if it's within you know, within hearing range. And uh you know it could be somewhere in the room y that you've no idea where it is and it would still do its job. Project Manager: Uh-huh. User Interface: That could also be built into the T_V_ though, which might make our remote control a bit obsolete. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: Well, hopefully we're uh we're ahead of the curve. {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} It might do us out of a job. User Interface: Yeah, okay. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um {disfmarker} Okay. {vocalsound} I like the whole sort of remote feedback thing. Um so I think rather than {disfmarker} and that also kind of takes out the speech recognition in terms of the interference of it not working very well and things like that, User Interface: Mm. Industrial Designer: Hmm. Project Manager: so I th User Interface: And the expense. Project Manager: yeah and expense and the time. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So I think if we're going to go {disfmarker} well I mean like the thing about the {disfmarker} there's the problem with the T_F_T_ or the L_C_D_ kind of thing is if you're also wanting the the kind of uh organic globby sort of feeling to it then you might have trouble incorporating the screen. User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Um, but I guess not I thin we'll just we'll just pretend that's not a problem. Um {vocalsound} {vocalsound} uh {vocalsound} and how are you about the glow in the dark material? Is that {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Um. User Interface: Maybe not even all of it'cause we said um colours and fashion w were important so maybe um just like a little l line that's kind of around the outside and then you can make the rest a different colour. Industrial Designer: Mm. Project Manager: Contrast contra well. Industrial Designer: Yeah, no th the material's cheap but it's just uh the the glow in the dark material needs some light to charge it you know, and then uh if you're, if you're sitting in the dark for too long it uh it won't glow any more. Project Manager: Yeah, okay. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: So if it's dow it's d uh yeah. Or if it's down under the couch cushions Industrial Designer: Right. Project Manager: um which is where I usually find mine. User Interface: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Right. Project Manager: Um {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Okay, well we can use {disfmarker} we can still use the glow in the dark as a gimmick essentially, User Interface: Yeah, Project Manager: um if we're gonna have to {disfmarker} User Interface:'cause what I thought, main {disfmarker} Project Manager: if we're gonna have the logo on as well, bright yellow logo in our our um slogan. User Interface: Slogan, yeah. Project Manager: Uh then you know they're gonna be fairly brightly coloured anyway, and we can have sort of a a a trimming as well, of the glow in the dark material, just as gimmickyness. User Interface: Right. Mm-hmm.'Cause yeah, that w more than finding it, that was more like you know if you're watching a film in the dark, you can um still see the remote control. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Alright, so n sorta if if if we're gon if we're gonna go with the idea of um {vocalsound} uh of feedback, sort of remote finder, then that kinda stuffs that one out then. User Interface: That was more of a a gimmick. Project Manager: Do you think? User Interface: Mm. Project Manager: Uh it makes it fairly unnecessary then. User Interface: Yeah, unnecessary. Yeah. Project Manager: Okay. Um, okay so scratch that. Uh so we've got do we want to go with the T_F_T_ idea or the {disfmarker} is that far too expensive? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Um yeah we're getting a lot of features now, I I think {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Well I mean I think I think the sort of find the finder things I mean it's uh I could probably write the circuit diagram for that myself. Industrial Designer: Yeah. Project Manager: Um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Well, I think a consideration too is that these uh remotes get abused a lot, you know they get thrown around, User Interface: Mm. Industrial Designer: there's a good chance the the T_F_T_ screen would break or uh get damaged. Project Manager: Mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: They're pretty fragile. Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: So is that one of our definite requirements that they wa that it needs a T_F_T_ screen? Project Manager: Um no, I mean {gap} that was going on ravs uh Raj's sort of um marketing research I guess. Um {vocalsound} {disfmarker} Uh {disfmarker} So we'll stick with sort of programmability um for the buttons that we do have. Um. {gap} So that's sort of included in your sub-module kind of stuff, um {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: Yeah mm. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh {vocalsound} you were finding out about teletext. Marketing: Yeah. Project Manager: If you could find out that uh {disfmarker} Marketing: Totally, it takes cheap speech recognition, she {disfmarker} they wi Project Manager: Um I think we're gonna scratch the speech recognition as a bit of a Industrial Designer: Oh. Project Manager: um expensive, User Interface: Yeah you think so? Industrial Designer: Oh no it's it's much cheaper than the T_F_T_, it's just a microphone and some some integrated circuits. Project Manager: no? Oh right, okay. Industrial Designer: And it'd it'd be a small vocabulary speech recognition system, Project Manager: Is it not the circuits that cost {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: like a {disfmarker} Project Manager: Oh right, okay. Industrial Designer: {gap} Project Manager: Uh well that kind of takes back the R_F_ {vocalsound} the R_F_ remote sort of idea as well. User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Um. {vocalsound} Five minutes. Okay. Decisions. Uh, votes, let's vote. Who wants T_F_T_? Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: No-one does. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: Excellent, so we'll go with speech recognition, yeah? Industrial Designer: Okay. Marketing: Yeah. User Interface: Mm-hmm, that's cool. Project Manager: Um, speech recognition, limited buttons, organic design. And what else was I thinking of that I haven't written down and therefore fallen out my head, User Interface: Um Project Manager: programmability. Marketing: Glow in dark. Project Manager: Uh {disfmarker} User Interface: if it's not too expensive s I think it's a good gimmick. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Uh o okay. Industrial Designer: Yeah. {gap} Project Manager: And also, integrating the, remember to integrate the logo and the s slogan. {vocalsound} User Interface: Mm-hmm. Project Manager: Okay, so. Um can you put all these reports in the project documents folder if they're not already in there as well. So, it just helps me summarize them. Industrial Designer: Yeah yeah. Marketing: Here? Sure. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: And um I'll put any {disfmarker} {gap} I'm I'm putting anything I do in there anyway, so uh {disfmarker} User Interface: And where is it sorry? Project Manager: Uh pro uh project documents. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} So it should be when you save Project Manager: On A_M_I_ scenario controller. Industrial Designer: on your desktop, so it goes save as, or {disfmarker} User Interface: Oh {gap}. Marketing: Uh it is in shared documents? Industrial Designer: And then uh hit that little folder up thing again. Project Manager: Where am I? Marketing: Projoct uh projector. Industrial Designer: Again. Project Manager: Project documents, yeah, it's on your desktop as well. Industrial Designer: All the way to the top, yeah that's up to desktop. Right and then project documents. User Interface: Okay, cool. Marketing: Hmm. It is not giving anything. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Marketing: Shared documents. Project Manager: And I will tr {gap} getting strings of um information, I'll try and forward any specific to anybody in particular, as soon as I get them now, rather than {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: {gap} Project Manager: I was about to sort of tell you about the changes before the meeting, and then the meeting turned up, so {disfmarker} {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay. Industrial Designer: Mm. Did you get my email? Okay. Project Manager: I did {gap}. {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Just making sure. Project Manager: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} User Interface: Okay. Project Manager: So {disfmarker} User Interface: {vocalsound} What I thought as well about the material is um maybe not this kind of material, but maybe more like um this kind of rubbery material, it's a bit more bouncy, like you said they get chucked around a lot. Um, a bit more {vocalsound} durable and that can also be ergonomic Project Manager: Okay. User Interface: and it kind of feels a bit different from all the other remote controls. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Yeah. Industrial Designer: Yeah. User Interface: The rubber rather than {disfmarker} Project Manager: More sort of um flesh-like than plasticky sort of. User Interface: Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Industrial Designer: Wow. Marketing: Um but we have to take care like {disfmarker} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: But we have to take care of our children also if they {disfmarker} {vocalsound} means if children catch hold of your or if they chew it it shouldn't be too harmful. So, whatever material we use it should be {disfmarker} yeah. Project Manager: Oh no, ethics, {vocalsound} that's gonna cost us money. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Marketing: So {vocalsound} we have to safety point of view also, we have to take care. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay, safety. Industrial Designer: {gap} User Interface: Oh I think wi with the more organic shape of it it won't be as {disfmarker} it won't as have many sharp corners as that, so that's something good, um {disfmarker} Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: I dunno, I mean {disfmarker} Industrial Designer: We could go comp yeah. Project Manager: It sme {vocalsound} smells good for children. {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: We could go completely out of the box and make the thing a big red ball foam ball. Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: And it's got the thing on the inside. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Industrial Designer: And there's no buttons at all, it's always on, and just yell at it, and it works. Marketing: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} That sounds, User Interface: That's a good idea. Industrial Designer: And then ch children will love it. {vocalsound} Project Manager: yeah it's gonna have to be it's gonna be have a big yellow foam ball, yeah, sorry. User Interface: {vocalsound} Interesting. Industrial Designer: Oh yellow, yellow ball. Right. User Interface: Yeah, d with the colour, um does it have to be all yellow, do you know? Project Manager: Please God no. Um. Well, I wouldn't th I mean, User Interface: No. Project Manager: my reaction to an all-yellow remote control wouldn't be anything other than horror, so I think just having it User Interface: Yeah. Marketing: Small logo with the like a small yellow strip or y yellow {gap} with the logo in it. Project Manager: surrounding the logo. User Interface: Having a little bit. Okay cool. Mm mm. Project Manager: Yeah. User Interface: Mm-hmm, okay. Project Manager: And I'll see if I can argue with boss about putting the {disfmarker} User Interface: Cool. Project Manager: what was it? We put {vocalsound} we put fashion into {disfmarker} Whoops, it's not working. Can't believe I've forgotten it {gap}. We put the fashion in electronics. {vocalsound} I bet that'll catch on well. User Interface: Oh yeah, that's a good one that. Yeah so. Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay, any last Marketing: Yeah. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Twelve thirty. Project Manager: worries, queries? Okay. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} S s {vocalsound} Marketing: Hmm. Project Manager: I know what you're thinking. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Marketing: {vocalsound} User Interface: {vocalsound} Project Manager: {vocalsound} Okay then, lunchtime, yay. Marketing: That's good. Project Manager: Okay, that felt a bit more like a {disfmarker} something with order and and reason to it than the last one. Marketing: {vocalsound} {vocalsound} Project Manager: This is quite fun actually. User Interface: Wow. Industrial Designer: Mm. User Interface: Has anybo oh. Project Manager: I really don't {disfmarker} User Interface: Has anybody pressed okay, it vibrates. It's pretty cool. Project Manager: Yeah, yeah. Industrial Designer: Yep. Marketing: Check here. Project Manager: Wow you've {gap} your first page. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Yeah I've been using up the pages. Project Manager: I was just writing really big. {vocalsound} {vocalsound} User Interface: Yeah, got small writing. I don't wanna waste it. Project Manager: I've finished the meeting now. Industrial Designer: {vocalsound} Another questionnaire. Project Manager: Oh, everybody needs k questionnaire. Marketing: {vocalsound}

This meeting took up the discussion from the last one. They specified the ideas brought up last time and adapted them according to the market potentials and budget limits. Marketing first reported their findings of market potentials. Altogether, they summarized four conclusions: (1) consumers were willing to spend more for fancy products (2) the current products didn't always match users'operating behaviours (3) a lot of buttons weren't used (4) they were not fun to use. Then, the team came up with a novel feature of automatic speech recognition to retrieve the remotes. In the latter half of the meeting, the team decided that the following functions would be for the new remotes: speech recognition, limited buttons, organic design, programmability, glowing in dark, and integrating the logo and slogan.

tr-sq-1228

tr-sq-1228_0

Summarize the discussion about schools causing concern with questions from Irranca-Davies. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received apologies for absence from Janet Finch-Saunders, and also from Dawn Bowden, and I'd like to welcome Huw Irranca-Davies, who is substituting for Dawn Bowden. Can I ask Members if there are any declarations of interest, please? No. Okay. We'll move on, then, to our evidence session for our inquiry on school improvement and raising standards. I'd like to welcome Kirsty Williams AM, Minister for Education, and Steve Davies, director of education. Thank you both for attending and for your detailed paper in advance of the meeting. We've got a lot of ground to cover, so we'll go straight into questions, if that's okay. If I can just start by asking you: to what extent is the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development still involved in the Welsh Government's school improvement journey? Kirsty Williams AM: First of all, can I thank the committee for their invitation this morning, and their interest in this particular area? As you will be aware, on coming into office, the director and I agreed to ask the OECD to do a rapid review of the state of Welsh education at the beginning of this Assembly term. They did that, and the feedback from that work informed the publication and content of the national mission. I was very clear in the national mission that I would invite the OECD back to review our progress against that mission, and that has happened in the tail end of last year, and the OECD will publish their latest report on Welsh education next month now, in March. So, the expectation is that the report will be published on 23 March, and my intention is to make a statement to the Chamber on 24 March. The nature of that review is part of our ongoing development of self-evaluation. So, we talk a lot about self-evaluation in the school system. Actually, the continuing relationship with OECD is about self-evaluation of the entirety of the system and Welsh Government. We don't want to accept our own orthodoxy and just be in a bubble where we are constantly listening to ourselves and those people who might want to agree with us or tell us what we want to hear. So, the OECD is our best attempt of having some external verification of where we are. That's a risk for Ministers and for Government, because we want them to give an honest evaluation of where we are, but that's a really important tool for me, to ensure that we're constantly testing ourselves. The nature of that review is that the OECD were able to talk to whoever they felt it was important to talk to, so that included practitioners on the ground, elements of the middle tier, as well as Welsh Government. And I know, Chair--I hope you'll be pleased to hear this--that the reports of this committee have formed parts of their review, looking at how the Senedd itself has contributed to and has held the Government to account. So, as I said, we expect our report to be published towards the end of March. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you, Minister. Can I ask about the powers under the School Standards and Organisation (Wales) Act 2013, to ask you to tell us about the use of those powers either by Welsh Government or by local authorities, and how effective you feel that legislation has been? Kirsty Williams AM: Okay. Well, as you'll be aware, local authorities have quite extensive powers of intervention in schools if they feel that is necessary. If I'm honest, I think there's a mixed picture, with some local authorities using those powers not on a regular basis, but obviously demonstrating a willingness to use those powers. There are other local authorities who don't seem to have used them. Since that legislation came into being, there have been a number of reasons, because of course a local authority has to give a reason for using those powers of intervention. They usually focus on standards, but sometimes they focus on a breakdown in governance arrangements, perhaps, or a failure or a breakdown in financial management. So, sometimes the budgetary issues trigger an intervention power. And the types of interventions that have been used have included, in some cases, appointing additional governors to governing bodies, or suspending a school's delegated budget so the local authority takes on, then, financial control of that particular school, or sometimes applying to the Welsh Government to entirely replace a governing body and establish an intervention board. So, if I can give you an example of where that's been used and has been successful, in Flintshire. They applied to Welsh Government for two interim executive boards, in Sir Richard Gwyn Catholic High School and in Ysgol Trefonnen. They applied to us. Those governing bodies were dissolved. The IEBs were put in place and both of those schools, which had been in special measures, moved quite rapidly, actually, out of special measures. Perhaps the most recent example of this is one that the Chair will know very well in her own constituency of Torfaen, in Cwmbran High School, where Torfaen has intervened in that case. The Welsh Government has not used those powers to date. My expectation always is that local authorities should be the first port of call, and I would encourage--and we always encourage--local authorities to take a proactive approach to intervention and to use those powers. But it's my belief that it is they who are best placed initially to do that. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you, Minister. Can I ask, then, about the national evaluation and improvement resource and how significant a role that will play in the raising of school standards, and how you feel it's evolved since it was first conceived? Kirsty Williams AM: So, this brings us back to the principle of self-evaluation and something, if we're honest, we've not been very good at. If you look at a number of chief inspectors'reports into the Welsh education system, self-evaluation has always been identified as something that is missing or underdeveloped in our system to date, hence, then, the work to establish not a new approach, but a more robust approach to self-evaluation. We've done that in conjunction, again, with the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. It's really important, throughout the entirety of our reform journey that that's done in co-construction, because we want this resource to be usable in schools. So, it's all very well having a conceptual idea and people outside the classroom working on it, but if it's of no practical use to a school leadership team, then we won't see the impact. So, it's--. We're in phase 2 at the moment, where we're doing--. So, the initial resource has been developed by the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. We're in the testing phase at the moment and having it evaluated itself, with a view to introducing that resource across the system at the start of the new academic year, in September 2020. I truly believe that, if we're to make progress in Welsh education, we have to develop the skills within our system to have robust self-evaluation. This resource gives us continuity of approach right the way across Wales. So, it's not left to an individual school to come up with a system; it's right the way across the system. My hope would be that those principles could then be applied to local education authorities, to regional school improvement services and Welsh Government as part of a whole-system approach to self-evaluation. I don't know if there's anything more you want to add, Steve. Steve Davies: Just to add that the other critical partners are Estyn themselves. Kirsty Williams AM: Oh, yes, sorry. Steve Davies: So, they have played a critical role and, as we know, as the Minister has said in the past, she may introduce policy and practice, but if Estyn are part of it then schools, usually, because they recognise that it will be part of the inspection process--it gives it greater push and support around it. So, they've been key players within it. Kirsty Williams AM: And I think, if I just say as well, that the external perception of what that's about is really important. It's not a test of school readiness for reform, it is a genuine attempt for a school to evaluate their strengths, their weaknesses and where they need to go next. It's not an Estyn checklist. And because of the word'toolkit'--the feedback was that it gave the impression of a checklist,'Just do this and check list'. So, we're actually going to change the name of that resource. So, it'll be called the national evaluation and improvement resource, rather than the toolkit, because, as I said, the feedback was that'toolkit'gave the impression of a checklist exercise, and it's got to be about more than that if it's going to be meaningful. So, it'll be changed to an'improvement resource'. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Before I bring Suzy in, can I just welcome Sian Gwenllian, who is joining us via video-conference in north Wales? Morning, Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Good morning. Can you hear me? Lynne Neagle AM: We can, yes. We can hear you very nicely, thank you. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Yes. Only a very quick one. It's about the development of the-- Kirsty Williams AM: The resource. Suzy Davies AM: Yes, the resource, thank you--about whether there were any conflicting ideas in the process of development that made it quite difficult to zone in on something that school leadership teams, in particular, could rely on. Were there differences of opinion on what this should look like? Kirsty Williams AM: Not that I'm aware of from the practitioners that I've spoken to who have been part of that. So, for instance, Suzy, you will know the very small school of Gladestry. The head of Gladestry has been involved in this process, and she said that she'd really enjoyed the process of working alongside Estyn and the OECD as a school leader to be able to shape it. But I'm not aware that there's been conflict in that process. Suzy Davies AM: I'm not suggesting that there has been; I'm just interested as to how it had worked, that's all. Steve Davies: Chair, I think, inevitably, when you bring stakeholders together, they're not going to be in total agreement as to how it's going to work, and I think initially one of the challenges was having Estyn there as part of the facilitation group. There are always some concerns that, actually, it's coming from a to inspect, oral, judgmental tick box. So, we had some early day challenges where we had to convince--and, ultimately, Estyn convinced them--that they were there to help and support as opposed to to inspect, and that the model that was developed, as the Minister said, was not going to be a tick box,'You are good at this part of self-evaluation', it was to build the skillsets up. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. So, it's got their full confidence. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, and I think again, also, what--. You know, four years into the job, what I've reflected on as well is there is this sometimes a feeling out there that the Minister says all the right stuff, but you're not actually going to do it, so, when you talk about a new approach to doing things, you're not actually serious about it. So, trying to build that confidence that we are serious about developing a new system around self-improvement, which is different from accountability--sometimes, the practitioners are like,'Oh, yes, we've heard it all before but it never actually happens.'And I think that's been a part of the constant--not pressure, but the responsibility on Welsh Government is in following through. So, we said that we were going to do this in the national mission, and we are going to do it. I'm really proud that there or thereabouts, a few months either way, we've actually kept to the timetable as outlined in the national mission, and that helps build confidence within the sector that we are committed to that programme and we're going to do what we say we're going to do. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: And a final question from me: how effective do you think the investment in school standards has been in this Assembly term, as opposed to the approach taken in the last Assembly term, where there was the protection put in place for core school budgets? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think, first of all, it's important that, whilst this additional resource is specifically targeted at school standards, that is only a part of a much wider education budget, a budget that--you know--is incredibly complex. And so it is really challenging to be able to draw straight lines--you know,'We did this and it's resulted in that'--given that we're looking at the entirety of school funding here. What's been really important is that, if you drill down into what that money has been spent on, 50 per cent of it has been directed towards professional learning in one form or another to support our teaching professionals. And that's been really important to me. I've said it time and time again: an education system cannot exceed the quality of the people who stand in front of our children day in, day out to work with them and teach them. Therefore, that investment in staff and investment in the professional learning of our staff and support for them I think is making a difference already but, importantly, will continue to make a difference. But I think it is really challenging to be able to say,'Well, we spent this bit of money and it definitely led to that', because it's such a complex picture. But that money, the way it's been spent, has been driven by evidence. And, again, what we do know from international best practice, what do we know that works in driving up standards, and then how can we align the money that we've got to supporting that? And, as I said, 50 per cent of that money has gone directly to simply supporting the professional learning of those who work with our children. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you very much. We're going to talk now a bit about schools causing concern with questions from Huw Irranca-Davies. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Thank you, Chair. If I can, just first of all, zoom in on the way in which we actually decide which schools need what support. So, one of the interesting questions for us is how do we use the different systems out there. So, we've got the school categorisation system, which we're familiar with. We've also got Estyn inspection reports, then we've got other intelligence, including local intelligence on the ground. How do you decide from that? How is it decided what schools need support, need challenge? How do we do that? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, you're right: what we have is a variety of ways in which we can identify schools that need support, or need to be challenged on their practice. But it's important not to confuse them either. So, our primary route to doing this is our school categorisation system. Sometimes, and perhaps this is inevitable--. That system is primarily there as a triage system around identifying where our resource should be spent. So, our school improvement service--it's a risk-based approach, so they can evaluate where they need to put their time, effort and resource. Sometimes, it's used by other people for other things, but that is not its primary purpose; its primary purpose there is not one of accountability, it is one of identifying risk and aligning that then to the support that is available. Estyn--now that is part of that accountability system. That is our method of holding schools and their governing bodies to account for their practice and for the work that they do. Both systems, of course, are evolving. So, how we do categorisation has changed over a period of time. The elements that go into making that judgment around the levels of support have changed, and, of course, the Estyn inspection regime is also changing. At the moment, schools are only inspected once every seven years. We're moving to a system where Estyn will be more regularly in schools. So, they are two systems, but they are different and they look at different things. But our categorisation system is how we look for those ways of identifying support for schools. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: And you've made, with feedback over the last few years, adjustments to the way that the categorisation system works. Are you content with where it is now, or do you see more adjustments being made? Have you got things in front of you that you're getting feedback on saying'Well, we need to tweak this again a little bit'? Kirsty Williams AM: So, that system has evolved over time. So, when it started, it was just a tool around secondary schools. Now, it covers the breadth of schools. Initially, on coming into office, when I first came in, it was purely driven by data, and it was also done in quartiles. So, there was a certain number of schools that had to be in the bottom, which drove practitioners mad. They were like'Ah, every year, there's going to be some of us that have to be in the bottom quartile', because of the way in which it was arranged, which seemed very unfair to them. So, we've changed that. It's not just purely driven on data now; there are other judgments--the professional judgments of our challenge advisers are taken into account. And I would expect that situation to continue to evolve to align itself to our curriculum reform, and our changes in self-evaluation. So, it's not a fixed point. I expect that that system will continue to evolve and change, so that it complements and assists in the reform journey as other parts of the system change. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Thanks for that. I think, for any impartial reader of the way that the trends have been going on this, there is some good news within that, in that, certainly, those schools that might have been identified as have been okay but coasting along, seem to be moving up the categories, although we still do have that--. Well, it's what the system is there to do, it's to identify those schools that do need that additional support. And I like your analogy of a triage system--'You're fit; keep on doing what you're doing and do it well; you need more support, we'll put the support in.'But, can I turn to those schools that are causing significant concern, and how we identify them? The Estyn chief inspector's conclusions at the end of the 2017-18 report that these schools are not being identified early enough--there's a need to do something urgently about these concerns, particularly in secondary schools. Have we addressed that? Are you content that we've addressed that concern? Was he right? Kirsty Williams AM: No, the chief inspector is absolutely right--absolutely right. I've got no beef with that statement at all. In some ways, when a school goes into special measures, in a way, that's a failure of the system, because that should have been identified sooner. So I've got no beef, as I said, with the chief inspector saying that. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: So just to ask, bearing in mind the earlier discussion we were having, how is it that we don't identify those schools? Kirsty Williams AM: That's it--you're quite right. Undoubtedly, what categorisation has done is led to a greater understanding, I think, on behalf of local education authorities'and school improvement services'knowledge about their schools. I think knowledge around schools is greatly enhanced by that process. But we are not there yet in terms of necessarily, then, moving those schools more quickly, once they've been identified as needing the highest level of support to see improvement. And secondary schools is a particular, particular challenge. So you will have seen from the last publication of categorisation data that our primary sector continues to improve--more and more and more of our primary schools are in a green rating, which is very satisfying to me. But we have got more of an issue with secondary schools, and we have a particular issue with the same schools being identified in that level of categorisation. So even though we've identified them as needing that extra help, they are not moving at pace away from that system. So there are two things that we are doing at the moment. The first is, we are, again, looking at different sets of data that can give us even earlier warning systems that things are going wrong in a school--and perhaps Steve will explain later. For instance, staff sickness, and carefully monitoring staff sickness, because there is a direct correlation between high levels of staff sickness in a school and what is going on in the school. And Steve can explain some of this work later. But we're piloting a new approach to those schools that are causing concern. Each local authority has been asked to identify two of their high schools that they are particularly worried about. And we have a new multi-agency approach, working with those schools to try and move them more forward. So it's two from each region, a multi-agency panel, working with the school. And that multi-agency panel includes the school itself, the local authority, the regional consortia school improvement staff, Estyn and Welsh Government--as a multi-agency panel to support improvement in that school. So, for instance, what would normally happen, Estyn would come in, Estyn would make a judgment on the school--requiring special measures or urgent improvement--and Estyn would go away. They'd go away for six months, and then they'd come back in six months, and they'd make another judgment,'No, still not good enough', and disappear for six months. We're saying--Estyn and the Welsh Government have agreed that's not the best approach; Estyn need to be part of the solution, rather than just coming and making a judgment. The initial feedback from this trial is very, very positive. Actually, we've had local authorities coming to us and saying,'Can we put more schools in? Rather than just having two of our high schools, can we engage more in this project and this pilot?'It's being evaluated by Cardiff Metropolitan University and Swansea University, so we're having some academic overview to see, actually, does this approach work, can we evidence it--that it actually makes a difference? And it's actually--I'd like to claim all the credit for it, but it's actually not dissimilar to something that's happening in Scotland as well. But we knew that carrying on doing the same old thing clearly wasn't moving these schools, we needed a new approach, and this is what we're doing at the moment. So it's relatively new, but the initial feedback is positive. Steve, I don't know-- Steve Davies: I think your important point is about,'What about the schools that are sliding in that direction?'And it's bringing together what we know from Estyn, but also, critically, local authorities have knowledge of their schools, and so do consortia. We've got to be better at bringing those together. So, the Minister gave the example of staff sickness--not always a trigger, but it's one of those. If you look at movement of pupils out of a school, you can look at complaints, you can look at, actually, emerging increased use of HR resources that a school pulls on a local authority. None of these have been pushed up into the public domain, but they're important antennae. The point the Minister made about Estyn as well is, historically, when they go into special measures, Estyn, at the end of that week, call in, historically, either the region or the local authority, they will feed back to one of them, and then they go away. So, they are staying with it. So, we are brining together the knowledge. But, as the Minister said, we want to keep a very clear distinction between the accountability and the transparency to the public, to parents, with the very detailed collective work of that multi-agency group to actually make that difference over time. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Okay. So, does that--. I'd love to go further, but time is against us. Does that deal with the issue of the schools that have been identified in those categories of requiring significant improvement and requiring special measures? Are those the ones that will be identified now, or is that above and beyond that again? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, those are the ones that are primarily at the forefront of our minds, but this way of sharing data better, to step in earlier, is part of our attempt to address what the chief inspector says about stepping in early--not waiting until a school gets into special measures and a formal judgment from Estyn of that, but actually using that intelligence to get support in there earlier. The three elements that that multi-agency approach look at are: what are the fundamentals that need addressing in this school? What is the capacity of the school itself to be able to address those fundamentals? And, what extra support needs to go into that senior management team and the governing body to get those fundamentals addressed? And actually, what does sustainable improvement look like? Because, again, one of the issues, sometimes, that happens is, a school goes into a category with Estyn, there's a big push and a big,'We must do something'and the school comes out, but actually, that improvement is not sustainable. It's the low-hanging fruit; it's the easy wins that have been achieved, but actually, perhaps some of the fundamental challenges underlying in that school haven't been addressed in that process. So, this is about what will sustainable improvement look like in six months, what's it going to look like in 12 months and what's it going to look like in 18 months. So, actually, a more strategic, longer term approach to real change in a school rather than, perhaps, some of the easy-to-fix items that make a school as if it's doing better, but we really haven't tackled some of the underlying problems that make that school vulnerable to slipping back. Does that make sense? Lynne Neagle AM: I've got a couple of supplementaries on--. Sorry? Kirsty Williams AM: Does that make sense? Lynne Neagle AM: Yes. We've got a couple of supplementaries on this, first from Suzy and then from Sian. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you for that, Chair. Obviously, I'm pleased to hear that this work is being done, but I'm wondering--. What strikes me, in the recent past, at least, particularly as we've got the usual suspects in this category--. I've got to ask myself why it is that councils have been reluctant, perhaps, to step in with these schools earlier, particularly as they've got consortia or middle-tier support as well. Has there been a deficit in that space that has meant that councils don't feel equipped to step in? I just don't really get it why they've been reluctant to step in so far. If they've been nervous about doing it, because they don't feel that they've got the tools to do it, then I think that's pretty important, because as you were saying, we were talking about fundamentals; surely, councils have been able to deal with fundamentals, and more importantly, consortia up until now. Because, obviously, we're asking these players to give us evidence at some point, so perhaps I'd like to challenge them on how come we're here now. Kirsty Williams AM: And rightly so. Suzy Davies AM: I'm not laying this at your door. Kirsty Williams AM: And rightly so. I guess each local authority will have an explanation for each individual school, I suspect. What's crucial to me is that we have to--. I see our job as corralling the collective effort, and I think, for too long in the system, there has been a lack of co-ordination. So, this is about bringing and corralling a collective effort to address this, going forward, in more sustainable way. And I think it does come back to this issue around self-evaluation and a willingness to be open, honest and upfront about some of the challenges that we've got. It's not easy, is it? It's not easy to accept or to acknowledge sometimes when things are-- Suzy Davies AM: That they don't know how to do this. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, that they're going badly, or perhaps they don't know exactly how to make the difference. So this approach, as I said, is a new way of trying to coral that collective effort across the board. But, I don't know if Steve--because you've done other roles in the system, so perhaps you've got a different insight. Steve Davies: I think you're right. The variation across the country, across local authorities--. There are some local authorities that we've worked with and we identify have taken the appropriate action. There are others that we're working with, and yes, at its best, it's done as a joint exercise where they use their regional school improvement service to help in the identification that there is a need for this. They take advice as to what the action is, whether it is, as the Minister said, in the more significant areas, a board, or whether a warning notice comes in terms of standards or finance. So, we're working with them and we're working with the Welsh Local Government Association to share that practice. An example of that work is: we have done a development training session for cabinet members for education, and scrutiny leads for education across Wales, and all 22 local authorities came to that and engaged with that. That was partly about self-improvement, but it was also about where significant issues arise, you have to constructively confront them. And that comes with what the region knows, and increasingly, we're looking to have it consistently across 22 local authorities, so they are collecting all the additional data that we referred to earlier, so they can legitimately hold a mirror up and say,'This is a real concern that we have. We're not punishing you, but we're registering the seriousness, and we want you to address it.'And we're making progress. I believe it's genuinely more consistent now, but I'd be lying if I said that there was consistency across all 22 local authorities. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. I'm conscious of time. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. I've got a supplementary from Sian, then back to Huw. Sian Gwenllian AM: Because you are moving to a more sophisticated approach in terms of identifying problems sooner, and so can offer the support earlier, is it time to think about moving away from the system of categorisation entirely? That is, has the categorisation system reached the end of its usefulness, and is the multi-agency approach, this more sophisticated approach, a better way, ultimately, of being able to assist schools in moving forward? Kirsty Williams AM: I think, Sian, as I said earlier, the categorisation system has evolved over time, and my expectation is that it will continue to evolve, because it has to be consistent with our overall approach to school improvement and raising standards. I expect OECD will have feedback for us on this important part of our system, and we'll wait to see exactly what they say about it, but as I said in answer to Huw Irranca-Davies earlier, I haven't got a closed mind; we've demonstrated over the last four years our willingness to change the system to make it a smarter system, and we will continue to keep that under review, as we move forward. If I could just go back briefly, it doesn't sound like a very exciting thing, does it, when we say we've been doing work with the WLGA, with cabinet members, but also scrutiny, because that's a really important part of the jigsaw as well, is actually local government scrutiny of the performance of your education portfolio holder and the leadership of your council. So this is about trying to up the ante on all sides, so that those issues around'What are you doing in your local authority to use the powers that you have?'You know, sometimes, making sure that everybody in that authority--those in power and those who are there to hold those in power to account--have the necessary skills, knowledge and understanding to do that appropriately. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Huw, briefly. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Yes, briefly. I only have one final question. We've talked a lot about early identification; getting in there and then managing the improvement, this triage approach there, and then getting some grip of it, as well, in doing all of that. But my question now is on what we currently have. I won't touch on the primary schools, but let's just look at secondary schools--11 per cent of secondary schools inspected in the last two academic years judged as unsatisfactory, needing urgent improvement. There will always be secondary schools and primary schools that hit moments of crisis for one reason or another, but 11 per cent to me, and to any layperson, would seem unreasonably high. Are you--? It would be daft to ask you if you're content. What is a level that you would be content with of having schools in red category in Wales? Kirsty Williams AM: You're right. Schools will need different levels of support at different points, and sometimes, it's not because of a crisis. So, for instance, in my region, we do have an increase in the number of schools in the amber category. That's because we've seen in that particular region a number of headteachers retire because they've reached retirement age, and there are new headteachers. Well, that is a moment of risk in the school--when senior leadership changes. Nothing else has changed in that school, but the simple fact that you have a new leader, sometimes in those cases it might be their first headship. That means that that school is going to need a little bit of extra support, so it isn't always just a crisis that needs extra support, there are just general things that happen in the life of a school that could lead to it. But you're absolutely right--we have a particular challenge in the secondary sector where we have not been able to move individual schools forward at pace. And 11 per cent is not acceptable to me, Huw, which is why we have introduced this new pilot to address those schools where, persistently, we have concerns about their ability to move forward. If we'd have carried on doing the same thing, I suspect we would have just carried on getting the same result--hence the need for a new approach to those schools that are causing concern. Steve Davies: Very briefly, the things we talked about earlier was how we measure the performance of schools, particularly at GCSEs, with a narrow focus. As was said earlier, some of these are the same groups--they trip in and then they don't come out. Our belief is, from research, that they concentrate on squeezing the pips to get the grades up in some small areas for a period of time, and you can do that by targeting and immersing them. Estyn can tick the box to say your grades have got better, but we haven't handled the serious underpinning issues--leadership, teaching and learning, and bringing those together. As the Minister said, what does sustainable improvement look like in six, 12,18 months? It isn't just, as important as they are, getting those exam grades up a bit. They're the fundamental--. And if they're all agreed as the indicators at the outset, we're more likely--. So it's multi-agency; it's not a little activity, it's a major strategy. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Hefin David has some questions now on the middle tier. Hefin David AM: I'd like to consider the work of the consortia. In 2016, your election manifesto very clearly said that you wanted to abolish regional consortia--three words in it. Why haven't you done it? Kirsty Williams AM: Because, given that you're such a keen student of my manifesto, you'll also know that-- Hefin David AM: It was only three words. Kirsty Williams AM: The Liberal Democrat manifesto also said that we supported major local government reform and a major reduction in the number of local government units. That hasn't happened. I have to say genuinely, my experience over the last four years has proven to me the value of regional working, and in the absence of significant local government reform, I think it's absolutely vital that we have scale in school improvement services--scale that I don't think can be delivered across 22 individual local authorities. Hefin David AM: Okay. So, if there was local government reform, you would abolish the consortia. Kirsty Williams AM: I think if there was significant local government reform and we could demonstrate that those units had such a scale that they could perform the functions of regional consortia, then I think it would be inevitable that any education Minister would look to see whether there was an opportunity to change structures. But in the absence of that, Hefin, I have been absolutely convinced whilst doing this job that you need larger units to be able to carry out successful school improvement work, and I think it would be reckless to advocate the system going back to school improvement being organised in 22 different ways. Hefin David AM: Okay. Do you think that the work of the four consortia has been consistent and effective? Kirsty Williams AM: The school improvement services? Hefin David AM: The four consortia. Kirsty Williams AM: I think, as with individual local education authorities, there are some regional consortia services that have performed really highly--and that's not me saying that, that's Estyn, but gives us assurance around that--and there are others that need to improve. I think the consortia themselves would admit that they, since their establishment, have found new ways of working. Initially, they were very separate entities that did things their own way. Increasingly, over recent years, we have seen those consortia working together on a national approach, but delivered on a regional basis. So I think they themselves have evolved over time. But we are constantly looking for optimum delivery from those particular organisations, but as I said, I think it would be absolutely reckless to go back to a situation where school improvement services were being delivered individually on 22 different bases. Hefin David AM: Okay. I'm happy to accept that you've changed your opinion there; that's no problem at all. But with regard to the four consortia, and we'll take Education through Regional Working as an example, it does things differently to the other three. Is that a cause for concern, or do you think that's entirely appropriate? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, ERW does things differently, but then so does the Education Achievement Service. EAS is constituted in a different way to the Central South Consortium. What I'm interested in is not necessarily how they are constituted and organised, I'm interested in the effectiveness of that organisation to deliver for children and for teachers. ERW has got particular challenges, and we continue to work with those in ERW to address those, but increasingly, as I said, what we are seeing the regional consortia do is develop a national approach to school improvement services but deliver that on a regional basis so that there is greater consistency in terms of delivery. Hefin David AM: Are you happy that, within the ERW area, local authorities employ their own improvement advisers, rather than doing it in the way that the others do? Kirsty Williams AM: We have discussed this at length with them. My preference would be for school improvement officers to be employed in the centre, and we continue to have those discussions, but what's really important to understand is that the regional consortia are not a beast of the Government; they are a beast of the local authorities that have worked together to create a school improvement service that meets their needs. So we can't impose that solution, and we continue to discuss with ERW what is the optimal way, and they continue to discuss with their constituent local authorities about how that should be organised. Hefin David AM: Are you concerned that Neath Port Talbot have given notice that they want to withdraw from regional working? Kirsty Williams AM: I think it's really disappointing that Neath Port Talbot have published that notice. What's important for me is to understand--not for me, it will be important for Estyn. It will be really important for us to understand how Neath Port Talbot intend to support their schools and their teachers if they were to withdraw from ERW, especially at what is a very, very critical time. The regional consortia have a key role to play in supporting systems with the introduction of the curriculum. I would want to know from Neath Port Talbot how they are going to do that without being part of that organisation. And, of course, there's the added complexity that so much of our money is channelled through to schools via the regional consortia. So, I would want to understand from Neath Port Talbot how they're going to safeguard their schools and make sure that the children who are receiving their education in Neath Port Talbot are not disadvantaged if they were to follow through on that decision. Hefin David AM: Do you feel that it's your role to intervene in that area and instruct Neath Port Talbot and ERW as to how they should resolve this issue? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, as I said, I would be seeking assurances-- Hefin David AM: What does that mean, though,'seeking assurances'? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, Neath Port Talbot would need to demonstrate to me how they're going to address these issues. If they're not part of ERW and their schools and their children are not going to be in receipt of the support from ERW, as I said, especially at this critical time, how are they intending to do that? I haven't seen those plans, but if they were to push forward and follow through on the notice, I would want to see them and I suspect Estyn would want to see them also. Hefin David AM: Okay, just last issue on that: you're just waiting to see what Neath Port Talbot do next, then. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, we have written to Neath Port Talbot to ask them to demonstrate to us, if they were to pull out of ERW, how they're going to meet their functions. I have not heard back from them. Hefin David AM: Steve, did you want to say something? Steve Davies: Obviously--[Inaudible. ]--that point. We wrote to them last Friday, and we are awaiting their response now. Hefin David AM: Okay. So, that's where we are. Okay. There was the document in 2015--'National model for regional working'. Is that the current document? Are there plans to change or update it, or is that exactly where we stand? Kirsty Williams AM: So, that is the current model. Some work was undertaken in 2017 and 2018 to look to update that model and revise that model. Some specific recommendations were put forward about additional services that could be organised on a regional basis; primarily, that is a specialist human resources resource. We know that, because of austerity in some local authorities, HR departments have been really stretched. Education HR is a specialist service, it's not generic. It's often a service that--. I see that as part of a school improvement service. Support for governors also has been stretched within individual local authorities. So, a proposal was put forward to include specialist HR and governor support as part of the regional model. That was rejected by local government. Our local authorities did not want to include that in the regional model. However, I must say, having presented that evidence, some of our local authorities, even though there wasn't a national agreement to put that into the national model, have pooled their resources, and those services are being delivered and supported on a regional basis. So, for instance, the Education Achievement Service now provide specialist HR resource, and EAS and Central South provide governor support. So, although we weren't successful in persuading local government to adopt a new national model, local authorities in those areas saw the value of moving that way. Hefin David AM: So, with that in mind, and perhaps I'll put this to Steve Davies, everything the Minister just said, and also the line in the document--'The implementation of this model will change over time'-- is it time to go back to that document and review it from a procedural point of view? Steve Davies: I don't think it's necessarily timely to go back and have a complete review of it. But, certainly, we are in ongoing discussions with the Welsh Local Government Association, both in terms of work with local authorities, and the type of intervention in schools. So, we keep a constant watch as to which areas that we believe we could develop further. We are not currently intending to do a wholesale review of that. As the Minister touched on earlier, there is some work to get consistency across the current area, particularly, as we just mentioned, in relation to ERW work. So, it's getting a consistent approach at that level, and sharing the practice. I think what is emerging, as the Minister said, is that there are two regions who have already made this shift to pool services. I think the two other regions are seeing and will see the benefits of that, and instead of forcing it through, we'd expect that to evolve. But we're not, at this stage, looking to a wholesale review of the national model. Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin. Hefin David AM: And Professor Dylan Jones's strategic delivery group seems to have had quite a warm welcome in the sector. Is it fair to say that? Kirsty Williams AM: I believe so. I'm very grateful to Dylan for his hard work and his skill in chairing that group, and I think it's been welcomed by all, so that we can get that clarity and consistency about the roles and responsibilities of the individual partners and players in the middle tier. Hefin David AM: And when will the work be completed, and what will the outcomes be? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, the group is currently engaging with Steve and other officials on agreeing a plan, but also, crucially, that plan is there to support the successful implementation of the curriculum, so that we're very clear about the roles and responsibilities in the middle tier in this crucial phase following the publication. We have to move now from the publication into a relentless focus on implementation. The history of devolution is full of fantastic documents, and, shall I say, patchy implementation. The work that has gone into that curriculum is too important for implementation to be left to chance. It's too important. It's too good to be left to chance. So, everything now is a relentless focus on successful implementation. Hefin David AM: Yes, but I'm thinking that the strategic delivery is reviewing the role of the middle tier. So, you know, what do we expect to see from it, notwithstanding the kind of softly, softly approach that you've already talked about? Steve Davies: It was set up, actually, about 18 months ago--just under. It was set up to build collective efficacy, because what people out there are seeing is that there's a confusion of roles, in what the regions are doing, and it was building that collective efficacy so everyone was behind the wheel. So, they've been looking at who is doing what for the last 18 months, and exploring and making some changes themselves. It's not just what they do with Government or what they do with each other; it's just happened that it's timely, because one of the key bits of feedback we believe we will get from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development is we have had co-construction, we'd had collective effort, but we need to do more, particularly within the middle tier. This is not controlled by Government, it is arm's length from Government, and it's not their job to get it ready for the new curriculum--that's a key part of it. This group will have an ongoing role; it's not a task and finish group. It does feed back in to the Minister but there's no formal mechanism by which they have to report. Hefin David AM: Okay, that's very clear. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. I've got supplementaries from Suzy, then Sian. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Briefly, please. Suzy Davies AM: I think this is a really interesting evidence session. What I'm about to say, I say it even though I'm a big localist: it all seems to be heading in one direction of a national service. Is the strategic group even thinking in these terms, obviously building in local accountability? But it'll just make it so much easier in terms of accountability and consistency to monitor what the middle tier does, if it's a national service, like the National Adoption Service. Local delivery, national service--is it heading in that direction? Kirsty Williams AM: That's not the intention of setting the group up. As Steve just said, I receive feedback from Dylan, because I meet Dylan in this particular capacity on a planned basis. He is there to give me advice on the middle tier, and to give me advice on what he thinks Welsh Government needs to do. But I've not had that conversation with him about a national service. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Well, thank you for that. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: What I was going to raise has been answered already, that is that, from what I can see, the work that Professor Dylan Jones is doing has evolved somewhat. I felt that, originally, the idea was to look at the middle tier in terms of any kind of duplication that was happening, and where it was possible to tighten up the people going into schools from different directions. But it appears that it has evolved to be something that's much more than that, and that it is placing a focus on the curriculum and other aspects of the educational system. Is there a risk for them to lose focus in that sense? Kirsty Williams AM: No, not at all. I think they are very, very clear around establishing roles and responsibilities for each of the players and to be very clear about the expectations that each part of the middle tier can have of each other, as to what they can expect from their partners in the middle tier. And absolutely, it is about making sure that there isn't duplication, that people aren't second-guessing each other's work, and there are clear demarcations about who does what in the system, and, as I said, knowing that you can rely on your colleague in the middle tier to do the bit that they are responsible for. So, I don't think there's a question of it losing focus. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We've got a lot of areas to cover so we are going to have to pick up our pace a bit. The next questions are from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Thinking about you as a Minister trying to see what the long-term trends are with regard to raising standards and improving educational attainment, is that difficult, because the performance measures have changed, haven't they? We can't compare like-for-like now, because of the changes that have been made in the way that performance is measured. So, to begin with, is that a challenge, to see whether progress has been made? And secondly, what evidence do you as Minister use to look at the long-term trends? Kirsty Williams AM: The first thing to say, with regard to changes to performance measures--you're right that change to those does make it, in some cases, more difficult to look at trends over a period of time. But those changes are made for really good reasons. If we change a performance measure, it is done to ensure that it is in the best interests of learners. And I think the best interests of learners always trumps the ease of comparison. I understand that, for researchers and for opposition Members, even for Ministers, it would be simpler to have the same set of measures over a period of time. But if we know that those things are driving behaviours that are unhelpful to children, and not in the best interests of children, then we have to change them, even thought that then does create challenges in different areas. With regard to what do we look at, there are a number of ways that we gain data and look at data in the system: everything from the categorisation system we spoke of earlier, and trends in categorisation; we look at Estyn reports; we continue to look at examination results. But we're trying to develop a broader range of data and statistics that give us a whole picture of the education performance, rather than narrowing down on one simple indicator that tells you one thing but doesn't tell you everything. But I don't know, Steve, if there's anything further that you'd like to add. Steve Davies: It's going back to what the Member raised earlier, in terms of the range of things that you look at--things that can make a difference. So, when Estyn review schools, or we're looking to develop national frameworks for things like mental health and well-being, which look to the practice that enables raising standards, it's collecting that information, both at a national level, through the annual review of Estyn, as well as our engagement with regions and local authorities. So, it's looking at the evidence base that goes beyond, but impacts on data. And, inevitably, we will use the Programme for International Student Assessment, and any other external assessments that come through organisations like the OECD. And even where we've changed the performance measures, we still have, at national level, the ongoing data. So, if you looked at level 2 plus, we believe it is important that children get five good GCSEs--for higher education and for employment. So, we've not lost sight of those at a national level--we're not using them as a narrow set of performance measures for individual schools. Kirsty Williams AM: So, if we look at--level 2 plus is a good example. We know that a relentless focus on that single measure, as a way of judging the system, leads to a set of behaviours in schools. It narrows the focus onto a certain part of the cohort, it narrows the curriculum, when we know that children-- Sian Gwenllian AM: I'm not challenging the fact that you've changed the performance measures--I understand that, and having a broader way of looking is better in the long run. I'm just saying, because there's been this change, it makes it more of a challenge--whilst accepting why you've made the changes, but it does present more of a challenge, presumably, because you have to look at more indicators, and take evidence from different places. But I take it that you're confident that the trajectory is going in the right way. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, I think we are making improvements. But you're right: it does make it more challenging. But those changes are being made for the right reasons, as I said, whether that be at level 2 plus. Look at English literature. I understand why perhaps a performance measure around English was introduced, but the effect of that was that significant numbers of children--and, it must be said, usually children who are entitled to free school meals--were suddenly not sitting English literature GCSE. We've changed that performance measure, and guess what? Last year, we saw a significant increase in the number of children that were sitting English literature GCSE. For standards of literacy and oracy, I think studying literature is really, really important, before we even get into the joy of introducing children to the written word and the love of reading. So, we make changes. Yes, it causes challenges, but we're making those changes because we believe that they are in the best interest of children, and that has to trump ease of comparison. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Why have you decided to ask the consortia, Estyn and so on not to report on local data or regional level data? How do we then come to conclusions about what is working if it isn't presented on a local authority and regional basis? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think the thing to say about the communications from Welsh Government, Estyn, and the WLGA is it's not about not communicating the data, it's about challenging people on how that data should be used. So, the data is still available, but it's a challenge to them about how to use that data. So, for instance, when we're presenting data that compares local authority to local authority, you could have a local authority that says,'There we go, I'm above the national average. I don't need to worry about the education in my local authority, because I'm above the average, or I'm better than my neighbour.'That doesn't necessarily mean that everything is right in your local education authority. Perhaps your children should be doing even better than what you're presented with. So, actually, it's not about hiding data; it's about how you use the data appropriately. And sometimes, how we were presenting data in the past was lulling some people into a false sense of security about the performance of their system. So, it's about how you use data, and that's what the communication from Welsh Government and the WLGA and Estyn was about: think very carefully about this data and what it's telling you about your system, and don't be lulled into a false sense of security that you may be doing brilliantly. Or, perhaps, looking at your data, you may think,'Oh, my goodness me, we're not doing very well at all', but, actually, more careful consideration of that might show that your school's impact on those children is really, really a positive one. So, you've got to use that data in the context. So, it's not about less data. If anything, it's about more data and, crucially for me, it's about more intelligent use and interrogation of that data, about truly what it's telling you about your system. Sian Gwenllian AM: But again, the Welsh Government--. You have continued to publish the local and regional level data. So, doesn't that contradict what you've been telling the consortia and everyone else? Kirsty Williams AM: No, not at all. As I said, we're not in the business of trying to hide data--I believe absolutely in full transparency. And in terms of level 2 data, I think I'm not moving away from the point that I think it's really important that more and more children get five really good GCSEs. I think it's important for their life chances. It is about how that data is used, not about hiding data or making that data not available. Steve Davies: Can I, very briefly--? We didn't just send a letter out collectively. We've now carried out training jointly with WLGA and Estyn on how to use that data. So, it's not just looking where your LA is; it's also not looking at whether your school's better than average for the authority. And it is well received, and it should broaden the approach of scrutiny committees to beyond what historically was, if I'm honest, looking at the league table for their authority or looking at the league table of local authorities. It's not that they shouldn't be looking at that, but they need to dig much, much deeper underneath it. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. We're going to go on now to Suzy. I'm going to appeal for brief questions and brief answers so that we can cover the rest of the questions. Suzy Davies AM: I'll shorten these questions, okay. We know why you got rid of the old measures. We've got interim measures now. What are they telling you about the success you've had in trying to avoid the bad behaviour? Short answers. Kirsty Williams AM: It's impossible. [Laughter. ] I think it's inevitable: whatever kind of measures we put in place, people will look to maximise their success in those measures, and I don't think we'll ever come up with a system where those measures are absolutely perfect. What's really important to me is that we're really, really, really challenging schools to look at the performance of all of their children, rather than just at a very, very narrow cohort around those C/D boundaries, which we knew was detrimental, potentially, to more able and talented children and really pushing those Bs to As and those As to A*s, and children for whom actually just getting in to school on a daily basis is an achievement, and the school has done well to provide that. So, our new capped 9 makes sure that there is breadth across a range of subjects, rather than just focusing on a narrower and narrower bunch of subject opportunities for children, and our new third-third-third system enables schools to really look at their performance. So if their capped 9 score is high, what's driving that? Is it because the bottom third of the cohort is doing really well, and the impact on those children is above and beyond what could be expected, but actually, you're not doing very well for your more able and talented; you're not pushing them on? Alternatively, maybe your capped 9 score is because your MAT children are doing incredibly well, but actually, you're not really making the progress for the middle tier of those children. It allows us to have a greater focus on the performance of our FSM children--where they really are within that system. So, it's a much more granular--. And crucially for me, it looks at the impact for every child, because every child has to matter in the system, and what we had before was a narrowing of curriculum choice and a narrowing on a certain cohort of children. Suzy Davies AM: So are the permanent measures likely to be pretty similar to what you've got now? Because the research--I don't know if the research is complete yet. When will you be publishing the new permanent evaluation? Kirsty Williams AM: Sue, you're right: they're interim measures at the moment, and we will need to make sure that the performance measures are aligned to the new curriculum. That, potentially, of course--. Because Wales's review of qualifications potentially has an impact on what those finally will look like, so that work is ongoing at the moment, and unless Steve can tell me off the top of his head when we expect that to be completed by, I will send you a note. But they're interim at the moment, because we need to align them to the new curriculum. Suzy Davies AM: I think we understand that. [Inaudible. ]--date. Steve Davies: No, no. This is not a quick fix. This is a two to three-year research base. The new qualifications for the new curriculum will not start until 2025. They have to be in place for 2022. There's a three-year roll on. I would expect the broad structure of the interim measures to continue over that time. There will be some tweaks for consistency. It's what's wrapped around those interim measures that I touched on earlier: the other evidence that we bring to bear about the effectiveness of a school, but we do want to say to schools that on the whole, broadly speaking, the interim measures will carry on for two, three years. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, and the reason I asked that is right at the beginning of this session, the Minister said to the Chair that this PS100 million that's going into school improvements will be going into things that work. We need some evidence that the interim measures are going to work as well, so when are they going to be evaluated? Steve Davies: Well, we've only just used them for one year. Suzy Davies AM: That's what I'm asking you. Steve Davies: We've signalled that they're only going to be in place for three years. We are carrying out our own review of the impact of those and that's been built in, but I expect the OECD report--because it is an extensive report--to give us feedback on how those things are working now, and some steer, as they did with the last report, as to the direction we would want to go into. Kirsty Williams AM: And what I'm also interested in is those performance management measures around schools. Yes, they're about outcomes for children, but actually are about a broader suite of behaviours within that school, so, yes, qualifications and grades are an important part of a performance measure, but actually, I have other expectations of schools, above and beyond simply qualifications. And so, we would want our permanent set of performance measures to look at a wider set of behaviours within a school, and I think because--. Exams are important--of course they are, qualifications are important--but the way in which those schools achieve those results are also important. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Would you anticipate that including well-being, then? Suzy Davies AM: In a whole-school approach. Kirsty Williams AM: I absolutely--and we need to find a way of how we can truly measure that. Sometimes, children's well-being is influenced by lots of things outside the control of a school. So, I don't want schools to be held accountable for things that they have no control over, because of the circumstances in which a child may be living. But, absolutely: well-being and how the culture of the school addresses well-being is really important to me. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Suzy. Move on to PISA, please. Suzy Davies AM: How useful is PISA for you in helping school improvement? I know that it's not always the thing that you enjoy watching or looking out for. But, genuinely, how useful is it? Kirsty Williams AM: It is one of a range of tools that we need to look at. Sian, quite rightly, talked about consistency. PISA is one thing where there is a level of consistency, so it will continue to be, I think, an important part of how we test how our system is doing. Suzy Davies AM: We know that you are a little bit encouraged, but we are not out of the woods yet. You mentioned this in Plenary when we talked about PISA. How confident are you that we are on track for meeting these targets that were set before your time, or do you think that having those targets is helpful? Is it setting up aspirations that are incapable of being met within a period of time? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, those long-term targets of a score around 500 are part of'Our National Mission', and we have to keep the pressure on to strive. They are testing, but we have to keep the pressure on to strive to reach them. In some cases, I can be quite encouraged. If we look at reading scores for girls, we are almost there, but that just demonstrates what a journey we've got with our boys to address. For me, one of the ways in which we will reach those targets and achieve them is further progress on our more able and talented children. Although we are now performing at an OECD average, I will be the first person to admit that, although we have seen an improvement in the higher level skills of our more able and talented children, we do not perform at an OECD average with regard to those level 6 and level 5 scores. Suzy Davies AM: Even within the UK, really, we are quite far behind. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes. So, I think that's where we really need to push on. That's one of the reasons why we have introduced a more able and talented budget to support that, and our Seren programme, which is delivering fantastic results post-16. That's why we're introducing the principles of Seren earlier into children's careers, bringing it down from year 9 upwards, to be able to drive improvements. So, I think that that's the area that we are particularly keen to work on: making sure that more of our children perform at the OECD average at level 5 and level 6. Clearly, we've got more work to do on reading. We are working with southern Ireland, who have consistently done well with reading scores, to look to see what lessons we can learn to press on with there with reading. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. My final question on this. You recognise it as a priority, particularly for boys. Does that mean that the focus will then drift slightly from maths, where there has been some success; and drift from science, where the encouragement of more people to take GCSE science has reduced the number of high-level passes? Kirsty Williams AM: First, we have to have a system that is capable of doing all of those of things at the same time. We can't accept a system that says,'Well, we can do a bit over here, but that means we have to--.'We have to have a system, Suzy, that can drive improvements at all levels. That's my expectation. Suzy Davies AM: The balloon needs to be bigger not just squeezing it at one end. Kirsty Williams AM: Absolutely, yes. That's my expectation of this system. You have to deliver across all of these. We have seen some progress. As I've said, it's far from perfect, and we've got more work to do, but we have to deliver across all three domains, as we did last time. And I'm not going to make any apologies for changing the performance indicators around science. It was a travesty that there were children who never had the opportunity to sit a science GCSE. We don't have to make assumptions about the nature of many, many, many of those children. We have seen a significant increase in the number of children who are having the opportunity to sit GCSE science and who are passing GCSE science. So, I'm not going to make any apologies about that. One of the reasons that I suspect we have ended up with poor science scores is because of the previous policy around science entries and science qualifications. Again, one of the reasons that we have changed it isn't just solely because we need to do better in PISA, but I think that by changing it, we will see an impact on PISA. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you for that. Lynne Neagle AM: The final set of questions is from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: I just want to discuss an issue that I know is important to you, namely closing the attainment gap between pupils who are eligible for free school meals and those who are not eligible for free school meals. Unfortunately, the problem persists, doesn't it? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes. We are not where we need to be in terms of the performance, not only of our children on free school meals, but the performance of our looked-after children, and the performance of some children from some ethnic minority groups. So, we will continue to look to support those learners in a variety of ways, again looking to amend our practice on the basis of evidence that is given to us from our experts who are there to advise us. There is clearly more that we need to do. There has been some progress in some areas, but it is not where I would want it to be. Sian Gwenllian AM: But, this is despite the fact that there is PS475 million that has been invested in the pupil development grant, for this exact purpose of closing the attainment gap. But, the problem persists, and in some places, it's deteriorating. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think that, as I said, I am not shying away from any assumption or declaration that we need to do better. But, I do think that we need to acknowledge where progress has been made. If we go back to look at what PISA has said about our performance, the PISA results show that pupils in Wales are relatively more able to overcome the disadvantage of their background than is the average in OECD countries. So, our children are doing better in that, and that gives me encouragement. That's not me saying that; that's there. If we look at pupils who are eligible for free school meals, they do score below their better-off counterparts in PISA by some 34 points. The gap in England is 40 points. So, again, that gap is smaller here in Wales. If we look at basic levels of qualifications, back in--. It's difficult to make comparisons because of all the reasons we have talked about, but if we look back to 2006 and we look at the very basic level of qualifications, which is a level 1 qualification, we have seen a jump from 9. 4 per cent of children in 2006 achieving a level 1 qualification to over 18 per cent. So, there is progress. There is evidence that the resources that we are spending are making a difference. But, clearly, we are not where we would want to be. That's why we will continue to focus those resources on those children, where we need it. But, we need to do that earlier. Sticking plasters in years 10 and 11 aren't going to cut it. We need to get this right for those children, the moment that they come into a nursery and the moment that they start their formal education at the age of 5. That's how we are going to make the difference. Providing catch-up, of course, we need to do for those kids; we can't throw those year 10s and year 11s to the wind. We have to support those children. But, we will see real improvement when we get in there earlier. Sian Gwenllian AM: But I'm sure that that is a disappointment to you, because it has been a personal priority for you as well. In terms of minority ethnic learners, while there are some groups within that category who are achieving, there is underachievement happening here as well, isn't there? It's not consistent across the minority ethnic group. Is that something that you will be focusing upon? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, and that's why we have committed to maintaining a ring-fenced grant to local authorities of some PS10 million, to support education of our minority ethnic children. But, again, you are right, you are absolutely right, Sian. We need a much more sophisticated conversation about what is really going on in attainment across minority ethnic groups so that we can best target that resource and have a conversation about what the differences are. You are absolutely correct: there is a real mixed picture. If we look at black Welsh girls entitled to free school meals, they perform almost at the national average for all children--not FSM children; the national average for all children. Black Welsh boys don't, but neither do white Welsh boys. So, there is a really complex picture here, and I really welcome a debate about acknowledging the various levels of performance of BAME children, and where the gaps in performance lie. You are quite right: it is a complex picture in the system. I'm committed to continuing to support educational opportunities, and that's why have ring-fenced the minority ethnic achievement grant. There are some interesting data there. Some children are doing very, very well; others, we need to concentrate on. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian, this will need to be the last question, I'm afraid. Sian Gwenllian AM: Sorry? Lynne Neagle AM: This is going to have to be the last question. Sian Gwenllian AM: The last question. Lynne Neagle AM: Yes. Sian Gwenllian AM: Fine. In terms of looked-after children, which is one of the groups where attainment isn't where we would like it to be, there was some improvement in 2016 at key stage 4, but it has been disappointing. Do we know what's been happening in 2019? Kirsty Williams AM: The 2019 data will be published next month, and there has been significant activity. You are right: in recent years, the data have been poor and not where we would want it to be. That's why we have had a reformed approach to PDG LAC; the employment of PDG LAC co-ordinators across the regions. We've identified new resource in the new financial year to test new approaches, so, for instance, virtual school approaches, where we know, in other systems, that has worked. But, we expect the next set of data around the performance of this particular group of learners in March. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay, and you hope to see progress. Kirsty Williams AM: I don't want to speculate, but I hope so. Sian Gwenllian AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you very much. We have come to the end of our time, so can I thank you, Minister, and your official for attending this morning? We have had a wide-ranging and very detailed discussion that will be very useful for the committee. As usual, you will be sent a transcript following the meeting to check for accuracy, but thank you again, both of you, for your attendance this morning. Diolch yn fawr. Okay. Item 3 is papers to note. Paper to note 1 is a letter from ERW providing additional information following the evidence session on 16 January. Paper to note 2 is a letter from Central South Consortium, similarly providing additional information following the evidence session. Paper to note 3 is a letter from the Noah's Ark Children's Hospital for Wales regarding children's rights in Wales, following up on some additional information there. Paper to note 4 is a letter from Qualifications Wales, providing additional information following the annual report scrutiny session in January. Item 4, then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting? Are Members content? Thank you.

According to Kirsty, there were a variety of ways in which schools that needed support or needed to be challenged on their practice would be identified. Basically, they relied on the school categorization system. What's more, in Kirsty's opinion, the school improvement service was a risk-based approach. Luckily, the categorization system on which they depended would continue to evolve to align itself to the curriculum reform and make changes in self-evaluation. It would continue to evolve because it had to be consistent with their overall approach to school improvement and raising standards. What they needed now was a more strategic, longer term approach to reach changes in a school rather than some of the easy-to-fix items that made a school as if it was doing better.

tr-sq-1229

tr-sq-1229_0

What was the method of holding schools and their governing bodies to account for their practice and for the work that they did? Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received apologies for absence from Janet Finch-Saunders, and also from Dawn Bowden, and I'd like to welcome Huw Irranca-Davies, who is substituting for Dawn Bowden. Can I ask Members if there are any declarations of interest, please? No. Okay. We'll move on, then, to our evidence session for our inquiry on school improvement and raising standards. I'd like to welcome Kirsty Williams AM, Minister for Education, and Steve Davies, director of education. Thank you both for attending and for your detailed paper in advance of the meeting. We've got a lot of ground to cover, so we'll go straight into questions, if that's okay. If I can just start by asking you: to what extent is the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development still involved in the Welsh Government's school improvement journey? Kirsty Williams AM: First of all, can I thank the committee for their invitation this morning, and their interest in this particular area? As you will be aware, on coming into office, the director and I agreed to ask the OECD to do a rapid review of the state of Welsh education at the beginning of this Assembly term. They did that, and the feedback from that work informed the publication and content of the national mission. I was very clear in the national mission that I would invite the OECD back to review our progress against that mission, and that has happened in the tail end of last year, and the OECD will publish their latest report on Welsh education next month now, in March. So, the expectation is that the report will be published on 23 March, and my intention is to make a statement to the Chamber on 24 March. The nature of that review is part of our ongoing development of self-evaluation. So, we talk a lot about self-evaluation in the school system. Actually, the continuing relationship with OECD is about self-evaluation of the entirety of the system and Welsh Government. We don't want to accept our own orthodoxy and just be in a bubble where we are constantly listening to ourselves and those people who might want to agree with us or tell us what we want to hear. So, the OECD is our best attempt of having some external verification of where we are. That's a risk for Ministers and for Government, because we want them to give an honest evaluation of where we are, but that's a really important tool for me, to ensure that we're constantly testing ourselves. The nature of that review is that the OECD were able to talk to whoever they felt it was important to talk to, so that included practitioners on the ground, elements of the middle tier, as well as Welsh Government. And I know, Chair--I hope you'll be pleased to hear this--that the reports of this committee have formed parts of their review, looking at how the Senedd itself has contributed to and has held the Government to account. So, as I said, we expect our report to be published towards the end of March. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you, Minister. Can I ask about the powers under the School Standards and Organisation (Wales) Act 2013, to ask you to tell us about the use of those powers either by Welsh Government or by local authorities, and how effective you feel that legislation has been? Kirsty Williams AM: Okay. Well, as you'll be aware, local authorities have quite extensive powers of intervention in schools if they feel that is necessary. If I'm honest, I think there's a mixed picture, with some local authorities using those powers not on a regular basis, but obviously demonstrating a willingness to use those powers. There are other local authorities who don't seem to have used them. Since that legislation came into being, there have been a number of reasons, because of course a local authority has to give a reason for using those powers of intervention. They usually focus on standards, but sometimes they focus on a breakdown in governance arrangements, perhaps, or a failure or a breakdown in financial management. So, sometimes the budgetary issues trigger an intervention power. And the types of interventions that have been used have included, in some cases, appointing additional governors to governing bodies, or suspending a school's delegated budget so the local authority takes on, then, financial control of that particular school, or sometimes applying to the Welsh Government to entirely replace a governing body and establish an intervention board. So, if I can give you an example of where that's been used and has been successful, in Flintshire. They applied to Welsh Government for two interim executive boards, in Sir Richard Gwyn Catholic High School and in Ysgol Trefonnen. They applied to us. Those governing bodies were dissolved. The IEBs were put in place and both of those schools, which had been in special measures, moved quite rapidly, actually, out of special measures. Perhaps the most recent example of this is one that the Chair will know very well in her own constituency of Torfaen, in Cwmbran High School, where Torfaen has intervened in that case. The Welsh Government has not used those powers to date. My expectation always is that local authorities should be the first port of call, and I would encourage--and we always encourage--local authorities to take a proactive approach to intervention and to use those powers. But it's my belief that it is they who are best placed initially to do that. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you, Minister. Can I ask, then, about the national evaluation and improvement resource and how significant a role that will play in the raising of school standards, and how you feel it's evolved since it was first conceived? Kirsty Williams AM: So, this brings us back to the principle of self-evaluation and something, if we're honest, we've not been very good at. If you look at a number of chief inspectors'reports into the Welsh education system, self-evaluation has always been identified as something that is missing or underdeveloped in our system to date, hence, then, the work to establish not a new approach, but a more robust approach to self-evaluation. We've done that in conjunction, again, with the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. It's really important, throughout the entirety of our reform journey that that's done in co-construction, because we want this resource to be usable in schools. So, it's all very well having a conceptual idea and people outside the classroom working on it, but if it's of no practical use to a school leadership team, then we won't see the impact. So, it's--. We're in phase 2 at the moment, where we're doing--. So, the initial resource has been developed by the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. We're in the testing phase at the moment and having it evaluated itself, with a view to introducing that resource across the system at the start of the new academic year, in September 2020. I truly believe that, if we're to make progress in Welsh education, we have to develop the skills within our system to have robust self-evaluation. This resource gives us continuity of approach right the way across Wales. So, it's not left to an individual school to come up with a system; it's right the way across the system. My hope would be that those principles could then be applied to local education authorities, to regional school improvement services and Welsh Government as part of a whole-system approach to self-evaluation. I don't know if there's anything more you want to add, Steve. Steve Davies: Just to add that the other critical partners are Estyn themselves. Kirsty Williams AM: Oh, yes, sorry. Steve Davies: So, they have played a critical role and, as we know, as the Minister has said in the past, she may introduce policy and practice, but if Estyn are part of it then schools, usually, because they recognise that it will be part of the inspection process--it gives it greater push and support around it. So, they've been key players within it. Kirsty Williams AM: And I think, if I just say as well, that the external perception of what that's about is really important. It's not a test of school readiness for reform, it is a genuine attempt for a school to evaluate their strengths, their weaknesses and where they need to go next. It's not an Estyn checklist. And because of the word'toolkit'--the feedback was that it gave the impression of a checklist,'Just do this and check list'. So, we're actually going to change the name of that resource. So, it'll be called the national evaluation and improvement resource, rather than the toolkit, because, as I said, the feedback was that'toolkit'gave the impression of a checklist exercise, and it's got to be about more than that if it's going to be meaningful. So, it'll be changed to an'improvement resource'. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Before I bring Suzy in, can I just welcome Sian Gwenllian, who is joining us via video-conference in north Wales? Morning, Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Good morning. Can you hear me? Lynne Neagle AM: We can, yes. We can hear you very nicely, thank you. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Yes. Only a very quick one. It's about the development of the-- Kirsty Williams AM: The resource. Suzy Davies AM: Yes, the resource, thank you--about whether there were any conflicting ideas in the process of development that made it quite difficult to zone in on something that school leadership teams, in particular, could rely on. Were there differences of opinion on what this should look like? Kirsty Williams AM: Not that I'm aware of from the practitioners that I've spoken to who have been part of that. So, for instance, Suzy, you will know the very small school of Gladestry. The head of Gladestry has been involved in this process, and she said that she'd really enjoyed the process of working alongside Estyn and the OECD as a school leader to be able to shape it. But I'm not aware that there's been conflict in that process. Suzy Davies AM: I'm not suggesting that there has been; I'm just interested as to how it had worked, that's all. Steve Davies: Chair, I think, inevitably, when you bring stakeholders together, they're not going to be in total agreement as to how it's going to work, and I think initially one of the challenges was having Estyn there as part of the facilitation group. There are always some concerns that, actually, it's coming from a to inspect, oral, judgmental tick box. So, we had some early day challenges where we had to convince--and, ultimately, Estyn convinced them--that they were there to help and support as opposed to to inspect, and that the model that was developed, as the Minister said, was not going to be a tick box,'You are good at this part of self-evaluation', it was to build the skillsets up. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. So, it's got their full confidence. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, and I think again, also, what--. You know, four years into the job, what I've reflected on as well is there is this sometimes a feeling out there that the Minister says all the right stuff, but you're not actually going to do it, so, when you talk about a new approach to doing things, you're not actually serious about it. So, trying to build that confidence that we are serious about developing a new system around self-improvement, which is different from accountability--sometimes, the practitioners are like,'Oh, yes, we've heard it all before but it never actually happens.'And I think that's been a part of the constant--not pressure, but the responsibility on Welsh Government is in following through. So, we said that we were going to do this in the national mission, and we are going to do it. I'm really proud that there or thereabouts, a few months either way, we've actually kept to the timetable as outlined in the national mission, and that helps build confidence within the sector that we are committed to that programme and we're going to do what we say we're going to do. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: And a final question from me: how effective do you think the investment in school standards has been in this Assembly term, as opposed to the approach taken in the last Assembly term, where there was the protection put in place for core school budgets? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think, first of all, it's important that, whilst this additional resource is specifically targeted at school standards, that is only a part of a much wider education budget, a budget that--you know--is incredibly complex. And so it is really challenging to be able to draw straight lines--you know,'We did this and it's resulted in that'--given that we're looking at the entirety of school funding here. What's been really important is that, if you drill down into what that money has been spent on, 50 per cent of it has been directed towards professional learning in one form or another to support our teaching professionals. And that's been really important to me. I've said it time and time again: an education system cannot exceed the quality of the people who stand in front of our children day in, day out to work with them and teach them. Therefore, that investment in staff and investment in the professional learning of our staff and support for them I think is making a difference already but, importantly, will continue to make a difference. But I think it is really challenging to be able to say,'Well, we spent this bit of money and it definitely led to that', because it's such a complex picture. But that money, the way it's been spent, has been driven by evidence. And, again, what we do know from international best practice, what do we know that works in driving up standards, and then how can we align the money that we've got to supporting that? And, as I said, 50 per cent of that money has gone directly to simply supporting the professional learning of those who work with our children. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you very much. We're going to talk now a bit about schools causing concern with questions from Huw Irranca-Davies. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Thank you, Chair. If I can, just first of all, zoom in on the way in which we actually decide which schools need what support. So, one of the interesting questions for us is how do we use the different systems out there. So, we've got the school categorisation system, which we're familiar with. We've also got Estyn inspection reports, then we've got other intelligence, including local intelligence on the ground. How do you decide from that? How is it decided what schools need support, need challenge? How do we do that? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, you're right: what we have is a variety of ways in which we can identify schools that need support, or need to be challenged on their practice. But it's important not to confuse them either. So, our primary route to doing this is our school categorisation system. Sometimes, and perhaps this is inevitable--. That system is primarily there as a triage system around identifying where our resource should be spent. So, our school improvement service--it's a risk-based approach, so they can evaluate where they need to put their time, effort and resource. Sometimes, it's used by other people for other things, but that is not its primary purpose; its primary purpose there is not one of accountability, it is one of identifying risk and aligning that then to the support that is available. Estyn--now that is part of that accountability system. That is our method of holding schools and their governing bodies to account for their practice and for the work that they do. Both systems, of course, are evolving. So, how we do categorisation has changed over a period of time. The elements that go into making that judgment around the levels of support have changed, and, of course, the Estyn inspection regime is also changing. At the moment, schools are only inspected once every seven years. We're moving to a system where Estyn will be more regularly in schools. So, they are two systems, but they are different and they look at different things. But our categorisation system is how we look for those ways of identifying support for schools. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: And you've made, with feedback over the last few years, adjustments to the way that the categorisation system works. Are you content with where it is now, or do you see more adjustments being made? Have you got things in front of you that you're getting feedback on saying'Well, we need to tweak this again a little bit'? Kirsty Williams AM: So, that system has evolved over time. So, when it started, it was just a tool around secondary schools. Now, it covers the breadth of schools. Initially, on coming into office, when I first came in, it was purely driven by data, and it was also done in quartiles. So, there was a certain number of schools that had to be in the bottom, which drove practitioners mad. They were like'Ah, every year, there's going to be some of us that have to be in the bottom quartile', because of the way in which it was arranged, which seemed very unfair to them. So, we've changed that. It's not just purely driven on data now; there are other judgments--the professional judgments of our challenge advisers are taken into account. And I would expect that situation to continue to evolve to align itself to our curriculum reform, and our changes in self-evaluation. So, it's not a fixed point. I expect that that system will continue to evolve and change, so that it complements and assists in the reform journey as other parts of the system change. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Thanks for that. I think, for any impartial reader of the way that the trends have been going on this, there is some good news within that, in that, certainly, those schools that might have been identified as have been okay but coasting along, seem to be moving up the categories, although we still do have that--. Well, it's what the system is there to do, it's to identify those schools that do need that additional support. And I like your analogy of a triage system--'You're fit; keep on doing what you're doing and do it well; you need more support, we'll put the support in.'But, can I turn to those schools that are causing significant concern, and how we identify them? The Estyn chief inspector's conclusions at the end of the 2017-18 report that these schools are not being identified early enough--there's a need to do something urgently about these concerns, particularly in secondary schools. Have we addressed that? Are you content that we've addressed that concern? Was he right? Kirsty Williams AM: No, the chief inspector is absolutely right--absolutely right. I've got no beef with that statement at all. In some ways, when a school goes into special measures, in a way, that's a failure of the system, because that should have been identified sooner. So I've got no beef, as I said, with the chief inspector saying that. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: So just to ask, bearing in mind the earlier discussion we were having, how is it that we don't identify those schools? Kirsty Williams AM: That's it--you're quite right. Undoubtedly, what categorisation has done is led to a greater understanding, I think, on behalf of local education authorities'and school improvement services'knowledge about their schools. I think knowledge around schools is greatly enhanced by that process. But we are not there yet in terms of necessarily, then, moving those schools more quickly, once they've been identified as needing the highest level of support to see improvement. And secondary schools is a particular, particular challenge. So you will have seen from the last publication of categorisation data that our primary sector continues to improve--more and more and more of our primary schools are in a green rating, which is very satisfying to me. But we have got more of an issue with secondary schools, and we have a particular issue with the same schools being identified in that level of categorisation. So even though we've identified them as needing that extra help, they are not moving at pace away from that system. So there are two things that we are doing at the moment. The first is, we are, again, looking at different sets of data that can give us even earlier warning systems that things are going wrong in a school--and perhaps Steve will explain later. For instance, staff sickness, and carefully monitoring staff sickness, because there is a direct correlation between high levels of staff sickness in a school and what is going on in the school. And Steve can explain some of this work later. But we're piloting a new approach to those schools that are causing concern. Each local authority has been asked to identify two of their high schools that they are particularly worried about. And we have a new multi-agency approach, working with those schools to try and move them more forward. So it's two from each region, a multi-agency panel, working with the school. And that multi-agency panel includes the school itself, the local authority, the regional consortia school improvement staff, Estyn and Welsh Government--as a multi-agency panel to support improvement in that school. So, for instance, what would normally happen, Estyn would come in, Estyn would make a judgment on the school--requiring special measures or urgent improvement--and Estyn would go away. They'd go away for six months, and then they'd come back in six months, and they'd make another judgment,'No, still not good enough', and disappear for six months. We're saying--Estyn and the Welsh Government have agreed that's not the best approach; Estyn need to be part of the solution, rather than just coming and making a judgment. The initial feedback from this trial is very, very positive. Actually, we've had local authorities coming to us and saying,'Can we put more schools in? Rather than just having two of our high schools, can we engage more in this project and this pilot?'It's being evaluated by Cardiff Metropolitan University and Swansea University, so we're having some academic overview to see, actually, does this approach work, can we evidence it--that it actually makes a difference? And it's actually--I'd like to claim all the credit for it, but it's actually not dissimilar to something that's happening in Scotland as well. But we knew that carrying on doing the same old thing clearly wasn't moving these schools, we needed a new approach, and this is what we're doing at the moment. So it's relatively new, but the initial feedback is positive. Steve, I don't know-- Steve Davies: I think your important point is about,'What about the schools that are sliding in that direction?'And it's bringing together what we know from Estyn, but also, critically, local authorities have knowledge of their schools, and so do consortia. We've got to be better at bringing those together. So, the Minister gave the example of staff sickness--not always a trigger, but it's one of those. If you look at movement of pupils out of a school, you can look at complaints, you can look at, actually, emerging increased use of HR resources that a school pulls on a local authority. None of these have been pushed up into the public domain, but they're important antennae. The point the Minister made about Estyn as well is, historically, when they go into special measures, Estyn, at the end of that week, call in, historically, either the region or the local authority, they will feed back to one of them, and then they go away. So, they are staying with it. So, we are brining together the knowledge. But, as the Minister said, we want to keep a very clear distinction between the accountability and the transparency to the public, to parents, with the very detailed collective work of that multi-agency group to actually make that difference over time. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Okay. So, does that--. I'd love to go further, but time is against us. Does that deal with the issue of the schools that have been identified in those categories of requiring significant improvement and requiring special measures? Are those the ones that will be identified now, or is that above and beyond that again? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, those are the ones that are primarily at the forefront of our minds, but this way of sharing data better, to step in earlier, is part of our attempt to address what the chief inspector says about stepping in early--not waiting until a school gets into special measures and a formal judgment from Estyn of that, but actually using that intelligence to get support in there earlier. The three elements that that multi-agency approach look at are: what are the fundamentals that need addressing in this school? What is the capacity of the school itself to be able to address those fundamentals? And, what extra support needs to go into that senior management team and the governing body to get those fundamentals addressed? And actually, what does sustainable improvement look like? Because, again, one of the issues, sometimes, that happens is, a school goes into a category with Estyn, there's a big push and a big,'We must do something'and the school comes out, but actually, that improvement is not sustainable. It's the low-hanging fruit; it's the easy wins that have been achieved, but actually, perhaps some of the fundamental challenges underlying in that school haven't been addressed in that process. So, this is about what will sustainable improvement look like in six months, what's it going to look like in 12 months and what's it going to look like in 18 months. So, actually, a more strategic, longer term approach to real change in a school rather than, perhaps, some of the easy-to-fix items that make a school as if it's doing better, but we really haven't tackled some of the underlying problems that make that school vulnerable to slipping back. Does that make sense? Lynne Neagle AM: I've got a couple of supplementaries on--. Sorry? Kirsty Williams AM: Does that make sense? Lynne Neagle AM: Yes. We've got a couple of supplementaries on this, first from Suzy and then from Sian. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you for that, Chair. Obviously, I'm pleased to hear that this work is being done, but I'm wondering--. What strikes me, in the recent past, at least, particularly as we've got the usual suspects in this category--. I've got to ask myself why it is that councils have been reluctant, perhaps, to step in with these schools earlier, particularly as they've got consortia or middle-tier support as well. Has there been a deficit in that space that has meant that councils don't feel equipped to step in? I just don't really get it why they've been reluctant to step in so far. If they've been nervous about doing it, because they don't feel that they've got the tools to do it, then I think that's pretty important, because as you were saying, we were talking about fundamentals; surely, councils have been able to deal with fundamentals, and more importantly, consortia up until now. Because, obviously, we're asking these players to give us evidence at some point, so perhaps I'd like to challenge them on how come we're here now. Kirsty Williams AM: And rightly so. Suzy Davies AM: I'm not laying this at your door. Kirsty Williams AM: And rightly so. I guess each local authority will have an explanation for each individual school, I suspect. What's crucial to me is that we have to--. I see our job as corralling the collective effort, and I think, for too long in the system, there has been a lack of co-ordination. So, this is about bringing and corralling a collective effort to address this, going forward, in more sustainable way. And I think it does come back to this issue around self-evaluation and a willingness to be open, honest and upfront about some of the challenges that we've got. It's not easy, is it? It's not easy to accept or to acknowledge sometimes when things are-- Suzy Davies AM: That they don't know how to do this. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, that they're going badly, or perhaps they don't know exactly how to make the difference. So this approach, as I said, is a new way of trying to coral that collective effort across the board. But, I don't know if Steve--because you've done other roles in the system, so perhaps you've got a different insight. Steve Davies: I think you're right. The variation across the country, across local authorities--. There are some local authorities that we've worked with and we identify have taken the appropriate action. There are others that we're working with, and yes, at its best, it's done as a joint exercise where they use their regional school improvement service to help in the identification that there is a need for this. They take advice as to what the action is, whether it is, as the Minister said, in the more significant areas, a board, or whether a warning notice comes in terms of standards or finance. So, we're working with them and we're working with the Welsh Local Government Association to share that practice. An example of that work is: we have done a development training session for cabinet members for education, and scrutiny leads for education across Wales, and all 22 local authorities came to that and engaged with that. That was partly about self-improvement, but it was also about where significant issues arise, you have to constructively confront them. And that comes with what the region knows, and increasingly, we're looking to have it consistently across 22 local authorities, so they are collecting all the additional data that we referred to earlier, so they can legitimately hold a mirror up and say,'This is a real concern that we have. We're not punishing you, but we're registering the seriousness, and we want you to address it.'And we're making progress. I believe it's genuinely more consistent now, but I'd be lying if I said that there was consistency across all 22 local authorities. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. I'm conscious of time. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. I've got a supplementary from Sian, then back to Huw. Sian Gwenllian AM: Because you are moving to a more sophisticated approach in terms of identifying problems sooner, and so can offer the support earlier, is it time to think about moving away from the system of categorisation entirely? That is, has the categorisation system reached the end of its usefulness, and is the multi-agency approach, this more sophisticated approach, a better way, ultimately, of being able to assist schools in moving forward? Kirsty Williams AM: I think, Sian, as I said earlier, the categorisation system has evolved over time, and my expectation is that it will continue to evolve, because it has to be consistent with our overall approach to school improvement and raising standards. I expect OECD will have feedback for us on this important part of our system, and we'll wait to see exactly what they say about it, but as I said in answer to Huw Irranca-Davies earlier, I haven't got a closed mind; we've demonstrated over the last four years our willingness to change the system to make it a smarter system, and we will continue to keep that under review, as we move forward. If I could just go back briefly, it doesn't sound like a very exciting thing, does it, when we say we've been doing work with the WLGA, with cabinet members, but also scrutiny, because that's a really important part of the jigsaw as well, is actually local government scrutiny of the performance of your education portfolio holder and the leadership of your council. So this is about trying to up the ante on all sides, so that those issues around'What are you doing in your local authority to use the powers that you have?'You know, sometimes, making sure that everybody in that authority--those in power and those who are there to hold those in power to account--have the necessary skills, knowledge and understanding to do that appropriately. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Huw, briefly. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Yes, briefly. I only have one final question. We've talked a lot about early identification; getting in there and then managing the improvement, this triage approach there, and then getting some grip of it, as well, in doing all of that. But my question now is on what we currently have. I won't touch on the primary schools, but let's just look at secondary schools--11 per cent of secondary schools inspected in the last two academic years judged as unsatisfactory, needing urgent improvement. There will always be secondary schools and primary schools that hit moments of crisis for one reason or another, but 11 per cent to me, and to any layperson, would seem unreasonably high. Are you--? It would be daft to ask you if you're content. What is a level that you would be content with of having schools in red category in Wales? Kirsty Williams AM: You're right. Schools will need different levels of support at different points, and sometimes, it's not because of a crisis. So, for instance, in my region, we do have an increase in the number of schools in the amber category. That's because we've seen in that particular region a number of headteachers retire because they've reached retirement age, and there are new headteachers. Well, that is a moment of risk in the school--when senior leadership changes. Nothing else has changed in that school, but the simple fact that you have a new leader, sometimes in those cases it might be their first headship. That means that that school is going to need a little bit of extra support, so it isn't always just a crisis that needs extra support, there are just general things that happen in the life of a school that could lead to it. But you're absolutely right--we have a particular challenge in the secondary sector where we have not been able to move individual schools forward at pace. And 11 per cent is not acceptable to me, Huw, which is why we have introduced this new pilot to address those schools where, persistently, we have concerns about their ability to move forward. If we'd have carried on doing the same thing, I suspect we would have just carried on getting the same result--hence the need for a new approach to those schools that are causing concern. Steve Davies: Very briefly, the things we talked about earlier was how we measure the performance of schools, particularly at GCSEs, with a narrow focus. As was said earlier, some of these are the same groups--they trip in and then they don't come out. Our belief is, from research, that they concentrate on squeezing the pips to get the grades up in some small areas for a period of time, and you can do that by targeting and immersing them. Estyn can tick the box to say your grades have got better, but we haven't handled the serious underpinning issues--leadership, teaching and learning, and bringing those together. As the Minister said, what does sustainable improvement look like in six, 12,18 months? It isn't just, as important as they are, getting those exam grades up a bit. They're the fundamental--. And if they're all agreed as the indicators at the outset, we're more likely--. So it's multi-agency; it's not a little activity, it's a major strategy. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Hefin David has some questions now on the middle tier. Hefin David AM: I'd like to consider the work of the consortia. In 2016, your election manifesto very clearly said that you wanted to abolish regional consortia--three words in it. Why haven't you done it? Kirsty Williams AM: Because, given that you're such a keen student of my manifesto, you'll also know that-- Hefin David AM: It was only three words. Kirsty Williams AM: The Liberal Democrat manifesto also said that we supported major local government reform and a major reduction in the number of local government units. That hasn't happened. I have to say genuinely, my experience over the last four years has proven to me the value of regional working, and in the absence of significant local government reform, I think it's absolutely vital that we have scale in school improvement services--scale that I don't think can be delivered across 22 individual local authorities. Hefin David AM: Okay. So, if there was local government reform, you would abolish the consortia. Kirsty Williams AM: I think if there was significant local government reform and we could demonstrate that those units had such a scale that they could perform the functions of regional consortia, then I think it would be inevitable that any education Minister would look to see whether there was an opportunity to change structures. But in the absence of that, Hefin, I have been absolutely convinced whilst doing this job that you need larger units to be able to carry out successful school improvement work, and I think it would be reckless to advocate the system going back to school improvement being organised in 22 different ways. Hefin David AM: Okay. Do you think that the work of the four consortia has been consistent and effective? Kirsty Williams AM: The school improvement services? Hefin David AM: The four consortia. Kirsty Williams AM: I think, as with individual local education authorities, there are some regional consortia services that have performed really highly--and that's not me saying that, that's Estyn, but gives us assurance around that--and there are others that need to improve. I think the consortia themselves would admit that they, since their establishment, have found new ways of working. Initially, they were very separate entities that did things their own way. Increasingly, over recent years, we have seen those consortia working together on a national approach, but delivered on a regional basis. So I think they themselves have evolved over time. But we are constantly looking for optimum delivery from those particular organisations, but as I said, I think it would be absolutely reckless to go back to a situation where school improvement services were being delivered individually on 22 different bases. Hefin David AM: Okay. I'm happy to accept that you've changed your opinion there; that's no problem at all. But with regard to the four consortia, and we'll take Education through Regional Working as an example, it does things differently to the other three. Is that a cause for concern, or do you think that's entirely appropriate? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, ERW does things differently, but then so does the Education Achievement Service. EAS is constituted in a different way to the Central South Consortium. What I'm interested in is not necessarily how they are constituted and organised, I'm interested in the effectiveness of that organisation to deliver for children and for teachers. ERW has got particular challenges, and we continue to work with those in ERW to address those, but increasingly, as I said, what we are seeing the regional consortia do is develop a national approach to school improvement services but deliver that on a regional basis so that there is greater consistency in terms of delivery. Hefin David AM: Are you happy that, within the ERW area, local authorities employ their own improvement advisers, rather than doing it in the way that the others do? Kirsty Williams AM: We have discussed this at length with them. My preference would be for school improvement officers to be employed in the centre, and we continue to have those discussions, but what's really important to understand is that the regional consortia are not a beast of the Government; they are a beast of the local authorities that have worked together to create a school improvement service that meets their needs. So we can't impose that solution, and we continue to discuss with ERW what is the optimal way, and they continue to discuss with their constituent local authorities about how that should be organised. Hefin David AM: Are you concerned that Neath Port Talbot have given notice that they want to withdraw from regional working? Kirsty Williams AM: I think it's really disappointing that Neath Port Talbot have published that notice. What's important for me is to understand--not for me, it will be important for Estyn. It will be really important for us to understand how Neath Port Talbot intend to support their schools and their teachers if they were to withdraw from ERW, especially at what is a very, very critical time. The regional consortia have a key role to play in supporting systems with the introduction of the curriculum. I would want to know from Neath Port Talbot how they are going to do that without being part of that organisation. And, of course, there's the added complexity that so much of our money is channelled through to schools via the regional consortia. So, I would want to understand from Neath Port Talbot how they're going to safeguard their schools and make sure that the children who are receiving their education in Neath Port Talbot are not disadvantaged if they were to follow through on that decision. Hefin David AM: Do you feel that it's your role to intervene in that area and instruct Neath Port Talbot and ERW as to how they should resolve this issue? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, as I said, I would be seeking assurances-- Hefin David AM: What does that mean, though,'seeking assurances'? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, Neath Port Talbot would need to demonstrate to me how they're going to address these issues. If they're not part of ERW and their schools and their children are not going to be in receipt of the support from ERW, as I said, especially at this critical time, how are they intending to do that? I haven't seen those plans, but if they were to push forward and follow through on the notice, I would want to see them and I suspect Estyn would want to see them also. Hefin David AM: Okay, just last issue on that: you're just waiting to see what Neath Port Talbot do next, then. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, we have written to Neath Port Talbot to ask them to demonstrate to us, if they were to pull out of ERW, how they're going to meet their functions. I have not heard back from them. Hefin David AM: Steve, did you want to say something? Steve Davies: Obviously--[Inaudible. ]--that point. We wrote to them last Friday, and we are awaiting their response now. Hefin David AM: Okay. So, that's where we are. Okay. There was the document in 2015--'National model for regional working'. Is that the current document? Are there plans to change or update it, or is that exactly where we stand? Kirsty Williams AM: So, that is the current model. Some work was undertaken in 2017 and 2018 to look to update that model and revise that model. Some specific recommendations were put forward about additional services that could be organised on a regional basis; primarily, that is a specialist human resources resource. We know that, because of austerity in some local authorities, HR departments have been really stretched. Education HR is a specialist service, it's not generic. It's often a service that--. I see that as part of a school improvement service. Support for governors also has been stretched within individual local authorities. So, a proposal was put forward to include specialist HR and governor support as part of the regional model. That was rejected by local government. Our local authorities did not want to include that in the regional model. However, I must say, having presented that evidence, some of our local authorities, even though there wasn't a national agreement to put that into the national model, have pooled their resources, and those services are being delivered and supported on a regional basis. So, for instance, the Education Achievement Service now provide specialist HR resource, and EAS and Central South provide governor support. So, although we weren't successful in persuading local government to adopt a new national model, local authorities in those areas saw the value of moving that way. Hefin David AM: So, with that in mind, and perhaps I'll put this to Steve Davies, everything the Minister just said, and also the line in the document--'The implementation of this model will change over time'-- is it time to go back to that document and review it from a procedural point of view? Steve Davies: I don't think it's necessarily timely to go back and have a complete review of it. But, certainly, we are in ongoing discussions with the Welsh Local Government Association, both in terms of work with local authorities, and the type of intervention in schools. So, we keep a constant watch as to which areas that we believe we could develop further. We are not currently intending to do a wholesale review of that. As the Minister touched on earlier, there is some work to get consistency across the current area, particularly, as we just mentioned, in relation to ERW work. So, it's getting a consistent approach at that level, and sharing the practice. I think what is emerging, as the Minister said, is that there are two regions who have already made this shift to pool services. I think the two other regions are seeing and will see the benefits of that, and instead of forcing it through, we'd expect that to evolve. But we're not, at this stage, looking to a wholesale review of the national model. Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin. Hefin David AM: And Professor Dylan Jones's strategic delivery group seems to have had quite a warm welcome in the sector. Is it fair to say that? Kirsty Williams AM: I believe so. I'm very grateful to Dylan for his hard work and his skill in chairing that group, and I think it's been welcomed by all, so that we can get that clarity and consistency about the roles and responsibilities of the individual partners and players in the middle tier. Hefin David AM: And when will the work be completed, and what will the outcomes be? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, the group is currently engaging with Steve and other officials on agreeing a plan, but also, crucially, that plan is there to support the successful implementation of the curriculum, so that we're very clear about the roles and responsibilities in the middle tier in this crucial phase following the publication. We have to move now from the publication into a relentless focus on implementation. The history of devolution is full of fantastic documents, and, shall I say, patchy implementation. The work that has gone into that curriculum is too important for implementation to be left to chance. It's too important. It's too good to be left to chance. So, everything now is a relentless focus on successful implementation. Hefin David AM: Yes, but I'm thinking that the strategic delivery is reviewing the role of the middle tier. So, you know, what do we expect to see from it, notwithstanding the kind of softly, softly approach that you've already talked about? Steve Davies: It was set up, actually, about 18 months ago--just under. It was set up to build collective efficacy, because what people out there are seeing is that there's a confusion of roles, in what the regions are doing, and it was building that collective efficacy so everyone was behind the wheel. So, they've been looking at who is doing what for the last 18 months, and exploring and making some changes themselves. It's not just what they do with Government or what they do with each other; it's just happened that it's timely, because one of the key bits of feedback we believe we will get from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development is we have had co-construction, we'd had collective effort, but we need to do more, particularly within the middle tier. This is not controlled by Government, it is arm's length from Government, and it's not their job to get it ready for the new curriculum--that's a key part of it. This group will have an ongoing role; it's not a task and finish group. It does feed back in to the Minister but there's no formal mechanism by which they have to report. Hefin David AM: Okay, that's very clear. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. I've got supplementaries from Suzy, then Sian. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Briefly, please. Suzy Davies AM: I think this is a really interesting evidence session. What I'm about to say, I say it even though I'm a big localist: it all seems to be heading in one direction of a national service. Is the strategic group even thinking in these terms, obviously building in local accountability? But it'll just make it so much easier in terms of accountability and consistency to monitor what the middle tier does, if it's a national service, like the National Adoption Service. Local delivery, national service--is it heading in that direction? Kirsty Williams AM: That's not the intention of setting the group up. As Steve just said, I receive feedback from Dylan, because I meet Dylan in this particular capacity on a planned basis. He is there to give me advice on the middle tier, and to give me advice on what he thinks Welsh Government needs to do. But I've not had that conversation with him about a national service. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Well, thank you for that. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: What I was going to raise has been answered already, that is that, from what I can see, the work that Professor Dylan Jones is doing has evolved somewhat. I felt that, originally, the idea was to look at the middle tier in terms of any kind of duplication that was happening, and where it was possible to tighten up the people going into schools from different directions. But it appears that it has evolved to be something that's much more than that, and that it is placing a focus on the curriculum and other aspects of the educational system. Is there a risk for them to lose focus in that sense? Kirsty Williams AM: No, not at all. I think they are very, very clear around establishing roles and responsibilities for each of the players and to be very clear about the expectations that each part of the middle tier can have of each other, as to what they can expect from their partners in the middle tier. And absolutely, it is about making sure that there isn't duplication, that people aren't second-guessing each other's work, and there are clear demarcations about who does what in the system, and, as I said, knowing that you can rely on your colleague in the middle tier to do the bit that they are responsible for. So, I don't think there's a question of it losing focus. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We've got a lot of areas to cover so we are going to have to pick up our pace a bit. The next questions are from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Thinking about you as a Minister trying to see what the long-term trends are with regard to raising standards and improving educational attainment, is that difficult, because the performance measures have changed, haven't they? We can't compare like-for-like now, because of the changes that have been made in the way that performance is measured. So, to begin with, is that a challenge, to see whether progress has been made? And secondly, what evidence do you as Minister use to look at the long-term trends? Kirsty Williams AM: The first thing to say, with regard to changes to performance measures--you're right that change to those does make it, in some cases, more difficult to look at trends over a period of time. But those changes are made for really good reasons. If we change a performance measure, it is done to ensure that it is in the best interests of learners. And I think the best interests of learners always trumps the ease of comparison. I understand that, for researchers and for opposition Members, even for Ministers, it would be simpler to have the same set of measures over a period of time. But if we know that those things are driving behaviours that are unhelpful to children, and not in the best interests of children, then we have to change them, even thought that then does create challenges in different areas. With regard to what do we look at, there are a number of ways that we gain data and look at data in the system: everything from the categorisation system we spoke of earlier, and trends in categorisation; we look at Estyn reports; we continue to look at examination results. But we're trying to develop a broader range of data and statistics that give us a whole picture of the education performance, rather than narrowing down on one simple indicator that tells you one thing but doesn't tell you everything. But I don't know, Steve, if there's anything further that you'd like to add. Steve Davies: It's going back to what the Member raised earlier, in terms of the range of things that you look at--things that can make a difference. So, when Estyn review schools, or we're looking to develop national frameworks for things like mental health and well-being, which look to the practice that enables raising standards, it's collecting that information, both at a national level, through the annual review of Estyn, as well as our engagement with regions and local authorities. So, it's looking at the evidence base that goes beyond, but impacts on data. And, inevitably, we will use the Programme for International Student Assessment, and any other external assessments that come through organisations like the OECD. And even where we've changed the performance measures, we still have, at national level, the ongoing data. So, if you looked at level 2 plus, we believe it is important that children get five good GCSEs--for higher education and for employment. So, we've not lost sight of those at a national level--we're not using them as a narrow set of performance measures for individual schools. Kirsty Williams AM: So, if we look at--level 2 plus is a good example. We know that a relentless focus on that single measure, as a way of judging the system, leads to a set of behaviours in schools. It narrows the focus onto a certain part of the cohort, it narrows the curriculum, when we know that children-- Sian Gwenllian AM: I'm not challenging the fact that you've changed the performance measures--I understand that, and having a broader way of looking is better in the long run. I'm just saying, because there's been this change, it makes it more of a challenge--whilst accepting why you've made the changes, but it does present more of a challenge, presumably, because you have to look at more indicators, and take evidence from different places. But I take it that you're confident that the trajectory is going in the right way. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, I think we are making improvements. But you're right: it does make it more challenging. But those changes are being made for the right reasons, as I said, whether that be at level 2 plus. Look at English literature. I understand why perhaps a performance measure around English was introduced, but the effect of that was that significant numbers of children--and, it must be said, usually children who are entitled to free school meals--were suddenly not sitting English literature GCSE. We've changed that performance measure, and guess what? Last year, we saw a significant increase in the number of children that were sitting English literature GCSE. For standards of literacy and oracy, I think studying literature is really, really important, before we even get into the joy of introducing children to the written word and the love of reading. So, we make changes. Yes, it causes challenges, but we're making those changes because we believe that they are in the best interest of children, and that has to trump ease of comparison. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Why have you decided to ask the consortia, Estyn and so on not to report on local data or regional level data? How do we then come to conclusions about what is working if it isn't presented on a local authority and regional basis? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think the thing to say about the communications from Welsh Government, Estyn, and the WLGA is it's not about not communicating the data, it's about challenging people on how that data should be used. So, the data is still available, but it's a challenge to them about how to use that data. So, for instance, when we're presenting data that compares local authority to local authority, you could have a local authority that says,'There we go, I'm above the national average. I don't need to worry about the education in my local authority, because I'm above the average, or I'm better than my neighbour.'That doesn't necessarily mean that everything is right in your local education authority. Perhaps your children should be doing even better than what you're presented with. So, actually, it's not about hiding data; it's about how you use the data appropriately. And sometimes, how we were presenting data in the past was lulling some people into a false sense of security about the performance of their system. So, it's about how you use data, and that's what the communication from Welsh Government and the WLGA and Estyn was about: think very carefully about this data and what it's telling you about your system, and don't be lulled into a false sense of security that you may be doing brilliantly. Or, perhaps, looking at your data, you may think,'Oh, my goodness me, we're not doing very well at all', but, actually, more careful consideration of that might show that your school's impact on those children is really, really a positive one. So, you've got to use that data in the context. So, it's not about less data. If anything, it's about more data and, crucially for me, it's about more intelligent use and interrogation of that data, about truly what it's telling you about your system. Sian Gwenllian AM: But again, the Welsh Government--. You have continued to publish the local and regional level data. So, doesn't that contradict what you've been telling the consortia and everyone else? Kirsty Williams AM: No, not at all. As I said, we're not in the business of trying to hide data--I believe absolutely in full transparency. And in terms of level 2 data, I think I'm not moving away from the point that I think it's really important that more and more children get five really good GCSEs. I think it's important for their life chances. It is about how that data is used, not about hiding data or making that data not available. Steve Davies: Can I, very briefly--? We didn't just send a letter out collectively. We've now carried out training jointly with WLGA and Estyn on how to use that data. So, it's not just looking where your LA is; it's also not looking at whether your school's better than average for the authority. And it is well received, and it should broaden the approach of scrutiny committees to beyond what historically was, if I'm honest, looking at the league table for their authority or looking at the league table of local authorities. It's not that they shouldn't be looking at that, but they need to dig much, much deeper underneath it. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. We're going to go on now to Suzy. I'm going to appeal for brief questions and brief answers so that we can cover the rest of the questions. Suzy Davies AM: I'll shorten these questions, okay. We know why you got rid of the old measures. We've got interim measures now. What are they telling you about the success you've had in trying to avoid the bad behaviour? Short answers. Kirsty Williams AM: It's impossible. [Laughter. ] I think it's inevitable: whatever kind of measures we put in place, people will look to maximise their success in those measures, and I don't think we'll ever come up with a system where those measures are absolutely perfect. What's really important to me is that we're really, really, really challenging schools to look at the performance of all of their children, rather than just at a very, very narrow cohort around those C/D boundaries, which we knew was detrimental, potentially, to more able and talented children and really pushing those Bs to As and those As to A*s, and children for whom actually just getting in to school on a daily basis is an achievement, and the school has done well to provide that. So, our new capped 9 makes sure that there is breadth across a range of subjects, rather than just focusing on a narrower and narrower bunch of subject opportunities for children, and our new third-third-third system enables schools to really look at their performance. So if their capped 9 score is high, what's driving that? Is it because the bottom third of the cohort is doing really well, and the impact on those children is above and beyond what could be expected, but actually, you're not doing very well for your more able and talented; you're not pushing them on? Alternatively, maybe your capped 9 score is because your MAT children are doing incredibly well, but actually, you're not really making the progress for the middle tier of those children. It allows us to have a greater focus on the performance of our FSM children--where they really are within that system. So, it's a much more granular--. And crucially for me, it looks at the impact for every child, because every child has to matter in the system, and what we had before was a narrowing of curriculum choice and a narrowing on a certain cohort of children. Suzy Davies AM: So are the permanent measures likely to be pretty similar to what you've got now? Because the research--I don't know if the research is complete yet. When will you be publishing the new permanent evaluation? Kirsty Williams AM: Sue, you're right: they're interim measures at the moment, and we will need to make sure that the performance measures are aligned to the new curriculum. That, potentially, of course--. Because Wales's review of qualifications potentially has an impact on what those finally will look like, so that work is ongoing at the moment, and unless Steve can tell me off the top of his head when we expect that to be completed by, I will send you a note. But they're interim at the moment, because we need to align them to the new curriculum. Suzy Davies AM: I think we understand that. [Inaudible. ]--date. Steve Davies: No, no. This is not a quick fix. This is a two to three-year research base. The new qualifications for the new curriculum will not start until 2025. They have to be in place for 2022. There's a three-year roll on. I would expect the broad structure of the interim measures to continue over that time. There will be some tweaks for consistency. It's what's wrapped around those interim measures that I touched on earlier: the other evidence that we bring to bear about the effectiveness of a school, but we do want to say to schools that on the whole, broadly speaking, the interim measures will carry on for two, three years. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, and the reason I asked that is right at the beginning of this session, the Minister said to the Chair that this PS100 million that's going into school improvements will be going into things that work. We need some evidence that the interim measures are going to work as well, so when are they going to be evaluated? Steve Davies: Well, we've only just used them for one year. Suzy Davies AM: That's what I'm asking you. Steve Davies: We've signalled that they're only going to be in place for three years. We are carrying out our own review of the impact of those and that's been built in, but I expect the OECD report--because it is an extensive report--to give us feedback on how those things are working now, and some steer, as they did with the last report, as to the direction we would want to go into. Kirsty Williams AM: And what I'm also interested in is those performance management measures around schools. Yes, they're about outcomes for children, but actually are about a broader suite of behaviours within that school, so, yes, qualifications and grades are an important part of a performance measure, but actually, I have other expectations of schools, above and beyond simply qualifications. And so, we would want our permanent set of performance measures to look at a wider set of behaviours within a school, and I think because--. Exams are important--of course they are, qualifications are important--but the way in which those schools achieve those results are also important. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Would you anticipate that including well-being, then? Suzy Davies AM: In a whole-school approach. Kirsty Williams AM: I absolutely--and we need to find a way of how we can truly measure that. Sometimes, children's well-being is influenced by lots of things outside the control of a school. So, I don't want schools to be held accountable for things that they have no control over, because of the circumstances in which a child may be living. But, absolutely: well-being and how the culture of the school addresses well-being is really important to me. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Suzy. Move on to PISA, please. Suzy Davies AM: How useful is PISA for you in helping school improvement? I know that it's not always the thing that you enjoy watching or looking out for. But, genuinely, how useful is it? Kirsty Williams AM: It is one of a range of tools that we need to look at. Sian, quite rightly, talked about consistency. PISA is one thing where there is a level of consistency, so it will continue to be, I think, an important part of how we test how our system is doing. Suzy Davies AM: We know that you are a little bit encouraged, but we are not out of the woods yet. You mentioned this in Plenary when we talked about PISA. How confident are you that we are on track for meeting these targets that were set before your time, or do you think that having those targets is helpful? Is it setting up aspirations that are incapable of being met within a period of time? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, those long-term targets of a score around 500 are part of'Our National Mission', and we have to keep the pressure on to strive. They are testing, but we have to keep the pressure on to strive to reach them. In some cases, I can be quite encouraged. If we look at reading scores for girls, we are almost there, but that just demonstrates what a journey we've got with our boys to address. For me, one of the ways in which we will reach those targets and achieve them is further progress on our more able and talented children. Although we are now performing at an OECD average, I will be the first person to admit that, although we have seen an improvement in the higher level skills of our more able and talented children, we do not perform at an OECD average with regard to those level 6 and level 5 scores. Suzy Davies AM: Even within the UK, really, we are quite far behind. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes. So, I think that's where we really need to push on. That's one of the reasons why we have introduced a more able and talented budget to support that, and our Seren programme, which is delivering fantastic results post-16. That's why we're introducing the principles of Seren earlier into children's careers, bringing it down from year 9 upwards, to be able to drive improvements. So, I think that that's the area that we are particularly keen to work on: making sure that more of our children perform at the OECD average at level 5 and level 6. Clearly, we've got more work to do on reading. We are working with southern Ireland, who have consistently done well with reading scores, to look to see what lessons we can learn to press on with there with reading. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. My final question on this. You recognise it as a priority, particularly for boys. Does that mean that the focus will then drift slightly from maths, where there has been some success; and drift from science, where the encouragement of more people to take GCSE science has reduced the number of high-level passes? Kirsty Williams AM: First, we have to have a system that is capable of doing all of those of things at the same time. We can't accept a system that says,'Well, we can do a bit over here, but that means we have to--.'We have to have a system, Suzy, that can drive improvements at all levels. That's my expectation. Suzy Davies AM: The balloon needs to be bigger not just squeezing it at one end. Kirsty Williams AM: Absolutely, yes. That's my expectation of this system. You have to deliver across all of these. We have seen some progress. As I've said, it's far from perfect, and we've got more work to do, but we have to deliver across all three domains, as we did last time. And I'm not going to make any apologies for changing the performance indicators around science. It was a travesty that there were children who never had the opportunity to sit a science GCSE. We don't have to make assumptions about the nature of many, many, many of those children. We have seen a significant increase in the number of children who are having the opportunity to sit GCSE science and who are passing GCSE science. So, I'm not going to make any apologies about that. One of the reasons that I suspect we have ended up with poor science scores is because of the previous policy around science entries and science qualifications. Again, one of the reasons that we have changed it isn't just solely because we need to do better in PISA, but I think that by changing it, we will see an impact on PISA. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you for that. Lynne Neagle AM: The final set of questions is from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: I just want to discuss an issue that I know is important to you, namely closing the attainment gap between pupils who are eligible for free school meals and those who are not eligible for free school meals. Unfortunately, the problem persists, doesn't it? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes. We are not where we need to be in terms of the performance, not only of our children on free school meals, but the performance of our looked-after children, and the performance of some children from some ethnic minority groups. So, we will continue to look to support those learners in a variety of ways, again looking to amend our practice on the basis of evidence that is given to us from our experts who are there to advise us. There is clearly more that we need to do. There has been some progress in some areas, but it is not where I would want it to be. Sian Gwenllian AM: But, this is despite the fact that there is PS475 million that has been invested in the pupil development grant, for this exact purpose of closing the attainment gap. But, the problem persists, and in some places, it's deteriorating. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think that, as I said, I am not shying away from any assumption or declaration that we need to do better. But, I do think that we need to acknowledge where progress has been made. If we go back to look at what PISA has said about our performance, the PISA results show that pupils in Wales are relatively more able to overcome the disadvantage of their background than is the average in OECD countries. So, our children are doing better in that, and that gives me encouragement. That's not me saying that; that's there. If we look at pupils who are eligible for free school meals, they do score below their better-off counterparts in PISA by some 34 points. The gap in England is 40 points. So, again, that gap is smaller here in Wales. If we look at basic levels of qualifications, back in--. It's difficult to make comparisons because of all the reasons we have talked about, but if we look back to 2006 and we look at the very basic level of qualifications, which is a level 1 qualification, we have seen a jump from 9. 4 per cent of children in 2006 achieving a level 1 qualification to over 18 per cent. So, there is progress. There is evidence that the resources that we are spending are making a difference. But, clearly, we are not where we would want to be. That's why we will continue to focus those resources on those children, where we need it. But, we need to do that earlier. Sticking plasters in years 10 and 11 aren't going to cut it. We need to get this right for those children, the moment that they come into a nursery and the moment that they start their formal education at the age of 5. That's how we are going to make the difference. Providing catch-up, of course, we need to do for those kids; we can't throw those year 10s and year 11s to the wind. We have to support those children. But, we will see real improvement when we get in there earlier. Sian Gwenllian AM: But I'm sure that that is a disappointment to you, because it has been a personal priority for you as well. In terms of minority ethnic learners, while there are some groups within that category who are achieving, there is underachievement happening here as well, isn't there? It's not consistent across the minority ethnic group. Is that something that you will be focusing upon? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, and that's why we have committed to maintaining a ring-fenced grant to local authorities of some PS10 million, to support education of our minority ethnic children. But, again, you are right, you are absolutely right, Sian. We need a much more sophisticated conversation about what is really going on in attainment across minority ethnic groups so that we can best target that resource and have a conversation about what the differences are. You are absolutely correct: there is a real mixed picture. If we look at black Welsh girls entitled to free school meals, they perform almost at the national average for all children--not FSM children; the national average for all children. Black Welsh boys don't, but neither do white Welsh boys. So, there is a really complex picture here, and I really welcome a debate about acknowledging the various levels of performance of BAME children, and where the gaps in performance lie. You are quite right: it is a complex picture in the system. I'm committed to continuing to support educational opportunities, and that's why have ring-fenced the minority ethnic achievement grant. There are some interesting data there. Some children are doing very, very well; others, we need to concentrate on. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian, this will need to be the last question, I'm afraid. Sian Gwenllian AM: Sorry? Lynne Neagle AM: This is going to have to be the last question. Sian Gwenllian AM: The last question. Lynne Neagle AM: Yes. Sian Gwenllian AM: Fine. In terms of looked-after children, which is one of the groups where attainment isn't where we would like it to be, there was some improvement in 2016 at key stage 4, but it has been disappointing. Do we know what's been happening in 2019? Kirsty Williams AM: The 2019 data will be published next month, and there has been significant activity. You are right: in recent years, the data have been poor and not where we would want it to be. That's why we have had a reformed approach to PDG LAC; the employment of PDG LAC co-ordinators across the regions. We've identified new resource in the new financial year to test new approaches, so, for instance, virtual school approaches, where we know, in other systems, that has worked. But, we expect the next set of data around the performance of this particular group of learners in March. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay, and you hope to see progress. Kirsty Williams AM: I don't want to speculate, but I hope so. Sian Gwenllian AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you very much. We have come to the end of our time, so can I thank you, Minister, and your official for attending this morning? We have had a wide-ranging and very detailed discussion that will be very useful for the committee. As usual, you will be sent a transcript following the meeting to check for accuracy, but thank you again, both of you, for your attendance this morning. Diolch yn fawr. Okay. Item 3 is papers to note. Paper to note 1 is a letter from ERW providing additional information following the evidence session on 16 January. Paper to note 2 is a letter from Central South Consortium, similarly providing additional information following the evidence session. Paper to note 3 is a letter from the Noah's Ark Children's Hospital for Wales regarding children's rights in Wales, following up on some additional information there. Paper to note 4 is a letter from Qualifications Wales, providing additional information following the annual report scrutiny session in January. Item 4, then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting? Are Members content? Thank you.

Now, Estyn was used as part of the accountability system. Since the systems were evolving all the time, the Estyn itself inspection regime was changing as well. Now, they were moving to a system where Estyn would be more regularly in schools. Although there were two systems, they were different and they looked at different things. The categorization system they used now was how they looked for those ways of identifying support for schools.

tr-sq-1230

tr-sq-1230_0

How could the schools that are causing significant concern be identified? Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received apologies for absence from Janet Finch-Saunders, and also from Dawn Bowden, and I'd like to welcome Huw Irranca-Davies, who is substituting for Dawn Bowden. Can I ask Members if there are any declarations of interest, please? No. Okay. We'll move on, then, to our evidence session for our inquiry on school improvement and raising standards. I'd like to welcome Kirsty Williams AM, Minister for Education, and Steve Davies, director of education. Thank you both for attending and for your detailed paper in advance of the meeting. We've got a lot of ground to cover, so we'll go straight into questions, if that's okay. If I can just start by asking you: to what extent is the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development still involved in the Welsh Government's school improvement journey? Kirsty Williams AM: First of all, can I thank the committee for their invitation this morning, and their interest in this particular area? As you will be aware, on coming into office, the director and I agreed to ask the OECD to do a rapid review of the state of Welsh education at the beginning of this Assembly term. They did that, and the feedback from that work informed the publication and content of the national mission. I was very clear in the national mission that I would invite the OECD back to review our progress against that mission, and that has happened in the tail end of last year, and the OECD will publish their latest report on Welsh education next month now, in March. So, the expectation is that the report will be published on 23 March, and my intention is to make a statement to the Chamber on 24 March. The nature of that review is part of our ongoing development of self-evaluation. So, we talk a lot about self-evaluation in the school system. Actually, the continuing relationship with OECD is about self-evaluation of the entirety of the system and Welsh Government. We don't want to accept our own orthodoxy and just be in a bubble where we are constantly listening to ourselves and those people who might want to agree with us or tell us what we want to hear. So, the OECD is our best attempt of having some external verification of where we are. That's a risk for Ministers and for Government, because we want them to give an honest evaluation of where we are, but that's a really important tool for me, to ensure that we're constantly testing ourselves. The nature of that review is that the OECD were able to talk to whoever they felt it was important to talk to, so that included practitioners on the ground, elements of the middle tier, as well as Welsh Government. And I know, Chair--I hope you'll be pleased to hear this--that the reports of this committee have formed parts of their review, looking at how the Senedd itself has contributed to and has held the Government to account. So, as I said, we expect our report to be published towards the end of March. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you, Minister. Can I ask about the powers under the School Standards and Organisation (Wales) Act 2013, to ask you to tell us about the use of those powers either by Welsh Government or by local authorities, and how effective you feel that legislation has been? Kirsty Williams AM: Okay. Well, as you'll be aware, local authorities have quite extensive powers of intervention in schools if they feel that is necessary. If I'm honest, I think there's a mixed picture, with some local authorities using those powers not on a regular basis, but obviously demonstrating a willingness to use those powers. There are other local authorities who don't seem to have used them. Since that legislation came into being, there have been a number of reasons, because of course a local authority has to give a reason for using those powers of intervention. They usually focus on standards, but sometimes they focus on a breakdown in governance arrangements, perhaps, or a failure or a breakdown in financial management. So, sometimes the budgetary issues trigger an intervention power. And the types of interventions that have been used have included, in some cases, appointing additional governors to governing bodies, or suspending a school's delegated budget so the local authority takes on, then, financial control of that particular school, or sometimes applying to the Welsh Government to entirely replace a governing body and establish an intervention board. So, if I can give you an example of where that's been used and has been successful, in Flintshire. They applied to Welsh Government for two interim executive boards, in Sir Richard Gwyn Catholic High School and in Ysgol Trefonnen. They applied to us. Those governing bodies were dissolved. The IEBs were put in place and both of those schools, which had been in special measures, moved quite rapidly, actually, out of special measures. Perhaps the most recent example of this is one that the Chair will know very well in her own constituency of Torfaen, in Cwmbran High School, where Torfaen has intervened in that case. The Welsh Government has not used those powers to date. My expectation always is that local authorities should be the first port of call, and I would encourage--and we always encourage--local authorities to take a proactive approach to intervention and to use those powers. But it's my belief that it is they who are best placed initially to do that. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you, Minister. Can I ask, then, about the national evaluation and improvement resource and how significant a role that will play in the raising of school standards, and how you feel it's evolved since it was first conceived? Kirsty Williams AM: So, this brings us back to the principle of self-evaluation and something, if we're honest, we've not been very good at. If you look at a number of chief inspectors'reports into the Welsh education system, self-evaluation has always been identified as something that is missing or underdeveloped in our system to date, hence, then, the work to establish not a new approach, but a more robust approach to self-evaluation. We've done that in conjunction, again, with the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. It's really important, throughout the entirety of our reform journey that that's done in co-construction, because we want this resource to be usable in schools. So, it's all very well having a conceptual idea and people outside the classroom working on it, but if it's of no practical use to a school leadership team, then we won't see the impact. So, it's--. We're in phase 2 at the moment, where we're doing--. So, the initial resource has been developed by the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. We're in the testing phase at the moment and having it evaluated itself, with a view to introducing that resource across the system at the start of the new academic year, in September 2020. I truly believe that, if we're to make progress in Welsh education, we have to develop the skills within our system to have robust self-evaluation. This resource gives us continuity of approach right the way across Wales. So, it's not left to an individual school to come up with a system; it's right the way across the system. My hope would be that those principles could then be applied to local education authorities, to regional school improvement services and Welsh Government as part of a whole-system approach to self-evaluation. I don't know if there's anything more you want to add, Steve. Steve Davies: Just to add that the other critical partners are Estyn themselves. Kirsty Williams AM: Oh, yes, sorry. Steve Davies: So, they have played a critical role and, as we know, as the Minister has said in the past, she may introduce policy and practice, but if Estyn are part of it then schools, usually, because they recognise that it will be part of the inspection process--it gives it greater push and support around it. So, they've been key players within it. Kirsty Williams AM: And I think, if I just say as well, that the external perception of what that's about is really important. It's not a test of school readiness for reform, it is a genuine attempt for a school to evaluate their strengths, their weaknesses and where they need to go next. It's not an Estyn checklist. And because of the word'toolkit'--the feedback was that it gave the impression of a checklist,'Just do this and check list'. So, we're actually going to change the name of that resource. So, it'll be called the national evaluation and improvement resource, rather than the toolkit, because, as I said, the feedback was that'toolkit'gave the impression of a checklist exercise, and it's got to be about more than that if it's going to be meaningful. So, it'll be changed to an'improvement resource'. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Before I bring Suzy in, can I just welcome Sian Gwenllian, who is joining us via video-conference in north Wales? Morning, Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Good morning. Can you hear me? Lynne Neagle AM: We can, yes. We can hear you very nicely, thank you. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Yes. Only a very quick one. It's about the development of the-- Kirsty Williams AM: The resource. Suzy Davies AM: Yes, the resource, thank you--about whether there were any conflicting ideas in the process of development that made it quite difficult to zone in on something that school leadership teams, in particular, could rely on. Were there differences of opinion on what this should look like? Kirsty Williams AM: Not that I'm aware of from the practitioners that I've spoken to who have been part of that. So, for instance, Suzy, you will know the very small school of Gladestry. The head of Gladestry has been involved in this process, and she said that she'd really enjoyed the process of working alongside Estyn and the OECD as a school leader to be able to shape it. But I'm not aware that there's been conflict in that process. Suzy Davies AM: I'm not suggesting that there has been; I'm just interested as to how it had worked, that's all. Steve Davies: Chair, I think, inevitably, when you bring stakeholders together, they're not going to be in total agreement as to how it's going to work, and I think initially one of the challenges was having Estyn there as part of the facilitation group. There are always some concerns that, actually, it's coming from a to inspect, oral, judgmental tick box. So, we had some early day challenges where we had to convince--and, ultimately, Estyn convinced them--that they were there to help and support as opposed to to inspect, and that the model that was developed, as the Minister said, was not going to be a tick box,'You are good at this part of self-evaluation', it was to build the skillsets up. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. So, it's got their full confidence. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, and I think again, also, what--. You know, four years into the job, what I've reflected on as well is there is this sometimes a feeling out there that the Minister says all the right stuff, but you're not actually going to do it, so, when you talk about a new approach to doing things, you're not actually serious about it. So, trying to build that confidence that we are serious about developing a new system around self-improvement, which is different from accountability--sometimes, the practitioners are like,'Oh, yes, we've heard it all before but it never actually happens.'And I think that's been a part of the constant--not pressure, but the responsibility on Welsh Government is in following through. So, we said that we were going to do this in the national mission, and we are going to do it. I'm really proud that there or thereabouts, a few months either way, we've actually kept to the timetable as outlined in the national mission, and that helps build confidence within the sector that we are committed to that programme and we're going to do what we say we're going to do. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: And a final question from me: how effective do you think the investment in school standards has been in this Assembly term, as opposed to the approach taken in the last Assembly term, where there was the protection put in place for core school budgets? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think, first of all, it's important that, whilst this additional resource is specifically targeted at school standards, that is only a part of a much wider education budget, a budget that--you know--is incredibly complex. And so it is really challenging to be able to draw straight lines--you know,'We did this and it's resulted in that'--given that we're looking at the entirety of school funding here. What's been really important is that, if you drill down into what that money has been spent on, 50 per cent of it has been directed towards professional learning in one form or another to support our teaching professionals. And that's been really important to me. I've said it time and time again: an education system cannot exceed the quality of the people who stand in front of our children day in, day out to work with them and teach them. Therefore, that investment in staff and investment in the professional learning of our staff and support for them I think is making a difference already but, importantly, will continue to make a difference. But I think it is really challenging to be able to say,'Well, we spent this bit of money and it definitely led to that', because it's such a complex picture. But that money, the way it's been spent, has been driven by evidence. And, again, what we do know from international best practice, what do we know that works in driving up standards, and then how can we align the money that we've got to supporting that? And, as I said, 50 per cent of that money has gone directly to simply supporting the professional learning of those who work with our children. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you very much. We're going to talk now a bit about schools causing concern with questions from Huw Irranca-Davies. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Thank you, Chair. If I can, just first of all, zoom in on the way in which we actually decide which schools need what support. So, one of the interesting questions for us is how do we use the different systems out there. So, we've got the school categorisation system, which we're familiar with. We've also got Estyn inspection reports, then we've got other intelligence, including local intelligence on the ground. How do you decide from that? How is it decided what schools need support, need challenge? How do we do that? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, you're right: what we have is a variety of ways in which we can identify schools that need support, or need to be challenged on their practice. But it's important not to confuse them either. So, our primary route to doing this is our school categorisation system. Sometimes, and perhaps this is inevitable--. That system is primarily there as a triage system around identifying where our resource should be spent. So, our school improvement service--it's a risk-based approach, so they can evaluate where they need to put their time, effort and resource. Sometimes, it's used by other people for other things, but that is not its primary purpose; its primary purpose there is not one of accountability, it is one of identifying risk and aligning that then to the support that is available. Estyn--now that is part of that accountability system. That is our method of holding schools and their governing bodies to account for their practice and for the work that they do. Both systems, of course, are evolving. So, how we do categorisation has changed over a period of time. The elements that go into making that judgment around the levels of support have changed, and, of course, the Estyn inspection regime is also changing. At the moment, schools are only inspected once every seven years. We're moving to a system where Estyn will be more regularly in schools. So, they are two systems, but they are different and they look at different things. But our categorisation system is how we look for those ways of identifying support for schools. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: And you've made, with feedback over the last few years, adjustments to the way that the categorisation system works. Are you content with where it is now, or do you see more adjustments being made? Have you got things in front of you that you're getting feedback on saying'Well, we need to tweak this again a little bit'? Kirsty Williams AM: So, that system has evolved over time. So, when it started, it was just a tool around secondary schools. Now, it covers the breadth of schools. Initially, on coming into office, when I first came in, it was purely driven by data, and it was also done in quartiles. So, there was a certain number of schools that had to be in the bottom, which drove practitioners mad. They were like'Ah, every year, there's going to be some of us that have to be in the bottom quartile', because of the way in which it was arranged, which seemed very unfair to them. So, we've changed that. It's not just purely driven on data now; there are other judgments--the professional judgments of our challenge advisers are taken into account. And I would expect that situation to continue to evolve to align itself to our curriculum reform, and our changes in self-evaluation. So, it's not a fixed point. I expect that that system will continue to evolve and change, so that it complements and assists in the reform journey as other parts of the system change. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Thanks for that. I think, for any impartial reader of the way that the trends have been going on this, there is some good news within that, in that, certainly, those schools that might have been identified as have been okay but coasting along, seem to be moving up the categories, although we still do have that--. Well, it's what the system is there to do, it's to identify those schools that do need that additional support. And I like your analogy of a triage system--'You're fit; keep on doing what you're doing and do it well; you need more support, we'll put the support in.'But, can I turn to those schools that are causing significant concern, and how we identify them? The Estyn chief inspector's conclusions at the end of the 2017-18 report that these schools are not being identified early enough--there's a need to do something urgently about these concerns, particularly in secondary schools. Have we addressed that? Are you content that we've addressed that concern? Was he right? Kirsty Williams AM: No, the chief inspector is absolutely right--absolutely right. I've got no beef with that statement at all. In some ways, when a school goes into special measures, in a way, that's a failure of the system, because that should have been identified sooner. So I've got no beef, as I said, with the chief inspector saying that. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: So just to ask, bearing in mind the earlier discussion we were having, how is it that we don't identify those schools? Kirsty Williams AM: That's it--you're quite right. Undoubtedly, what categorisation has done is led to a greater understanding, I think, on behalf of local education authorities'and school improvement services'knowledge about their schools. I think knowledge around schools is greatly enhanced by that process. But we are not there yet in terms of necessarily, then, moving those schools more quickly, once they've been identified as needing the highest level of support to see improvement. And secondary schools is a particular, particular challenge. So you will have seen from the last publication of categorisation data that our primary sector continues to improve--more and more and more of our primary schools are in a green rating, which is very satisfying to me. But we have got more of an issue with secondary schools, and we have a particular issue with the same schools being identified in that level of categorisation. So even though we've identified them as needing that extra help, they are not moving at pace away from that system. So there are two things that we are doing at the moment. The first is, we are, again, looking at different sets of data that can give us even earlier warning systems that things are going wrong in a school--and perhaps Steve will explain later. For instance, staff sickness, and carefully monitoring staff sickness, because there is a direct correlation between high levels of staff sickness in a school and what is going on in the school. And Steve can explain some of this work later. But we're piloting a new approach to those schools that are causing concern. Each local authority has been asked to identify two of their high schools that they are particularly worried about. And we have a new multi-agency approach, working with those schools to try and move them more forward. So it's two from each region, a multi-agency panel, working with the school. And that multi-agency panel includes the school itself, the local authority, the regional consortia school improvement staff, Estyn and Welsh Government--as a multi-agency panel to support improvement in that school. So, for instance, what would normally happen, Estyn would come in, Estyn would make a judgment on the school--requiring special measures or urgent improvement--and Estyn would go away. They'd go away for six months, and then they'd come back in six months, and they'd make another judgment,'No, still not good enough', and disappear for six months. We're saying--Estyn and the Welsh Government have agreed that's not the best approach; Estyn need to be part of the solution, rather than just coming and making a judgment. The initial feedback from this trial is very, very positive. Actually, we've had local authorities coming to us and saying,'Can we put more schools in? Rather than just having two of our high schools, can we engage more in this project and this pilot?'It's being evaluated by Cardiff Metropolitan University and Swansea University, so we're having some academic overview to see, actually, does this approach work, can we evidence it--that it actually makes a difference? And it's actually--I'd like to claim all the credit for it, but it's actually not dissimilar to something that's happening in Scotland as well. But we knew that carrying on doing the same old thing clearly wasn't moving these schools, we needed a new approach, and this is what we're doing at the moment. So it's relatively new, but the initial feedback is positive. Steve, I don't know-- Steve Davies: I think your important point is about,'What about the schools that are sliding in that direction?'And it's bringing together what we know from Estyn, but also, critically, local authorities have knowledge of their schools, and so do consortia. We've got to be better at bringing those together. So, the Minister gave the example of staff sickness--not always a trigger, but it's one of those. If you look at movement of pupils out of a school, you can look at complaints, you can look at, actually, emerging increased use of HR resources that a school pulls on a local authority. None of these have been pushed up into the public domain, but they're important antennae. The point the Minister made about Estyn as well is, historically, when they go into special measures, Estyn, at the end of that week, call in, historically, either the region or the local authority, they will feed back to one of them, and then they go away. So, they are staying with it. So, we are brining together the knowledge. But, as the Minister said, we want to keep a very clear distinction between the accountability and the transparency to the public, to parents, with the very detailed collective work of that multi-agency group to actually make that difference over time. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Okay. So, does that--. I'd love to go further, but time is against us. Does that deal with the issue of the schools that have been identified in those categories of requiring significant improvement and requiring special measures? Are those the ones that will be identified now, or is that above and beyond that again? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, those are the ones that are primarily at the forefront of our minds, but this way of sharing data better, to step in earlier, is part of our attempt to address what the chief inspector says about stepping in early--not waiting until a school gets into special measures and a formal judgment from Estyn of that, but actually using that intelligence to get support in there earlier. The three elements that that multi-agency approach look at are: what are the fundamentals that need addressing in this school? What is the capacity of the school itself to be able to address those fundamentals? And, what extra support needs to go into that senior management team and the governing body to get those fundamentals addressed? And actually, what does sustainable improvement look like? Because, again, one of the issues, sometimes, that happens is, a school goes into a category with Estyn, there's a big push and a big,'We must do something'and the school comes out, but actually, that improvement is not sustainable. It's the low-hanging fruit; it's the easy wins that have been achieved, but actually, perhaps some of the fundamental challenges underlying in that school haven't been addressed in that process. So, this is about what will sustainable improvement look like in six months, what's it going to look like in 12 months and what's it going to look like in 18 months. So, actually, a more strategic, longer term approach to real change in a school rather than, perhaps, some of the easy-to-fix items that make a school as if it's doing better, but we really haven't tackled some of the underlying problems that make that school vulnerable to slipping back. Does that make sense? Lynne Neagle AM: I've got a couple of supplementaries on--. Sorry? Kirsty Williams AM: Does that make sense? Lynne Neagle AM: Yes. We've got a couple of supplementaries on this, first from Suzy and then from Sian. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you for that, Chair. Obviously, I'm pleased to hear that this work is being done, but I'm wondering--. What strikes me, in the recent past, at least, particularly as we've got the usual suspects in this category--. I've got to ask myself why it is that councils have been reluctant, perhaps, to step in with these schools earlier, particularly as they've got consortia or middle-tier support as well. Has there been a deficit in that space that has meant that councils don't feel equipped to step in? I just don't really get it why they've been reluctant to step in so far. If they've been nervous about doing it, because they don't feel that they've got the tools to do it, then I think that's pretty important, because as you were saying, we were talking about fundamentals; surely, councils have been able to deal with fundamentals, and more importantly, consortia up until now. Because, obviously, we're asking these players to give us evidence at some point, so perhaps I'd like to challenge them on how come we're here now. Kirsty Williams AM: And rightly so. Suzy Davies AM: I'm not laying this at your door. Kirsty Williams AM: And rightly so. I guess each local authority will have an explanation for each individual school, I suspect. What's crucial to me is that we have to--. I see our job as corralling the collective effort, and I think, for too long in the system, there has been a lack of co-ordination. So, this is about bringing and corralling a collective effort to address this, going forward, in more sustainable way. And I think it does come back to this issue around self-evaluation and a willingness to be open, honest and upfront about some of the challenges that we've got. It's not easy, is it? It's not easy to accept or to acknowledge sometimes when things are-- Suzy Davies AM: That they don't know how to do this. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, that they're going badly, or perhaps they don't know exactly how to make the difference. So this approach, as I said, is a new way of trying to coral that collective effort across the board. But, I don't know if Steve--because you've done other roles in the system, so perhaps you've got a different insight. Steve Davies: I think you're right. The variation across the country, across local authorities--. There are some local authorities that we've worked with and we identify have taken the appropriate action. There are others that we're working with, and yes, at its best, it's done as a joint exercise where they use their regional school improvement service to help in the identification that there is a need for this. They take advice as to what the action is, whether it is, as the Minister said, in the more significant areas, a board, or whether a warning notice comes in terms of standards or finance. So, we're working with them and we're working with the Welsh Local Government Association to share that practice. An example of that work is: we have done a development training session for cabinet members for education, and scrutiny leads for education across Wales, and all 22 local authorities came to that and engaged with that. That was partly about self-improvement, but it was also about where significant issues arise, you have to constructively confront them. And that comes with what the region knows, and increasingly, we're looking to have it consistently across 22 local authorities, so they are collecting all the additional data that we referred to earlier, so they can legitimately hold a mirror up and say,'This is a real concern that we have. We're not punishing you, but we're registering the seriousness, and we want you to address it.'And we're making progress. I believe it's genuinely more consistent now, but I'd be lying if I said that there was consistency across all 22 local authorities. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. I'm conscious of time. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. I've got a supplementary from Sian, then back to Huw. Sian Gwenllian AM: Because you are moving to a more sophisticated approach in terms of identifying problems sooner, and so can offer the support earlier, is it time to think about moving away from the system of categorisation entirely? That is, has the categorisation system reached the end of its usefulness, and is the multi-agency approach, this more sophisticated approach, a better way, ultimately, of being able to assist schools in moving forward? Kirsty Williams AM: I think, Sian, as I said earlier, the categorisation system has evolved over time, and my expectation is that it will continue to evolve, because it has to be consistent with our overall approach to school improvement and raising standards. I expect OECD will have feedback for us on this important part of our system, and we'll wait to see exactly what they say about it, but as I said in answer to Huw Irranca-Davies earlier, I haven't got a closed mind; we've demonstrated over the last four years our willingness to change the system to make it a smarter system, and we will continue to keep that under review, as we move forward. If I could just go back briefly, it doesn't sound like a very exciting thing, does it, when we say we've been doing work with the WLGA, with cabinet members, but also scrutiny, because that's a really important part of the jigsaw as well, is actually local government scrutiny of the performance of your education portfolio holder and the leadership of your council. So this is about trying to up the ante on all sides, so that those issues around'What are you doing in your local authority to use the powers that you have?'You know, sometimes, making sure that everybody in that authority--those in power and those who are there to hold those in power to account--have the necessary skills, knowledge and understanding to do that appropriately. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Huw, briefly. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Yes, briefly. I only have one final question. We've talked a lot about early identification; getting in there and then managing the improvement, this triage approach there, and then getting some grip of it, as well, in doing all of that. But my question now is on what we currently have. I won't touch on the primary schools, but let's just look at secondary schools--11 per cent of secondary schools inspected in the last two academic years judged as unsatisfactory, needing urgent improvement. There will always be secondary schools and primary schools that hit moments of crisis for one reason or another, but 11 per cent to me, and to any layperson, would seem unreasonably high. Are you--? It would be daft to ask you if you're content. What is a level that you would be content with of having schools in red category in Wales? Kirsty Williams AM: You're right. Schools will need different levels of support at different points, and sometimes, it's not because of a crisis. So, for instance, in my region, we do have an increase in the number of schools in the amber category. That's because we've seen in that particular region a number of headteachers retire because they've reached retirement age, and there are new headteachers. Well, that is a moment of risk in the school--when senior leadership changes. Nothing else has changed in that school, but the simple fact that you have a new leader, sometimes in those cases it might be their first headship. That means that that school is going to need a little bit of extra support, so it isn't always just a crisis that needs extra support, there are just general things that happen in the life of a school that could lead to it. But you're absolutely right--we have a particular challenge in the secondary sector where we have not been able to move individual schools forward at pace. And 11 per cent is not acceptable to me, Huw, which is why we have introduced this new pilot to address those schools where, persistently, we have concerns about their ability to move forward. If we'd have carried on doing the same thing, I suspect we would have just carried on getting the same result--hence the need for a new approach to those schools that are causing concern. Steve Davies: Very briefly, the things we talked about earlier was how we measure the performance of schools, particularly at GCSEs, with a narrow focus. As was said earlier, some of these are the same groups--they trip in and then they don't come out. Our belief is, from research, that they concentrate on squeezing the pips to get the grades up in some small areas for a period of time, and you can do that by targeting and immersing them. Estyn can tick the box to say your grades have got better, but we haven't handled the serious underpinning issues--leadership, teaching and learning, and bringing those together. As the Minister said, what does sustainable improvement look like in six, 12,18 months? It isn't just, as important as they are, getting those exam grades up a bit. They're the fundamental--. And if they're all agreed as the indicators at the outset, we're more likely--. So it's multi-agency; it's not a little activity, it's a major strategy. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Hefin David has some questions now on the middle tier. Hefin David AM: I'd like to consider the work of the consortia. In 2016, your election manifesto very clearly said that you wanted to abolish regional consortia--three words in it. Why haven't you done it? Kirsty Williams AM: Because, given that you're such a keen student of my manifesto, you'll also know that-- Hefin David AM: It was only three words. Kirsty Williams AM: The Liberal Democrat manifesto also said that we supported major local government reform and a major reduction in the number of local government units. That hasn't happened. I have to say genuinely, my experience over the last four years has proven to me the value of regional working, and in the absence of significant local government reform, I think it's absolutely vital that we have scale in school improvement services--scale that I don't think can be delivered across 22 individual local authorities. Hefin David AM: Okay. So, if there was local government reform, you would abolish the consortia. Kirsty Williams AM: I think if there was significant local government reform and we could demonstrate that those units had such a scale that they could perform the functions of regional consortia, then I think it would be inevitable that any education Minister would look to see whether there was an opportunity to change structures. But in the absence of that, Hefin, I have been absolutely convinced whilst doing this job that you need larger units to be able to carry out successful school improvement work, and I think it would be reckless to advocate the system going back to school improvement being organised in 22 different ways. Hefin David AM: Okay. Do you think that the work of the four consortia has been consistent and effective? Kirsty Williams AM: The school improvement services? Hefin David AM: The four consortia. Kirsty Williams AM: I think, as with individual local education authorities, there are some regional consortia services that have performed really highly--and that's not me saying that, that's Estyn, but gives us assurance around that--and there are others that need to improve. I think the consortia themselves would admit that they, since their establishment, have found new ways of working. Initially, they were very separate entities that did things their own way. Increasingly, over recent years, we have seen those consortia working together on a national approach, but delivered on a regional basis. So I think they themselves have evolved over time. But we are constantly looking for optimum delivery from those particular organisations, but as I said, I think it would be absolutely reckless to go back to a situation where school improvement services were being delivered individually on 22 different bases. Hefin David AM: Okay. I'm happy to accept that you've changed your opinion there; that's no problem at all. But with regard to the four consortia, and we'll take Education through Regional Working as an example, it does things differently to the other three. Is that a cause for concern, or do you think that's entirely appropriate? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, ERW does things differently, but then so does the Education Achievement Service. EAS is constituted in a different way to the Central South Consortium. What I'm interested in is not necessarily how they are constituted and organised, I'm interested in the effectiveness of that organisation to deliver for children and for teachers. ERW has got particular challenges, and we continue to work with those in ERW to address those, but increasingly, as I said, what we are seeing the regional consortia do is develop a national approach to school improvement services but deliver that on a regional basis so that there is greater consistency in terms of delivery. Hefin David AM: Are you happy that, within the ERW area, local authorities employ their own improvement advisers, rather than doing it in the way that the others do? Kirsty Williams AM: We have discussed this at length with them. My preference would be for school improvement officers to be employed in the centre, and we continue to have those discussions, but what's really important to understand is that the regional consortia are not a beast of the Government; they are a beast of the local authorities that have worked together to create a school improvement service that meets their needs. So we can't impose that solution, and we continue to discuss with ERW what is the optimal way, and they continue to discuss with their constituent local authorities about how that should be organised. Hefin David AM: Are you concerned that Neath Port Talbot have given notice that they want to withdraw from regional working? Kirsty Williams AM: I think it's really disappointing that Neath Port Talbot have published that notice. What's important for me is to understand--not for me, it will be important for Estyn. It will be really important for us to understand how Neath Port Talbot intend to support their schools and their teachers if they were to withdraw from ERW, especially at what is a very, very critical time. The regional consortia have a key role to play in supporting systems with the introduction of the curriculum. I would want to know from Neath Port Talbot how they are going to do that without being part of that organisation. And, of course, there's the added complexity that so much of our money is channelled through to schools via the regional consortia. So, I would want to understand from Neath Port Talbot how they're going to safeguard their schools and make sure that the children who are receiving their education in Neath Port Talbot are not disadvantaged if they were to follow through on that decision. Hefin David AM: Do you feel that it's your role to intervene in that area and instruct Neath Port Talbot and ERW as to how they should resolve this issue? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, as I said, I would be seeking assurances-- Hefin David AM: What does that mean, though,'seeking assurances'? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, Neath Port Talbot would need to demonstrate to me how they're going to address these issues. If they're not part of ERW and their schools and their children are not going to be in receipt of the support from ERW, as I said, especially at this critical time, how are they intending to do that? I haven't seen those plans, but if they were to push forward and follow through on the notice, I would want to see them and I suspect Estyn would want to see them also. Hefin David AM: Okay, just last issue on that: you're just waiting to see what Neath Port Talbot do next, then. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, we have written to Neath Port Talbot to ask them to demonstrate to us, if they were to pull out of ERW, how they're going to meet their functions. I have not heard back from them. Hefin David AM: Steve, did you want to say something? Steve Davies: Obviously--[Inaudible. ]--that point. We wrote to them last Friday, and we are awaiting their response now. Hefin David AM: Okay. So, that's where we are. Okay. There was the document in 2015--'National model for regional working'. Is that the current document? Are there plans to change or update it, or is that exactly where we stand? Kirsty Williams AM: So, that is the current model. Some work was undertaken in 2017 and 2018 to look to update that model and revise that model. Some specific recommendations were put forward about additional services that could be organised on a regional basis; primarily, that is a specialist human resources resource. We know that, because of austerity in some local authorities, HR departments have been really stretched. Education HR is a specialist service, it's not generic. It's often a service that--. I see that as part of a school improvement service. Support for governors also has been stretched within individual local authorities. So, a proposal was put forward to include specialist HR and governor support as part of the regional model. That was rejected by local government. Our local authorities did not want to include that in the regional model. However, I must say, having presented that evidence, some of our local authorities, even though there wasn't a national agreement to put that into the national model, have pooled their resources, and those services are being delivered and supported on a regional basis. So, for instance, the Education Achievement Service now provide specialist HR resource, and EAS and Central South provide governor support. So, although we weren't successful in persuading local government to adopt a new national model, local authorities in those areas saw the value of moving that way. Hefin David AM: So, with that in mind, and perhaps I'll put this to Steve Davies, everything the Minister just said, and also the line in the document--'The implementation of this model will change over time'-- is it time to go back to that document and review it from a procedural point of view? Steve Davies: I don't think it's necessarily timely to go back and have a complete review of it. But, certainly, we are in ongoing discussions with the Welsh Local Government Association, both in terms of work with local authorities, and the type of intervention in schools. So, we keep a constant watch as to which areas that we believe we could develop further. We are not currently intending to do a wholesale review of that. As the Minister touched on earlier, there is some work to get consistency across the current area, particularly, as we just mentioned, in relation to ERW work. So, it's getting a consistent approach at that level, and sharing the practice. I think what is emerging, as the Minister said, is that there are two regions who have already made this shift to pool services. I think the two other regions are seeing and will see the benefits of that, and instead of forcing it through, we'd expect that to evolve. But we're not, at this stage, looking to a wholesale review of the national model. Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin. Hefin David AM: And Professor Dylan Jones's strategic delivery group seems to have had quite a warm welcome in the sector. Is it fair to say that? Kirsty Williams AM: I believe so. I'm very grateful to Dylan for his hard work and his skill in chairing that group, and I think it's been welcomed by all, so that we can get that clarity and consistency about the roles and responsibilities of the individual partners and players in the middle tier. Hefin David AM: And when will the work be completed, and what will the outcomes be? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, the group is currently engaging with Steve and other officials on agreeing a plan, but also, crucially, that plan is there to support the successful implementation of the curriculum, so that we're very clear about the roles and responsibilities in the middle tier in this crucial phase following the publication. We have to move now from the publication into a relentless focus on implementation. The history of devolution is full of fantastic documents, and, shall I say, patchy implementation. The work that has gone into that curriculum is too important for implementation to be left to chance. It's too important. It's too good to be left to chance. So, everything now is a relentless focus on successful implementation. Hefin David AM: Yes, but I'm thinking that the strategic delivery is reviewing the role of the middle tier. So, you know, what do we expect to see from it, notwithstanding the kind of softly, softly approach that you've already talked about? Steve Davies: It was set up, actually, about 18 months ago--just under. It was set up to build collective efficacy, because what people out there are seeing is that there's a confusion of roles, in what the regions are doing, and it was building that collective efficacy so everyone was behind the wheel. So, they've been looking at who is doing what for the last 18 months, and exploring and making some changes themselves. It's not just what they do with Government or what they do with each other; it's just happened that it's timely, because one of the key bits of feedback we believe we will get from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development is we have had co-construction, we'd had collective effort, but we need to do more, particularly within the middle tier. This is not controlled by Government, it is arm's length from Government, and it's not their job to get it ready for the new curriculum--that's a key part of it. This group will have an ongoing role; it's not a task and finish group. It does feed back in to the Minister but there's no formal mechanism by which they have to report. Hefin David AM: Okay, that's very clear. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. I've got supplementaries from Suzy, then Sian. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Briefly, please. Suzy Davies AM: I think this is a really interesting evidence session. What I'm about to say, I say it even though I'm a big localist: it all seems to be heading in one direction of a national service. Is the strategic group even thinking in these terms, obviously building in local accountability? But it'll just make it so much easier in terms of accountability and consistency to monitor what the middle tier does, if it's a national service, like the National Adoption Service. Local delivery, national service--is it heading in that direction? Kirsty Williams AM: That's not the intention of setting the group up. As Steve just said, I receive feedback from Dylan, because I meet Dylan in this particular capacity on a planned basis. He is there to give me advice on the middle tier, and to give me advice on what he thinks Welsh Government needs to do. But I've not had that conversation with him about a national service. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Well, thank you for that. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: What I was going to raise has been answered already, that is that, from what I can see, the work that Professor Dylan Jones is doing has evolved somewhat. I felt that, originally, the idea was to look at the middle tier in terms of any kind of duplication that was happening, and where it was possible to tighten up the people going into schools from different directions. But it appears that it has evolved to be something that's much more than that, and that it is placing a focus on the curriculum and other aspects of the educational system. Is there a risk for them to lose focus in that sense? Kirsty Williams AM: No, not at all. I think they are very, very clear around establishing roles and responsibilities for each of the players and to be very clear about the expectations that each part of the middle tier can have of each other, as to what they can expect from their partners in the middle tier. And absolutely, it is about making sure that there isn't duplication, that people aren't second-guessing each other's work, and there are clear demarcations about who does what in the system, and, as I said, knowing that you can rely on your colleague in the middle tier to do the bit that they are responsible for. So, I don't think there's a question of it losing focus. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We've got a lot of areas to cover so we are going to have to pick up our pace a bit. The next questions are from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Thinking about you as a Minister trying to see what the long-term trends are with regard to raising standards and improving educational attainment, is that difficult, because the performance measures have changed, haven't they? We can't compare like-for-like now, because of the changes that have been made in the way that performance is measured. So, to begin with, is that a challenge, to see whether progress has been made? And secondly, what evidence do you as Minister use to look at the long-term trends? Kirsty Williams AM: The first thing to say, with regard to changes to performance measures--you're right that change to those does make it, in some cases, more difficult to look at trends over a period of time. But those changes are made for really good reasons. If we change a performance measure, it is done to ensure that it is in the best interests of learners. And I think the best interests of learners always trumps the ease of comparison. I understand that, for researchers and for opposition Members, even for Ministers, it would be simpler to have the same set of measures over a period of time. But if we know that those things are driving behaviours that are unhelpful to children, and not in the best interests of children, then we have to change them, even thought that then does create challenges in different areas. With regard to what do we look at, there are a number of ways that we gain data and look at data in the system: everything from the categorisation system we spoke of earlier, and trends in categorisation; we look at Estyn reports; we continue to look at examination results. But we're trying to develop a broader range of data and statistics that give us a whole picture of the education performance, rather than narrowing down on one simple indicator that tells you one thing but doesn't tell you everything. But I don't know, Steve, if there's anything further that you'd like to add. Steve Davies: It's going back to what the Member raised earlier, in terms of the range of things that you look at--things that can make a difference. So, when Estyn review schools, or we're looking to develop national frameworks for things like mental health and well-being, which look to the practice that enables raising standards, it's collecting that information, both at a national level, through the annual review of Estyn, as well as our engagement with regions and local authorities. So, it's looking at the evidence base that goes beyond, but impacts on data. And, inevitably, we will use the Programme for International Student Assessment, and any other external assessments that come through organisations like the OECD. And even where we've changed the performance measures, we still have, at national level, the ongoing data. So, if you looked at level 2 plus, we believe it is important that children get five good GCSEs--for higher education and for employment. So, we've not lost sight of those at a national level--we're not using them as a narrow set of performance measures for individual schools. Kirsty Williams AM: So, if we look at--level 2 plus is a good example. We know that a relentless focus on that single measure, as a way of judging the system, leads to a set of behaviours in schools. It narrows the focus onto a certain part of the cohort, it narrows the curriculum, when we know that children-- Sian Gwenllian AM: I'm not challenging the fact that you've changed the performance measures--I understand that, and having a broader way of looking is better in the long run. I'm just saying, because there's been this change, it makes it more of a challenge--whilst accepting why you've made the changes, but it does present more of a challenge, presumably, because you have to look at more indicators, and take evidence from different places. But I take it that you're confident that the trajectory is going in the right way. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, I think we are making improvements. But you're right: it does make it more challenging. But those changes are being made for the right reasons, as I said, whether that be at level 2 plus. Look at English literature. I understand why perhaps a performance measure around English was introduced, but the effect of that was that significant numbers of children--and, it must be said, usually children who are entitled to free school meals--were suddenly not sitting English literature GCSE. We've changed that performance measure, and guess what? Last year, we saw a significant increase in the number of children that were sitting English literature GCSE. For standards of literacy and oracy, I think studying literature is really, really important, before we even get into the joy of introducing children to the written word and the love of reading. So, we make changes. Yes, it causes challenges, but we're making those changes because we believe that they are in the best interest of children, and that has to trump ease of comparison. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Why have you decided to ask the consortia, Estyn and so on not to report on local data or regional level data? How do we then come to conclusions about what is working if it isn't presented on a local authority and regional basis? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think the thing to say about the communications from Welsh Government, Estyn, and the WLGA is it's not about not communicating the data, it's about challenging people on how that data should be used. So, the data is still available, but it's a challenge to them about how to use that data. So, for instance, when we're presenting data that compares local authority to local authority, you could have a local authority that says,'There we go, I'm above the national average. I don't need to worry about the education in my local authority, because I'm above the average, or I'm better than my neighbour.'That doesn't necessarily mean that everything is right in your local education authority. Perhaps your children should be doing even better than what you're presented with. So, actually, it's not about hiding data; it's about how you use the data appropriately. And sometimes, how we were presenting data in the past was lulling some people into a false sense of security about the performance of their system. So, it's about how you use data, and that's what the communication from Welsh Government and the WLGA and Estyn was about: think very carefully about this data and what it's telling you about your system, and don't be lulled into a false sense of security that you may be doing brilliantly. Or, perhaps, looking at your data, you may think,'Oh, my goodness me, we're not doing very well at all', but, actually, more careful consideration of that might show that your school's impact on those children is really, really a positive one. So, you've got to use that data in the context. So, it's not about less data. If anything, it's about more data and, crucially for me, it's about more intelligent use and interrogation of that data, about truly what it's telling you about your system. Sian Gwenllian AM: But again, the Welsh Government--. You have continued to publish the local and regional level data. So, doesn't that contradict what you've been telling the consortia and everyone else? Kirsty Williams AM: No, not at all. As I said, we're not in the business of trying to hide data--I believe absolutely in full transparency. And in terms of level 2 data, I think I'm not moving away from the point that I think it's really important that more and more children get five really good GCSEs. I think it's important for their life chances. It is about how that data is used, not about hiding data or making that data not available. Steve Davies: Can I, very briefly--? We didn't just send a letter out collectively. We've now carried out training jointly with WLGA and Estyn on how to use that data. So, it's not just looking where your LA is; it's also not looking at whether your school's better than average for the authority. And it is well received, and it should broaden the approach of scrutiny committees to beyond what historically was, if I'm honest, looking at the league table for their authority or looking at the league table of local authorities. It's not that they shouldn't be looking at that, but they need to dig much, much deeper underneath it. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. We're going to go on now to Suzy. I'm going to appeal for brief questions and brief answers so that we can cover the rest of the questions. Suzy Davies AM: I'll shorten these questions, okay. We know why you got rid of the old measures. We've got interim measures now. What are they telling you about the success you've had in trying to avoid the bad behaviour? Short answers. Kirsty Williams AM: It's impossible. [Laughter. ] I think it's inevitable: whatever kind of measures we put in place, people will look to maximise their success in those measures, and I don't think we'll ever come up with a system where those measures are absolutely perfect. What's really important to me is that we're really, really, really challenging schools to look at the performance of all of their children, rather than just at a very, very narrow cohort around those C/D boundaries, which we knew was detrimental, potentially, to more able and talented children and really pushing those Bs to As and those As to A*s, and children for whom actually just getting in to school on a daily basis is an achievement, and the school has done well to provide that. So, our new capped 9 makes sure that there is breadth across a range of subjects, rather than just focusing on a narrower and narrower bunch of subject opportunities for children, and our new third-third-third system enables schools to really look at their performance. So if their capped 9 score is high, what's driving that? Is it because the bottom third of the cohort is doing really well, and the impact on those children is above and beyond what could be expected, but actually, you're not doing very well for your more able and talented; you're not pushing them on? Alternatively, maybe your capped 9 score is because your MAT children are doing incredibly well, but actually, you're not really making the progress for the middle tier of those children. It allows us to have a greater focus on the performance of our FSM children--where they really are within that system. So, it's a much more granular--. And crucially for me, it looks at the impact for every child, because every child has to matter in the system, and what we had before was a narrowing of curriculum choice and a narrowing on a certain cohort of children. Suzy Davies AM: So are the permanent measures likely to be pretty similar to what you've got now? Because the research--I don't know if the research is complete yet. When will you be publishing the new permanent evaluation? Kirsty Williams AM: Sue, you're right: they're interim measures at the moment, and we will need to make sure that the performance measures are aligned to the new curriculum. That, potentially, of course--. Because Wales's review of qualifications potentially has an impact on what those finally will look like, so that work is ongoing at the moment, and unless Steve can tell me off the top of his head when we expect that to be completed by, I will send you a note. But they're interim at the moment, because we need to align them to the new curriculum. Suzy Davies AM: I think we understand that. [Inaudible. ]--date. Steve Davies: No, no. This is not a quick fix. This is a two to three-year research base. The new qualifications for the new curriculum will not start until 2025. They have to be in place for 2022. There's a three-year roll on. I would expect the broad structure of the interim measures to continue over that time. There will be some tweaks for consistency. It's what's wrapped around those interim measures that I touched on earlier: the other evidence that we bring to bear about the effectiveness of a school, but we do want to say to schools that on the whole, broadly speaking, the interim measures will carry on for two, three years. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, and the reason I asked that is right at the beginning of this session, the Minister said to the Chair that this PS100 million that's going into school improvements will be going into things that work. We need some evidence that the interim measures are going to work as well, so when are they going to be evaluated? Steve Davies: Well, we've only just used them for one year. Suzy Davies AM: That's what I'm asking you. Steve Davies: We've signalled that they're only going to be in place for three years. We are carrying out our own review of the impact of those and that's been built in, but I expect the OECD report--because it is an extensive report--to give us feedback on how those things are working now, and some steer, as they did with the last report, as to the direction we would want to go into. Kirsty Williams AM: And what I'm also interested in is those performance management measures around schools. Yes, they're about outcomes for children, but actually are about a broader suite of behaviours within that school, so, yes, qualifications and grades are an important part of a performance measure, but actually, I have other expectations of schools, above and beyond simply qualifications. And so, we would want our permanent set of performance measures to look at a wider set of behaviours within a school, and I think because--. Exams are important--of course they are, qualifications are important--but the way in which those schools achieve those results are also important. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Would you anticipate that including well-being, then? Suzy Davies AM: In a whole-school approach. Kirsty Williams AM: I absolutely--and we need to find a way of how we can truly measure that. Sometimes, children's well-being is influenced by lots of things outside the control of a school. So, I don't want schools to be held accountable for things that they have no control over, because of the circumstances in which a child may be living. But, absolutely: well-being and how the culture of the school addresses well-being is really important to me. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Suzy. Move on to PISA, please. Suzy Davies AM: How useful is PISA for you in helping school improvement? I know that it's not always the thing that you enjoy watching or looking out for. But, genuinely, how useful is it? Kirsty Williams AM: It is one of a range of tools that we need to look at. Sian, quite rightly, talked about consistency. PISA is one thing where there is a level of consistency, so it will continue to be, I think, an important part of how we test how our system is doing. Suzy Davies AM: We know that you are a little bit encouraged, but we are not out of the woods yet. You mentioned this in Plenary when we talked about PISA. How confident are you that we are on track for meeting these targets that were set before your time, or do you think that having those targets is helpful? Is it setting up aspirations that are incapable of being met within a period of time? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, those long-term targets of a score around 500 are part of'Our National Mission', and we have to keep the pressure on to strive. They are testing, but we have to keep the pressure on to strive to reach them. In some cases, I can be quite encouraged. If we look at reading scores for girls, we are almost there, but that just demonstrates what a journey we've got with our boys to address. For me, one of the ways in which we will reach those targets and achieve them is further progress on our more able and talented children. Although we are now performing at an OECD average, I will be the first person to admit that, although we have seen an improvement in the higher level skills of our more able and talented children, we do not perform at an OECD average with regard to those level 6 and level 5 scores. Suzy Davies AM: Even within the UK, really, we are quite far behind. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes. So, I think that's where we really need to push on. That's one of the reasons why we have introduced a more able and talented budget to support that, and our Seren programme, which is delivering fantastic results post-16. That's why we're introducing the principles of Seren earlier into children's careers, bringing it down from year 9 upwards, to be able to drive improvements. So, I think that that's the area that we are particularly keen to work on: making sure that more of our children perform at the OECD average at level 5 and level 6. Clearly, we've got more work to do on reading. We are working with southern Ireland, who have consistently done well with reading scores, to look to see what lessons we can learn to press on with there with reading. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. My final question on this. You recognise it as a priority, particularly for boys. Does that mean that the focus will then drift slightly from maths, where there has been some success; and drift from science, where the encouragement of more people to take GCSE science has reduced the number of high-level passes? Kirsty Williams AM: First, we have to have a system that is capable of doing all of those of things at the same time. We can't accept a system that says,'Well, we can do a bit over here, but that means we have to--.'We have to have a system, Suzy, that can drive improvements at all levels. That's my expectation. Suzy Davies AM: The balloon needs to be bigger not just squeezing it at one end. Kirsty Williams AM: Absolutely, yes. That's my expectation of this system. You have to deliver across all of these. We have seen some progress. As I've said, it's far from perfect, and we've got more work to do, but we have to deliver across all three domains, as we did last time. And I'm not going to make any apologies for changing the performance indicators around science. It was a travesty that there were children who never had the opportunity to sit a science GCSE. We don't have to make assumptions about the nature of many, many, many of those children. We have seen a significant increase in the number of children who are having the opportunity to sit GCSE science and who are passing GCSE science. So, I'm not going to make any apologies about that. One of the reasons that I suspect we have ended up with poor science scores is because of the previous policy around science entries and science qualifications. Again, one of the reasons that we have changed it isn't just solely because we need to do better in PISA, but I think that by changing it, we will see an impact on PISA. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you for that. Lynne Neagle AM: The final set of questions is from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: I just want to discuss an issue that I know is important to you, namely closing the attainment gap between pupils who are eligible for free school meals and those who are not eligible for free school meals. Unfortunately, the problem persists, doesn't it? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes. We are not where we need to be in terms of the performance, not only of our children on free school meals, but the performance of our looked-after children, and the performance of some children from some ethnic minority groups. So, we will continue to look to support those learners in a variety of ways, again looking to amend our practice on the basis of evidence that is given to us from our experts who are there to advise us. There is clearly more that we need to do. There has been some progress in some areas, but it is not where I would want it to be. Sian Gwenllian AM: But, this is despite the fact that there is PS475 million that has been invested in the pupil development grant, for this exact purpose of closing the attainment gap. But, the problem persists, and in some places, it's deteriorating. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think that, as I said, I am not shying away from any assumption or declaration that we need to do better. But, I do think that we need to acknowledge where progress has been made. If we go back to look at what PISA has said about our performance, the PISA results show that pupils in Wales are relatively more able to overcome the disadvantage of their background than is the average in OECD countries. So, our children are doing better in that, and that gives me encouragement. That's not me saying that; that's there. If we look at pupils who are eligible for free school meals, they do score below their better-off counterparts in PISA by some 34 points. The gap in England is 40 points. So, again, that gap is smaller here in Wales. If we look at basic levels of qualifications, back in--. It's difficult to make comparisons because of all the reasons we have talked about, but if we look back to 2006 and we look at the very basic level of qualifications, which is a level 1 qualification, we have seen a jump from 9. 4 per cent of children in 2006 achieving a level 1 qualification to over 18 per cent. So, there is progress. There is evidence that the resources that we are spending are making a difference. But, clearly, we are not where we would want to be. That's why we will continue to focus those resources on those children, where we need it. But, we need to do that earlier. Sticking plasters in years 10 and 11 aren't going to cut it. We need to get this right for those children, the moment that they come into a nursery and the moment that they start their formal education at the age of 5. That's how we are going to make the difference. Providing catch-up, of course, we need to do for those kids; we can't throw those year 10s and year 11s to the wind. We have to support those children. But, we will see real improvement when we get in there earlier. Sian Gwenllian AM: But I'm sure that that is a disappointment to you, because it has been a personal priority for you as well. In terms of minority ethnic learners, while there are some groups within that category who are achieving, there is underachievement happening here as well, isn't there? It's not consistent across the minority ethnic group. Is that something that you will be focusing upon? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, and that's why we have committed to maintaining a ring-fenced grant to local authorities of some PS10 million, to support education of our minority ethnic children. But, again, you are right, you are absolutely right, Sian. We need a much more sophisticated conversation about what is really going on in attainment across minority ethnic groups so that we can best target that resource and have a conversation about what the differences are. You are absolutely correct: there is a real mixed picture. If we look at black Welsh girls entitled to free school meals, they perform almost at the national average for all children--not FSM children; the national average for all children. Black Welsh boys don't, but neither do white Welsh boys. So, there is a really complex picture here, and I really welcome a debate about acknowledging the various levels of performance of BAME children, and where the gaps in performance lie. You are quite right: it is a complex picture in the system. I'm committed to continuing to support educational opportunities, and that's why have ring-fenced the minority ethnic achievement grant. There are some interesting data there. Some children are doing very, very well; others, we need to concentrate on. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian, this will need to be the last question, I'm afraid. Sian Gwenllian AM: Sorry? Lynne Neagle AM: This is going to have to be the last question. Sian Gwenllian AM: The last question. Lynne Neagle AM: Yes. Sian Gwenllian AM: Fine. In terms of looked-after children, which is one of the groups where attainment isn't where we would like it to be, there was some improvement in 2016 at key stage 4, but it has been disappointing. Do we know what's been happening in 2019? Kirsty Williams AM: The 2019 data will be published next month, and there has been significant activity. You are right: in recent years, the data have been poor and not where we would want it to be. That's why we have had a reformed approach to PDG LAC; the employment of PDG LAC co-ordinators across the regions. We've identified new resource in the new financial year to test new approaches, so, for instance, virtual school approaches, where we know, in other systems, that has worked. But, we expect the next set of data around the performance of this particular group of learners in March. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay, and you hope to see progress. Kirsty Williams AM: I don't want to speculate, but I hope so. Sian Gwenllian AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you very much. We have come to the end of our time, so can I thank you, Minister, and your official for attending this morning? We have had a wide-ranging and very detailed discussion that will be very useful for the committee. As usual, you will be sent a transcript following the meeting to check for accuracy, but thank you again, both of you, for your attendance this morning. Diolch yn fawr. Okay. Item 3 is papers to note. Paper to note 1 is a letter from ERW providing additional information following the evidence session on 16 January. Paper to note 2 is a letter from Central South Consortium, similarly providing additional information following the evidence session. Paper to note 3 is a letter from the Noah's Ark Children's Hospital for Wales regarding children's rights in Wales, following up on some additional information there. Paper to note 4 is a letter from Qualifications Wales, providing additional information following the annual report scrutiny session in January. Item 4, then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting? Are Members content? Thank you.

According to Kirsty and Huw, the real question was how was it that they didn't identify those schools. Since these schools were not being identified early enough, there was a need to do something urgently about these concerns, particularly in secondary schools. Even though they had identified them as needing that extra help, they were not moving at pace away from that system. In Steve's opinion, the importance lied on" What about the schools that are sliding in that direction?" And it brought together what they knew from Estyn, but also, local authorities had knowledge of their schools, and so did consortia. They had got to be better at bringing those together.

tr-sq-1231

tr-sq-1231_0

What was a level that Kirsty would be content with of having schools in red category in Wales? Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received apologies for absence from Janet Finch-Saunders, and also from Dawn Bowden, and I'd like to welcome Huw Irranca-Davies, who is substituting for Dawn Bowden. Can I ask Members if there are any declarations of interest, please? No. Okay. We'll move on, then, to our evidence session for our inquiry on school improvement and raising standards. I'd like to welcome Kirsty Williams AM, Minister for Education, and Steve Davies, director of education. Thank you both for attending and for your detailed paper in advance of the meeting. We've got a lot of ground to cover, so we'll go straight into questions, if that's okay. If I can just start by asking you: to what extent is the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development still involved in the Welsh Government's school improvement journey? Kirsty Williams AM: First of all, can I thank the committee for their invitation this morning, and their interest in this particular area? As you will be aware, on coming into office, the director and I agreed to ask the OECD to do a rapid review of the state of Welsh education at the beginning of this Assembly term. They did that, and the feedback from that work informed the publication and content of the national mission. I was very clear in the national mission that I would invite the OECD back to review our progress against that mission, and that has happened in the tail end of last year, and the OECD will publish their latest report on Welsh education next month now, in March. So, the expectation is that the report will be published on 23 March, and my intention is to make a statement to the Chamber on 24 March. The nature of that review is part of our ongoing development of self-evaluation. So, we talk a lot about self-evaluation in the school system. Actually, the continuing relationship with OECD is about self-evaluation of the entirety of the system and Welsh Government. We don't want to accept our own orthodoxy and just be in a bubble where we are constantly listening to ourselves and those people who might want to agree with us or tell us what we want to hear. So, the OECD is our best attempt of having some external verification of where we are. That's a risk for Ministers and for Government, because we want them to give an honest evaluation of where we are, but that's a really important tool for me, to ensure that we're constantly testing ourselves. The nature of that review is that the OECD were able to talk to whoever they felt it was important to talk to, so that included practitioners on the ground, elements of the middle tier, as well as Welsh Government. And I know, Chair--I hope you'll be pleased to hear this--that the reports of this committee have formed parts of their review, looking at how the Senedd itself has contributed to and has held the Government to account. So, as I said, we expect our report to be published towards the end of March. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you, Minister. Can I ask about the powers under the School Standards and Organisation (Wales) Act 2013, to ask you to tell us about the use of those powers either by Welsh Government or by local authorities, and how effective you feel that legislation has been? Kirsty Williams AM: Okay. Well, as you'll be aware, local authorities have quite extensive powers of intervention in schools if they feel that is necessary. If I'm honest, I think there's a mixed picture, with some local authorities using those powers not on a regular basis, but obviously demonstrating a willingness to use those powers. There are other local authorities who don't seem to have used them. Since that legislation came into being, there have been a number of reasons, because of course a local authority has to give a reason for using those powers of intervention. They usually focus on standards, but sometimes they focus on a breakdown in governance arrangements, perhaps, or a failure or a breakdown in financial management. So, sometimes the budgetary issues trigger an intervention power. And the types of interventions that have been used have included, in some cases, appointing additional governors to governing bodies, or suspending a school's delegated budget so the local authority takes on, then, financial control of that particular school, or sometimes applying to the Welsh Government to entirely replace a governing body and establish an intervention board. So, if I can give you an example of where that's been used and has been successful, in Flintshire. They applied to Welsh Government for two interim executive boards, in Sir Richard Gwyn Catholic High School and in Ysgol Trefonnen. They applied to us. Those governing bodies were dissolved. The IEBs were put in place and both of those schools, which had been in special measures, moved quite rapidly, actually, out of special measures. Perhaps the most recent example of this is one that the Chair will know very well in her own constituency of Torfaen, in Cwmbran High School, where Torfaen has intervened in that case. The Welsh Government has not used those powers to date. My expectation always is that local authorities should be the first port of call, and I would encourage--and we always encourage--local authorities to take a proactive approach to intervention and to use those powers. But it's my belief that it is they who are best placed initially to do that. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you, Minister. Can I ask, then, about the national evaluation and improvement resource and how significant a role that will play in the raising of school standards, and how you feel it's evolved since it was first conceived? Kirsty Williams AM: So, this brings us back to the principle of self-evaluation and something, if we're honest, we've not been very good at. If you look at a number of chief inspectors'reports into the Welsh education system, self-evaluation has always been identified as something that is missing or underdeveloped in our system to date, hence, then, the work to establish not a new approach, but a more robust approach to self-evaluation. We've done that in conjunction, again, with the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. It's really important, throughout the entirety of our reform journey that that's done in co-construction, because we want this resource to be usable in schools. So, it's all very well having a conceptual idea and people outside the classroom working on it, but if it's of no practical use to a school leadership team, then we won't see the impact. So, it's--. We're in phase 2 at the moment, where we're doing--. So, the initial resource has been developed by the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. We're in the testing phase at the moment and having it evaluated itself, with a view to introducing that resource across the system at the start of the new academic year, in September 2020. I truly believe that, if we're to make progress in Welsh education, we have to develop the skills within our system to have robust self-evaluation. This resource gives us continuity of approach right the way across Wales. So, it's not left to an individual school to come up with a system; it's right the way across the system. My hope would be that those principles could then be applied to local education authorities, to regional school improvement services and Welsh Government as part of a whole-system approach to self-evaluation. I don't know if there's anything more you want to add, Steve. Steve Davies: Just to add that the other critical partners are Estyn themselves. Kirsty Williams AM: Oh, yes, sorry. Steve Davies: So, they have played a critical role and, as we know, as the Minister has said in the past, she may introduce policy and practice, but if Estyn are part of it then schools, usually, because they recognise that it will be part of the inspection process--it gives it greater push and support around it. So, they've been key players within it. Kirsty Williams AM: And I think, if I just say as well, that the external perception of what that's about is really important. It's not a test of school readiness for reform, it is a genuine attempt for a school to evaluate their strengths, their weaknesses and where they need to go next. It's not an Estyn checklist. And because of the word'toolkit'--the feedback was that it gave the impression of a checklist,'Just do this and check list'. So, we're actually going to change the name of that resource. So, it'll be called the national evaluation and improvement resource, rather than the toolkit, because, as I said, the feedback was that'toolkit'gave the impression of a checklist exercise, and it's got to be about more than that if it's going to be meaningful. So, it'll be changed to an'improvement resource'. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Before I bring Suzy in, can I just welcome Sian Gwenllian, who is joining us via video-conference in north Wales? Morning, Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Good morning. Can you hear me? Lynne Neagle AM: We can, yes. We can hear you very nicely, thank you. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Yes. Only a very quick one. It's about the development of the-- Kirsty Williams AM: The resource. Suzy Davies AM: Yes, the resource, thank you--about whether there were any conflicting ideas in the process of development that made it quite difficult to zone in on something that school leadership teams, in particular, could rely on. Were there differences of opinion on what this should look like? Kirsty Williams AM: Not that I'm aware of from the practitioners that I've spoken to who have been part of that. So, for instance, Suzy, you will know the very small school of Gladestry. The head of Gladestry has been involved in this process, and she said that she'd really enjoyed the process of working alongside Estyn and the OECD as a school leader to be able to shape it. But I'm not aware that there's been conflict in that process. Suzy Davies AM: I'm not suggesting that there has been; I'm just interested as to how it had worked, that's all. Steve Davies: Chair, I think, inevitably, when you bring stakeholders together, they're not going to be in total agreement as to how it's going to work, and I think initially one of the challenges was having Estyn there as part of the facilitation group. There are always some concerns that, actually, it's coming from a to inspect, oral, judgmental tick box. So, we had some early day challenges where we had to convince--and, ultimately, Estyn convinced them--that they were there to help and support as opposed to to inspect, and that the model that was developed, as the Minister said, was not going to be a tick box,'You are good at this part of self-evaluation', it was to build the skillsets up. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. So, it's got their full confidence. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, and I think again, also, what--. You know, four years into the job, what I've reflected on as well is there is this sometimes a feeling out there that the Minister says all the right stuff, but you're not actually going to do it, so, when you talk about a new approach to doing things, you're not actually serious about it. So, trying to build that confidence that we are serious about developing a new system around self-improvement, which is different from accountability--sometimes, the practitioners are like,'Oh, yes, we've heard it all before but it never actually happens.'And I think that's been a part of the constant--not pressure, but the responsibility on Welsh Government is in following through. So, we said that we were going to do this in the national mission, and we are going to do it. I'm really proud that there or thereabouts, a few months either way, we've actually kept to the timetable as outlined in the national mission, and that helps build confidence within the sector that we are committed to that programme and we're going to do what we say we're going to do. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: And a final question from me: how effective do you think the investment in school standards has been in this Assembly term, as opposed to the approach taken in the last Assembly term, where there was the protection put in place for core school budgets? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think, first of all, it's important that, whilst this additional resource is specifically targeted at school standards, that is only a part of a much wider education budget, a budget that--you know--is incredibly complex. And so it is really challenging to be able to draw straight lines--you know,'We did this and it's resulted in that'--given that we're looking at the entirety of school funding here. What's been really important is that, if you drill down into what that money has been spent on, 50 per cent of it has been directed towards professional learning in one form or another to support our teaching professionals. And that's been really important to me. I've said it time and time again: an education system cannot exceed the quality of the people who stand in front of our children day in, day out to work with them and teach them. Therefore, that investment in staff and investment in the professional learning of our staff and support for them I think is making a difference already but, importantly, will continue to make a difference. But I think it is really challenging to be able to say,'Well, we spent this bit of money and it definitely led to that', because it's such a complex picture. But that money, the way it's been spent, has been driven by evidence. And, again, what we do know from international best practice, what do we know that works in driving up standards, and then how can we align the money that we've got to supporting that? And, as I said, 50 per cent of that money has gone directly to simply supporting the professional learning of those who work with our children. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you very much. We're going to talk now a bit about schools causing concern with questions from Huw Irranca-Davies. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Thank you, Chair. If I can, just first of all, zoom in on the way in which we actually decide which schools need what support. So, one of the interesting questions for us is how do we use the different systems out there. So, we've got the school categorisation system, which we're familiar with. We've also got Estyn inspection reports, then we've got other intelligence, including local intelligence on the ground. How do you decide from that? How is it decided what schools need support, need challenge? How do we do that? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, you're right: what we have is a variety of ways in which we can identify schools that need support, or need to be challenged on their practice. But it's important not to confuse them either. So, our primary route to doing this is our school categorisation system. Sometimes, and perhaps this is inevitable--. That system is primarily there as a triage system around identifying where our resource should be spent. So, our school improvement service--it's a risk-based approach, so they can evaluate where they need to put their time, effort and resource. Sometimes, it's used by other people for other things, but that is not its primary purpose; its primary purpose there is not one of accountability, it is one of identifying risk and aligning that then to the support that is available. Estyn--now that is part of that accountability system. That is our method of holding schools and their governing bodies to account for their practice and for the work that they do. Both systems, of course, are evolving. So, how we do categorisation has changed over a period of time. The elements that go into making that judgment around the levels of support have changed, and, of course, the Estyn inspection regime is also changing. At the moment, schools are only inspected once every seven years. We're moving to a system where Estyn will be more regularly in schools. So, they are two systems, but they are different and they look at different things. But our categorisation system is how we look for those ways of identifying support for schools. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: And you've made, with feedback over the last few years, adjustments to the way that the categorisation system works. Are you content with where it is now, or do you see more adjustments being made? Have you got things in front of you that you're getting feedback on saying'Well, we need to tweak this again a little bit'? Kirsty Williams AM: So, that system has evolved over time. So, when it started, it was just a tool around secondary schools. Now, it covers the breadth of schools. Initially, on coming into office, when I first came in, it was purely driven by data, and it was also done in quartiles. So, there was a certain number of schools that had to be in the bottom, which drove practitioners mad. They were like'Ah, every year, there's going to be some of us that have to be in the bottom quartile', because of the way in which it was arranged, which seemed very unfair to them. So, we've changed that. It's not just purely driven on data now; there are other judgments--the professional judgments of our challenge advisers are taken into account. And I would expect that situation to continue to evolve to align itself to our curriculum reform, and our changes in self-evaluation. So, it's not a fixed point. I expect that that system will continue to evolve and change, so that it complements and assists in the reform journey as other parts of the system change. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Thanks for that. I think, for any impartial reader of the way that the trends have been going on this, there is some good news within that, in that, certainly, those schools that might have been identified as have been okay but coasting along, seem to be moving up the categories, although we still do have that--. Well, it's what the system is there to do, it's to identify those schools that do need that additional support. And I like your analogy of a triage system--'You're fit; keep on doing what you're doing and do it well; you need more support, we'll put the support in.'But, can I turn to those schools that are causing significant concern, and how we identify them? The Estyn chief inspector's conclusions at the end of the 2017-18 report that these schools are not being identified early enough--there's a need to do something urgently about these concerns, particularly in secondary schools. Have we addressed that? Are you content that we've addressed that concern? Was he right? Kirsty Williams AM: No, the chief inspector is absolutely right--absolutely right. I've got no beef with that statement at all. In some ways, when a school goes into special measures, in a way, that's a failure of the system, because that should have been identified sooner. So I've got no beef, as I said, with the chief inspector saying that. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: So just to ask, bearing in mind the earlier discussion we were having, how is it that we don't identify those schools? Kirsty Williams AM: That's it--you're quite right. Undoubtedly, what categorisation has done is led to a greater understanding, I think, on behalf of local education authorities'and school improvement services'knowledge about their schools. I think knowledge around schools is greatly enhanced by that process. But we are not there yet in terms of necessarily, then, moving those schools more quickly, once they've been identified as needing the highest level of support to see improvement. And secondary schools is a particular, particular challenge. So you will have seen from the last publication of categorisation data that our primary sector continues to improve--more and more and more of our primary schools are in a green rating, which is very satisfying to me. But we have got more of an issue with secondary schools, and we have a particular issue with the same schools being identified in that level of categorisation. So even though we've identified them as needing that extra help, they are not moving at pace away from that system. So there are two things that we are doing at the moment. The first is, we are, again, looking at different sets of data that can give us even earlier warning systems that things are going wrong in a school--and perhaps Steve will explain later. For instance, staff sickness, and carefully monitoring staff sickness, because there is a direct correlation between high levels of staff sickness in a school and what is going on in the school. And Steve can explain some of this work later. But we're piloting a new approach to those schools that are causing concern. Each local authority has been asked to identify two of their high schools that they are particularly worried about. And we have a new multi-agency approach, working with those schools to try and move them more forward. So it's two from each region, a multi-agency panel, working with the school. And that multi-agency panel includes the school itself, the local authority, the regional consortia school improvement staff, Estyn and Welsh Government--as a multi-agency panel to support improvement in that school. So, for instance, what would normally happen, Estyn would come in, Estyn would make a judgment on the school--requiring special measures or urgent improvement--and Estyn would go away. They'd go away for six months, and then they'd come back in six months, and they'd make another judgment,'No, still not good enough', and disappear for six months. We're saying--Estyn and the Welsh Government have agreed that's not the best approach; Estyn need to be part of the solution, rather than just coming and making a judgment. The initial feedback from this trial is very, very positive. Actually, we've had local authorities coming to us and saying,'Can we put more schools in? Rather than just having two of our high schools, can we engage more in this project and this pilot?'It's being evaluated by Cardiff Metropolitan University and Swansea University, so we're having some academic overview to see, actually, does this approach work, can we evidence it--that it actually makes a difference? And it's actually--I'd like to claim all the credit for it, but it's actually not dissimilar to something that's happening in Scotland as well. But we knew that carrying on doing the same old thing clearly wasn't moving these schools, we needed a new approach, and this is what we're doing at the moment. So it's relatively new, but the initial feedback is positive. Steve, I don't know-- Steve Davies: I think your important point is about,'What about the schools that are sliding in that direction?'And it's bringing together what we know from Estyn, but also, critically, local authorities have knowledge of their schools, and so do consortia. We've got to be better at bringing those together. So, the Minister gave the example of staff sickness--not always a trigger, but it's one of those. If you look at movement of pupils out of a school, you can look at complaints, you can look at, actually, emerging increased use of HR resources that a school pulls on a local authority. None of these have been pushed up into the public domain, but they're important antennae. The point the Minister made about Estyn as well is, historically, when they go into special measures, Estyn, at the end of that week, call in, historically, either the region or the local authority, they will feed back to one of them, and then they go away. So, they are staying with it. So, we are brining together the knowledge. But, as the Minister said, we want to keep a very clear distinction between the accountability and the transparency to the public, to parents, with the very detailed collective work of that multi-agency group to actually make that difference over time. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Okay. So, does that--. I'd love to go further, but time is against us. Does that deal with the issue of the schools that have been identified in those categories of requiring significant improvement and requiring special measures? Are those the ones that will be identified now, or is that above and beyond that again? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, those are the ones that are primarily at the forefront of our minds, but this way of sharing data better, to step in earlier, is part of our attempt to address what the chief inspector says about stepping in early--not waiting until a school gets into special measures and a formal judgment from Estyn of that, but actually using that intelligence to get support in there earlier. The three elements that that multi-agency approach look at are: what are the fundamentals that need addressing in this school? What is the capacity of the school itself to be able to address those fundamentals? And, what extra support needs to go into that senior management team and the governing body to get those fundamentals addressed? And actually, what does sustainable improvement look like? Because, again, one of the issues, sometimes, that happens is, a school goes into a category with Estyn, there's a big push and a big,'We must do something'and the school comes out, but actually, that improvement is not sustainable. It's the low-hanging fruit; it's the easy wins that have been achieved, but actually, perhaps some of the fundamental challenges underlying in that school haven't been addressed in that process. So, this is about what will sustainable improvement look like in six months, what's it going to look like in 12 months and what's it going to look like in 18 months. So, actually, a more strategic, longer term approach to real change in a school rather than, perhaps, some of the easy-to-fix items that make a school as if it's doing better, but we really haven't tackled some of the underlying problems that make that school vulnerable to slipping back. Does that make sense? Lynne Neagle AM: I've got a couple of supplementaries on--. Sorry? Kirsty Williams AM: Does that make sense? Lynne Neagle AM: Yes. We've got a couple of supplementaries on this, first from Suzy and then from Sian. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you for that, Chair. Obviously, I'm pleased to hear that this work is being done, but I'm wondering--. What strikes me, in the recent past, at least, particularly as we've got the usual suspects in this category--. I've got to ask myself why it is that councils have been reluctant, perhaps, to step in with these schools earlier, particularly as they've got consortia or middle-tier support as well. Has there been a deficit in that space that has meant that councils don't feel equipped to step in? I just don't really get it why they've been reluctant to step in so far. If they've been nervous about doing it, because they don't feel that they've got the tools to do it, then I think that's pretty important, because as you were saying, we were talking about fundamentals; surely, councils have been able to deal with fundamentals, and more importantly, consortia up until now. Because, obviously, we're asking these players to give us evidence at some point, so perhaps I'd like to challenge them on how come we're here now. Kirsty Williams AM: And rightly so. Suzy Davies AM: I'm not laying this at your door. Kirsty Williams AM: And rightly so. I guess each local authority will have an explanation for each individual school, I suspect. What's crucial to me is that we have to--. I see our job as corralling the collective effort, and I think, for too long in the system, there has been a lack of co-ordination. So, this is about bringing and corralling a collective effort to address this, going forward, in more sustainable way. And I think it does come back to this issue around self-evaluation and a willingness to be open, honest and upfront about some of the challenges that we've got. It's not easy, is it? It's not easy to accept or to acknowledge sometimes when things are-- Suzy Davies AM: That they don't know how to do this. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, that they're going badly, or perhaps they don't know exactly how to make the difference. So this approach, as I said, is a new way of trying to coral that collective effort across the board. But, I don't know if Steve--because you've done other roles in the system, so perhaps you've got a different insight. Steve Davies: I think you're right. The variation across the country, across local authorities--. There are some local authorities that we've worked with and we identify have taken the appropriate action. There are others that we're working with, and yes, at its best, it's done as a joint exercise where they use their regional school improvement service to help in the identification that there is a need for this. They take advice as to what the action is, whether it is, as the Minister said, in the more significant areas, a board, or whether a warning notice comes in terms of standards or finance. So, we're working with them and we're working with the Welsh Local Government Association to share that practice. An example of that work is: we have done a development training session for cabinet members for education, and scrutiny leads for education across Wales, and all 22 local authorities came to that and engaged with that. That was partly about self-improvement, but it was also about where significant issues arise, you have to constructively confront them. And that comes with what the region knows, and increasingly, we're looking to have it consistently across 22 local authorities, so they are collecting all the additional data that we referred to earlier, so they can legitimately hold a mirror up and say,'This is a real concern that we have. We're not punishing you, but we're registering the seriousness, and we want you to address it.'And we're making progress. I believe it's genuinely more consistent now, but I'd be lying if I said that there was consistency across all 22 local authorities. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. I'm conscious of time. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. I've got a supplementary from Sian, then back to Huw. Sian Gwenllian AM: Because you are moving to a more sophisticated approach in terms of identifying problems sooner, and so can offer the support earlier, is it time to think about moving away from the system of categorisation entirely? That is, has the categorisation system reached the end of its usefulness, and is the multi-agency approach, this more sophisticated approach, a better way, ultimately, of being able to assist schools in moving forward? Kirsty Williams AM: I think, Sian, as I said earlier, the categorisation system has evolved over time, and my expectation is that it will continue to evolve, because it has to be consistent with our overall approach to school improvement and raising standards. I expect OECD will have feedback for us on this important part of our system, and we'll wait to see exactly what they say about it, but as I said in answer to Huw Irranca-Davies earlier, I haven't got a closed mind; we've demonstrated over the last four years our willingness to change the system to make it a smarter system, and we will continue to keep that under review, as we move forward. If I could just go back briefly, it doesn't sound like a very exciting thing, does it, when we say we've been doing work with the WLGA, with cabinet members, but also scrutiny, because that's a really important part of the jigsaw as well, is actually local government scrutiny of the performance of your education portfolio holder and the leadership of your council. So this is about trying to up the ante on all sides, so that those issues around'What are you doing in your local authority to use the powers that you have?'You know, sometimes, making sure that everybody in that authority--those in power and those who are there to hold those in power to account--have the necessary skills, knowledge and understanding to do that appropriately. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Huw, briefly. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Yes, briefly. I only have one final question. We've talked a lot about early identification; getting in there and then managing the improvement, this triage approach there, and then getting some grip of it, as well, in doing all of that. But my question now is on what we currently have. I won't touch on the primary schools, but let's just look at secondary schools--11 per cent of secondary schools inspected in the last two academic years judged as unsatisfactory, needing urgent improvement. There will always be secondary schools and primary schools that hit moments of crisis for one reason or another, but 11 per cent to me, and to any layperson, would seem unreasonably high. Are you--? It would be daft to ask you if you're content. What is a level that you would be content with of having schools in red category in Wales? Kirsty Williams AM: You're right. Schools will need different levels of support at different points, and sometimes, it's not because of a crisis. So, for instance, in my region, we do have an increase in the number of schools in the amber category. That's because we've seen in that particular region a number of headteachers retire because they've reached retirement age, and there are new headteachers. Well, that is a moment of risk in the school--when senior leadership changes. Nothing else has changed in that school, but the simple fact that you have a new leader, sometimes in those cases it might be their first headship. That means that that school is going to need a little bit of extra support, so it isn't always just a crisis that needs extra support, there are just general things that happen in the life of a school that could lead to it. But you're absolutely right--we have a particular challenge in the secondary sector where we have not been able to move individual schools forward at pace. And 11 per cent is not acceptable to me, Huw, which is why we have introduced this new pilot to address those schools where, persistently, we have concerns about their ability to move forward. If we'd have carried on doing the same thing, I suspect we would have just carried on getting the same result--hence the need for a new approach to those schools that are causing concern. Steve Davies: Very briefly, the things we talked about earlier was how we measure the performance of schools, particularly at GCSEs, with a narrow focus. As was said earlier, some of these are the same groups--they trip in and then they don't come out. Our belief is, from research, that they concentrate on squeezing the pips to get the grades up in some small areas for a period of time, and you can do that by targeting and immersing them. Estyn can tick the box to say your grades have got better, but we haven't handled the serious underpinning issues--leadership, teaching and learning, and bringing those together. As the Minister said, what does sustainable improvement look like in six, 12,18 months? It isn't just, as important as they are, getting those exam grades up a bit. They're the fundamental--. And if they're all agreed as the indicators at the outset, we're more likely--. So it's multi-agency; it's not a little activity, it's a major strategy. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Hefin David has some questions now on the middle tier. Hefin David AM: I'd like to consider the work of the consortia. In 2016, your election manifesto very clearly said that you wanted to abolish regional consortia--three words in it. Why haven't you done it? Kirsty Williams AM: Because, given that you're such a keen student of my manifesto, you'll also know that-- Hefin David AM: It was only three words. Kirsty Williams AM: The Liberal Democrat manifesto also said that we supported major local government reform and a major reduction in the number of local government units. That hasn't happened. I have to say genuinely, my experience over the last four years has proven to me the value of regional working, and in the absence of significant local government reform, I think it's absolutely vital that we have scale in school improvement services--scale that I don't think can be delivered across 22 individual local authorities. Hefin David AM: Okay. So, if there was local government reform, you would abolish the consortia. Kirsty Williams AM: I think if there was significant local government reform and we could demonstrate that those units had such a scale that they could perform the functions of regional consortia, then I think it would be inevitable that any education Minister would look to see whether there was an opportunity to change structures. But in the absence of that, Hefin, I have been absolutely convinced whilst doing this job that you need larger units to be able to carry out successful school improvement work, and I think it would be reckless to advocate the system going back to school improvement being organised in 22 different ways. Hefin David AM: Okay. Do you think that the work of the four consortia has been consistent and effective? Kirsty Williams AM: The school improvement services? Hefin David AM: The four consortia. Kirsty Williams AM: I think, as with individual local education authorities, there are some regional consortia services that have performed really highly--and that's not me saying that, that's Estyn, but gives us assurance around that--and there are others that need to improve. I think the consortia themselves would admit that they, since their establishment, have found new ways of working. Initially, they were very separate entities that did things their own way. Increasingly, over recent years, we have seen those consortia working together on a national approach, but delivered on a regional basis. So I think they themselves have evolved over time. But we are constantly looking for optimum delivery from those particular organisations, but as I said, I think it would be absolutely reckless to go back to a situation where school improvement services were being delivered individually on 22 different bases. Hefin David AM: Okay. I'm happy to accept that you've changed your opinion there; that's no problem at all. But with regard to the four consortia, and we'll take Education through Regional Working as an example, it does things differently to the other three. Is that a cause for concern, or do you think that's entirely appropriate? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, ERW does things differently, but then so does the Education Achievement Service. EAS is constituted in a different way to the Central South Consortium. What I'm interested in is not necessarily how they are constituted and organised, I'm interested in the effectiveness of that organisation to deliver for children and for teachers. ERW has got particular challenges, and we continue to work with those in ERW to address those, but increasingly, as I said, what we are seeing the regional consortia do is develop a national approach to school improvement services but deliver that on a regional basis so that there is greater consistency in terms of delivery. Hefin David AM: Are you happy that, within the ERW area, local authorities employ their own improvement advisers, rather than doing it in the way that the others do? Kirsty Williams AM: We have discussed this at length with them. My preference would be for school improvement officers to be employed in the centre, and we continue to have those discussions, but what's really important to understand is that the regional consortia are not a beast of the Government; they are a beast of the local authorities that have worked together to create a school improvement service that meets their needs. So we can't impose that solution, and we continue to discuss with ERW what is the optimal way, and they continue to discuss with their constituent local authorities about how that should be organised. Hefin David AM: Are you concerned that Neath Port Talbot have given notice that they want to withdraw from regional working? Kirsty Williams AM: I think it's really disappointing that Neath Port Talbot have published that notice. What's important for me is to understand--not for me, it will be important for Estyn. It will be really important for us to understand how Neath Port Talbot intend to support their schools and their teachers if they were to withdraw from ERW, especially at what is a very, very critical time. The regional consortia have a key role to play in supporting systems with the introduction of the curriculum. I would want to know from Neath Port Talbot how they are going to do that without being part of that organisation. And, of course, there's the added complexity that so much of our money is channelled through to schools via the regional consortia. So, I would want to understand from Neath Port Talbot how they're going to safeguard their schools and make sure that the children who are receiving their education in Neath Port Talbot are not disadvantaged if they were to follow through on that decision. Hefin David AM: Do you feel that it's your role to intervene in that area and instruct Neath Port Talbot and ERW as to how they should resolve this issue? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, as I said, I would be seeking assurances-- Hefin David AM: What does that mean, though,'seeking assurances'? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, Neath Port Talbot would need to demonstrate to me how they're going to address these issues. If they're not part of ERW and their schools and their children are not going to be in receipt of the support from ERW, as I said, especially at this critical time, how are they intending to do that? I haven't seen those plans, but if they were to push forward and follow through on the notice, I would want to see them and I suspect Estyn would want to see them also. Hefin David AM: Okay, just last issue on that: you're just waiting to see what Neath Port Talbot do next, then. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, we have written to Neath Port Talbot to ask them to demonstrate to us, if they were to pull out of ERW, how they're going to meet their functions. I have not heard back from them. Hefin David AM: Steve, did you want to say something? Steve Davies: Obviously--[Inaudible. ]--that point. We wrote to them last Friday, and we are awaiting their response now. Hefin David AM: Okay. So, that's where we are. Okay. There was the document in 2015--'National model for regional working'. Is that the current document? Are there plans to change or update it, or is that exactly where we stand? Kirsty Williams AM: So, that is the current model. Some work was undertaken in 2017 and 2018 to look to update that model and revise that model. Some specific recommendations were put forward about additional services that could be organised on a regional basis; primarily, that is a specialist human resources resource. We know that, because of austerity in some local authorities, HR departments have been really stretched. Education HR is a specialist service, it's not generic. It's often a service that--. I see that as part of a school improvement service. Support for governors also has been stretched within individual local authorities. So, a proposal was put forward to include specialist HR and governor support as part of the regional model. That was rejected by local government. Our local authorities did not want to include that in the regional model. However, I must say, having presented that evidence, some of our local authorities, even though there wasn't a national agreement to put that into the national model, have pooled their resources, and those services are being delivered and supported on a regional basis. So, for instance, the Education Achievement Service now provide specialist HR resource, and EAS and Central South provide governor support. So, although we weren't successful in persuading local government to adopt a new national model, local authorities in those areas saw the value of moving that way. Hefin David AM: So, with that in mind, and perhaps I'll put this to Steve Davies, everything the Minister just said, and also the line in the document--'The implementation of this model will change over time'-- is it time to go back to that document and review it from a procedural point of view? Steve Davies: I don't think it's necessarily timely to go back and have a complete review of it. But, certainly, we are in ongoing discussions with the Welsh Local Government Association, both in terms of work with local authorities, and the type of intervention in schools. So, we keep a constant watch as to which areas that we believe we could develop further. We are not currently intending to do a wholesale review of that. As the Minister touched on earlier, there is some work to get consistency across the current area, particularly, as we just mentioned, in relation to ERW work. So, it's getting a consistent approach at that level, and sharing the practice. I think what is emerging, as the Minister said, is that there are two regions who have already made this shift to pool services. I think the two other regions are seeing and will see the benefits of that, and instead of forcing it through, we'd expect that to evolve. But we're not, at this stage, looking to a wholesale review of the national model. Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin. Hefin David AM: And Professor Dylan Jones's strategic delivery group seems to have had quite a warm welcome in the sector. Is it fair to say that? Kirsty Williams AM: I believe so. I'm very grateful to Dylan for his hard work and his skill in chairing that group, and I think it's been welcomed by all, so that we can get that clarity and consistency about the roles and responsibilities of the individual partners and players in the middle tier. Hefin David AM: And when will the work be completed, and what will the outcomes be? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, the group is currently engaging with Steve and other officials on agreeing a plan, but also, crucially, that plan is there to support the successful implementation of the curriculum, so that we're very clear about the roles and responsibilities in the middle tier in this crucial phase following the publication. We have to move now from the publication into a relentless focus on implementation. The history of devolution is full of fantastic documents, and, shall I say, patchy implementation. The work that has gone into that curriculum is too important for implementation to be left to chance. It's too important. It's too good to be left to chance. So, everything now is a relentless focus on successful implementation. Hefin David AM: Yes, but I'm thinking that the strategic delivery is reviewing the role of the middle tier. So, you know, what do we expect to see from it, notwithstanding the kind of softly, softly approach that you've already talked about? Steve Davies: It was set up, actually, about 18 months ago--just under. It was set up to build collective efficacy, because what people out there are seeing is that there's a confusion of roles, in what the regions are doing, and it was building that collective efficacy so everyone was behind the wheel. So, they've been looking at who is doing what for the last 18 months, and exploring and making some changes themselves. It's not just what they do with Government or what they do with each other; it's just happened that it's timely, because one of the key bits of feedback we believe we will get from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development is we have had co-construction, we'd had collective effort, but we need to do more, particularly within the middle tier. This is not controlled by Government, it is arm's length from Government, and it's not their job to get it ready for the new curriculum--that's a key part of it. This group will have an ongoing role; it's not a task and finish group. It does feed back in to the Minister but there's no formal mechanism by which they have to report. Hefin David AM: Okay, that's very clear. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. I've got supplementaries from Suzy, then Sian. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Briefly, please. Suzy Davies AM: I think this is a really interesting evidence session. What I'm about to say, I say it even though I'm a big localist: it all seems to be heading in one direction of a national service. Is the strategic group even thinking in these terms, obviously building in local accountability? But it'll just make it so much easier in terms of accountability and consistency to monitor what the middle tier does, if it's a national service, like the National Adoption Service. Local delivery, national service--is it heading in that direction? Kirsty Williams AM: That's not the intention of setting the group up. As Steve just said, I receive feedback from Dylan, because I meet Dylan in this particular capacity on a planned basis. He is there to give me advice on the middle tier, and to give me advice on what he thinks Welsh Government needs to do. But I've not had that conversation with him about a national service. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Well, thank you for that. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: What I was going to raise has been answered already, that is that, from what I can see, the work that Professor Dylan Jones is doing has evolved somewhat. I felt that, originally, the idea was to look at the middle tier in terms of any kind of duplication that was happening, and where it was possible to tighten up the people going into schools from different directions. But it appears that it has evolved to be something that's much more than that, and that it is placing a focus on the curriculum and other aspects of the educational system. Is there a risk for them to lose focus in that sense? Kirsty Williams AM: No, not at all. I think they are very, very clear around establishing roles and responsibilities for each of the players and to be very clear about the expectations that each part of the middle tier can have of each other, as to what they can expect from their partners in the middle tier. And absolutely, it is about making sure that there isn't duplication, that people aren't second-guessing each other's work, and there are clear demarcations about who does what in the system, and, as I said, knowing that you can rely on your colleague in the middle tier to do the bit that they are responsible for. So, I don't think there's a question of it losing focus. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We've got a lot of areas to cover so we are going to have to pick up our pace a bit. The next questions are from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Thinking about you as a Minister trying to see what the long-term trends are with regard to raising standards and improving educational attainment, is that difficult, because the performance measures have changed, haven't they? We can't compare like-for-like now, because of the changes that have been made in the way that performance is measured. So, to begin with, is that a challenge, to see whether progress has been made? And secondly, what evidence do you as Minister use to look at the long-term trends? Kirsty Williams AM: The first thing to say, with regard to changes to performance measures--you're right that change to those does make it, in some cases, more difficult to look at trends over a period of time. But those changes are made for really good reasons. If we change a performance measure, it is done to ensure that it is in the best interests of learners. And I think the best interests of learners always trumps the ease of comparison. I understand that, for researchers and for opposition Members, even for Ministers, it would be simpler to have the same set of measures over a period of time. But if we know that those things are driving behaviours that are unhelpful to children, and not in the best interests of children, then we have to change them, even thought that then does create challenges in different areas. With regard to what do we look at, there are a number of ways that we gain data and look at data in the system: everything from the categorisation system we spoke of earlier, and trends in categorisation; we look at Estyn reports; we continue to look at examination results. But we're trying to develop a broader range of data and statistics that give us a whole picture of the education performance, rather than narrowing down on one simple indicator that tells you one thing but doesn't tell you everything. But I don't know, Steve, if there's anything further that you'd like to add. Steve Davies: It's going back to what the Member raised earlier, in terms of the range of things that you look at--things that can make a difference. So, when Estyn review schools, or we're looking to develop national frameworks for things like mental health and well-being, which look to the practice that enables raising standards, it's collecting that information, both at a national level, through the annual review of Estyn, as well as our engagement with regions and local authorities. So, it's looking at the evidence base that goes beyond, but impacts on data. And, inevitably, we will use the Programme for International Student Assessment, and any other external assessments that come through organisations like the OECD. And even where we've changed the performance measures, we still have, at national level, the ongoing data. So, if you looked at level 2 plus, we believe it is important that children get five good GCSEs--for higher education and for employment. So, we've not lost sight of those at a national level--we're not using them as a narrow set of performance measures for individual schools. Kirsty Williams AM: So, if we look at--level 2 plus is a good example. We know that a relentless focus on that single measure, as a way of judging the system, leads to a set of behaviours in schools. It narrows the focus onto a certain part of the cohort, it narrows the curriculum, when we know that children-- Sian Gwenllian AM: I'm not challenging the fact that you've changed the performance measures--I understand that, and having a broader way of looking is better in the long run. I'm just saying, because there's been this change, it makes it more of a challenge--whilst accepting why you've made the changes, but it does present more of a challenge, presumably, because you have to look at more indicators, and take evidence from different places. But I take it that you're confident that the trajectory is going in the right way. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, I think we are making improvements. But you're right: it does make it more challenging. But those changes are being made for the right reasons, as I said, whether that be at level 2 plus. Look at English literature. I understand why perhaps a performance measure around English was introduced, but the effect of that was that significant numbers of children--and, it must be said, usually children who are entitled to free school meals--were suddenly not sitting English literature GCSE. We've changed that performance measure, and guess what? Last year, we saw a significant increase in the number of children that were sitting English literature GCSE. For standards of literacy and oracy, I think studying literature is really, really important, before we even get into the joy of introducing children to the written word and the love of reading. So, we make changes. Yes, it causes challenges, but we're making those changes because we believe that they are in the best interest of children, and that has to trump ease of comparison. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Why have you decided to ask the consortia, Estyn and so on not to report on local data or regional level data? How do we then come to conclusions about what is working if it isn't presented on a local authority and regional basis? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think the thing to say about the communications from Welsh Government, Estyn, and the WLGA is it's not about not communicating the data, it's about challenging people on how that data should be used. So, the data is still available, but it's a challenge to them about how to use that data. So, for instance, when we're presenting data that compares local authority to local authority, you could have a local authority that says,'There we go, I'm above the national average. I don't need to worry about the education in my local authority, because I'm above the average, or I'm better than my neighbour.'That doesn't necessarily mean that everything is right in your local education authority. Perhaps your children should be doing even better than what you're presented with. So, actually, it's not about hiding data; it's about how you use the data appropriately. And sometimes, how we were presenting data in the past was lulling some people into a false sense of security about the performance of their system. So, it's about how you use data, and that's what the communication from Welsh Government and the WLGA and Estyn was about: think very carefully about this data and what it's telling you about your system, and don't be lulled into a false sense of security that you may be doing brilliantly. Or, perhaps, looking at your data, you may think,'Oh, my goodness me, we're not doing very well at all', but, actually, more careful consideration of that might show that your school's impact on those children is really, really a positive one. So, you've got to use that data in the context. So, it's not about less data. If anything, it's about more data and, crucially for me, it's about more intelligent use and interrogation of that data, about truly what it's telling you about your system. Sian Gwenllian AM: But again, the Welsh Government--. You have continued to publish the local and regional level data. So, doesn't that contradict what you've been telling the consortia and everyone else? Kirsty Williams AM: No, not at all. As I said, we're not in the business of trying to hide data--I believe absolutely in full transparency. And in terms of level 2 data, I think I'm not moving away from the point that I think it's really important that more and more children get five really good GCSEs. I think it's important for their life chances. It is about how that data is used, not about hiding data or making that data not available. Steve Davies: Can I, very briefly--? We didn't just send a letter out collectively. We've now carried out training jointly with WLGA and Estyn on how to use that data. So, it's not just looking where your LA is; it's also not looking at whether your school's better than average for the authority. And it is well received, and it should broaden the approach of scrutiny committees to beyond what historically was, if I'm honest, looking at the league table for their authority or looking at the league table of local authorities. It's not that they shouldn't be looking at that, but they need to dig much, much deeper underneath it. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. We're going to go on now to Suzy. I'm going to appeal for brief questions and brief answers so that we can cover the rest of the questions. Suzy Davies AM: I'll shorten these questions, okay. We know why you got rid of the old measures. We've got interim measures now. What are they telling you about the success you've had in trying to avoid the bad behaviour? Short answers. Kirsty Williams AM: It's impossible. [Laughter. ] I think it's inevitable: whatever kind of measures we put in place, people will look to maximise their success in those measures, and I don't think we'll ever come up with a system where those measures are absolutely perfect. What's really important to me is that we're really, really, really challenging schools to look at the performance of all of their children, rather than just at a very, very narrow cohort around those C/D boundaries, which we knew was detrimental, potentially, to more able and talented children and really pushing those Bs to As and those As to A*s, and children for whom actually just getting in to school on a daily basis is an achievement, and the school has done well to provide that. So, our new capped 9 makes sure that there is breadth across a range of subjects, rather than just focusing on a narrower and narrower bunch of subject opportunities for children, and our new third-third-third system enables schools to really look at their performance. So if their capped 9 score is high, what's driving that? Is it because the bottom third of the cohort is doing really well, and the impact on those children is above and beyond what could be expected, but actually, you're not doing very well for your more able and talented; you're not pushing them on? Alternatively, maybe your capped 9 score is because your MAT children are doing incredibly well, but actually, you're not really making the progress for the middle tier of those children. It allows us to have a greater focus on the performance of our FSM children--where they really are within that system. So, it's a much more granular--. And crucially for me, it looks at the impact for every child, because every child has to matter in the system, and what we had before was a narrowing of curriculum choice and a narrowing on a certain cohort of children. Suzy Davies AM: So are the permanent measures likely to be pretty similar to what you've got now? Because the research--I don't know if the research is complete yet. When will you be publishing the new permanent evaluation? Kirsty Williams AM: Sue, you're right: they're interim measures at the moment, and we will need to make sure that the performance measures are aligned to the new curriculum. That, potentially, of course--. Because Wales's review of qualifications potentially has an impact on what those finally will look like, so that work is ongoing at the moment, and unless Steve can tell me off the top of his head when we expect that to be completed by, I will send you a note. But they're interim at the moment, because we need to align them to the new curriculum. Suzy Davies AM: I think we understand that. [Inaudible. ]--date. Steve Davies: No, no. This is not a quick fix. This is a two to three-year research base. The new qualifications for the new curriculum will not start until 2025. They have to be in place for 2022. There's a three-year roll on. I would expect the broad structure of the interim measures to continue over that time. There will be some tweaks for consistency. It's what's wrapped around those interim measures that I touched on earlier: the other evidence that we bring to bear about the effectiveness of a school, but we do want to say to schools that on the whole, broadly speaking, the interim measures will carry on for two, three years. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, and the reason I asked that is right at the beginning of this session, the Minister said to the Chair that this PS100 million that's going into school improvements will be going into things that work. We need some evidence that the interim measures are going to work as well, so when are they going to be evaluated? Steve Davies: Well, we've only just used them for one year. Suzy Davies AM: That's what I'm asking you. Steve Davies: We've signalled that they're only going to be in place for three years. We are carrying out our own review of the impact of those and that's been built in, but I expect the OECD report--because it is an extensive report--to give us feedback on how those things are working now, and some steer, as they did with the last report, as to the direction we would want to go into. Kirsty Williams AM: And what I'm also interested in is those performance management measures around schools. Yes, they're about outcomes for children, but actually are about a broader suite of behaviours within that school, so, yes, qualifications and grades are an important part of a performance measure, but actually, I have other expectations of schools, above and beyond simply qualifications. And so, we would want our permanent set of performance measures to look at a wider set of behaviours within a school, and I think because--. Exams are important--of course they are, qualifications are important--but the way in which those schools achieve those results are also important. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Would you anticipate that including well-being, then? Suzy Davies AM: In a whole-school approach. Kirsty Williams AM: I absolutely--and we need to find a way of how we can truly measure that. Sometimes, children's well-being is influenced by lots of things outside the control of a school. So, I don't want schools to be held accountable for things that they have no control over, because of the circumstances in which a child may be living. But, absolutely: well-being and how the culture of the school addresses well-being is really important to me. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Suzy. Move on to PISA, please. Suzy Davies AM: How useful is PISA for you in helping school improvement? I know that it's not always the thing that you enjoy watching or looking out for. But, genuinely, how useful is it? Kirsty Williams AM: It is one of a range of tools that we need to look at. Sian, quite rightly, talked about consistency. PISA is one thing where there is a level of consistency, so it will continue to be, I think, an important part of how we test how our system is doing. Suzy Davies AM: We know that you are a little bit encouraged, but we are not out of the woods yet. You mentioned this in Plenary when we talked about PISA. How confident are you that we are on track for meeting these targets that were set before your time, or do you think that having those targets is helpful? Is it setting up aspirations that are incapable of being met within a period of time? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, those long-term targets of a score around 500 are part of'Our National Mission', and we have to keep the pressure on to strive. They are testing, but we have to keep the pressure on to strive to reach them. In some cases, I can be quite encouraged. If we look at reading scores for girls, we are almost there, but that just demonstrates what a journey we've got with our boys to address. For me, one of the ways in which we will reach those targets and achieve them is further progress on our more able and talented children. Although we are now performing at an OECD average, I will be the first person to admit that, although we have seen an improvement in the higher level skills of our more able and talented children, we do not perform at an OECD average with regard to those level 6 and level 5 scores. Suzy Davies AM: Even within the UK, really, we are quite far behind. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes. So, I think that's where we really need to push on. That's one of the reasons why we have introduced a more able and talented budget to support that, and our Seren programme, which is delivering fantastic results post-16. That's why we're introducing the principles of Seren earlier into children's careers, bringing it down from year 9 upwards, to be able to drive improvements. So, I think that that's the area that we are particularly keen to work on: making sure that more of our children perform at the OECD average at level 5 and level 6. Clearly, we've got more work to do on reading. We are working with southern Ireland, who have consistently done well with reading scores, to look to see what lessons we can learn to press on with there with reading. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. My final question on this. You recognise it as a priority, particularly for boys. Does that mean that the focus will then drift slightly from maths, where there has been some success; and drift from science, where the encouragement of more people to take GCSE science has reduced the number of high-level passes? Kirsty Williams AM: First, we have to have a system that is capable of doing all of those of things at the same time. We can't accept a system that says,'Well, we can do a bit over here, but that means we have to--.'We have to have a system, Suzy, that can drive improvements at all levels. That's my expectation. Suzy Davies AM: The balloon needs to be bigger not just squeezing it at one end. Kirsty Williams AM: Absolutely, yes. That's my expectation of this system. You have to deliver across all of these. We have seen some progress. As I've said, it's far from perfect, and we've got more work to do, but we have to deliver across all three domains, as we did last time. And I'm not going to make any apologies for changing the performance indicators around science. It was a travesty that there were children who never had the opportunity to sit a science GCSE. We don't have to make assumptions about the nature of many, many, many of those children. We have seen a significant increase in the number of children who are having the opportunity to sit GCSE science and who are passing GCSE science. So, I'm not going to make any apologies about that. One of the reasons that I suspect we have ended up with poor science scores is because of the previous policy around science entries and science qualifications. Again, one of the reasons that we have changed it isn't just solely because we need to do better in PISA, but I think that by changing it, we will see an impact on PISA. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you for that. Lynne Neagle AM: The final set of questions is from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: I just want to discuss an issue that I know is important to you, namely closing the attainment gap between pupils who are eligible for free school meals and those who are not eligible for free school meals. Unfortunately, the problem persists, doesn't it? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes. We are not where we need to be in terms of the performance, not only of our children on free school meals, but the performance of our looked-after children, and the performance of some children from some ethnic minority groups. So, we will continue to look to support those learners in a variety of ways, again looking to amend our practice on the basis of evidence that is given to us from our experts who are there to advise us. There is clearly more that we need to do. There has been some progress in some areas, but it is not where I would want it to be. Sian Gwenllian AM: But, this is despite the fact that there is PS475 million that has been invested in the pupil development grant, for this exact purpose of closing the attainment gap. But, the problem persists, and in some places, it's deteriorating. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think that, as I said, I am not shying away from any assumption or declaration that we need to do better. But, I do think that we need to acknowledge where progress has been made. If we go back to look at what PISA has said about our performance, the PISA results show that pupils in Wales are relatively more able to overcome the disadvantage of their background than is the average in OECD countries. So, our children are doing better in that, and that gives me encouragement. That's not me saying that; that's there. If we look at pupils who are eligible for free school meals, they do score below their better-off counterparts in PISA by some 34 points. The gap in England is 40 points. So, again, that gap is smaller here in Wales. If we look at basic levels of qualifications, back in--. It's difficult to make comparisons because of all the reasons we have talked about, but if we look back to 2006 and we look at the very basic level of qualifications, which is a level 1 qualification, we have seen a jump from 9. 4 per cent of children in 2006 achieving a level 1 qualification to over 18 per cent. So, there is progress. There is evidence that the resources that we are spending are making a difference. But, clearly, we are not where we would want to be. That's why we will continue to focus those resources on those children, where we need it. But, we need to do that earlier. Sticking plasters in years 10 and 11 aren't going to cut it. We need to get this right for those children, the moment that they come into a nursery and the moment that they start their formal education at the age of 5. That's how we are going to make the difference. Providing catch-up, of course, we need to do for those kids; we can't throw those year 10s and year 11s to the wind. We have to support those children. But, we will see real improvement when we get in there earlier. Sian Gwenllian AM: But I'm sure that that is a disappointment to you, because it has been a personal priority for you as well. In terms of minority ethnic learners, while there are some groups within that category who are achieving, there is underachievement happening here as well, isn't there? It's not consistent across the minority ethnic group. Is that something that you will be focusing upon? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, and that's why we have committed to maintaining a ring-fenced grant to local authorities of some PS10 million, to support education of our minority ethnic children. But, again, you are right, you are absolutely right, Sian. We need a much more sophisticated conversation about what is really going on in attainment across minority ethnic groups so that we can best target that resource and have a conversation about what the differences are. You are absolutely correct: there is a real mixed picture. If we look at black Welsh girls entitled to free school meals, they perform almost at the national average for all children--not FSM children; the national average for all children. Black Welsh boys don't, but neither do white Welsh boys. So, there is a really complex picture here, and I really welcome a debate about acknowledging the various levels of performance of BAME children, and where the gaps in performance lie. You are quite right: it is a complex picture in the system. I'm committed to continuing to support educational opportunities, and that's why have ring-fenced the minority ethnic achievement grant. There are some interesting data there. Some children are doing very, very well; others, we need to concentrate on. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian, this will need to be the last question, I'm afraid. Sian Gwenllian AM: Sorry? Lynne Neagle AM: This is going to have to be the last question. Sian Gwenllian AM: The last question. Lynne Neagle AM: Yes. Sian Gwenllian AM: Fine. In terms of looked-after children, which is one of the groups where attainment isn't where we would like it to be, there was some improvement in 2016 at key stage 4, but it has been disappointing. Do we know what's been happening in 2019? Kirsty Williams AM: The 2019 data will be published next month, and there has been significant activity. You are right: in recent years, the data have been poor and not where we would want it to be. That's why we have had a reformed approach to PDG LAC; the employment of PDG LAC co-ordinators across the regions. We've identified new resource in the new financial year to test new approaches, so, for instance, virtual school approaches, where we know, in other systems, that has worked. But, we expect the next set of data around the performance of this particular group of learners in March. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay, and you hope to see progress. Kirsty Williams AM: I don't want to speculate, but I hope so. Sian Gwenllian AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you very much. We have come to the end of our time, so can I thank you, Minister, and your official for attending this morning? We have had a wide-ranging and very detailed discussion that will be very useful for the committee. As usual, you will be sent a transcript following the meeting to check for accuracy, but thank you again, both of you, for your attendance this morning. Diolch yn fawr. Okay. Item 3 is papers to note. Paper to note 1 is a letter from ERW providing additional information following the evidence session on 16 January. Paper to note 2 is a letter from Central South Consortium, similarly providing additional information following the evidence session. Paper to note 3 is a letter from the Noah's Ark Children's Hospital for Wales regarding children's rights in Wales, following up on some additional information there. Paper to note 4 is a letter from Qualifications Wales, providing additional information following the annual report scrutiny session in January. Item 4, then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting? Are Members content? Thank you.

According to Kirsty, school was going to need a little bit of extra support, so it was not always just a crisis that needed extra support. There were just general things that happen in the life of a school that could lead to it. However, it was also right that they had a particular challenge in the secondary sector. That's why they had introduced the new pilot to address those schools. If they carried on doing the same thing, they would keep getting the same results, which was not satisfying enough.

tr-sq-1232

tr-sq-1232_0

Summarize the discussion about the attitudes and opinions on the work of consortia. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received apologies for absence from Janet Finch-Saunders, and also from Dawn Bowden, and I'd like to welcome Huw Irranca-Davies, who is substituting for Dawn Bowden. Can I ask Members if there are any declarations of interest, please? No. Okay. We'll move on, then, to our evidence session for our inquiry on school improvement and raising standards. I'd like to welcome Kirsty Williams AM, Minister for Education, and Steve Davies, director of education. Thank you both for attending and for your detailed paper in advance of the meeting. We've got a lot of ground to cover, so we'll go straight into questions, if that's okay. If I can just start by asking you: to what extent is the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development still involved in the Welsh Government's school improvement journey? Kirsty Williams AM: First of all, can I thank the committee for their invitation this morning, and their interest in this particular area? As you will be aware, on coming into office, the director and I agreed to ask the OECD to do a rapid review of the state of Welsh education at the beginning of this Assembly term. They did that, and the feedback from that work informed the publication and content of the national mission. I was very clear in the national mission that I would invite the OECD back to review our progress against that mission, and that has happened in the tail end of last year, and the OECD will publish their latest report on Welsh education next month now, in March. So, the expectation is that the report will be published on 23 March, and my intention is to make a statement to the Chamber on 24 March. The nature of that review is part of our ongoing development of self-evaluation. So, we talk a lot about self-evaluation in the school system. Actually, the continuing relationship with OECD is about self-evaluation of the entirety of the system and Welsh Government. We don't want to accept our own orthodoxy and just be in a bubble where we are constantly listening to ourselves and those people who might want to agree with us or tell us what we want to hear. So, the OECD is our best attempt of having some external verification of where we are. That's a risk for Ministers and for Government, because we want them to give an honest evaluation of where we are, but that's a really important tool for me, to ensure that we're constantly testing ourselves. The nature of that review is that the OECD were able to talk to whoever they felt it was important to talk to, so that included practitioners on the ground, elements of the middle tier, as well as Welsh Government. And I know, Chair--I hope you'll be pleased to hear this--that the reports of this committee have formed parts of their review, looking at how the Senedd itself has contributed to and has held the Government to account. So, as I said, we expect our report to be published towards the end of March. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you, Minister. Can I ask about the powers under the School Standards and Organisation (Wales) Act 2013, to ask you to tell us about the use of those powers either by Welsh Government or by local authorities, and how effective you feel that legislation has been? Kirsty Williams AM: Okay. Well, as you'll be aware, local authorities have quite extensive powers of intervention in schools if they feel that is necessary. If I'm honest, I think there's a mixed picture, with some local authorities using those powers not on a regular basis, but obviously demonstrating a willingness to use those powers. There are other local authorities who don't seem to have used them. Since that legislation came into being, there have been a number of reasons, because of course a local authority has to give a reason for using those powers of intervention. They usually focus on standards, but sometimes they focus on a breakdown in governance arrangements, perhaps, or a failure or a breakdown in financial management. So, sometimes the budgetary issues trigger an intervention power. And the types of interventions that have been used have included, in some cases, appointing additional governors to governing bodies, or suspending a school's delegated budget so the local authority takes on, then, financial control of that particular school, or sometimes applying to the Welsh Government to entirely replace a governing body and establish an intervention board. So, if I can give you an example of where that's been used and has been successful, in Flintshire. They applied to Welsh Government for two interim executive boards, in Sir Richard Gwyn Catholic High School and in Ysgol Trefonnen. They applied to us. Those governing bodies were dissolved. The IEBs were put in place and both of those schools, which had been in special measures, moved quite rapidly, actually, out of special measures. Perhaps the most recent example of this is one that the Chair will know very well in her own constituency of Torfaen, in Cwmbran High School, where Torfaen has intervened in that case. The Welsh Government has not used those powers to date. My expectation always is that local authorities should be the first port of call, and I would encourage--and we always encourage--local authorities to take a proactive approach to intervention and to use those powers. But it's my belief that it is they who are best placed initially to do that. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you, Minister. Can I ask, then, about the national evaluation and improvement resource and how significant a role that will play in the raising of school standards, and how you feel it's evolved since it was first conceived? Kirsty Williams AM: So, this brings us back to the principle of self-evaluation and something, if we're honest, we've not been very good at. If you look at a number of chief inspectors'reports into the Welsh education system, self-evaluation has always been identified as something that is missing or underdeveloped in our system to date, hence, then, the work to establish not a new approach, but a more robust approach to self-evaluation. We've done that in conjunction, again, with the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. It's really important, throughout the entirety of our reform journey that that's done in co-construction, because we want this resource to be usable in schools. So, it's all very well having a conceptual idea and people outside the classroom working on it, but if it's of no practical use to a school leadership team, then we won't see the impact. So, it's--. We're in phase 2 at the moment, where we're doing--. So, the initial resource has been developed by the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. We're in the testing phase at the moment and having it evaluated itself, with a view to introducing that resource across the system at the start of the new academic year, in September 2020. I truly believe that, if we're to make progress in Welsh education, we have to develop the skills within our system to have robust self-evaluation. This resource gives us continuity of approach right the way across Wales. So, it's not left to an individual school to come up with a system; it's right the way across the system. My hope would be that those principles could then be applied to local education authorities, to regional school improvement services and Welsh Government as part of a whole-system approach to self-evaluation. I don't know if there's anything more you want to add, Steve. Steve Davies: Just to add that the other critical partners are Estyn themselves. Kirsty Williams AM: Oh, yes, sorry. Steve Davies: So, they have played a critical role and, as we know, as the Minister has said in the past, she may introduce policy and practice, but if Estyn are part of it then schools, usually, because they recognise that it will be part of the inspection process--it gives it greater push and support around it. So, they've been key players within it. Kirsty Williams AM: And I think, if I just say as well, that the external perception of what that's about is really important. It's not a test of school readiness for reform, it is a genuine attempt for a school to evaluate their strengths, their weaknesses and where they need to go next. It's not an Estyn checklist. And because of the word'toolkit'--the feedback was that it gave the impression of a checklist,'Just do this and check list'. So, we're actually going to change the name of that resource. So, it'll be called the national evaluation and improvement resource, rather than the toolkit, because, as I said, the feedback was that'toolkit'gave the impression of a checklist exercise, and it's got to be about more than that if it's going to be meaningful. So, it'll be changed to an'improvement resource'. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Before I bring Suzy in, can I just welcome Sian Gwenllian, who is joining us via video-conference in north Wales? Morning, Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Good morning. Can you hear me? Lynne Neagle AM: We can, yes. We can hear you very nicely, thank you. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Yes. Only a very quick one. It's about the development of the-- Kirsty Williams AM: The resource. Suzy Davies AM: Yes, the resource, thank you--about whether there were any conflicting ideas in the process of development that made it quite difficult to zone in on something that school leadership teams, in particular, could rely on. Were there differences of opinion on what this should look like? Kirsty Williams AM: Not that I'm aware of from the practitioners that I've spoken to who have been part of that. So, for instance, Suzy, you will know the very small school of Gladestry. The head of Gladestry has been involved in this process, and she said that she'd really enjoyed the process of working alongside Estyn and the OECD as a school leader to be able to shape it. But I'm not aware that there's been conflict in that process. Suzy Davies AM: I'm not suggesting that there has been; I'm just interested as to how it had worked, that's all. Steve Davies: Chair, I think, inevitably, when you bring stakeholders together, they're not going to be in total agreement as to how it's going to work, and I think initially one of the challenges was having Estyn there as part of the facilitation group. There are always some concerns that, actually, it's coming from a to inspect, oral, judgmental tick box. So, we had some early day challenges where we had to convince--and, ultimately, Estyn convinced them--that they were there to help and support as opposed to to inspect, and that the model that was developed, as the Minister said, was not going to be a tick box,'You are good at this part of self-evaluation', it was to build the skillsets up. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. So, it's got their full confidence. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, and I think again, also, what--. You know, four years into the job, what I've reflected on as well is there is this sometimes a feeling out there that the Minister says all the right stuff, but you're not actually going to do it, so, when you talk about a new approach to doing things, you're not actually serious about it. So, trying to build that confidence that we are serious about developing a new system around self-improvement, which is different from accountability--sometimes, the practitioners are like,'Oh, yes, we've heard it all before but it never actually happens.'And I think that's been a part of the constant--not pressure, but the responsibility on Welsh Government is in following through. So, we said that we were going to do this in the national mission, and we are going to do it. I'm really proud that there or thereabouts, a few months either way, we've actually kept to the timetable as outlined in the national mission, and that helps build confidence within the sector that we are committed to that programme and we're going to do what we say we're going to do. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: And a final question from me: how effective do you think the investment in school standards has been in this Assembly term, as opposed to the approach taken in the last Assembly term, where there was the protection put in place for core school budgets? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think, first of all, it's important that, whilst this additional resource is specifically targeted at school standards, that is only a part of a much wider education budget, a budget that--you know--is incredibly complex. And so it is really challenging to be able to draw straight lines--you know,'We did this and it's resulted in that'--given that we're looking at the entirety of school funding here. What's been really important is that, if you drill down into what that money has been spent on, 50 per cent of it has been directed towards professional learning in one form or another to support our teaching professionals. And that's been really important to me. I've said it time and time again: an education system cannot exceed the quality of the people who stand in front of our children day in, day out to work with them and teach them. Therefore, that investment in staff and investment in the professional learning of our staff and support for them I think is making a difference already but, importantly, will continue to make a difference. But I think it is really challenging to be able to say,'Well, we spent this bit of money and it definitely led to that', because it's such a complex picture. But that money, the way it's been spent, has been driven by evidence. And, again, what we do know from international best practice, what do we know that works in driving up standards, and then how can we align the money that we've got to supporting that? And, as I said, 50 per cent of that money has gone directly to simply supporting the professional learning of those who work with our children. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you very much. We're going to talk now a bit about schools causing concern with questions from Huw Irranca-Davies. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Thank you, Chair. If I can, just first of all, zoom in on the way in which we actually decide which schools need what support. So, one of the interesting questions for us is how do we use the different systems out there. So, we've got the school categorisation system, which we're familiar with. We've also got Estyn inspection reports, then we've got other intelligence, including local intelligence on the ground. How do you decide from that? How is it decided what schools need support, need challenge? How do we do that? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, you're right: what we have is a variety of ways in which we can identify schools that need support, or need to be challenged on their practice. But it's important not to confuse them either. So, our primary route to doing this is our school categorisation system. Sometimes, and perhaps this is inevitable--. That system is primarily there as a triage system around identifying where our resource should be spent. So, our school improvement service--it's a risk-based approach, so they can evaluate where they need to put their time, effort and resource. Sometimes, it's used by other people for other things, but that is not its primary purpose; its primary purpose there is not one of accountability, it is one of identifying risk and aligning that then to the support that is available. Estyn--now that is part of that accountability system. That is our method of holding schools and their governing bodies to account for their practice and for the work that they do. Both systems, of course, are evolving. So, how we do categorisation has changed over a period of time. The elements that go into making that judgment around the levels of support have changed, and, of course, the Estyn inspection regime is also changing. At the moment, schools are only inspected once every seven years. We're moving to a system where Estyn will be more regularly in schools. So, they are two systems, but they are different and they look at different things. But our categorisation system is how we look for those ways of identifying support for schools. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: And you've made, with feedback over the last few years, adjustments to the way that the categorisation system works. Are you content with where it is now, or do you see more adjustments being made? Have you got things in front of you that you're getting feedback on saying'Well, we need to tweak this again a little bit'? Kirsty Williams AM: So, that system has evolved over time. So, when it started, it was just a tool around secondary schools. Now, it covers the breadth of schools. Initially, on coming into office, when I first came in, it was purely driven by data, and it was also done in quartiles. So, there was a certain number of schools that had to be in the bottom, which drove practitioners mad. They were like'Ah, every year, there's going to be some of us that have to be in the bottom quartile', because of the way in which it was arranged, which seemed very unfair to them. So, we've changed that. It's not just purely driven on data now; there are other judgments--the professional judgments of our challenge advisers are taken into account. And I would expect that situation to continue to evolve to align itself to our curriculum reform, and our changes in self-evaluation. So, it's not a fixed point. I expect that that system will continue to evolve and change, so that it complements and assists in the reform journey as other parts of the system change. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Thanks for that. I think, for any impartial reader of the way that the trends have been going on this, there is some good news within that, in that, certainly, those schools that might have been identified as have been okay but coasting along, seem to be moving up the categories, although we still do have that--. Well, it's what the system is there to do, it's to identify those schools that do need that additional support. And I like your analogy of a triage system--'You're fit; keep on doing what you're doing and do it well; you need more support, we'll put the support in.'But, can I turn to those schools that are causing significant concern, and how we identify them? The Estyn chief inspector's conclusions at the end of the 2017-18 report that these schools are not being identified early enough--there's a need to do something urgently about these concerns, particularly in secondary schools. Have we addressed that? Are you content that we've addressed that concern? Was he right? Kirsty Williams AM: No, the chief inspector is absolutely right--absolutely right. I've got no beef with that statement at all. In some ways, when a school goes into special measures, in a way, that's a failure of the system, because that should have been identified sooner. So I've got no beef, as I said, with the chief inspector saying that. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: So just to ask, bearing in mind the earlier discussion we were having, how is it that we don't identify those schools? Kirsty Williams AM: That's it--you're quite right. Undoubtedly, what categorisation has done is led to a greater understanding, I think, on behalf of local education authorities'and school improvement services'knowledge about their schools. I think knowledge around schools is greatly enhanced by that process. But we are not there yet in terms of necessarily, then, moving those schools more quickly, once they've been identified as needing the highest level of support to see improvement. And secondary schools is a particular, particular challenge. So you will have seen from the last publication of categorisation data that our primary sector continues to improve--more and more and more of our primary schools are in a green rating, which is very satisfying to me. But we have got more of an issue with secondary schools, and we have a particular issue with the same schools being identified in that level of categorisation. So even though we've identified them as needing that extra help, they are not moving at pace away from that system. So there are two things that we are doing at the moment. The first is, we are, again, looking at different sets of data that can give us even earlier warning systems that things are going wrong in a school--and perhaps Steve will explain later. For instance, staff sickness, and carefully monitoring staff sickness, because there is a direct correlation between high levels of staff sickness in a school and what is going on in the school. And Steve can explain some of this work later. But we're piloting a new approach to those schools that are causing concern. Each local authority has been asked to identify two of their high schools that they are particularly worried about. And we have a new multi-agency approach, working with those schools to try and move them more forward. So it's two from each region, a multi-agency panel, working with the school. And that multi-agency panel includes the school itself, the local authority, the regional consortia school improvement staff, Estyn and Welsh Government--as a multi-agency panel to support improvement in that school. So, for instance, what would normally happen, Estyn would come in, Estyn would make a judgment on the school--requiring special measures or urgent improvement--and Estyn would go away. They'd go away for six months, and then they'd come back in six months, and they'd make another judgment,'No, still not good enough', and disappear for six months. We're saying--Estyn and the Welsh Government have agreed that's not the best approach; Estyn need to be part of the solution, rather than just coming and making a judgment. The initial feedback from this trial is very, very positive. Actually, we've had local authorities coming to us and saying,'Can we put more schools in? Rather than just having two of our high schools, can we engage more in this project and this pilot?'It's being evaluated by Cardiff Metropolitan University and Swansea University, so we're having some academic overview to see, actually, does this approach work, can we evidence it--that it actually makes a difference? And it's actually--I'd like to claim all the credit for it, but it's actually not dissimilar to something that's happening in Scotland as well. But we knew that carrying on doing the same old thing clearly wasn't moving these schools, we needed a new approach, and this is what we're doing at the moment. So it's relatively new, but the initial feedback is positive. Steve, I don't know-- Steve Davies: I think your important point is about,'What about the schools that are sliding in that direction?'And it's bringing together what we know from Estyn, but also, critically, local authorities have knowledge of their schools, and so do consortia. We've got to be better at bringing those together. So, the Minister gave the example of staff sickness--not always a trigger, but it's one of those. If you look at movement of pupils out of a school, you can look at complaints, you can look at, actually, emerging increased use of HR resources that a school pulls on a local authority. None of these have been pushed up into the public domain, but they're important antennae. The point the Minister made about Estyn as well is, historically, when they go into special measures, Estyn, at the end of that week, call in, historically, either the region or the local authority, they will feed back to one of them, and then they go away. So, they are staying with it. So, we are brining together the knowledge. But, as the Minister said, we want to keep a very clear distinction between the accountability and the transparency to the public, to parents, with the very detailed collective work of that multi-agency group to actually make that difference over time. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Okay. So, does that--. I'd love to go further, but time is against us. Does that deal with the issue of the schools that have been identified in those categories of requiring significant improvement and requiring special measures? Are those the ones that will be identified now, or is that above and beyond that again? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, those are the ones that are primarily at the forefront of our minds, but this way of sharing data better, to step in earlier, is part of our attempt to address what the chief inspector says about stepping in early--not waiting until a school gets into special measures and a formal judgment from Estyn of that, but actually using that intelligence to get support in there earlier. The three elements that that multi-agency approach look at are: what are the fundamentals that need addressing in this school? What is the capacity of the school itself to be able to address those fundamentals? And, what extra support needs to go into that senior management team and the governing body to get those fundamentals addressed? And actually, what does sustainable improvement look like? Because, again, one of the issues, sometimes, that happens is, a school goes into a category with Estyn, there's a big push and a big,'We must do something'and the school comes out, but actually, that improvement is not sustainable. It's the low-hanging fruit; it's the easy wins that have been achieved, but actually, perhaps some of the fundamental challenges underlying in that school haven't been addressed in that process. So, this is about what will sustainable improvement look like in six months, what's it going to look like in 12 months and what's it going to look like in 18 months. So, actually, a more strategic, longer term approach to real change in a school rather than, perhaps, some of the easy-to-fix items that make a school as if it's doing better, but we really haven't tackled some of the underlying problems that make that school vulnerable to slipping back. Does that make sense? Lynne Neagle AM: I've got a couple of supplementaries on--. Sorry? Kirsty Williams AM: Does that make sense? Lynne Neagle AM: Yes. We've got a couple of supplementaries on this, first from Suzy and then from Sian. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you for that, Chair. Obviously, I'm pleased to hear that this work is being done, but I'm wondering--. What strikes me, in the recent past, at least, particularly as we've got the usual suspects in this category--. I've got to ask myself why it is that councils have been reluctant, perhaps, to step in with these schools earlier, particularly as they've got consortia or middle-tier support as well. Has there been a deficit in that space that has meant that councils don't feel equipped to step in? I just don't really get it why they've been reluctant to step in so far. If they've been nervous about doing it, because they don't feel that they've got the tools to do it, then I think that's pretty important, because as you were saying, we were talking about fundamentals; surely, councils have been able to deal with fundamentals, and more importantly, consortia up until now. Because, obviously, we're asking these players to give us evidence at some point, so perhaps I'd like to challenge them on how come we're here now. Kirsty Williams AM: And rightly so. Suzy Davies AM: I'm not laying this at your door. Kirsty Williams AM: And rightly so. I guess each local authority will have an explanation for each individual school, I suspect. What's crucial to me is that we have to--. I see our job as corralling the collective effort, and I think, for too long in the system, there has been a lack of co-ordination. So, this is about bringing and corralling a collective effort to address this, going forward, in more sustainable way. And I think it does come back to this issue around self-evaluation and a willingness to be open, honest and upfront about some of the challenges that we've got. It's not easy, is it? It's not easy to accept or to acknowledge sometimes when things are-- Suzy Davies AM: That they don't know how to do this. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, that they're going badly, or perhaps they don't know exactly how to make the difference. So this approach, as I said, is a new way of trying to coral that collective effort across the board. But, I don't know if Steve--because you've done other roles in the system, so perhaps you've got a different insight. Steve Davies: I think you're right. The variation across the country, across local authorities--. There are some local authorities that we've worked with and we identify have taken the appropriate action. There are others that we're working with, and yes, at its best, it's done as a joint exercise where they use their regional school improvement service to help in the identification that there is a need for this. They take advice as to what the action is, whether it is, as the Minister said, in the more significant areas, a board, or whether a warning notice comes in terms of standards or finance. So, we're working with them and we're working with the Welsh Local Government Association to share that practice. An example of that work is: we have done a development training session for cabinet members for education, and scrutiny leads for education across Wales, and all 22 local authorities came to that and engaged with that. That was partly about self-improvement, but it was also about where significant issues arise, you have to constructively confront them. And that comes with what the region knows, and increasingly, we're looking to have it consistently across 22 local authorities, so they are collecting all the additional data that we referred to earlier, so they can legitimately hold a mirror up and say,'This is a real concern that we have. We're not punishing you, but we're registering the seriousness, and we want you to address it.'And we're making progress. I believe it's genuinely more consistent now, but I'd be lying if I said that there was consistency across all 22 local authorities. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. I'm conscious of time. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. I've got a supplementary from Sian, then back to Huw. Sian Gwenllian AM: Because you are moving to a more sophisticated approach in terms of identifying problems sooner, and so can offer the support earlier, is it time to think about moving away from the system of categorisation entirely? That is, has the categorisation system reached the end of its usefulness, and is the multi-agency approach, this more sophisticated approach, a better way, ultimately, of being able to assist schools in moving forward? Kirsty Williams AM: I think, Sian, as I said earlier, the categorisation system has evolved over time, and my expectation is that it will continue to evolve, because it has to be consistent with our overall approach to school improvement and raising standards. I expect OECD will have feedback for us on this important part of our system, and we'll wait to see exactly what they say about it, but as I said in answer to Huw Irranca-Davies earlier, I haven't got a closed mind; we've demonstrated over the last four years our willingness to change the system to make it a smarter system, and we will continue to keep that under review, as we move forward. If I could just go back briefly, it doesn't sound like a very exciting thing, does it, when we say we've been doing work with the WLGA, with cabinet members, but also scrutiny, because that's a really important part of the jigsaw as well, is actually local government scrutiny of the performance of your education portfolio holder and the leadership of your council. So this is about trying to up the ante on all sides, so that those issues around'What are you doing in your local authority to use the powers that you have?'You know, sometimes, making sure that everybody in that authority--those in power and those who are there to hold those in power to account--have the necessary skills, knowledge and understanding to do that appropriately. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Huw, briefly. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Yes, briefly. I only have one final question. We've talked a lot about early identification; getting in there and then managing the improvement, this triage approach there, and then getting some grip of it, as well, in doing all of that. But my question now is on what we currently have. I won't touch on the primary schools, but let's just look at secondary schools--11 per cent of secondary schools inspected in the last two academic years judged as unsatisfactory, needing urgent improvement. There will always be secondary schools and primary schools that hit moments of crisis for one reason or another, but 11 per cent to me, and to any layperson, would seem unreasonably high. Are you--? It would be daft to ask you if you're content. What is a level that you would be content with of having schools in red category in Wales? Kirsty Williams AM: You're right. Schools will need different levels of support at different points, and sometimes, it's not because of a crisis. So, for instance, in my region, we do have an increase in the number of schools in the amber category. That's because we've seen in that particular region a number of headteachers retire because they've reached retirement age, and there are new headteachers. Well, that is a moment of risk in the school--when senior leadership changes. Nothing else has changed in that school, but the simple fact that you have a new leader, sometimes in those cases it might be their first headship. That means that that school is going to need a little bit of extra support, so it isn't always just a crisis that needs extra support, there are just general things that happen in the life of a school that could lead to it. But you're absolutely right--we have a particular challenge in the secondary sector where we have not been able to move individual schools forward at pace. And 11 per cent is not acceptable to me, Huw, which is why we have introduced this new pilot to address those schools where, persistently, we have concerns about their ability to move forward. If we'd have carried on doing the same thing, I suspect we would have just carried on getting the same result--hence the need for a new approach to those schools that are causing concern. Steve Davies: Very briefly, the things we talked about earlier was how we measure the performance of schools, particularly at GCSEs, with a narrow focus. As was said earlier, some of these are the same groups--they trip in and then they don't come out. Our belief is, from research, that they concentrate on squeezing the pips to get the grades up in some small areas for a period of time, and you can do that by targeting and immersing them. Estyn can tick the box to say your grades have got better, but we haven't handled the serious underpinning issues--leadership, teaching and learning, and bringing those together. As the Minister said, what does sustainable improvement look like in six, 12,18 months? It isn't just, as important as they are, getting those exam grades up a bit. They're the fundamental--. And if they're all agreed as the indicators at the outset, we're more likely--. So it's multi-agency; it's not a little activity, it's a major strategy. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Hefin David has some questions now on the middle tier. Hefin David AM: I'd like to consider the work of the consortia. In 2016, your election manifesto very clearly said that you wanted to abolish regional consortia--three words in it. Why haven't you done it? Kirsty Williams AM: Because, given that you're such a keen student of my manifesto, you'll also know that-- Hefin David AM: It was only three words. Kirsty Williams AM: The Liberal Democrat manifesto also said that we supported major local government reform and a major reduction in the number of local government units. That hasn't happened. I have to say genuinely, my experience over the last four years has proven to me the value of regional working, and in the absence of significant local government reform, I think it's absolutely vital that we have scale in school improvement services--scale that I don't think can be delivered across 22 individual local authorities. Hefin David AM: Okay. So, if there was local government reform, you would abolish the consortia. Kirsty Williams AM: I think if there was significant local government reform and we could demonstrate that those units had such a scale that they could perform the functions of regional consortia, then I think it would be inevitable that any education Minister would look to see whether there was an opportunity to change structures. But in the absence of that, Hefin, I have been absolutely convinced whilst doing this job that you need larger units to be able to carry out successful school improvement work, and I think it would be reckless to advocate the system going back to school improvement being organised in 22 different ways. Hefin David AM: Okay. Do you think that the work of the four consortia has been consistent and effective? Kirsty Williams AM: The school improvement services? Hefin David AM: The four consortia. Kirsty Williams AM: I think, as with individual local education authorities, there are some regional consortia services that have performed really highly--and that's not me saying that, that's Estyn, but gives us assurance around that--and there are others that need to improve. I think the consortia themselves would admit that they, since their establishment, have found new ways of working. Initially, they were very separate entities that did things their own way. Increasingly, over recent years, we have seen those consortia working together on a national approach, but delivered on a regional basis. So I think they themselves have evolved over time. But we are constantly looking for optimum delivery from those particular organisations, but as I said, I think it would be absolutely reckless to go back to a situation where school improvement services were being delivered individually on 22 different bases. Hefin David AM: Okay. I'm happy to accept that you've changed your opinion there; that's no problem at all. But with regard to the four consortia, and we'll take Education through Regional Working as an example, it does things differently to the other three. Is that a cause for concern, or do you think that's entirely appropriate? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, ERW does things differently, but then so does the Education Achievement Service. EAS is constituted in a different way to the Central South Consortium. What I'm interested in is not necessarily how they are constituted and organised, I'm interested in the effectiveness of that organisation to deliver for children and for teachers. ERW has got particular challenges, and we continue to work with those in ERW to address those, but increasingly, as I said, what we are seeing the regional consortia do is develop a national approach to school improvement services but deliver that on a regional basis so that there is greater consistency in terms of delivery. Hefin David AM: Are you happy that, within the ERW area, local authorities employ their own improvement advisers, rather than doing it in the way that the others do? Kirsty Williams AM: We have discussed this at length with them. My preference would be for school improvement officers to be employed in the centre, and we continue to have those discussions, but what's really important to understand is that the regional consortia are not a beast of the Government; they are a beast of the local authorities that have worked together to create a school improvement service that meets their needs. So we can't impose that solution, and we continue to discuss with ERW what is the optimal way, and they continue to discuss with their constituent local authorities about how that should be organised. Hefin David AM: Are you concerned that Neath Port Talbot have given notice that they want to withdraw from regional working? Kirsty Williams AM: I think it's really disappointing that Neath Port Talbot have published that notice. What's important for me is to understand--not for me, it will be important for Estyn. It will be really important for us to understand how Neath Port Talbot intend to support their schools and their teachers if they were to withdraw from ERW, especially at what is a very, very critical time. The regional consortia have a key role to play in supporting systems with the introduction of the curriculum. I would want to know from Neath Port Talbot how they are going to do that without being part of that organisation. And, of course, there's the added complexity that so much of our money is channelled through to schools via the regional consortia. So, I would want to understand from Neath Port Talbot how they're going to safeguard their schools and make sure that the children who are receiving their education in Neath Port Talbot are not disadvantaged if they were to follow through on that decision. Hefin David AM: Do you feel that it's your role to intervene in that area and instruct Neath Port Talbot and ERW as to how they should resolve this issue? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, as I said, I would be seeking assurances-- Hefin David AM: What does that mean, though,'seeking assurances'? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, Neath Port Talbot would need to demonstrate to me how they're going to address these issues. If they're not part of ERW and their schools and their children are not going to be in receipt of the support from ERW, as I said, especially at this critical time, how are they intending to do that? I haven't seen those plans, but if they were to push forward and follow through on the notice, I would want to see them and I suspect Estyn would want to see them also. Hefin David AM: Okay, just last issue on that: you're just waiting to see what Neath Port Talbot do next, then. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, we have written to Neath Port Talbot to ask them to demonstrate to us, if they were to pull out of ERW, how they're going to meet their functions. I have not heard back from them. Hefin David AM: Steve, did you want to say something? Steve Davies: Obviously--[Inaudible. ]--that point. We wrote to them last Friday, and we are awaiting their response now. Hefin David AM: Okay. So, that's where we are. Okay. There was the document in 2015--'National model for regional working'. Is that the current document? Are there plans to change or update it, or is that exactly where we stand? Kirsty Williams AM: So, that is the current model. Some work was undertaken in 2017 and 2018 to look to update that model and revise that model. Some specific recommendations were put forward about additional services that could be organised on a regional basis; primarily, that is a specialist human resources resource. We know that, because of austerity in some local authorities, HR departments have been really stretched. Education HR is a specialist service, it's not generic. It's often a service that--. I see that as part of a school improvement service. Support for governors also has been stretched within individual local authorities. So, a proposal was put forward to include specialist HR and governor support as part of the regional model. That was rejected by local government. Our local authorities did not want to include that in the regional model. However, I must say, having presented that evidence, some of our local authorities, even though there wasn't a national agreement to put that into the national model, have pooled their resources, and those services are being delivered and supported on a regional basis. So, for instance, the Education Achievement Service now provide specialist HR resource, and EAS and Central South provide governor support. So, although we weren't successful in persuading local government to adopt a new national model, local authorities in those areas saw the value of moving that way. Hefin David AM: So, with that in mind, and perhaps I'll put this to Steve Davies, everything the Minister just said, and also the line in the document--'The implementation of this model will change over time'-- is it time to go back to that document and review it from a procedural point of view? Steve Davies: I don't think it's necessarily timely to go back and have a complete review of it. But, certainly, we are in ongoing discussions with the Welsh Local Government Association, both in terms of work with local authorities, and the type of intervention in schools. So, we keep a constant watch as to which areas that we believe we could develop further. We are not currently intending to do a wholesale review of that. As the Minister touched on earlier, there is some work to get consistency across the current area, particularly, as we just mentioned, in relation to ERW work. So, it's getting a consistent approach at that level, and sharing the practice. I think what is emerging, as the Minister said, is that there are two regions who have already made this shift to pool services. I think the two other regions are seeing and will see the benefits of that, and instead of forcing it through, we'd expect that to evolve. But we're not, at this stage, looking to a wholesale review of the national model. Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin. Hefin David AM: And Professor Dylan Jones's strategic delivery group seems to have had quite a warm welcome in the sector. Is it fair to say that? Kirsty Williams AM: I believe so. I'm very grateful to Dylan for his hard work and his skill in chairing that group, and I think it's been welcomed by all, so that we can get that clarity and consistency about the roles and responsibilities of the individual partners and players in the middle tier. Hefin David AM: And when will the work be completed, and what will the outcomes be? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, the group is currently engaging with Steve and other officials on agreeing a plan, but also, crucially, that plan is there to support the successful implementation of the curriculum, so that we're very clear about the roles and responsibilities in the middle tier in this crucial phase following the publication. We have to move now from the publication into a relentless focus on implementation. The history of devolution is full of fantastic documents, and, shall I say, patchy implementation. The work that has gone into that curriculum is too important for implementation to be left to chance. It's too important. It's too good to be left to chance. So, everything now is a relentless focus on successful implementation. Hefin David AM: Yes, but I'm thinking that the strategic delivery is reviewing the role of the middle tier. So, you know, what do we expect to see from it, notwithstanding the kind of softly, softly approach that you've already talked about? Steve Davies: It was set up, actually, about 18 months ago--just under. It was set up to build collective efficacy, because what people out there are seeing is that there's a confusion of roles, in what the regions are doing, and it was building that collective efficacy so everyone was behind the wheel. So, they've been looking at who is doing what for the last 18 months, and exploring and making some changes themselves. It's not just what they do with Government or what they do with each other; it's just happened that it's timely, because one of the key bits of feedback we believe we will get from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development is we have had co-construction, we'd had collective effort, but we need to do more, particularly within the middle tier. This is not controlled by Government, it is arm's length from Government, and it's not their job to get it ready for the new curriculum--that's a key part of it. This group will have an ongoing role; it's not a task and finish group. It does feed back in to the Minister but there's no formal mechanism by which they have to report. Hefin David AM: Okay, that's very clear. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. I've got supplementaries from Suzy, then Sian. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Briefly, please. Suzy Davies AM: I think this is a really interesting evidence session. What I'm about to say, I say it even though I'm a big localist: it all seems to be heading in one direction of a national service. Is the strategic group even thinking in these terms, obviously building in local accountability? But it'll just make it so much easier in terms of accountability and consistency to monitor what the middle tier does, if it's a national service, like the National Adoption Service. Local delivery, national service--is it heading in that direction? Kirsty Williams AM: That's not the intention of setting the group up. As Steve just said, I receive feedback from Dylan, because I meet Dylan in this particular capacity on a planned basis. He is there to give me advice on the middle tier, and to give me advice on what he thinks Welsh Government needs to do. But I've not had that conversation with him about a national service. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Well, thank you for that. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: What I was going to raise has been answered already, that is that, from what I can see, the work that Professor Dylan Jones is doing has evolved somewhat. I felt that, originally, the idea was to look at the middle tier in terms of any kind of duplication that was happening, and where it was possible to tighten up the people going into schools from different directions. But it appears that it has evolved to be something that's much more than that, and that it is placing a focus on the curriculum and other aspects of the educational system. Is there a risk for them to lose focus in that sense? Kirsty Williams AM: No, not at all. I think they are very, very clear around establishing roles and responsibilities for each of the players and to be very clear about the expectations that each part of the middle tier can have of each other, as to what they can expect from their partners in the middle tier. And absolutely, it is about making sure that there isn't duplication, that people aren't second-guessing each other's work, and there are clear demarcations about who does what in the system, and, as I said, knowing that you can rely on your colleague in the middle tier to do the bit that they are responsible for. So, I don't think there's a question of it losing focus. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We've got a lot of areas to cover so we are going to have to pick up our pace a bit. The next questions are from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Thinking about you as a Minister trying to see what the long-term trends are with regard to raising standards and improving educational attainment, is that difficult, because the performance measures have changed, haven't they? We can't compare like-for-like now, because of the changes that have been made in the way that performance is measured. So, to begin with, is that a challenge, to see whether progress has been made? And secondly, what evidence do you as Minister use to look at the long-term trends? Kirsty Williams AM: The first thing to say, with regard to changes to performance measures--you're right that change to those does make it, in some cases, more difficult to look at trends over a period of time. But those changes are made for really good reasons. If we change a performance measure, it is done to ensure that it is in the best interests of learners. And I think the best interests of learners always trumps the ease of comparison. I understand that, for researchers and for opposition Members, even for Ministers, it would be simpler to have the same set of measures over a period of time. But if we know that those things are driving behaviours that are unhelpful to children, and not in the best interests of children, then we have to change them, even thought that then does create challenges in different areas. With regard to what do we look at, there are a number of ways that we gain data and look at data in the system: everything from the categorisation system we spoke of earlier, and trends in categorisation; we look at Estyn reports; we continue to look at examination results. But we're trying to develop a broader range of data and statistics that give us a whole picture of the education performance, rather than narrowing down on one simple indicator that tells you one thing but doesn't tell you everything. But I don't know, Steve, if there's anything further that you'd like to add. Steve Davies: It's going back to what the Member raised earlier, in terms of the range of things that you look at--things that can make a difference. So, when Estyn review schools, or we're looking to develop national frameworks for things like mental health and well-being, which look to the practice that enables raising standards, it's collecting that information, both at a national level, through the annual review of Estyn, as well as our engagement with regions and local authorities. So, it's looking at the evidence base that goes beyond, but impacts on data. And, inevitably, we will use the Programme for International Student Assessment, and any other external assessments that come through organisations like the OECD. And even where we've changed the performance measures, we still have, at national level, the ongoing data. So, if you looked at level 2 plus, we believe it is important that children get five good GCSEs--for higher education and for employment. So, we've not lost sight of those at a national level--we're not using them as a narrow set of performance measures for individual schools. Kirsty Williams AM: So, if we look at--level 2 plus is a good example. We know that a relentless focus on that single measure, as a way of judging the system, leads to a set of behaviours in schools. It narrows the focus onto a certain part of the cohort, it narrows the curriculum, when we know that children-- Sian Gwenllian AM: I'm not challenging the fact that you've changed the performance measures--I understand that, and having a broader way of looking is better in the long run. I'm just saying, because there's been this change, it makes it more of a challenge--whilst accepting why you've made the changes, but it does present more of a challenge, presumably, because you have to look at more indicators, and take evidence from different places. But I take it that you're confident that the trajectory is going in the right way. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, I think we are making improvements. But you're right: it does make it more challenging. But those changes are being made for the right reasons, as I said, whether that be at level 2 plus. Look at English literature. I understand why perhaps a performance measure around English was introduced, but the effect of that was that significant numbers of children--and, it must be said, usually children who are entitled to free school meals--were suddenly not sitting English literature GCSE. We've changed that performance measure, and guess what? Last year, we saw a significant increase in the number of children that were sitting English literature GCSE. For standards of literacy and oracy, I think studying literature is really, really important, before we even get into the joy of introducing children to the written word and the love of reading. So, we make changes. Yes, it causes challenges, but we're making those changes because we believe that they are in the best interest of children, and that has to trump ease of comparison. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Why have you decided to ask the consortia, Estyn and so on not to report on local data or regional level data? How do we then come to conclusions about what is working if it isn't presented on a local authority and regional basis? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think the thing to say about the communications from Welsh Government, Estyn, and the WLGA is it's not about not communicating the data, it's about challenging people on how that data should be used. So, the data is still available, but it's a challenge to them about how to use that data. So, for instance, when we're presenting data that compares local authority to local authority, you could have a local authority that says,'There we go, I'm above the national average. I don't need to worry about the education in my local authority, because I'm above the average, or I'm better than my neighbour.'That doesn't necessarily mean that everything is right in your local education authority. Perhaps your children should be doing even better than what you're presented with. So, actually, it's not about hiding data; it's about how you use the data appropriately. And sometimes, how we were presenting data in the past was lulling some people into a false sense of security about the performance of their system. So, it's about how you use data, and that's what the communication from Welsh Government and the WLGA and Estyn was about: think very carefully about this data and what it's telling you about your system, and don't be lulled into a false sense of security that you may be doing brilliantly. Or, perhaps, looking at your data, you may think,'Oh, my goodness me, we're not doing very well at all', but, actually, more careful consideration of that might show that your school's impact on those children is really, really a positive one. So, you've got to use that data in the context. So, it's not about less data. If anything, it's about more data and, crucially for me, it's about more intelligent use and interrogation of that data, about truly what it's telling you about your system. Sian Gwenllian AM: But again, the Welsh Government--. You have continued to publish the local and regional level data. So, doesn't that contradict what you've been telling the consortia and everyone else? Kirsty Williams AM: No, not at all. As I said, we're not in the business of trying to hide data--I believe absolutely in full transparency. And in terms of level 2 data, I think I'm not moving away from the point that I think it's really important that more and more children get five really good GCSEs. I think it's important for their life chances. It is about how that data is used, not about hiding data or making that data not available. Steve Davies: Can I, very briefly--? We didn't just send a letter out collectively. We've now carried out training jointly with WLGA and Estyn on how to use that data. So, it's not just looking where your LA is; it's also not looking at whether your school's better than average for the authority. And it is well received, and it should broaden the approach of scrutiny committees to beyond what historically was, if I'm honest, looking at the league table for their authority or looking at the league table of local authorities. It's not that they shouldn't be looking at that, but they need to dig much, much deeper underneath it. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. We're going to go on now to Suzy. I'm going to appeal for brief questions and brief answers so that we can cover the rest of the questions. Suzy Davies AM: I'll shorten these questions, okay. We know why you got rid of the old measures. We've got interim measures now. What are they telling you about the success you've had in trying to avoid the bad behaviour? Short answers. Kirsty Williams AM: It's impossible. [Laughter. ] I think it's inevitable: whatever kind of measures we put in place, people will look to maximise their success in those measures, and I don't think we'll ever come up with a system where those measures are absolutely perfect. What's really important to me is that we're really, really, really challenging schools to look at the performance of all of their children, rather than just at a very, very narrow cohort around those C/D boundaries, which we knew was detrimental, potentially, to more able and talented children and really pushing those Bs to As and those As to A*s, and children for whom actually just getting in to school on a daily basis is an achievement, and the school has done well to provide that. So, our new capped 9 makes sure that there is breadth across a range of subjects, rather than just focusing on a narrower and narrower bunch of subject opportunities for children, and our new third-third-third system enables schools to really look at their performance. So if their capped 9 score is high, what's driving that? Is it because the bottom third of the cohort is doing really well, and the impact on those children is above and beyond what could be expected, but actually, you're not doing very well for your more able and talented; you're not pushing them on? Alternatively, maybe your capped 9 score is because your MAT children are doing incredibly well, but actually, you're not really making the progress for the middle tier of those children. It allows us to have a greater focus on the performance of our FSM children--where they really are within that system. So, it's a much more granular--. And crucially for me, it looks at the impact for every child, because every child has to matter in the system, and what we had before was a narrowing of curriculum choice and a narrowing on a certain cohort of children. Suzy Davies AM: So are the permanent measures likely to be pretty similar to what you've got now? Because the research--I don't know if the research is complete yet. When will you be publishing the new permanent evaluation? Kirsty Williams AM: Sue, you're right: they're interim measures at the moment, and we will need to make sure that the performance measures are aligned to the new curriculum. That, potentially, of course--. Because Wales's review of qualifications potentially has an impact on what those finally will look like, so that work is ongoing at the moment, and unless Steve can tell me off the top of his head when we expect that to be completed by, I will send you a note. But they're interim at the moment, because we need to align them to the new curriculum. Suzy Davies AM: I think we understand that. [Inaudible. ]--date. Steve Davies: No, no. This is not a quick fix. This is a two to three-year research base. The new qualifications for the new curriculum will not start until 2025. They have to be in place for 2022. There's a three-year roll on. I would expect the broad structure of the interim measures to continue over that time. There will be some tweaks for consistency. It's what's wrapped around those interim measures that I touched on earlier: the other evidence that we bring to bear about the effectiveness of a school, but we do want to say to schools that on the whole, broadly speaking, the interim measures will carry on for two, three years. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, and the reason I asked that is right at the beginning of this session, the Minister said to the Chair that this PS100 million that's going into school improvements will be going into things that work. We need some evidence that the interim measures are going to work as well, so when are they going to be evaluated? Steve Davies: Well, we've only just used them for one year. Suzy Davies AM: That's what I'm asking you. Steve Davies: We've signalled that they're only going to be in place for three years. We are carrying out our own review of the impact of those and that's been built in, but I expect the OECD report--because it is an extensive report--to give us feedback on how those things are working now, and some steer, as they did with the last report, as to the direction we would want to go into. Kirsty Williams AM: And what I'm also interested in is those performance management measures around schools. Yes, they're about outcomes for children, but actually are about a broader suite of behaviours within that school, so, yes, qualifications and grades are an important part of a performance measure, but actually, I have other expectations of schools, above and beyond simply qualifications. And so, we would want our permanent set of performance measures to look at a wider set of behaviours within a school, and I think because--. Exams are important--of course they are, qualifications are important--but the way in which those schools achieve those results are also important. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Would you anticipate that including well-being, then? Suzy Davies AM: In a whole-school approach. Kirsty Williams AM: I absolutely--and we need to find a way of how we can truly measure that. Sometimes, children's well-being is influenced by lots of things outside the control of a school. So, I don't want schools to be held accountable for things that they have no control over, because of the circumstances in which a child may be living. But, absolutely: well-being and how the culture of the school addresses well-being is really important to me. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Suzy. Move on to PISA, please. Suzy Davies AM: How useful is PISA for you in helping school improvement? I know that it's not always the thing that you enjoy watching or looking out for. But, genuinely, how useful is it? Kirsty Williams AM: It is one of a range of tools that we need to look at. Sian, quite rightly, talked about consistency. PISA is one thing where there is a level of consistency, so it will continue to be, I think, an important part of how we test how our system is doing. Suzy Davies AM: We know that you are a little bit encouraged, but we are not out of the woods yet. You mentioned this in Plenary when we talked about PISA. How confident are you that we are on track for meeting these targets that were set before your time, or do you think that having those targets is helpful? Is it setting up aspirations that are incapable of being met within a period of time? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, those long-term targets of a score around 500 are part of'Our National Mission', and we have to keep the pressure on to strive. They are testing, but we have to keep the pressure on to strive to reach them. In some cases, I can be quite encouraged. If we look at reading scores for girls, we are almost there, but that just demonstrates what a journey we've got with our boys to address. For me, one of the ways in which we will reach those targets and achieve them is further progress on our more able and talented children. Although we are now performing at an OECD average, I will be the first person to admit that, although we have seen an improvement in the higher level skills of our more able and talented children, we do not perform at an OECD average with regard to those level 6 and level 5 scores. Suzy Davies AM: Even within the UK, really, we are quite far behind. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes. So, I think that's where we really need to push on. That's one of the reasons why we have introduced a more able and talented budget to support that, and our Seren programme, which is delivering fantastic results post-16. That's why we're introducing the principles of Seren earlier into children's careers, bringing it down from year 9 upwards, to be able to drive improvements. So, I think that that's the area that we are particularly keen to work on: making sure that more of our children perform at the OECD average at level 5 and level 6. Clearly, we've got more work to do on reading. We are working with southern Ireland, who have consistently done well with reading scores, to look to see what lessons we can learn to press on with there with reading. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. My final question on this. You recognise it as a priority, particularly for boys. Does that mean that the focus will then drift slightly from maths, where there has been some success; and drift from science, where the encouragement of more people to take GCSE science has reduced the number of high-level passes? Kirsty Williams AM: First, we have to have a system that is capable of doing all of those of things at the same time. We can't accept a system that says,'Well, we can do a bit over here, but that means we have to--.'We have to have a system, Suzy, that can drive improvements at all levels. That's my expectation. Suzy Davies AM: The balloon needs to be bigger not just squeezing it at one end. Kirsty Williams AM: Absolutely, yes. That's my expectation of this system. You have to deliver across all of these. We have seen some progress. As I've said, it's far from perfect, and we've got more work to do, but we have to deliver across all three domains, as we did last time. And I'm not going to make any apologies for changing the performance indicators around science. It was a travesty that there were children who never had the opportunity to sit a science GCSE. We don't have to make assumptions about the nature of many, many, many of those children. We have seen a significant increase in the number of children who are having the opportunity to sit GCSE science and who are passing GCSE science. So, I'm not going to make any apologies about that. One of the reasons that I suspect we have ended up with poor science scores is because of the previous policy around science entries and science qualifications. Again, one of the reasons that we have changed it isn't just solely because we need to do better in PISA, but I think that by changing it, we will see an impact on PISA. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you for that. Lynne Neagle AM: The final set of questions is from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: I just want to discuss an issue that I know is important to you, namely closing the attainment gap between pupils who are eligible for free school meals and those who are not eligible for free school meals. Unfortunately, the problem persists, doesn't it? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes. We are not where we need to be in terms of the performance, not only of our children on free school meals, but the performance of our looked-after children, and the performance of some children from some ethnic minority groups. So, we will continue to look to support those learners in a variety of ways, again looking to amend our practice on the basis of evidence that is given to us from our experts who are there to advise us. There is clearly more that we need to do. There has been some progress in some areas, but it is not where I would want it to be. Sian Gwenllian AM: But, this is despite the fact that there is PS475 million that has been invested in the pupil development grant, for this exact purpose of closing the attainment gap. But, the problem persists, and in some places, it's deteriorating. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think that, as I said, I am not shying away from any assumption or declaration that we need to do better. But, I do think that we need to acknowledge where progress has been made. If we go back to look at what PISA has said about our performance, the PISA results show that pupils in Wales are relatively more able to overcome the disadvantage of their background than is the average in OECD countries. So, our children are doing better in that, and that gives me encouragement. That's not me saying that; that's there. If we look at pupils who are eligible for free school meals, they do score below their better-off counterparts in PISA by some 34 points. The gap in England is 40 points. So, again, that gap is smaller here in Wales. If we look at basic levels of qualifications, back in--. It's difficult to make comparisons because of all the reasons we have talked about, but if we look back to 2006 and we look at the very basic level of qualifications, which is a level 1 qualification, we have seen a jump from 9. 4 per cent of children in 2006 achieving a level 1 qualification to over 18 per cent. So, there is progress. There is evidence that the resources that we are spending are making a difference. But, clearly, we are not where we would want to be. That's why we will continue to focus those resources on those children, where we need it. But, we need to do that earlier. Sticking plasters in years 10 and 11 aren't going to cut it. We need to get this right for those children, the moment that they come into a nursery and the moment that they start their formal education at the age of 5. That's how we are going to make the difference. Providing catch-up, of course, we need to do for those kids; we can't throw those year 10s and year 11s to the wind. We have to support those children. But, we will see real improvement when we get in there earlier. Sian Gwenllian AM: But I'm sure that that is a disappointment to you, because it has been a personal priority for you as well. In terms of minority ethnic learners, while there are some groups within that category who are achieving, there is underachievement happening here as well, isn't there? It's not consistent across the minority ethnic group. Is that something that you will be focusing upon? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, and that's why we have committed to maintaining a ring-fenced grant to local authorities of some PS10 million, to support education of our minority ethnic children. But, again, you are right, you are absolutely right, Sian. We need a much more sophisticated conversation about what is really going on in attainment across minority ethnic groups so that we can best target that resource and have a conversation about what the differences are. You are absolutely correct: there is a real mixed picture. If we look at black Welsh girls entitled to free school meals, they perform almost at the national average for all children--not FSM children; the national average for all children. Black Welsh boys don't, but neither do white Welsh boys. So, there is a really complex picture here, and I really welcome a debate about acknowledging the various levels of performance of BAME children, and where the gaps in performance lie. You are quite right: it is a complex picture in the system. I'm committed to continuing to support educational opportunities, and that's why have ring-fenced the minority ethnic achievement grant. There are some interesting data there. Some children are doing very, very well; others, we need to concentrate on. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian, this will need to be the last question, I'm afraid. Sian Gwenllian AM: Sorry? Lynne Neagle AM: This is going to have to be the last question. Sian Gwenllian AM: The last question. Lynne Neagle AM: Yes. Sian Gwenllian AM: Fine. In terms of looked-after children, which is one of the groups where attainment isn't where we would like it to be, there was some improvement in 2016 at key stage 4, but it has been disappointing. Do we know what's been happening in 2019? Kirsty Williams AM: The 2019 data will be published next month, and there has been significant activity. You are right: in recent years, the data have been poor and not where we would want it to be. That's why we have had a reformed approach to PDG LAC; the employment of PDG LAC co-ordinators across the regions. We've identified new resource in the new financial year to test new approaches, so, for instance, virtual school approaches, where we know, in other systems, that has worked. But, we expect the next set of data around the performance of this particular group of learners in March. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay, and you hope to see progress. Kirsty Williams AM: I don't want to speculate, but I hope so. Sian Gwenllian AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you very much. We have come to the end of our time, so can I thank you, Minister, and your official for attending this morning? We have had a wide-ranging and very detailed discussion that will be very useful for the committee. As usual, you will be sent a transcript following the meeting to check for accuracy, but thank you again, both of you, for your attendance this morning. Diolch yn fawr. Okay. Item 3 is papers to note. Paper to note 1 is a letter from ERW providing additional information following the evidence session on 16 January. Paper to note 2 is a letter from Central South Consortium, similarly providing additional information following the evidence session. Paper to note 3 is a letter from the Noah's Ark Children's Hospital for Wales regarding children's rights in Wales, following up on some additional information there. Paper to note 4 is a letter from Qualifications Wales, providing additional information following the annual report scrutiny session in January. Item 4, then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting? Are Members content? Thank you.

According to Hefin, some regional consortia services performed really highly, but there were others that needed to improve. Those consortia shall be seen as working together on a national approach, but being delivered on a regional basis. Also, it had evolved over time, and they were constantly looking for optimum delivery. By taking Education through Regional Working as an example, they had pointed out that ERW as well as the Education Achievement Service EAS was constituted in a different way to the Central South Consortium. They delivered on a regional basis. They would continue to discuss with ERW what was the optimal way and continued to cooperate with the constituent local authorities about how that shall be organized.

tr-sq-1233

tr-sq-1233_0

Why did they take Education through Regional Working as an example? Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received apologies for absence from Janet Finch-Saunders, and also from Dawn Bowden, and I'd like to welcome Huw Irranca-Davies, who is substituting for Dawn Bowden. Can I ask Members if there are any declarations of interest, please? No. Okay. We'll move on, then, to our evidence session for our inquiry on school improvement and raising standards. I'd like to welcome Kirsty Williams AM, Minister for Education, and Steve Davies, director of education. Thank you both for attending and for your detailed paper in advance of the meeting. We've got a lot of ground to cover, so we'll go straight into questions, if that's okay. If I can just start by asking you: to what extent is the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development still involved in the Welsh Government's school improvement journey? Kirsty Williams AM: First of all, can I thank the committee for their invitation this morning, and their interest in this particular area? As you will be aware, on coming into office, the director and I agreed to ask the OECD to do a rapid review of the state of Welsh education at the beginning of this Assembly term. They did that, and the feedback from that work informed the publication and content of the national mission. I was very clear in the national mission that I would invite the OECD back to review our progress against that mission, and that has happened in the tail end of last year, and the OECD will publish their latest report on Welsh education next month now, in March. So, the expectation is that the report will be published on 23 March, and my intention is to make a statement to the Chamber on 24 March. The nature of that review is part of our ongoing development of self-evaluation. So, we talk a lot about self-evaluation in the school system. Actually, the continuing relationship with OECD is about self-evaluation of the entirety of the system and Welsh Government. We don't want to accept our own orthodoxy and just be in a bubble where we are constantly listening to ourselves and those people who might want to agree with us or tell us what we want to hear. So, the OECD is our best attempt of having some external verification of where we are. That's a risk for Ministers and for Government, because we want them to give an honest evaluation of where we are, but that's a really important tool for me, to ensure that we're constantly testing ourselves. The nature of that review is that the OECD were able to talk to whoever they felt it was important to talk to, so that included practitioners on the ground, elements of the middle tier, as well as Welsh Government. And I know, Chair--I hope you'll be pleased to hear this--that the reports of this committee have formed parts of their review, looking at how the Senedd itself has contributed to and has held the Government to account. So, as I said, we expect our report to be published towards the end of March. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you, Minister. Can I ask about the powers under the School Standards and Organisation (Wales) Act 2013, to ask you to tell us about the use of those powers either by Welsh Government or by local authorities, and how effective you feel that legislation has been? Kirsty Williams AM: Okay. Well, as you'll be aware, local authorities have quite extensive powers of intervention in schools if they feel that is necessary. If I'm honest, I think there's a mixed picture, with some local authorities using those powers not on a regular basis, but obviously demonstrating a willingness to use those powers. There are other local authorities who don't seem to have used them. Since that legislation came into being, there have been a number of reasons, because of course a local authority has to give a reason for using those powers of intervention. They usually focus on standards, but sometimes they focus on a breakdown in governance arrangements, perhaps, or a failure or a breakdown in financial management. So, sometimes the budgetary issues trigger an intervention power. And the types of interventions that have been used have included, in some cases, appointing additional governors to governing bodies, or suspending a school's delegated budget so the local authority takes on, then, financial control of that particular school, or sometimes applying to the Welsh Government to entirely replace a governing body and establish an intervention board. So, if I can give you an example of where that's been used and has been successful, in Flintshire. They applied to Welsh Government for two interim executive boards, in Sir Richard Gwyn Catholic High School and in Ysgol Trefonnen. They applied to us. Those governing bodies were dissolved. The IEBs were put in place and both of those schools, which had been in special measures, moved quite rapidly, actually, out of special measures. Perhaps the most recent example of this is one that the Chair will know very well in her own constituency of Torfaen, in Cwmbran High School, where Torfaen has intervened in that case. The Welsh Government has not used those powers to date. My expectation always is that local authorities should be the first port of call, and I would encourage--and we always encourage--local authorities to take a proactive approach to intervention and to use those powers. But it's my belief that it is they who are best placed initially to do that. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you, Minister. Can I ask, then, about the national evaluation and improvement resource and how significant a role that will play in the raising of school standards, and how you feel it's evolved since it was first conceived? Kirsty Williams AM: So, this brings us back to the principle of self-evaluation and something, if we're honest, we've not been very good at. If you look at a number of chief inspectors'reports into the Welsh education system, self-evaluation has always been identified as something that is missing or underdeveloped in our system to date, hence, then, the work to establish not a new approach, but a more robust approach to self-evaluation. We've done that in conjunction, again, with the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. It's really important, throughout the entirety of our reform journey that that's done in co-construction, because we want this resource to be usable in schools. So, it's all very well having a conceptual idea and people outside the classroom working on it, but if it's of no practical use to a school leadership team, then we won't see the impact. So, it's--. We're in phase 2 at the moment, where we're doing--. So, the initial resource has been developed by the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. We're in the testing phase at the moment and having it evaluated itself, with a view to introducing that resource across the system at the start of the new academic year, in September 2020. I truly believe that, if we're to make progress in Welsh education, we have to develop the skills within our system to have robust self-evaluation. This resource gives us continuity of approach right the way across Wales. So, it's not left to an individual school to come up with a system; it's right the way across the system. My hope would be that those principles could then be applied to local education authorities, to regional school improvement services and Welsh Government as part of a whole-system approach to self-evaluation. I don't know if there's anything more you want to add, Steve. Steve Davies: Just to add that the other critical partners are Estyn themselves. Kirsty Williams AM: Oh, yes, sorry. Steve Davies: So, they have played a critical role and, as we know, as the Minister has said in the past, she may introduce policy and practice, but if Estyn are part of it then schools, usually, because they recognise that it will be part of the inspection process--it gives it greater push and support around it. So, they've been key players within it. Kirsty Williams AM: And I think, if I just say as well, that the external perception of what that's about is really important. It's not a test of school readiness for reform, it is a genuine attempt for a school to evaluate their strengths, their weaknesses and where they need to go next. It's not an Estyn checklist. And because of the word'toolkit'--the feedback was that it gave the impression of a checklist,'Just do this and check list'. So, we're actually going to change the name of that resource. So, it'll be called the national evaluation and improvement resource, rather than the toolkit, because, as I said, the feedback was that'toolkit'gave the impression of a checklist exercise, and it's got to be about more than that if it's going to be meaningful. So, it'll be changed to an'improvement resource'. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Before I bring Suzy in, can I just welcome Sian Gwenllian, who is joining us via video-conference in north Wales? Morning, Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Good morning. Can you hear me? Lynne Neagle AM: We can, yes. We can hear you very nicely, thank you. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Yes. Only a very quick one. It's about the development of the-- Kirsty Williams AM: The resource. Suzy Davies AM: Yes, the resource, thank you--about whether there were any conflicting ideas in the process of development that made it quite difficult to zone in on something that school leadership teams, in particular, could rely on. Were there differences of opinion on what this should look like? Kirsty Williams AM: Not that I'm aware of from the practitioners that I've spoken to who have been part of that. So, for instance, Suzy, you will know the very small school of Gladestry. The head of Gladestry has been involved in this process, and she said that she'd really enjoyed the process of working alongside Estyn and the OECD as a school leader to be able to shape it. But I'm not aware that there's been conflict in that process. Suzy Davies AM: I'm not suggesting that there has been; I'm just interested as to how it had worked, that's all. Steve Davies: Chair, I think, inevitably, when you bring stakeholders together, they're not going to be in total agreement as to how it's going to work, and I think initially one of the challenges was having Estyn there as part of the facilitation group. There are always some concerns that, actually, it's coming from a to inspect, oral, judgmental tick box. So, we had some early day challenges where we had to convince--and, ultimately, Estyn convinced them--that they were there to help and support as opposed to to inspect, and that the model that was developed, as the Minister said, was not going to be a tick box,'You are good at this part of self-evaluation', it was to build the skillsets up. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. So, it's got their full confidence. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, and I think again, also, what--. You know, four years into the job, what I've reflected on as well is there is this sometimes a feeling out there that the Minister says all the right stuff, but you're not actually going to do it, so, when you talk about a new approach to doing things, you're not actually serious about it. So, trying to build that confidence that we are serious about developing a new system around self-improvement, which is different from accountability--sometimes, the practitioners are like,'Oh, yes, we've heard it all before but it never actually happens.'And I think that's been a part of the constant--not pressure, but the responsibility on Welsh Government is in following through. So, we said that we were going to do this in the national mission, and we are going to do it. I'm really proud that there or thereabouts, a few months either way, we've actually kept to the timetable as outlined in the national mission, and that helps build confidence within the sector that we are committed to that programme and we're going to do what we say we're going to do. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: And a final question from me: how effective do you think the investment in school standards has been in this Assembly term, as opposed to the approach taken in the last Assembly term, where there was the protection put in place for core school budgets? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think, first of all, it's important that, whilst this additional resource is specifically targeted at school standards, that is only a part of a much wider education budget, a budget that--you know--is incredibly complex. And so it is really challenging to be able to draw straight lines--you know,'We did this and it's resulted in that'--given that we're looking at the entirety of school funding here. What's been really important is that, if you drill down into what that money has been spent on, 50 per cent of it has been directed towards professional learning in one form or another to support our teaching professionals. And that's been really important to me. I've said it time and time again: an education system cannot exceed the quality of the people who stand in front of our children day in, day out to work with them and teach them. Therefore, that investment in staff and investment in the professional learning of our staff and support for them I think is making a difference already but, importantly, will continue to make a difference. But I think it is really challenging to be able to say,'Well, we spent this bit of money and it definitely led to that', because it's such a complex picture. But that money, the way it's been spent, has been driven by evidence. And, again, what we do know from international best practice, what do we know that works in driving up standards, and then how can we align the money that we've got to supporting that? And, as I said, 50 per cent of that money has gone directly to simply supporting the professional learning of those who work with our children. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you very much. We're going to talk now a bit about schools causing concern with questions from Huw Irranca-Davies. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Thank you, Chair. If I can, just first of all, zoom in on the way in which we actually decide which schools need what support. So, one of the interesting questions for us is how do we use the different systems out there. So, we've got the school categorisation system, which we're familiar with. We've also got Estyn inspection reports, then we've got other intelligence, including local intelligence on the ground. How do you decide from that? How is it decided what schools need support, need challenge? How do we do that? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, you're right: what we have is a variety of ways in which we can identify schools that need support, or need to be challenged on their practice. But it's important not to confuse them either. So, our primary route to doing this is our school categorisation system. Sometimes, and perhaps this is inevitable--. That system is primarily there as a triage system around identifying where our resource should be spent. So, our school improvement service--it's a risk-based approach, so they can evaluate where they need to put their time, effort and resource. Sometimes, it's used by other people for other things, but that is not its primary purpose; its primary purpose there is not one of accountability, it is one of identifying risk and aligning that then to the support that is available. Estyn--now that is part of that accountability system. That is our method of holding schools and their governing bodies to account for their practice and for the work that they do. Both systems, of course, are evolving. So, how we do categorisation has changed over a period of time. The elements that go into making that judgment around the levels of support have changed, and, of course, the Estyn inspection regime is also changing. At the moment, schools are only inspected once every seven years. We're moving to a system where Estyn will be more regularly in schools. So, they are two systems, but they are different and they look at different things. But our categorisation system is how we look for those ways of identifying support for schools. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: And you've made, with feedback over the last few years, adjustments to the way that the categorisation system works. Are you content with where it is now, or do you see more adjustments being made? Have you got things in front of you that you're getting feedback on saying'Well, we need to tweak this again a little bit'? Kirsty Williams AM: So, that system has evolved over time. So, when it started, it was just a tool around secondary schools. Now, it covers the breadth of schools. Initially, on coming into office, when I first came in, it was purely driven by data, and it was also done in quartiles. So, there was a certain number of schools that had to be in the bottom, which drove practitioners mad. They were like'Ah, every year, there's going to be some of us that have to be in the bottom quartile', because of the way in which it was arranged, which seemed very unfair to them. So, we've changed that. It's not just purely driven on data now; there are other judgments--the professional judgments of our challenge advisers are taken into account. And I would expect that situation to continue to evolve to align itself to our curriculum reform, and our changes in self-evaluation. So, it's not a fixed point. I expect that that system will continue to evolve and change, so that it complements and assists in the reform journey as other parts of the system change. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Thanks for that. I think, for any impartial reader of the way that the trends have been going on this, there is some good news within that, in that, certainly, those schools that might have been identified as have been okay but coasting along, seem to be moving up the categories, although we still do have that--. Well, it's what the system is there to do, it's to identify those schools that do need that additional support. And I like your analogy of a triage system--'You're fit; keep on doing what you're doing and do it well; you need more support, we'll put the support in.'But, can I turn to those schools that are causing significant concern, and how we identify them? The Estyn chief inspector's conclusions at the end of the 2017-18 report that these schools are not being identified early enough--there's a need to do something urgently about these concerns, particularly in secondary schools. Have we addressed that? Are you content that we've addressed that concern? Was he right? Kirsty Williams AM: No, the chief inspector is absolutely right--absolutely right. I've got no beef with that statement at all. In some ways, when a school goes into special measures, in a way, that's a failure of the system, because that should have been identified sooner. So I've got no beef, as I said, with the chief inspector saying that. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: So just to ask, bearing in mind the earlier discussion we were having, how is it that we don't identify those schools? Kirsty Williams AM: That's it--you're quite right. Undoubtedly, what categorisation has done is led to a greater understanding, I think, on behalf of local education authorities'and school improvement services'knowledge about their schools. I think knowledge around schools is greatly enhanced by that process. But we are not there yet in terms of necessarily, then, moving those schools more quickly, once they've been identified as needing the highest level of support to see improvement. And secondary schools is a particular, particular challenge. So you will have seen from the last publication of categorisation data that our primary sector continues to improve--more and more and more of our primary schools are in a green rating, which is very satisfying to me. But we have got more of an issue with secondary schools, and we have a particular issue with the same schools being identified in that level of categorisation. So even though we've identified them as needing that extra help, they are not moving at pace away from that system. So there are two things that we are doing at the moment. The first is, we are, again, looking at different sets of data that can give us even earlier warning systems that things are going wrong in a school--and perhaps Steve will explain later. For instance, staff sickness, and carefully monitoring staff sickness, because there is a direct correlation between high levels of staff sickness in a school and what is going on in the school. And Steve can explain some of this work later. But we're piloting a new approach to those schools that are causing concern. Each local authority has been asked to identify two of their high schools that they are particularly worried about. And we have a new multi-agency approach, working with those schools to try and move them more forward. So it's two from each region, a multi-agency panel, working with the school. And that multi-agency panel includes the school itself, the local authority, the regional consortia school improvement staff, Estyn and Welsh Government--as a multi-agency panel to support improvement in that school. So, for instance, what would normally happen, Estyn would come in, Estyn would make a judgment on the school--requiring special measures or urgent improvement--and Estyn would go away. They'd go away for six months, and then they'd come back in six months, and they'd make another judgment,'No, still not good enough', and disappear for six months. We're saying--Estyn and the Welsh Government have agreed that's not the best approach; Estyn need to be part of the solution, rather than just coming and making a judgment. The initial feedback from this trial is very, very positive. Actually, we've had local authorities coming to us and saying,'Can we put more schools in? Rather than just having two of our high schools, can we engage more in this project and this pilot?'It's being evaluated by Cardiff Metropolitan University and Swansea University, so we're having some academic overview to see, actually, does this approach work, can we evidence it--that it actually makes a difference? And it's actually--I'd like to claim all the credit for it, but it's actually not dissimilar to something that's happening in Scotland as well. But we knew that carrying on doing the same old thing clearly wasn't moving these schools, we needed a new approach, and this is what we're doing at the moment. So it's relatively new, but the initial feedback is positive. Steve, I don't know-- Steve Davies: I think your important point is about,'What about the schools that are sliding in that direction?'And it's bringing together what we know from Estyn, but also, critically, local authorities have knowledge of their schools, and so do consortia. We've got to be better at bringing those together. So, the Minister gave the example of staff sickness--not always a trigger, but it's one of those. If you look at movement of pupils out of a school, you can look at complaints, you can look at, actually, emerging increased use of HR resources that a school pulls on a local authority. None of these have been pushed up into the public domain, but they're important antennae. The point the Minister made about Estyn as well is, historically, when they go into special measures, Estyn, at the end of that week, call in, historically, either the region or the local authority, they will feed back to one of them, and then they go away. So, they are staying with it. So, we are brining together the knowledge. But, as the Minister said, we want to keep a very clear distinction between the accountability and the transparency to the public, to parents, with the very detailed collective work of that multi-agency group to actually make that difference over time. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Okay. So, does that--. I'd love to go further, but time is against us. Does that deal with the issue of the schools that have been identified in those categories of requiring significant improvement and requiring special measures? Are those the ones that will be identified now, or is that above and beyond that again? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, those are the ones that are primarily at the forefront of our minds, but this way of sharing data better, to step in earlier, is part of our attempt to address what the chief inspector says about stepping in early--not waiting until a school gets into special measures and a formal judgment from Estyn of that, but actually using that intelligence to get support in there earlier. The three elements that that multi-agency approach look at are: what are the fundamentals that need addressing in this school? What is the capacity of the school itself to be able to address those fundamentals? And, what extra support needs to go into that senior management team and the governing body to get those fundamentals addressed? And actually, what does sustainable improvement look like? Because, again, one of the issues, sometimes, that happens is, a school goes into a category with Estyn, there's a big push and a big,'We must do something'and the school comes out, but actually, that improvement is not sustainable. It's the low-hanging fruit; it's the easy wins that have been achieved, but actually, perhaps some of the fundamental challenges underlying in that school haven't been addressed in that process. So, this is about what will sustainable improvement look like in six months, what's it going to look like in 12 months and what's it going to look like in 18 months. So, actually, a more strategic, longer term approach to real change in a school rather than, perhaps, some of the easy-to-fix items that make a school as if it's doing better, but we really haven't tackled some of the underlying problems that make that school vulnerable to slipping back. Does that make sense? Lynne Neagle AM: I've got a couple of supplementaries on--. Sorry? Kirsty Williams AM: Does that make sense? Lynne Neagle AM: Yes. We've got a couple of supplementaries on this, first from Suzy and then from Sian. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you for that, Chair. Obviously, I'm pleased to hear that this work is being done, but I'm wondering--. What strikes me, in the recent past, at least, particularly as we've got the usual suspects in this category--. I've got to ask myself why it is that councils have been reluctant, perhaps, to step in with these schools earlier, particularly as they've got consortia or middle-tier support as well. Has there been a deficit in that space that has meant that councils don't feel equipped to step in? I just don't really get it why they've been reluctant to step in so far. If they've been nervous about doing it, because they don't feel that they've got the tools to do it, then I think that's pretty important, because as you were saying, we were talking about fundamentals; surely, councils have been able to deal with fundamentals, and more importantly, consortia up until now. Because, obviously, we're asking these players to give us evidence at some point, so perhaps I'd like to challenge them on how come we're here now. Kirsty Williams AM: And rightly so. Suzy Davies AM: I'm not laying this at your door. Kirsty Williams AM: And rightly so. I guess each local authority will have an explanation for each individual school, I suspect. What's crucial to me is that we have to--. I see our job as corralling the collective effort, and I think, for too long in the system, there has been a lack of co-ordination. So, this is about bringing and corralling a collective effort to address this, going forward, in more sustainable way. And I think it does come back to this issue around self-evaluation and a willingness to be open, honest and upfront about some of the challenges that we've got. It's not easy, is it? It's not easy to accept or to acknowledge sometimes when things are-- Suzy Davies AM: That they don't know how to do this. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, that they're going badly, or perhaps they don't know exactly how to make the difference. So this approach, as I said, is a new way of trying to coral that collective effort across the board. But, I don't know if Steve--because you've done other roles in the system, so perhaps you've got a different insight. Steve Davies: I think you're right. The variation across the country, across local authorities--. There are some local authorities that we've worked with and we identify have taken the appropriate action. There are others that we're working with, and yes, at its best, it's done as a joint exercise where they use their regional school improvement service to help in the identification that there is a need for this. They take advice as to what the action is, whether it is, as the Minister said, in the more significant areas, a board, or whether a warning notice comes in terms of standards or finance. So, we're working with them and we're working with the Welsh Local Government Association to share that practice. An example of that work is: we have done a development training session for cabinet members for education, and scrutiny leads for education across Wales, and all 22 local authorities came to that and engaged with that. That was partly about self-improvement, but it was also about where significant issues arise, you have to constructively confront them. And that comes with what the region knows, and increasingly, we're looking to have it consistently across 22 local authorities, so they are collecting all the additional data that we referred to earlier, so they can legitimately hold a mirror up and say,'This is a real concern that we have. We're not punishing you, but we're registering the seriousness, and we want you to address it.'And we're making progress. I believe it's genuinely more consistent now, but I'd be lying if I said that there was consistency across all 22 local authorities. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. I'm conscious of time. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. I've got a supplementary from Sian, then back to Huw. Sian Gwenllian AM: Because you are moving to a more sophisticated approach in terms of identifying problems sooner, and so can offer the support earlier, is it time to think about moving away from the system of categorisation entirely? That is, has the categorisation system reached the end of its usefulness, and is the multi-agency approach, this more sophisticated approach, a better way, ultimately, of being able to assist schools in moving forward? Kirsty Williams AM: I think, Sian, as I said earlier, the categorisation system has evolved over time, and my expectation is that it will continue to evolve, because it has to be consistent with our overall approach to school improvement and raising standards. I expect OECD will have feedback for us on this important part of our system, and we'll wait to see exactly what they say about it, but as I said in answer to Huw Irranca-Davies earlier, I haven't got a closed mind; we've demonstrated over the last four years our willingness to change the system to make it a smarter system, and we will continue to keep that under review, as we move forward. If I could just go back briefly, it doesn't sound like a very exciting thing, does it, when we say we've been doing work with the WLGA, with cabinet members, but also scrutiny, because that's a really important part of the jigsaw as well, is actually local government scrutiny of the performance of your education portfolio holder and the leadership of your council. So this is about trying to up the ante on all sides, so that those issues around'What are you doing in your local authority to use the powers that you have?'You know, sometimes, making sure that everybody in that authority--those in power and those who are there to hold those in power to account--have the necessary skills, knowledge and understanding to do that appropriately. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Huw, briefly. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Yes, briefly. I only have one final question. We've talked a lot about early identification; getting in there and then managing the improvement, this triage approach there, and then getting some grip of it, as well, in doing all of that. But my question now is on what we currently have. I won't touch on the primary schools, but let's just look at secondary schools--11 per cent of secondary schools inspected in the last two academic years judged as unsatisfactory, needing urgent improvement. There will always be secondary schools and primary schools that hit moments of crisis for one reason or another, but 11 per cent to me, and to any layperson, would seem unreasonably high. Are you--? It would be daft to ask you if you're content. What is a level that you would be content with of having schools in red category in Wales? Kirsty Williams AM: You're right. Schools will need different levels of support at different points, and sometimes, it's not because of a crisis. So, for instance, in my region, we do have an increase in the number of schools in the amber category. That's because we've seen in that particular region a number of headteachers retire because they've reached retirement age, and there are new headteachers. Well, that is a moment of risk in the school--when senior leadership changes. Nothing else has changed in that school, but the simple fact that you have a new leader, sometimes in those cases it might be their first headship. That means that that school is going to need a little bit of extra support, so it isn't always just a crisis that needs extra support, there are just general things that happen in the life of a school that could lead to it. But you're absolutely right--we have a particular challenge in the secondary sector where we have not been able to move individual schools forward at pace. And 11 per cent is not acceptable to me, Huw, which is why we have introduced this new pilot to address those schools where, persistently, we have concerns about their ability to move forward. If we'd have carried on doing the same thing, I suspect we would have just carried on getting the same result--hence the need for a new approach to those schools that are causing concern. Steve Davies: Very briefly, the things we talked about earlier was how we measure the performance of schools, particularly at GCSEs, with a narrow focus. As was said earlier, some of these are the same groups--they trip in and then they don't come out. Our belief is, from research, that they concentrate on squeezing the pips to get the grades up in some small areas for a period of time, and you can do that by targeting and immersing them. Estyn can tick the box to say your grades have got better, but we haven't handled the serious underpinning issues--leadership, teaching and learning, and bringing those together. As the Minister said, what does sustainable improvement look like in six, 12,18 months? It isn't just, as important as they are, getting those exam grades up a bit. They're the fundamental--. And if they're all agreed as the indicators at the outset, we're more likely--. So it's multi-agency; it's not a little activity, it's a major strategy. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Hefin David has some questions now on the middle tier. Hefin David AM: I'd like to consider the work of the consortia. In 2016, your election manifesto very clearly said that you wanted to abolish regional consortia--three words in it. Why haven't you done it? Kirsty Williams AM: Because, given that you're such a keen student of my manifesto, you'll also know that-- Hefin David AM: It was only three words. Kirsty Williams AM: The Liberal Democrat manifesto also said that we supported major local government reform and a major reduction in the number of local government units. That hasn't happened. I have to say genuinely, my experience over the last four years has proven to me the value of regional working, and in the absence of significant local government reform, I think it's absolutely vital that we have scale in school improvement services--scale that I don't think can be delivered across 22 individual local authorities. Hefin David AM: Okay. So, if there was local government reform, you would abolish the consortia. Kirsty Williams AM: I think if there was significant local government reform and we could demonstrate that those units had such a scale that they could perform the functions of regional consortia, then I think it would be inevitable that any education Minister would look to see whether there was an opportunity to change structures. But in the absence of that, Hefin, I have been absolutely convinced whilst doing this job that you need larger units to be able to carry out successful school improvement work, and I think it would be reckless to advocate the system going back to school improvement being organised in 22 different ways. Hefin David AM: Okay. Do you think that the work of the four consortia has been consistent and effective? Kirsty Williams AM: The school improvement services? Hefin David AM: The four consortia. Kirsty Williams AM: I think, as with individual local education authorities, there are some regional consortia services that have performed really highly--and that's not me saying that, that's Estyn, but gives us assurance around that--and there are others that need to improve. I think the consortia themselves would admit that they, since their establishment, have found new ways of working. Initially, they were very separate entities that did things their own way. Increasingly, over recent years, we have seen those consortia working together on a national approach, but delivered on a regional basis. So I think they themselves have evolved over time. But we are constantly looking for optimum delivery from those particular organisations, but as I said, I think it would be absolutely reckless to go back to a situation where school improvement services were being delivered individually on 22 different bases. Hefin David AM: Okay. I'm happy to accept that you've changed your opinion there; that's no problem at all. But with regard to the four consortia, and we'll take Education through Regional Working as an example, it does things differently to the other three. Is that a cause for concern, or do you think that's entirely appropriate? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, ERW does things differently, but then so does the Education Achievement Service. EAS is constituted in a different way to the Central South Consortium. What I'm interested in is not necessarily how they are constituted and organised, I'm interested in the effectiveness of that organisation to deliver for children and for teachers. ERW has got particular challenges, and we continue to work with those in ERW to address those, but increasingly, as I said, what we are seeing the regional consortia do is develop a national approach to school improvement services but deliver that on a regional basis so that there is greater consistency in terms of delivery. Hefin David AM: Are you happy that, within the ERW area, local authorities employ their own improvement advisers, rather than doing it in the way that the others do? Kirsty Williams AM: We have discussed this at length with them. My preference would be for school improvement officers to be employed in the centre, and we continue to have those discussions, but what's really important to understand is that the regional consortia are not a beast of the Government; they are a beast of the local authorities that have worked together to create a school improvement service that meets their needs. So we can't impose that solution, and we continue to discuss with ERW what is the optimal way, and they continue to discuss with their constituent local authorities about how that should be organised. Hefin David AM: Are you concerned that Neath Port Talbot have given notice that they want to withdraw from regional working? Kirsty Williams AM: I think it's really disappointing that Neath Port Talbot have published that notice. What's important for me is to understand--not for me, it will be important for Estyn. It will be really important for us to understand how Neath Port Talbot intend to support their schools and their teachers if they were to withdraw from ERW, especially at what is a very, very critical time. The regional consortia have a key role to play in supporting systems with the introduction of the curriculum. I would want to know from Neath Port Talbot how they are going to do that without being part of that organisation. And, of course, there's the added complexity that so much of our money is channelled through to schools via the regional consortia. So, I would want to understand from Neath Port Talbot how they're going to safeguard their schools and make sure that the children who are receiving their education in Neath Port Talbot are not disadvantaged if they were to follow through on that decision. Hefin David AM: Do you feel that it's your role to intervene in that area and instruct Neath Port Talbot and ERW as to how they should resolve this issue? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, as I said, I would be seeking assurances-- Hefin David AM: What does that mean, though,'seeking assurances'? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, Neath Port Talbot would need to demonstrate to me how they're going to address these issues. If they're not part of ERW and their schools and their children are not going to be in receipt of the support from ERW, as I said, especially at this critical time, how are they intending to do that? I haven't seen those plans, but if they were to push forward and follow through on the notice, I would want to see them and I suspect Estyn would want to see them also. Hefin David AM: Okay, just last issue on that: you're just waiting to see what Neath Port Talbot do next, then. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, we have written to Neath Port Talbot to ask them to demonstrate to us, if they were to pull out of ERW, how they're going to meet their functions. I have not heard back from them. Hefin David AM: Steve, did you want to say something? Steve Davies: Obviously--[Inaudible. ]--that point. We wrote to them last Friday, and we are awaiting their response now. Hefin David AM: Okay. So, that's where we are. Okay. There was the document in 2015--'National model for regional working'. Is that the current document? Are there plans to change or update it, or is that exactly where we stand? Kirsty Williams AM: So, that is the current model. Some work was undertaken in 2017 and 2018 to look to update that model and revise that model. Some specific recommendations were put forward about additional services that could be organised on a regional basis; primarily, that is a specialist human resources resource. We know that, because of austerity in some local authorities, HR departments have been really stretched. Education HR is a specialist service, it's not generic. It's often a service that--. I see that as part of a school improvement service. Support for governors also has been stretched within individual local authorities. So, a proposal was put forward to include specialist HR and governor support as part of the regional model. That was rejected by local government. Our local authorities did not want to include that in the regional model. However, I must say, having presented that evidence, some of our local authorities, even though there wasn't a national agreement to put that into the national model, have pooled their resources, and those services are being delivered and supported on a regional basis. So, for instance, the Education Achievement Service now provide specialist HR resource, and EAS and Central South provide governor support. So, although we weren't successful in persuading local government to adopt a new national model, local authorities in those areas saw the value of moving that way. Hefin David AM: So, with that in mind, and perhaps I'll put this to Steve Davies, everything the Minister just said, and also the line in the document--'The implementation of this model will change over time'-- is it time to go back to that document and review it from a procedural point of view? Steve Davies: I don't think it's necessarily timely to go back and have a complete review of it. But, certainly, we are in ongoing discussions with the Welsh Local Government Association, both in terms of work with local authorities, and the type of intervention in schools. So, we keep a constant watch as to which areas that we believe we could develop further. We are not currently intending to do a wholesale review of that. As the Minister touched on earlier, there is some work to get consistency across the current area, particularly, as we just mentioned, in relation to ERW work. So, it's getting a consistent approach at that level, and sharing the practice. I think what is emerging, as the Minister said, is that there are two regions who have already made this shift to pool services. I think the two other regions are seeing and will see the benefits of that, and instead of forcing it through, we'd expect that to evolve. But we're not, at this stage, looking to a wholesale review of the national model. Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin. Hefin David AM: And Professor Dylan Jones's strategic delivery group seems to have had quite a warm welcome in the sector. Is it fair to say that? Kirsty Williams AM: I believe so. I'm very grateful to Dylan for his hard work and his skill in chairing that group, and I think it's been welcomed by all, so that we can get that clarity and consistency about the roles and responsibilities of the individual partners and players in the middle tier. Hefin David AM: And when will the work be completed, and what will the outcomes be? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, the group is currently engaging with Steve and other officials on agreeing a plan, but also, crucially, that plan is there to support the successful implementation of the curriculum, so that we're very clear about the roles and responsibilities in the middle tier in this crucial phase following the publication. We have to move now from the publication into a relentless focus on implementation. The history of devolution is full of fantastic documents, and, shall I say, patchy implementation. The work that has gone into that curriculum is too important for implementation to be left to chance. It's too important. It's too good to be left to chance. So, everything now is a relentless focus on successful implementation. Hefin David AM: Yes, but I'm thinking that the strategic delivery is reviewing the role of the middle tier. So, you know, what do we expect to see from it, notwithstanding the kind of softly, softly approach that you've already talked about? Steve Davies: It was set up, actually, about 18 months ago--just under. It was set up to build collective efficacy, because what people out there are seeing is that there's a confusion of roles, in what the regions are doing, and it was building that collective efficacy so everyone was behind the wheel. So, they've been looking at who is doing what for the last 18 months, and exploring and making some changes themselves. It's not just what they do with Government or what they do with each other; it's just happened that it's timely, because one of the key bits of feedback we believe we will get from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development is we have had co-construction, we'd had collective effort, but we need to do more, particularly within the middle tier. This is not controlled by Government, it is arm's length from Government, and it's not their job to get it ready for the new curriculum--that's a key part of it. This group will have an ongoing role; it's not a task and finish group. It does feed back in to the Minister but there's no formal mechanism by which they have to report. Hefin David AM: Okay, that's very clear. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. I've got supplementaries from Suzy, then Sian. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Briefly, please. Suzy Davies AM: I think this is a really interesting evidence session. What I'm about to say, I say it even though I'm a big localist: it all seems to be heading in one direction of a national service. Is the strategic group even thinking in these terms, obviously building in local accountability? But it'll just make it so much easier in terms of accountability and consistency to monitor what the middle tier does, if it's a national service, like the National Adoption Service. Local delivery, national service--is it heading in that direction? Kirsty Williams AM: That's not the intention of setting the group up. As Steve just said, I receive feedback from Dylan, because I meet Dylan in this particular capacity on a planned basis. He is there to give me advice on the middle tier, and to give me advice on what he thinks Welsh Government needs to do. But I've not had that conversation with him about a national service. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Well, thank you for that. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: What I was going to raise has been answered already, that is that, from what I can see, the work that Professor Dylan Jones is doing has evolved somewhat. I felt that, originally, the idea was to look at the middle tier in terms of any kind of duplication that was happening, and where it was possible to tighten up the people going into schools from different directions. But it appears that it has evolved to be something that's much more than that, and that it is placing a focus on the curriculum and other aspects of the educational system. Is there a risk for them to lose focus in that sense? Kirsty Williams AM: No, not at all. I think they are very, very clear around establishing roles and responsibilities for each of the players and to be very clear about the expectations that each part of the middle tier can have of each other, as to what they can expect from their partners in the middle tier. And absolutely, it is about making sure that there isn't duplication, that people aren't second-guessing each other's work, and there are clear demarcations about who does what in the system, and, as I said, knowing that you can rely on your colleague in the middle tier to do the bit that they are responsible for. So, I don't think there's a question of it losing focus. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We've got a lot of areas to cover so we are going to have to pick up our pace a bit. The next questions are from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Thinking about you as a Minister trying to see what the long-term trends are with regard to raising standards and improving educational attainment, is that difficult, because the performance measures have changed, haven't they? We can't compare like-for-like now, because of the changes that have been made in the way that performance is measured. So, to begin with, is that a challenge, to see whether progress has been made? And secondly, what evidence do you as Minister use to look at the long-term trends? Kirsty Williams AM: The first thing to say, with regard to changes to performance measures--you're right that change to those does make it, in some cases, more difficult to look at trends over a period of time. But those changes are made for really good reasons. If we change a performance measure, it is done to ensure that it is in the best interests of learners. And I think the best interests of learners always trumps the ease of comparison. I understand that, for researchers and for opposition Members, even for Ministers, it would be simpler to have the same set of measures over a period of time. But if we know that those things are driving behaviours that are unhelpful to children, and not in the best interests of children, then we have to change them, even thought that then does create challenges in different areas. With regard to what do we look at, there are a number of ways that we gain data and look at data in the system: everything from the categorisation system we spoke of earlier, and trends in categorisation; we look at Estyn reports; we continue to look at examination results. But we're trying to develop a broader range of data and statistics that give us a whole picture of the education performance, rather than narrowing down on one simple indicator that tells you one thing but doesn't tell you everything. But I don't know, Steve, if there's anything further that you'd like to add. Steve Davies: It's going back to what the Member raised earlier, in terms of the range of things that you look at--things that can make a difference. So, when Estyn review schools, or we're looking to develop national frameworks for things like mental health and well-being, which look to the practice that enables raising standards, it's collecting that information, both at a national level, through the annual review of Estyn, as well as our engagement with regions and local authorities. So, it's looking at the evidence base that goes beyond, but impacts on data. And, inevitably, we will use the Programme for International Student Assessment, and any other external assessments that come through organisations like the OECD. And even where we've changed the performance measures, we still have, at national level, the ongoing data. So, if you looked at level 2 plus, we believe it is important that children get five good GCSEs--for higher education and for employment. So, we've not lost sight of those at a national level--we're not using them as a narrow set of performance measures for individual schools. Kirsty Williams AM: So, if we look at--level 2 plus is a good example. We know that a relentless focus on that single measure, as a way of judging the system, leads to a set of behaviours in schools. It narrows the focus onto a certain part of the cohort, it narrows the curriculum, when we know that children-- Sian Gwenllian AM: I'm not challenging the fact that you've changed the performance measures--I understand that, and having a broader way of looking is better in the long run. I'm just saying, because there's been this change, it makes it more of a challenge--whilst accepting why you've made the changes, but it does present more of a challenge, presumably, because you have to look at more indicators, and take evidence from different places. But I take it that you're confident that the trajectory is going in the right way. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, I think we are making improvements. But you're right: it does make it more challenging. But those changes are being made for the right reasons, as I said, whether that be at level 2 plus. Look at English literature. I understand why perhaps a performance measure around English was introduced, but the effect of that was that significant numbers of children--and, it must be said, usually children who are entitled to free school meals--were suddenly not sitting English literature GCSE. We've changed that performance measure, and guess what? Last year, we saw a significant increase in the number of children that were sitting English literature GCSE. For standards of literacy and oracy, I think studying literature is really, really important, before we even get into the joy of introducing children to the written word and the love of reading. So, we make changes. Yes, it causes challenges, but we're making those changes because we believe that they are in the best interest of children, and that has to trump ease of comparison. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Why have you decided to ask the consortia, Estyn and so on not to report on local data or regional level data? How do we then come to conclusions about what is working if it isn't presented on a local authority and regional basis? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think the thing to say about the communications from Welsh Government, Estyn, and the WLGA is it's not about not communicating the data, it's about challenging people on how that data should be used. So, the data is still available, but it's a challenge to them about how to use that data. So, for instance, when we're presenting data that compares local authority to local authority, you could have a local authority that says,'There we go, I'm above the national average. I don't need to worry about the education in my local authority, because I'm above the average, or I'm better than my neighbour.'That doesn't necessarily mean that everything is right in your local education authority. Perhaps your children should be doing even better than what you're presented with. So, actually, it's not about hiding data; it's about how you use the data appropriately. And sometimes, how we were presenting data in the past was lulling some people into a false sense of security about the performance of their system. So, it's about how you use data, and that's what the communication from Welsh Government and the WLGA and Estyn was about: think very carefully about this data and what it's telling you about your system, and don't be lulled into a false sense of security that you may be doing brilliantly. Or, perhaps, looking at your data, you may think,'Oh, my goodness me, we're not doing very well at all', but, actually, more careful consideration of that might show that your school's impact on those children is really, really a positive one. So, you've got to use that data in the context. So, it's not about less data. If anything, it's about more data and, crucially for me, it's about more intelligent use and interrogation of that data, about truly what it's telling you about your system. Sian Gwenllian AM: But again, the Welsh Government--. You have continued to publish the local and regional level data. So, doesn't that contradict what you've been telling the consortia and everyone else? Kirsty Williams AM: No, not at all. As I said, we're not in the business of trying to hide data--I believe absolutely in full transparency. And in terms of level 2 data, I think I'm not moving away from the point that I think it's really important that more and more children get five really good GCSEs. I think it's important for their life chances. It is about how that data is used, not about hiding data or making that data not available. Steve Davies: Can I, very briefly--? We didn't just send a letter out collectively. We've now carried out training jointly with WLGA and Estyn on how to use that data. So, it's not just looking where your LA is; it's also not looking at whether your school's better than average for the authority. And it is well received, and it should broaden the approach of scrutiny committees to beyond what historically was, if I'm honest, looking at the league table for their authority or looking at the league table of local authorities. It's not that they shouldn't be looking at that, but they need to dig much, much deeper underneath it. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. We're going to go on now to Suzy. I'm going to appeal for brief questions and brief answers so that we can cover the rest of the questions. Suzy Davies AM: I'll shorten these questions, okay. We know why you got rid of the old measures. We've got interim measures now. What are they telling you about the success you've had in trying to avoid the bad behaviour? Short answers. Kirsty Williams AM: It's impossible. [Laughter. ] I think it's inevitable: whatever kind of measures we put in place, people will look to maximise their success in those measures, and I don't think we'll ever come up with a system where those measures are absolutely perfect. What's really important to me is that we're really, really, really challenging schools to look at the performance of all of their children, rather than just at a very, very narrow cohort around those C/D boundaries, which we knew was detrimental, potentially, to more able and talented children and really pushing those Bs to As and those As to A*s, and children for whom actually just getting in to school on a daily basis is an achievement, and the school has done well to provide that. So, our new capped 9 makes sure that there is breadth across a range of subjects, rather than just focusing on a narrower and narrower bunch of subject opportunities for children, and our new third-third-third system enables schools to really look at their performance. So if their capped 9 score is high, what's driving that? Is it because the bottom third of the cohort is doing really well, and the impact on those children is above and beyond what could be expected, but actually, you're not doing very well for your more able and talented; you're not pushing them on? Alternatively, maybe your capped 9 score is because your MAT children are doing incredibly well, but actually, you're not really making the progress for the middle tier of those children. It allows us to have a greater focus on the performance of our FSM children--where they really are within that system. So, it's a much more granular--. And crucially for me, it looks at the impact for every child, because every child has to matter in the system, and what we had before was a narrowing of curriculum choice and a narrowing on a certain cohort of children. Suzy Davies AM: So are the permanent measures likely to be pretty similar to what you've got now? Because the research--I don't know if the research is complete yet. When will you be publishing the new permanent evaluation? Kirsty Williams AM: Sue, you're right: they're interim measures at the moment, and we will need to make sure that the performance measures are aligned to the new curriculum. That, potentially, of course--. Because Wales's review of qualifications potentially has an impact on what those finally will look like, so that work is ongoing at the moment, and unless Steve can tell me off the top of his head when we expect that to be completed by, I will send you a note. But they're interim at the moment, because we need to align them to the new curriculum. Suzy Davies AM: I think we understand that. [Inaudible. ]--date. Steve Davies: No, no. This is not a quick fix. This is a two to three-year research base. The new qualifications for the new curriculum will not start until 2025. They have to be in place for 2022. There's a three-year roll on. I would expect the broad structure of the interim measures to continue over that time. There will be some tweaks for consistency. It's what's wrapped around those interim measures that I touched on earlier: the other evidence that we bring to bear about the effectiveness of a school, but we do want to say to schools that on the whole, broadly speaking, the interim measures will carry on for two, three years. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, and the reason I asked that is right at the beginning of this session, the Minister said to the Chair that this PS100 million that's going into school improvements will be going into things that work. We need some evidence that the interim measures are going to work as well, so when are they going to be evaluated? Steve Davies: Well, we've only just used them for one year. Suzy Davies AM: That's what I'm asking you. Steve Davies: We've signalled that they're only going to be in place for three years. We are carrying out our own review of the impact of those and that's been built in, but I expect the OECD report--because it is an extensive report--to give us feedback on how those things are working now, and some steer, as they did with the last report, as to the direction we would want to go into. Kirsty Williams AM: And what I'm also interested in is those performance management measures around schools. Yes, they're about outcomes for children, but actually are about a broader suite of behaviours within that school, so, yes, qualifications and grades are an important part of a performance measure, but actually, I have other expectations of schools, above and beyond simply qualifications. And so, we would want our permanent set of performance measures to look at a wider set of behaviours within a school, and I think because--. Exams are important--of course they are, qualifications are important--but the way in which those schools achieve those results are also important. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Would you anticipate that including well-being, then? Suzy Davies AM: In a whole-school approach. Kirsty Williams AM: I absolutely--and we need to find a way of how we can truly measure that. Sometimes, children's well-being is influenced by lots of things outside the control of a school. So, I don't want schools to be held accountable for things that they have no control over, because of the circumstances in which a child may be living. But, absolutely: well-being and how the culture of the school addresses well-being is really important to me. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Suzy. Move on to PISA, please. Suzy Davies AM: How useful is PISA for you in helping school improvement? I know that it's not always the thing that you enjoy watching or looking out for. But, genuinely, how useful is it? Kirsty Williams AM: It is one of a range of tools that we need to look at. Sian, quite rightly, talked about consistency. PISA is one thing where there is a level of consistency, so it will continue to be, I think, an important part of how we test how our system is doing. Suzy Davies AM: We know that you are a little bit encouraged, but we are not out of the woods yet. You mentioned this in Plenary when we talked about PISA. How confident are you that we are on track for meeting these targets that were set before your time, or do you think that having those targets is helpful? Is it setting up aspirations that are incapable of being met within a period of time? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, those long-term targets of a score around 500 are part of'Our National Mission', and we have to keep the pressure on to strive. They are testing, but we have to keep the pressure on to strive to reach them. In some cases, I can be quite encouraged. If we look at reading scores for girls, we are almost there, but that just demonstrates what a journey we've got with our boys to address. For me, one of the ways in which we will reach those targets and achieve them is further progress on our more able and talented children. Although we are now performing at an OECD average, I will be the first person to admit that, although we have seen an improvement in the higher level skills of our more able and talented children, we do not perform at an OECD average with regard to those level 6 and level 5 scores. Suzy Davies AM: Even within the UK, really, we are quite far behind. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes. So, I think that's where we really need to push on. That's one of the reasons why we have introduced a more able and talented budget to support that, and our Seren programme, which is delivering fantastic results post-16. That's why we're introducing the principles of Seren earlier into children's careers, bringing it down from year 9 upwards, to be able to drive improvements. So, I think that that's the area that we are particularly keen to work on: making sure that more of our children perform at the OECD average at level 5 and level 6. Clearly, we've got more work to do on reading. We are working with southern Ireland, who have consistently done well with reading scores, to look to see what lessons we can learn to press on with there with reading. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. My final question on this. You recognise it as a priority, particularly for boys. Does that mean that the focus will then drift slightly from maths, where there has been some success; and drift from science, where the encouragement of more people to take GCSE science has reduced the number of high-level passes? Kirsty Williams AM: First, we have to have a system that is capable of doing all of those of things at the same time. We can't accept a system that says,'Well, we can do a bit over here, but that means we have to--.'We have to have a system, Suzy, that can drive improvements at all levels. That's my expectation. Suzy Davies AM: The balloon needs to be bigger not just squeezing it at one end. Kirsty Williams AM: Absolutely, yes. That's my expectation of this system. You have to deliver across all of these. We have seen some progress. As I've said, it's far from perfect, and we've got more work to do, but we have to deliver across all three domains, as we did last time. And I'm not going to make any apologies for changing the performance indicators around science. It was a travesty that there were children who never had the opportunity to sit a science GCSE. We don't have to make assumptions about the nature of many, many, many of those children. We have seen a significant increase in the number of children who are having the opportunity to sit GCSE science and who are passing GCSE science. So, I'm not going to make any apologies about that. One of the reasons that I suspect we have ended up with poor science scores is because of the previous policy around science entries and science qualifications. Again, one of the reasons that we have changed it isn't just solely because we need to do better in PISA, but I think that by changing it, we will see an impact on PISA. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you for that. Lynne Neagle AM: The final set of questions is from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: I just want to discuss an issue that I know is important to you, namely closing the attainment gap between pupils who are eligible for free school meals and those who are not eligible for free school meals. Unfortunately, the problem persists, doesn't it? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes. We are not where we need to be in terms of the performance, not only of our children on free school meals, but the performance of our looked-after children, and the performance of some children from some ethnic minority groups. So, we will continue to look to support those learners in a variety of ways, again looking to amend our practice on the basis of evidence that is given to us from our experts who are there to advise us. There is clearly more that we need to do. There has been some progress in some areas, but it is not where I would want it to be. Sian Gwenllian AM: But, this is despite the fact that there is PS475 million that has been invested in the pupil development grant, for this exact purpose of closing the attainment gap. But, the problem persists, and in some places, it's deteriorating. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think that, as I said, I am not shying away from any assumption or declaration that we need to do better. But, I do think that we need to acknowledge where progress has been made. If we go back to look at what PISA has said about our performance, the PISA results show that pupils in Wales are relatively more able to overcome the disadvantage of their background than is the average in OECD countries. So, our children are doing better in that, and that gives me encouragement. That's not me saying that; that's there. If we look at pupils who are eligible for free school meals, they do score below their better-off counterparts in PISA by some 34 points. The gap in England is 40 points. So, again, that gap is smaller here in Wales. If we look at basic levels of qualifications, back in--. It's difficult to make comparisons because of all the reasons we have talked about, but if we look back to 2006 and we look at the very basic level of qualifications, which is a level 1 qualification, we have seen a jump from 9. 4 per cent of children in 2006 achieving a level 1 qualification to over 18 per cent. So, there is progress. There is evidence that the resources that we are spending are making a difference. But, clearly, we are not where we would want to be. That's why we will continue to focus those resources on those children, where we need it. But, we need to do that earlier. Sticking plasters in years 10 and 11 aren't going to cut it. We need to get this right for those children, the moment that they come into a nursery and the moment that they start their formal education at the age of 5. That's how we are going to make the difference. Providing catch-up, of course, we need to do for those kids; we can't throw those year 10s and year 11s to the wind. We have to support those children. But, we will see real improvement when we get in there earlier. Sian Gwenllian AM: But I'm sure that that is a disappointment to you, because it has been a personal priority for you as well. In terms of minority ethnic learners, while there are some groups within that category who are achieving, there is underachievement happening here as well, isn't there? It's not consistent across the minority ethnic group. Is that something that you will be focusing upon? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, and that's why we have committed to maintaining a ring-fenced grant to local authorities of some PS10 million, to support education of our minority ethnic children. But, again, you are right, you are absolutely right, Sian. We need a much more sophisticated conversation about what is really going on in attainment across minority ethnic groups so that we can best target that resource and have a conversation about what the differences are. You are absolutely correct: there is a real mixed picture. If we look at black Welsh girls entitled to free school meals, they perform almost at the national average for all children--not FSM children; the national average for all children. Black Welsh boys don't, but neither do white Welsh boys. So, there is a really complex picture here, and I really welcome a debate about acknowledging the various levels of performance of BAME children, and where the gaps in performance lie. You are quite right: it is a complex picture in the system. I'm committed to continuing to support educational opportunities, and that's why have ring-fenced the minority ethnic achievement grant. There are some interesting data there. Some children are doing very, very well; others, we need to concentrate on. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian, this will need to be the last question, I'm afraid. Sian Gwenllian AM: Sorry? Lynne Neagle AM: This is going to have to be the last question. Sian Gwenllian AM: The last question. Lynne Neagle AM: Yes. Sian Gwenllian AM: Fine. In terms of looked-after children, which is one of the groups where attainment isn't where we would like it to be, there was some improvement in 2016 at key stage 4, but it has been disappointing. Do we know what's been happening in 2019? Kirsty Williams AM: The 2019 data will be published next month, and there has been significant activity. You are right: in recent years, the data have been poor and not where we would want it to be. That's why we have had a reformed approach to PDG LAC; the employment of PDG LAC co-ordinators across the regions. We've identified new resource in the new financial year to test new approaches, so, for instance, virtual school approaches, where we know, in other systems, that has worked. But, we expect the next set of data around the performance of this particular group of learners in March. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay, and you hope to see progress. Kirsty Williams AM: I don't want to speculate, but I hope so. Sian Gwenllian AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you very much. We have come to the end of our time, so can I thank you, Minister, and your official for attending this morning? We have had a wide-ranging and very detailed discussion that will be very useful for the committee. As usual, you will be sent a transcript following the meeting to check for accuracy, but thank you again, both of you, for your attendance this morning. Diolch yn fawr. Okay. Item 3 is papers to note. Paper to note 1 is a letter from ERW providing additional information following the evidence session on 16 January. Paper to note 2 is a letter from Central South Consortium, similarly providing additional information following the evidence session. Paper to note 3 is a letter from the Noah's Ark Children's Hospital for Wales regarding children's rights in Wales, following up on some additional information there. Paper to note 4 is a letter from Qualifications Wales, providing additional information following the annual report scrutiny session in January. Item 4, then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting? Are Members content? Thank you.

In Hefin's opinion, they took ERW as an example because it did things differently with regard to the four consortia. They were interested in the effectiveness of that organization to deliver for children and for teachers since ERW had got particular challenges. What they were seeing the national consortia do is developing a national approach to school improvement services. What's more, according to Hefin, the regional consortia were not a beast of the Government; they were a beast of the local authorities that had worked together to create a school improvement service that met their needs.

tr-sq-1234

tr-sq-1234_0

What's their opinion in intervening Neath Port Talbot and ERW about addressing the issue of safeguarding their schools? Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received apologies for absence from Janet Finch-Saunders, and also from Dawn Bowden, and I'd like to welcome Huw Irranca-Davies, who is substituting for Dawn Bowden. Can I ask Members if there are any declarations of interest, please? No. Okay. We'll move on, then, to our evidence session for our inquiry on school improvement and raising standards. I'd like to welcome Kirsty Williams AM, Minister for Education, and Steve Davies, director of education. Thank you both for attending and for your detailed paper in advance of the meeting. We've got a lot of ground to cover, so we'll go straight into questions, if that's okay. If I can just start by asking you: to what extent is the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development still involved in the Welsh Government's school improvement journey? Kirsty Williams AM: First of all, can I thank the committee for their invitation this morning, and their interest in this particular area? As you will be aware, on coming into office, the director and I agreed to ask the OECD to do a rapid review of the state of Welsh education at the beginning of this Assembly term. They did that, and the feedback from that work informed the publication and content of the national mission. I was very clear in the national mission that I would invite the OECD back to review our progress against that mission, and that has happened in the tail end of last year, and the OECD will publish their latest report on Welsh education next month now, in March. So, the expectation is that the report will be published on 23 March, and my intention is to make a statement to the Chamber on 24 March. The nature of that review is part of our ongoing development of self-evaluation. So, we talk a lot about self-evaluation in the school system. Actually, the continuing relationship with OECD is about self-evaluation of the entirety of the system and Welsh Government. We don't want to accept our own orthodoxy and just be in a bubble where we are constantly listening to ourselves and those people who might want to agree with us or tell us what we want to hear. So, the OECD is our best attempt of having some external verification of where we are. That's a risk for Ministers and for Government, because we want them to give an honest evaluation of where we are, but that's a really important tool for me, to ensure that we're constantly testing ourselves. The nature of that review is that the OECD were able to talk to whoever they felt it was important to talk to, so that included practitioners on the ground, elements of the middle tier, as well as Welsh Government. And I know, Chair--I hope you'll be pleased to hear this--that the reports of this committee have formed parts of their review, looking at how the Senedd itself has contributed to and has held the Government to account. So, as I said, we expect our report to be published towards the end of March. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you, Minister. Can I ask about the powers under the School Standards and Organisation (Wales) Act 2013, to ask you to tell us about the use of those powers either by Welsh Government or by local authorities, and how effective you feel that legislation has been? Kirsty Williams AM: Okay. Well, as you'll be aware, local authorities have quite extensive powers of intervention in schools if they feel that is necessary. If I'm honest, I think there's a mixed picture, with some local authorities using those powers not on a regular basis, but obviously demonstrating a willingness to use those powers. There are other local authorities who don't seem to have used them. Since that legislation came into being, there have been a number of reasons, because of course a local authority has to give a reason for using those powers of intervention. They usually focus on standards, but sometimes they focus on a breakdown in governance arrangements, perhaps, or a failure or a breakdown in financial management. So, sometimes the budgetary issues trigger an intervention power. And the types of interventions that have been used have included, in some cases, appointing additional governors to governing bodies, or suspending a school's delegated budget so the local authority takes on, then, financial control of that particular school, or sometimes applying to the Welsh Government to entirely replace a governing body and establish an intervention board. So, if I can give you an example of where that's been used and has been successful, in Flintshire. They applied to Welsh Government for two interim executive boards, in Sir Richard Gwyn Catholic High School and in Ysgol Trefonnen. They applied to us. Those governing bodies were dissolved. The IEBs were put in place and both of those schools, which had been in special measures, moved quite rapidly, actually, out of special measures. Perhaps the most recent example of this is one that the Chair will know very well in her own constituency of Torfaen, in Cwmbran High School, where Torfaen has intervened in that case. The Welsh Government has not used those powers to date. My expectation always is that local authorities should be the first port of call, and I would encourage--and we always encourage--local authorities to take a proactive approach to intervention and to use those powers. But it's my belief that it is they who are best placed initially to do that. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you, Minister. Can I ask, then, about the national evaluation and improvement resource and how significant a role that will play in the raising of school standards, and how you feel it's evolved since it was first conceived? Kirsty Williams AM: So, this brings us back to the principle of self-evaluation and something, if we're honest, we've not been very good at. If you look at a number of chief inspectors'reports into the Welsh education system, self-evaluation has always been identified as something that is missing or underdeveloped in our system to date, hence, then, the work to establish not a new approach, but a more robust approach to self-evaluation. We've done that in conjunction, again, with the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. It's really important, throughout the entirety of our reform journey that that's done in co-construction, because we want this resource to be usable in schools. So, it's all very well having a conceptual idea and people outside the classroom working on it, but if it's of no practical use to a school leadership team, then we won't see the impact. So, it's--. We're in phase 2 at the moment, where we're doing--. So, the initial resource has been developed by the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. We're in the testing phase at the moment and having it evaluated itself, with a view to introducing that resource across the system at the start of the new academic year, in September 2020. I truly believe that, if we're to make progress in Welsh education, we have to develop the skills within our system to have robust self-evaluation. This resource gives us continuity of approach right the way across Wales. So, it's not left to an individual school to come up with a system; it's right the way across the system. My hope would be that those principles could then be applied to local education authorities, to regional school improvement services and Welsh Government as part of a whole-system approach to self-evaluation. I don't know if there's anything more you want to add, Steve. Steve Davies: Just to add that the other critical partners are Estyn themselves. Kirsty Williams AM: Oh, yes, sorry. Steve Davies: So, they have played a critical role and, as we know, as the Minister has said in the past, she may introduce policy and practice, but if Estyn are part of it then schools, usually, because they recognise that it will be part of the inspection process--it gives it greater push and support around it. So, they've been key players within it. Kirsty Williams AM: And I think, if I just say as well, that the external perception of what that's about is really important. It's not a test of school readiness for reform, it is a genuine attempt for a school to evaluate their strengths, their weaknesses and where they need to go next. It's not an Estyn checklist. And because of the word'toolkit'--the feedback was that it gave the impression of a checklist,'Just do this and check list'. So, we're actually going to change the name of that resource. So, it'll be called the national evaluation and improvement resource, rather than the toolkit, because, as I said, the feedback was that'toolkit'gave the impression of a checklist exercise, and it's got to be about more than that if it's going to be meaningful. So, it'll be changed to an'improvement resource'. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Before I bring Suzy in, can I just welcome Sian Gwenllian, who is joining us via video-conference in north Wales? Morning, Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Good morning. Can you hear me? Lynne Neagle AM: We can, yes. We can hear you very nicely, thank you. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Yes. Only a very quick one. It's about the development of the-- Kirsty Williams AM: The resource. Suzy Davies AM: Yes, the resource, thank you--about whether there were any conflicting ideas in the process of development that made it quite difficult to zone in on something that school leadership teams, in particular, could rely on. Were there differences of opinion on what this should look like? Kirsty Williams AM: Not that I'm aware of from the practitioners that I've spoken to who have been part of that. So, for instance, Suzy, you will know the very small school of Gladestry. The head of Gladestry has been involved in this process, and she said that she'd really enjoyed the process of working alongside Estyn and the OECD as a school leader to be able to shape it. But I'm not aware that there's been conflict in that process. Suzy Davies AM: I'm not suggesting that there has been; I'm just interested as to how it had worked, that's all. Steve Davies: Chair, I think, inevitably, when you bring stakeholders together, they're not going to be in total agreement as to how it's going to work, and I think initially one of the challenges was having Estyn there as part of the facilitation group. There are always some concerns that, actually, it's coming from a to inspect, oral, judgmental tick box. So, we had some early day challenges where we had to convince--and, ultimately, Estyn convinced them--that they were there to help and support as opposed to to inspect, and that the model that was developed, as the Minister said, was not going to be a tick box,'You are good at this part of self-evaluation', it was to build the skillsets up. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. So, it's got their full confidence. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, and I think again, also, what--. You know, four years into the job, what I've reflected on as well is there is this sometimes a feeling out there that the Minister says all the right stuff, but you're not actually going to do it, so, when you talk about a new approach to doing things, you're not actually serious about it. So, trying to build that confidence that we are serious about developing a new system around self-improvement, which is different from accountability--sometimes, the practitioners are like,'Oh, yes, we've heard it all before but it never actually happens.'And I think that's been a part of the constant--not pressure, but the responsibility on Welsh Government is in following through. So, we said that we were going to do this in the national mission, and we are going to do it. I'm really proud that there or thereabouts, a few months either way, we've actually kept to the timetable as outlined in the national mission, and that helps build confidence within the sector that we are committed to that programme and we're going to do what we say we're going to do. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: And a final question from me: how effective do you think the investment in school standards has been in this Assembly term, as opposed to the approach taken in the last Assembly term, where there was the protection put in place for core school budgets? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think, first of all, it's important that, whilst this additional resource is specifically targeted at school standards, that is only a part of a much wider education budget, a budget that--you know--is incredibly complex. And so it is really challenging to be able to draw straight lines--you know,'We did this and it's resulted in that'--given that we're looking at the entirety of school funding here. What's been really important is that, if you drill down into what that money has been spent on, 50 per cent of it has been directed towards professional learning in one form or another to support our teaching professionals. And that's been really important to me. I've said it time and time again: an education system cannot exceed the quality of the people who stand in front of our children day in, day out to work with them and teach them. Therefore, that investment in staff and investment in the professional learning of our staff and support for them I think is making a difference already but, importantly, will continue to make a difference. But I think it is really challenging to be able to say,'Well, we spent this bit of money and it definitely led to that', because it's such a complex picture. But that money, the way it's been spent, has been driven by evidence. And, again, what we do know from international best practice, what do we know that works in driving up standards, and then how can we align the money that we've got to supporting that? And, as I said, 50 per cent of that money has gone directly to simply supporting the professional learning of those who work with our children. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you very much. We're going to talk now a bit about schools causing concern with questions from Huw Irranca-Davies. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Thank you, Chair. If I can, just first of all, zoom in on the way in which we actually decide which schools need what support. So, one of the interesting questions for us is how do we use the different systems out there. So, we've got the school categorisation system, which we're familiar with. We've also got Estyn inspection reports, then we've got other intelligence, including local intelligence on the ground. How do you decide from that? How is it decided what schools need support, need challenge? How do we do that? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, you're right: what we have is a variety of ways in which we can identify schools that need support, or need to be challenged on their practice. But it's important not to confuse them either. So, our primary route to doing this is our school categorisation system. Sometimes, and perhaps this is inevitable--. That system is primarily there as a triage system around identifying where our resource should be spent. So, our school improvement service--it's a risk-based approach, so they can evaluate where they need to put their time, effort and resource. Sometimes, it's used by other people for other things, but that is not its primary purpose; its primary purpose there is not one of accountability, it is one of identifying risk and aligning that then to the support that is available. Estyn--now that is part of that accountability system. That is our method of holding schools and their governing bodies to account for their practice and for the work that they do. Both systems, of course, are evolving. So, how we do categorisation has changed over a period of time. The elements that go into making that judgment around the levels of support have changed, and, of course, the Estyn inspection regime is also changing. At the moment, schools are only inspected once every seven years. We're moving to a system where Estyn will be more regularly in schools. So, they are two systems, but they are different and they look at different things. But our categorisation system is how we look for those ways of identifying support for schools. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: And you've made, with feedback over the last few years, adjustments to the way that the categorisation system works. Are you content with where it is now, or do you see more adjustments being made? Have you got things in front of you that you're getting feedback on saying'Well, we need to tweak this again a little bit'? Kirsty Williams AM: So, that system has evolved over time. So, when it started, it was just a tool around secondary schools. Now, it covers the breadth of schools. Initially, on coming into office, when I first came in, it was purely driven by data, and it was also done in quartiles. So, there was a certain number of schools that had to be in the bottom, which drove practitioners mad. They were like'Ah, every year, there's going to be some of us that have to be in the bottom quartile', because of the way in which it was arranged, which seemed very unfair to them. So, we've changed that. It's not just purely driven on data now; there are other judgments--the professional judgments of our challenge advisers are taken into account. And I would expect that situation to continue to evolve to align itself to our curriculum reform, and our changes in self-evaluation. So, it's not a fixed point. I expect that that system will continue to evolve and change, so that it complements and assists in the reform journey as other parts of the system change. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Thanks for that. I think, for any impartial reader of the way that the trends have been going on this, there is some good news within that, in that, certainly, those schools that might have been identified as have been okay but coasting along, seem to be moving up the categories, although we still do have that--. Well, it's what the system is there to do, it's to identify those schools that do need that additional support. And I like your analogy of a triage system--'You're fit; keep on doing what you're doing and do it well; you need more support, we'll put the support in.'But, can I turn to those schools that are causing significant concern, and how we identify them? The Estyn chief inspector's conclusions at the end of the 2017-18 report that these schools are not being identified early enough--there's a need to do something urgently about these concerns, particularly in secondary schools. Have we addressed that? Are you content that we've addressed that concern? Was he right? Kirsty Williams AM: No, the chief inspector is absolutely right--absolutely right. I've got no beef with that statement at all. In some ways, when a school goes into special measures, in a way, that's a failure of the system, because that should have been identified sooner. So I've got no beef, as I said, with the chief inspector saying that. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: So just to ask, bearing in mind the earlier discussion we were having, how is it that we don't identify those schools? Kirsty Williams AM: That's it--you're quite right. Undoubtedly, what categorisation has done is led to a greater understanding, I think, on behalf of local education authorities'and school improvement services'knowledge about their schools. I think knowledge around schools is greatly enhanced by that process. But we are not there yet in terms of necessarily, then, moving those schools more quickly, once they've been identified as needing the highest level of support to see improvement. And secondary schools is a particular, particular challenge. So you will have seen from the last publication of categorisation data that our primary sector continues to improve--more and more and more of our primary schools are in a green rating, which is very satisfying to me. But we have got more of an issue with secondary schools, and we have a particular issue with the same schools being identified in that level of categorisation. So even though we've identified them as needing that extra help, they are not moving at pace away from that system. So there are two things that we are doing at the moment. The first is, we are, again, looking at different sets of data that can give us even earlier warning systems that things are going wrong in a school--and perhaps Steve will explain later. For instance, staff sickness, and carefully monitoring staff sickness, because there is a direct correlation between high levels of staff sickness in a school and what is going on in the school. And Steve can explain some of this work later. But we're piloting a new approach to those schools that are causing concern. Each local authority has been asked to identify two of their high schools that they are particularly worried about. And we have a new multi-agency approach, working with those schools to try and move them more forward. So it's two from each region, a multi-agency panel, working with the school. And that multi-agency panel includes the school itself, the local authority, the regional consortia school improvement staff, Estyn and Welsh Government--as a multi-agency panel to support improvement in that school. So, for instance, what would normally happen, Estyn would come in, Estyn would make a judgment on the school--requiring special measures or urgent improvement--and Estyn would go away. They'd go away for six months, and then they'd come back in six months, and they'd make another judgment,'No, still not good enough', and disappear for six months. We're saying--Estyn and the Welsh Government have agreed that's not the best approach; Estyn need to be part of the solution, rather than just coming and making a judgment. The initial feedback from this trial is very, very positive. Actually, we've had local authorities coming to us and saying,'Can we put more schools in? Rather than just having two of our high schools, can we engage more in this project and this pilot?'It's being evaluated by Cardiff Metropolitan University and Swansea University, so we're having some academic overview to see, actually, does this approach work, can we evidence it--that it actually makes a difference? And it's actually--I'd like to claim all the credit for it, but it's actually not dissimilar to something that's happening in Scotland as well. But we knew that carrying on doing the same old thing clearly wasn't moving these schools, we needed a new approach, and this is what we're doing at the moment. So it's relatively new, but the initial feedback is positive. Steve, I don't know-- Steve Davies: I think your important point is about,'What about the schools that are sliding in that direction?'And it's bringing together what we know from Estyn, but also, critically, local authorities have knowledge of their schools, and so do consortia. We've got to be better at bringing those together. So, the Minister gave the example of staff sickness--not always a trigger, but it's one of those. If you look at movement of pupils out of a school, you can look at complaints, you can look at, actually, emerging increased use of HR resources that a school pulls on a local authority. None of these have been pushed up into the public domain, but they're important antennae. The point the Minister made about Estyn as well is, historically, when they go into special measures, Estyn, at the end of that week, call in, historically, either the region or the local authority, they will feed back to one of them, and then they go away. So, they are staying with it. So, we are brining together the knowledge. But, as the Minister said, we want to keep a very clear distinction between the accountability and the transparency to the public, to parents, with the very detailed collective work of that multi-agency group to actually make that difference over time. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Okay. So, does that--. I'd love to go further, but time is against us. Does that deal with the issue of the schools that have been identified in those categories of requiring significant improvement and requiring special measures? Are those the ones that will be identified now, or is that above and beyond that again? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, those are the ones that are primarily at the forefront of our minds, but this way of sharing data better, to step in earlier, is part of our attempt to address what the chief inspector says about stepping in early--not waiting until a school gets into special measures and a formal judgment from Estyn of that, but actually using that intelligence to get support in there earlier. The three elements that that multi-agency approach look at are: what are the fundamentals that need addressing in this school? What is the capacity of the school itself to be able to address those fundamentals? And, what extra support needs to go into that senior management team and the governing body to get those fundamentals addressed? And actually, what does sustainable improvement look like? Because, again, one of the issues, sometimes, that happens is, a school goes into a category with Estyn, there's a big push and a big,'We must do something'and the school comes out, but actually, that improvement is not sustainable. It's the low-hanging fruit; it's the easy wins that have been achieved, but actually, perhaps some of the fundamental challenges underlying in that school haven't been addressed in that process. So, this is about what will sustainable improvement look like in six months, what's it going to look like in 12 months and what's it going to look like in 18 months. So, actually, a more strategic, longer term approach to real change in a school rather than, perhaps, some of the easy-to-fix items that make a school as if it's doing better, but we really haven't tackled some of the underlying problems that make that school vulnerable to slipping back. Does that make sense? Lynne Neagle AM: I've got a couple of supplementaries on--. Sorry? Kirsty Williams AM: Does that make sense? Lynne Neagle AM: Yes. We've got a couple of supplementaries on this, first from Suzy and then from Sian. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you for that, Chair. Obviously, I'm pleased to hear that this work is being done, but I'm wondering--. What strikes me, in the recent past, at least, particularly as we've got the usual suspects in this category--. I've got to ask myself why it is that councils have been reluctant, perhaps, to step in with these schools earlier, particularly as they've got consortia or middle-tier support as well. Has there been a deficit in that space that has meant that councils don't feel equipped to step in? I just don't really get it why they've been reluctant to step in so far. If they've been nervous about doing it, because they don't feel that they've got the tools to do it, then I think that's pretty important, because as you were saying, we were talking about fundamentals; surely, councils have been able to deal with fundamentals, and more importantly, consortia up until now. Because, obviously, we're asking these players to give us evidence at some point, so perhaps I'd like to challenge them on how come we're here now. Kirsty Williams AM: And rightly so. Suzy Davies AM: I'm not laying this at your door. Kirsty Williams AM: And rightly so. I guess each local authority will have an explanation for each individual school, I suspect. What's crucial to me is that we have to--. I see our job as corralling the collective effort, and I think, for too long in the system, there has been a lack of co-ordination. So, this is about bringing and corralling a collective effort to address this, going forward, in more sustainable way. And I think it does come back to this issue around self-evaluation and a willingness to be open, honest and upfront about some of the challenges that we've got. It's not easy, is it? It's not easy to accept or to acknowledge sometimes when things are-- Suzy Davies AM: That they don't know how to do this. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, that they're going badly, or perhaps they don't know exactly how to make the difference. So this approach, as I said, is a new way of trying to coral that collective effort across the board. But, I don't know if Steve--because you've done other roles in the system, so perhaps you've got a different insight. Steve Davies: I think you're right. The variation across the country, across local authorities--. There are some local authorities that we've worked with and we identify have taken the appropriate action. There are others that we're working with, and yes, at its best, it's done as a joint exercise where they use their regional school improvement service to help in the identification that there is a need for this. They take advice as to what the action is, whether it is, as the Minister said, in the more significant areas, a board, or whether a warning notice comes in terms of standards or finance. So, we're working with them and we're working with the Welsh Local Government Association to share that practice. An example of that work is: we have done a development training session for cabinet members for education, and scrutiny leads for education across Wales, and all 22 local authorities came to that and engaged with that. That was partly about self-improvement, but it was also about where significant issues arise, you have to constructively confront them. And that comes with what the region knows, and increasingly, we're looking to have it consistently across 22 local authorities, so they are collecting all the additional data that we referred to earlier, so they can legitimately hold a mirror up and say,'This is a real concern that we have. We're not punishing you, but we're registering the seriousness, and we want you to address it.'And we're making progress. I believe it's genuinely more consistent now, but I'd be lying if I said that there was consistency across all 22 local authorities. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. I'm conscious of time. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. I've got a supplementary from Sian, then back to Huw. Sian Gwenllian AM: Because you are moving to a more sophisticated approach in terms of identifying problems sooner, and so can offer the support earlier, is it time to think about moving away from the system of categorisation entirely? That is, has the categorisation system reached the end of its usefulness, and is the multi-agency approach, this more sophisticated approach, a better way, ultimately, of being able to assist schools in moving forward? Kirsty Williams AM: I think, Sian, as I said earlier, the categorisation system has evolved over time, and my expectation is that it will continue to evolve, because it has to be consistent with our overall approach to school improvement and raising standards. I expect OECD will have feedback for us on this important part of our system, and we'll wait to see exactly what they say about it, but as I said in answer to Huw Irranca-Davies earlier, I haven't got a closed mind; we've demonstrated over the last four years our willingness to change the system to make it a smarter system, and we will continue to keep that under review, as we move forward. If I could just go back briefly, it doesn't sound like a very exciting thing, does it, when we say we've been doing work with the WLGA, with cabinet members, but also scrutiny, because that's a really important part of the jigsaw as well, is actually local government scrutiny of the performance of your education portfolio holder and the leadership of your council. So this is about trying to up the ante on all sides, so that those issues around'What are you doing in your local authority to use the powers that you have?'You know, sometimes, making sure that everybody in that authority--those in power and those who are there to hold those in power to account--have the necessary skills, knowledge and understanding to do that appropriately. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Huw, briefly. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Yes, briefly. I only have one final question. We've talked a lot about early identification; getting in there and then managing the improvement, this triage approach there, and then getting some grip of it, as well, in doing all of that. But my question now is on what we currently have. I won't touch on the primary schools, but let's just look at secondary schools--11 per cent of secondary schools inspected in the last two academic years judged as unsatisfactory, needing urgent improvement. There will always be secondary schools and primary schools that hit moments of crisis for one reason or another, but 11 per cent to me, and to any layperson, would seem unreasonably high. Are you--? It would be daft to ask you if you're content. What is a level that you would be content with of having schools in red category in Wales? Kirsty Williams AM: You're right. Schools will need different levels of support at different points, and sometimes, it's not because of a crisis. So, for instance, in my region, we do have an increase in the number of schools in the amber category. That's because we've seen in that particular region a number of headteachers retire because they've reached retirement age, and there are new headteachers. Well, that is a moment of risk in the school--when senior leadership changes. Nothing else has changed in that school, but the simple fact that you have a new leader, sometimes in those cases it might be their first headship. That means that that school is going to need a little bit of extra support, so it isn't always just a crisis that needs extra support, there are just general things that happen in the life of a school that could lead to it. But you're absolutely right--we have a particular challenge in the secondary sector where we have not been able to move individual schools forward at pace. And 11 per cent is not acceptable to me, Huw, which is why we have introduced this new pilot to address those schools where, persistently, we have concerns about their ability to move forward. If we'd have carried on doing the same thing, I suspect we would have just carried on getting the same result--hence the need for a new approach to those schools that are causing concern. Steve Davies: Very briefly, the things we talked about earlier was how we measure the performance of schools, particularly at GCSEs, with a narrow focus. As was said earlier, some of these are the same groups--they trip in and then they don't come out. Our belief is, from research, that they concentrate on squeezing the pips to get the grades up in some small areas for a period of time, and you can do that by targeting and immersing them. Estyn can tick the box to say your grades have got better, but we haven't handled the serious underpinning issues--leadership, teaching and learning, and bringing those together. As the Minister said, what does sustainable improvement look like in six, 12,18 months? It isn't just, as important as they are, getting those exam grades up a bit. They're the fundamental--. And if they're all agreed as the indicators at the outset, we're more likely--. So it's multi-agency; it's not a little activity, it's a major strategy. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Hefin David has some questions now on the middle tier. Hefin David AM: I'd like to consider the work of the consortia. In 2016, your election manifesto very clearly said that you wanted to abolish regional consortia--three words in it. Why haven't you done it? Kirsty Williams AM: Because, given that you're such a keen student of my manifesto, you'll also know that-- Hefin David AM: It was only three words. Kirsty Williams AM: The Liberal Democrat manifesto also said that we supported major local government reform and a major reduction in the number of local government units. That hasn't happened. I have to say genuinely, my experience over the last four years has proven to me the value of regional working, and in the absence of significant local government reform, I think it's absolutely vital that we have scale in school improvement services--scale that I don't think can be delivered across 22 individual local authorities. Hefin David AM: Okay. So, if there was local government reform, you would abolish the consortia. Kirsty Williams AM: I think if there was significant local government reform and we could demonstrate that those units had such a scale that they could perform the functions of regional consortia, then I think it would be inevitable that any education Minister would look to see whether there was an opportunity to change structures. But in the absence of that, Hefin, I have been absolutely convinced whilst doing this job that you need larger units to be able to carry out successful school improvement work, and I think it would be reckless to advocate the system going back to school improvement being organised in 22 different ways. Hefin David AM: Okay. Do you think that the work of the four consortia has been consistent and effective? Kirsty Williams AM: The school improvement services? Hefin David AM: The four consortia. Kirsty Williams AM: I think, as with individual local education authorities, there are some regional consortia services that have performed really highly--and that's not me saying that, that's Estyn, but gives us assurance around that--and there are others that need to improve. I think the consortia themselves would admit that they, since their establishment, have found new ways of working. Initially, they were very separate entities that did things their own way. Increasingly, over recent years, we have seen those consortia working together on a national approach, but delivered on a regional basis. So I think they themselves have evolved over time. But we are constantly looking for optimum delivery from those particular organisations, but as I said, I think it would be absolutely reckless to go back to a situation where school improvement services were being delivered individually on 22 different bases. Hefin David AM: Okay. I'm happy to accept that you've changed your opinion there; that's no problem at all. But with regard to the four consortia, and we'll take Education through Regional Working as an example, it does things differently to the other three. Is that a cause for concern, or do you think that's entirely appropriate? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, ERW does things differently, but then so does the Education Achievement Service. EAS is constituted in a different way to the Central South Consortium. What I'm interested in is not necessarily how they are constituted and organised, I'm interested in the effectiveness of that organisation to deliver for children and for teachers. ERW has got particular challenges, and we continue to work with those in ERW to address those, but increasingly, as I said, what we are seeing the regional consortia do is develop a national approach to school improvement services but deliver that on a regional basis so that there is greater consistency in terms of delivery. Hefin David AM: Are you happy that, within the ERW area, local authorities employ their own improvement advisers, rather than doing it in the way that the others do? Kirsty Williams AM: We have discussed this at length with them. My preference would be for school improvement officers to be employed in the centre, and we continue to have those discussions, but what's really important to understand is that the regional consortia are not a beast of the Government; they are a beast of the local authorities that have worked together to create a school improvement service that meets their needs. So we can't impose that solution, and we continue to discuss with ERW what is the optimal way, and they continue to discuss with their constituent local authorities about how that should be organised. Hefin David AM: Are you concerned that Neath Port Talbot have given notice that they want to withdraw from regional working? Kirsty Williams AM: I think it's really disappointing that Neath Port Talbot have published that notice. What's important for me is to understand--not for me, it will be important for Estyn. It will be really important for us to understand how Neath Port Talbot intend to support their schools and their teachers if they were to withdraw from ERW, especially at what is a very, very critical time. The regional consortia have a key role to play in supporting systems with the introduction of the curriculum. I would want to know from Neath Port Talbot how they are going to do that without being part of that organisation. And, of course, there's the added complexity that so much of our money is channelled through to schools via the regional consortia. So, I would want to understand from Neath Port Talbot how they're going to safeguard their schools and make sure that the children who are receiving their education in Neath Port Talbot are not disadvantaged if they were to follow through on that decision. Hefin David AM: Do you feel that it's your role to intervene in that area and instruct Neath Port Talbot and ERW as to how they should resolve this issue? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, as I said, I would be seeking assurances-- Hefin David AM: What does that mean, though,'seeking assurances'? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, Neath Port Talbot would need to demonstrate to me how they're going to address these issues. If they're not part of ERW and their schools and their children are not going to be in receipt of the support from ERW, as I said, especially at this critical time, how are they intending to do that? I haven't seen those plans, but if they were to push forward and follow through on the notice, I would want to see them and I suspect Estyn would want to see them also. Hefin David AM: Okay, just last issue on that: you're just waiting to see what Neath Port Talbot do next, then. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, we have written to Neath Port Talbot to ask them to demonstrate to us, if they were to pull out of ERW, how they're going to meet their functions. I have not heard back from them. Hefin David AM: Steve, did you want to say something? Steve Davies: Obviously--[Inaudible. ]--that point. We wrote to them last Friday, and we are awaiting their response now. Hefin David AM: Okay. So, that's where we are. Okay. There was the document in 2015--'National model for regional working'. Is that the current document? Are there plans to change or update it, or is that exactly where we stand? Kirsty Williams AM: So, that is the current model. Some work was undertaken in 2017 and 2018 to look to update that model and revise that model. Some specific recommendations were put forward about additional services that could be organised on a regional basis; primarily, that is a specialist human resources resource. We know that, because of austerity in some local authorities, HR departments have been really stretched. Education HR is a specialist service, it's not generic. It's often a service that--. I see that as part of a school improvement service. Support for governors also has been stretched within individual local authorities. So, a proposal was put forward to include specialist HR and governor support as part of the regional model. That was rejected by local government. Our local authorities did not want to include that in the regional model. However, I must say, having presented that evidence, some of our local authorities, even though there wasn't a national agreement to put that into the national model, have pooled their resources, and those services are being delivered and supported on a regional basis. So, for instance, the Education Achievement Service now provide specialist HR resource, and EAS and Central South provide governor support. So, although we weren't successful in persuading local government to adopt a new national model, local authorities in those areas saw the value of moving that way. Hefin David AM: So, with that in mind, and perhaps I'll put this to Steve Davies, everything the Minister just said, and also the line in the document--'The implementation of this model will change over time'-- is it time to go back to that document and review it from a procedural point of view? Steve Davies: I don't think it's necessarily timely to go back and have a complete review of it. But, certainly, we are in ongoing discussions with the Welsh Local Government Association, both in terms of work with local authorities, and the type of intervention in schools. So, we keep a constant watch as to which areas that we believe we could develop further. We are not currently intending to do a wholesale review of that. As the Minister touched on earlier, there is some work to get consistency across the current area, particularly, as we just mentioned, in relation to ERW work. So, it's getting a consistent approach at that level, and sharing the practice. I think what is emerging, as the Minister said, is that there are two regions who have already made this shift to pool services. I think the two other regions are seeing and will see the benefits of that, and instead of forcing it through, we'd expect that to evolve. But we're not, at this stage, looking to a wholesale review of the national model. Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin. Hefin David AM: And Professor Dylan Jones's strategic delivery group seems to have had quite a warm welcome in the sector. Is it fair to say that? Kirsty Williams AM: I believe so. I'm very grateful to Dylan for his hard work and his skill in chairing that group, and I think it's been welcomed by all, so that we can get that clarity and consistency about the roles and responsibilities of the individual partners and players in the middle tier. Hefin David AM: And when will the work be completed, and what will the outcomes be? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, the group is currently engaging with Steve and other officials on agreeing a plan, but also, crucially, that plan is there to support the successful implementation of the curriculum, so that we're very clear about the roles and responsibilities in the middle tier in this crucial phase following the publication. We have to move now from the publication into a relentless focus on implementation. The history of devolution is full of fantastic documents, and, shall I say, patchy implementation. The work that has gone into that curriculum is too important for implementation to be left to chance. It's too important. It's too good to be left to chance. So, everything now is a relentless focus on successful implementation. Hefin David AM: Yes, but I'm thinking that the strategic delivery is reviewing the role of the middle tier. So, you know, what do we expect to see from it, notwithstanding the kind of softly, softly approach that you've already talked about? Steve Davies: It was set up, actually, about 18 months ago--just under. It was set up to build collective efficacy, because what people out there are seeing is that there's a confusion of roles, in what the regions are doing, and it was building that collective efficacy so everyone was behind the wheel. So, they've been looking at who is doing what for the last 18 months, and exploring and making some changes themselves. It's not just what they do with Government or what they do with each other; it's just happened that it's timely, because one of the key bits of feedback we believe we will get from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development is we have had co-construction, we'd had collective effort, but we need to do more, particularly within the middle tier. This is not controlled by Government, it is arm's length from Government, and it's not their job to get it ready for the new curriculum--that's a key part of it. This group will have an ongoing role; it's not a task and finish group. It does feed back in to the Minister but there's no formal mechanism by which they have to report. Hefin David AM: Okay, that's very clear. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. I've got supplementaries from Suzy, then Sian. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Briefly, please. Suzy Davies AM: I think this is a really interesting evidence session. What I'm about to say, I say it even though I'm a big localist: it all seems to be heading in one direction of a national service. Is the strategic group even thinking in these terms, obviously building in local accountability? But it'll just make it so much easier in terms of accountability and consistency to monitor what the middle tier does, if it's a national service, like the National Adoption Service. Local delivery, national service--is it heading in that direction? Kirsty Williams AM: That's not the intention of setting the group up. As Steve just said, I receive feedback from Dylan, because I meet Dylan in this particular capacity on a planned basis. He is there to give me advice on the middle tier, and to give me advice on what he thinks Welsh Government needs to do. But I've not had that conversation with him about a national service. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Well, thank you for that. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: What I was going to raise has been answered already, that is that, from what I can see, the work that Professor Dylan Jones is doing has evolved somewhat. I felt that, originally, the idea was to look at the middle tier in terms of any kind of duplication that was happening, and where it was possible to tighten up the people going into schools from different directions. But it appears that it has evolved to be something that's much more than that, and that it is placing a focus on the curriculum and other aspects of the educational system. Is there a risk for them to lose focus in that sense? Kirsty Williams AM: No, not at all. I think they are very, very clear around establishing roles and responsibilities for each of the players and to be very clear about the expectations that each part of the middle tier can have of each other, as to what they can expect from their partners in the middle tier. And absolutely, it is about making sure that there isn't duplication, that people aren't second-guessing each other's work, and there are clear demarcations about who does what in the system, and, as I said, knowing that you can rely on your colleague in the middle tier to do the bit that they are responsible for. So, I don't think there's a question of it losing focus. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We've got a lot of areas to cover so we are going to have to pick up our pace a bit. The next questions are from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Thinking about you as a Minister trying to see what the long-term trends are with regard to raising standards and improving educational attainment, is that difficult, because the performance measures have changed, haven't they? We can't compare like-for-like now, because of the changes that have been made in the way that performance is measured. So, to begin with, is that a challenge, to see whether progress has been made? And secondly, what evidence do you as Minister use to look at the long-term trends? Kirsty Williams AM: The first thing to say, with regard to changes to performance measures--you're right that change to those does make it, in some cases, more difficult to look at trends over a period of time. But those changes are made for really good reasons. If we change a performance measure, it is done to ensure that it is in the best interests of learners. And I think the best interests of learners always trumps the ease of comparison. I understand that, for researchers and for opposition Members, even for Ministers, it would be simpler to have the same set of measures over a period of time. But if we know that those things are driving behaviours that are unhelpful to children, and not in the best interests of children, then we have to change them, even thought that then does create challenges in different areas. With regard to what do we look at, there are a number of ways that we gain data and look at data in the system: everything from the categorisation system we spoke of earlier, and trends in categorisation; we look at Estyn reports; we continue to look at examination results. But we're trying to develop a broader range of data and statistics that give us a whole picture of the education performance, rather than narrowing down on one simple indicator that tells you one thing but doesn't tell you everything. But I don't know, Steve, if there's anything further that you'd like to add. Steve Davies: It's going back to what the Member raised earlier, in terms of the range of things that you look at--things that can make a difference. So, when Estyn review schools, or we're looking to develop national frameworks for things like mental health and well-being, which look to the practice that enables raising standards, it's collecting that information, both at a national level, through the annual review of Estyn, as well as our engagement with regions and local authorities. So, it's looking at the evidence base that goes beyond, but impacts on data. And, inevitably, we will use the Programme for International Student Assessment, and any other external assessments that come through organisations like the OECD. And even where we've changed the performance measures, we still have, at national level, the ongoing data. So, if you looked at level 2 plus, we believe it is important that children get five good GCSEs--for higher education and for employment. So, we've not lost sight of those at a national level--we're not using them as a narrow set of performance measures for individual schools. Kirsty Williams AM: So, if we look at--level 2 plus is a good example. We know that a relentless focus on that single measure, as a way of judging the system, leads to a set of behaviours in schools. It narrows the focus onto a certain part of the cohort, it narrows the curriculum, when we know that children-- Sian Gwenllian AM: I'm not challenging the fact that you've changed the performance measures--I understand that, and having a broader way of looking is better in the long run. I'm just saying, because there's been this change, it makes it more of a challenge--whilst accepting why you've made the changes, but it does present more of a challenge, presumably, because you have to look at more indicators, and take evidence from different places. But I take it that you're confident that the trajectory is going in the right way. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, I think we are making improvements. But you're right: it does make it more challenging. But those changes are being made for the right reasons, as I said, whether that be at level 2 plus. Look at English literature. I understand why perhaps a performance measure around English was introduced, but the effect of that was that significant numbers of children--and, it must be said, usually children who are entitled to free school meals--were suddenly not sitting English literature GCSE. We've changed that performance measure, and guess what? Last year, we saw a significant increase in the number of children that were sitting English literature GCSE. For standards of literacy and oracy, I think studying literature is really, really important, before we even get into the joy of introducing children to the written word and the love of reading. So, we make changes. Yes, it causes challenges, but we're making those changes because we believe that they are in the best interest of children, and that has to trump ease of comparison. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Why have you decided to ask the consortia, Estyn and so on not to report on local data or regional level data? How do we then come to conclusions about what is working if it isn't presented on a local authority and regional basis? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think the thing to say about the communications from Welsh Government, Estyn, and the WLGA is it's not about not communicating the data, it's about challenging people on how that data should be used. So, the data is still available, but it's a challenge to them about how to use that data. So, for instance, when we're presenting data that compares local authority to local authority, you could have a local authority that says,'There we go, I'm above the national average. I don't need to worry about the education in my local authority, because I'm above the average, or I'm better than my neighbour.'That doesn't necessarily mean that everything is right in your local education authority. Perhaps your children should be doing even better than what you're presented with. So, actually, it's not about hiding data; it's about how you use the data appropriately. And sometimes, how we were presenting data in the past was lulling some people into a false sense of security about the performance of their system. So, it's about how you use data, and that's what the communication from Welsh Government and the WLGA and Estyn was about: think very carefully about this data and what it's telling you about your system, and don't be lulled into a false sense of security that you may be doing brilliantly. Or, perhaps, looking at your data, you may think,'Oh, my goodness me, we're not doing very well at all', but, actually, more careful consideration of that might show that your school's impact on those children is really, really a positive one. So, you've got to use that data in the context. So, it's not about less data. If anything, it's about more data and, crucially for me, it's about more intelligent use and interrogation of that data, about truly what it's telling you about your system. Sian Gwenllian AM: But again, the Welsh Government--. You have continued to publish the local and regional level data. So, doesn't that contradict what you've been telling the consortia and everyone else? Kirsty Williams AM: No, not at all. As I said, we're not in the business of trying to hide data--I believe absolutely in full transparency. And in terms of level 2 data, I think I'm not moving away from the point that I think it's really important that more and more children get five really good GCSEs. I think it's important for their life chances. It is about how that data is used, not about hiding data or making that data not available. Steve Davies: Can I, very briefly--? We didn't just send a letter out collectively. We've now carried out training jointly with WLGA and Estyn on how to use that data. So, it's not just looking where your LA is; it's also not looking at whether your school's better than average for the authority. And it is well received, and it should broaden the approach of scrutiny committees to beyond what historically was, if I'm honest, looking at the league table for their authority or looking at the league table of local authorities. It's not that they shouldn't be looking at that, but they need to dig much, much deeper underneath it. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. We're going to go on now to Suzy. I'm going to appeal for brief questions and brief answers so that we can cover the rest of the questions. Suzy Davies AM: I'll shorten these questions, okay. We know why you got rid of the old measures. We've got interim measures now. What are they telling you about the success you've had in trying to avoid the bad behaviour? Short answers. Kirsty Williams AM: It's impossible. [Laughter. ] I think it's inevitable: whatever kind of measures we put in place, people will look to maximise their success in those measures, and I don't think we'll ever come up with a system where those measures are absolutely perfect. What's really important to me is that we're really, really, really challenging schools to look at the performance of all of their children, rather than just at a very, very narrow cohort around those C/D boundaries, which we knew was detrimental, potentially, to more able and talented children and really pushing those Bs to As and those As to A*s, and children for whom actually just getting in to school on a daily basis is an achievement, and the school has done well to provide that. So, our new capped 9 makes sure that there is breadth across a range of subjects, rather than just focusing on a narrower and narrower bunch of subject opportunities for children, and our new third-third-third system enables schools to really look at their performance. So if their capped 9 score is high, what's driving that? Is it because the bottom third of the cohort is doing really well, and the impact on those children is above and beyond what could be expected, but actually, you're not doing very well for your more able and talented; you're not pushing them on? Alternatively, maybe your capped 9 score is because your MAT children are doing incredibly well, but actually, you're not really making the progress for the middle tier of those children. It allows us to have a greater focus on the performance of our FSM children--where they really are within that system. So, it's a much more granular--. And crucially for me, it looks at the impact for every child, because every child has to matter in the system, and what we had before was a narrowing of curriculum choice and a narrowing on a certain cohort of children. Suzy Davies AM: So are the permanent measures likely to be pretty similar to what you've got now? Because the research--I don't know if the research is complete yet. When will you be publishing the new permanent evaluation? Kirsty Williams AM: Sue, you're right: they're interim measures at the moment, and we will need to make sure that the performance measures are aligned to the new curriculum. That, potentially, of course--. Because Wales's review of qualifications potentially has an impact on what those finally will look like, so that work is ongoing at the moment, and unless Steve can tell me off the top of his head when we expect that to be completed by, I will send you a note. But they're interim at the moment, because we need to align them to the new curriculum. Suzy Davies AM: I think we understand that. [Inaudible. ]--date. Steve Davies: No, no. This is not a quick fix. This is a two to three-year research base. The new qualifications for the new curriculum will not start until 2025. They have to be in place for 2022. There's a three-year roll on. I would expect the broad structure of the interim measures to continue over that time. There will be some tweaks for consistency. It's what's wrapped around those interim measures that I touched on earlier: the other evidence that we bring to bear about the effectiveness of a school, but we do want to say to schools that on the whole, broadly speaking, the interim measures will carry on for two, three years. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, and the reason I asked that is right at the beginning of this session, the Minister said to the Chair that this PS100 million that's going into school improvements will be going into things that work. We need some evidence that the interim measures are going to work as well, so when are they going to be evaluated? Steve Davies: Well, we've only just used them for one year. Suzy Davies AM: That's what I'm asking you. Steve Davies: We've signalled that they're only going to be in place for three years. We are carrying out our own review of the impact of those and that's been built in, but I expect the OECD report--because it is an extensive report--to give us feedback on how those things are working now, and some steer, as they did with the last report, as to the direction we would want to go into. Kirsty Williams AM: And what I'm also interested in is those performance management measures around schools. Yes, they're about outcomes for children, but actually are about a broader suite of behaviours within that school, so, yes, qualifications and grades are an important part of a performance measure, but actually, I have other expectations of schools, above and beyond simply qualifications. And so, we would want our permanent set of performance measures to look at a wider set of behaviours within a school, and I think because--. Exams are important--of course they are, qualifications are important--but the way in which those schools achieve those results are also important. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Would you anticipate that including well-being, then? Suzy Davies AM: In a whole-school approach. Kirsty Williams AM: I absolutely--and we need to find a way of how we can truly measure that. Sometimes, children's well-being is influenced by lots of things outside the control of a school. So, I don't want schools to be held accountable for things that they have no control over, because of the circumstances in which a child may be living. But, absolutely: well-being and how the culture of the school addresses well-being is really important to me. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Suzy. Move on to PISA, please. Suzy Davies AM: How useful is PISA for you in helping school improvement? I know that it's not always the thing that you enjoy watching or looking out for. But, genuinely, how useful is it? Kirsty Williams AM: It is one of a range of tools that we need to look at. Sian, quite rightly, talked about consistency. PISA is one thing where there is a level of consistency, so it will continue to be, I think, an important part of how we test how our system is doing. Suzy Davies AM: We know that you are a little bit encouraged, but we are not out of the woods yet. You mentioned this in Plenary when we talked about PISA. How confident are you that we are on track for meeting these targets that were set before your time, or do you think that having those targets is helpful? Is it setting up aspirations that are incapable of being met within a period of time? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, those long-term targets of a score around 500 are part of'Our National Mission', and we have to keep the pressure on to strive. They are testing, but we have to keep the pressure on to strive to reach them. In some cases, I can be quite encouraged. If we look at reading scores for girls, we are almost there, but that just demonstrates what a journey we've got with our boys to address. For me, one of the ways in which we will reach those targets and achieve them is further progress on our more able and talented children. Although we are now performing at an OECD average, I will be the first person to admit that, although we have seen an improvement in the higher level skills of our more able and talented children, we do not perform at an OECD average with regard to those level 6 and level 5 scores. Suzy Davies AM: Even within the UK, really, we are quite far behind. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes. So, I think that's where we really need to push on. That's one of the reasons why we have introduced a more able and talented budget to support that, and our Seren programme, which is delivering fantastic results post-16. That's why we're introducing the principles of Seren earlier into children's careers, bringing it down from year 9 upwards, to be able to drive improvements. So, I think that that's the area that we are particularly keen to work on: making sure that more of our children perform at the OECD average at level 5 and level 6. Clearly, we've got more work to do on reading. We are working with southern Ireland, who have consistently done well with reading scores, to look to see what lessons we can learn to press on with there with reading. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. My final question on this. You recognise it as a priority, particularly for boys. Does that mean that the focus will then drift slightly from maths, where there has been some success; and drift from science, where the encouragement of more people to take GCSE science has reduced the number of high-level passes? Kirsty Williams AM: First, we have to have a system that is capable of doing all of those of things at the same time. We can't accept a system that says,'Well, we can do a bit over here, but that means we have to--.'We have to have a system, Suzy, that can drive improvements at all levels. That's my expectation. Suzy Davies AM: The balloon needs to be bigger not just squeezing it at one end. Kirsty Williams AM: Absolutely, yes. That's my expectation of this system. You have to deliver across all of these. We have seen some progress. As I've said, it's far from perfect, and we've got more work to do, but we have to deliver across all three domains, as we did last time. And I'm not going to make any apologies for changing the performance indicators around science. It was a travesty that there were children who never had the opportunity to sit a science GCSE. We don't have to make assumptions about the nature of many, many, many of those children. We have seen a significant increase in the number of children who are having the opportunity to sit GCSE science and who are passing GCSE science. So, I'm not going to make any apologies about that. One of the reasons that I suspect we have ended up with poor science scores is because of the previous policy around science entries and science qualifications. Again, one of the reasons that we have changed it isn't just solely because we need to do better in PISA, but I think that by changing it, we will see an impact on PISA. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you for that. Lynne Neagle AM: The final set of questions is from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: I just want to discuss an issue that I know is important to you, namely closing the attainment gap between pupils who are eligible for free school meals and those who are not eligible for free school meals. Unfortunately, the problem persists, doesn't it? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes. We are not where we need to be in terms of the performance, not only of our children on free school meals, but the performance of our looked-after children, and the performance of some children from some ethnic minority groups. So, we will continue to look to support those learners in a variety of ways, again looking to amend our practice on the basis of evidence that is given to us from our experts who are there to advise us. There is clearly more that we need to do. There has been some progress in some areas, but it is not where I would want it to be. Sian Gwenllian AM: But, this is despite the fact that there is PS475 million that has been invested in the pupil development grant, for this exact purpose of closing the attainment gap. But, the problem persists, and in some places, it's deteriorating. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think that, as I said, I am not shying away from any assumption or declaration that we need to do better. But, I do think that we need to acknowledge where progress has been made. If we go back to look at what PISA has said about our performance, the PISA results show that pupils in Wales are relatively more able to overcome the disadvantage of their background than is the average in OECD countries. So, our children are doing better in that, and that gives me encouragement. That's not me saying that; that's there. If we look at pupils who are eligible for free school meals, they do score below their better-off counterparts in PISA by some 34 points. The gap in England is 40 points. So, again, that gap is smaller here in Wales. If we look at basic levels of qualifications, back in--. It's difficult to make comparisons because of all the reasons we have talked about, but if we look back to 2006 and we look at the very basic level of qualifications, which is a level 1 qualification, we have seen a jump from 9. 4 per cent of children in 2006 achieving a level 1 qualification to over 18 per cent. So, there is progress. There is evidence that the resources that we are spending are making a difference. But, clearly, we are not where we would want to be. That's why we will continue to focus those resources on those children, where we need it. But, we need to do that earlier. Sticking plasters in years 10 and 11 aren't going to cut it. We need to get this right for those children, the moment that they come into a nursery and the moment that they start their formal education at the age of 5. That's how we are going to make the difference. Providing catch-up, of course, we need to do for those kids; we can't throw those year 10s and year 11s to the wind. We have to support those children. But, we will see real improvement when we get in there earlier. Sian Gwenllian AM: But I'm sure that that is a disappointment to you, because it has been a personal priority for you as well. In terms of minority ethnic learners, while there are some groups within that category who are achieving, there is underachievement happening here as well, isn't there? It's not consistent across the minority ethnic group. Is that something that you will be focusing upon? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, and that's why we have committed to maintaining a ring-fenced grant to local authorities of some PS10 million, to support education of our minority ethnic children. But, again, you are right, you are absolutely right, Sian. We need a much more sophisticated conversation about what is really going on in attainment across minority ethnic groups so that we can best target that resource and have a conversation about what the differences are. You are absolutely correct: there is a real mixed picture. If we look at black Welsh girls entitled to free school meals, they perform almost at the national average for all children--not FSM children; the national average for all children. Black Welsh boys don't, but neither do white Welsh boys. So, there is a really complex picture here, and I really welcome a debate about acknowledging the various levels of performance of BAME children, and where the gaps in performance lie. You are quite right: it is a complex picture in the system. I'm committed to continuing to support educational opportunities, and that's why have ring-fenced the minority ethnic achievement grant. There are some interesting data there. Some children are doing very, very well; others, we need to concentrate on. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian, this will need to be the last question, I'm afraid. Sian Gwenllian AM: Sorry? Lynne Neagle AM: This is going to have to be the last question. Sian Gwenllian AM: The last question. Lynne Neagle AM: Yes. Sian Gwenllian AM: Fine. In terms of looked-after children, which is one of the groups where attainment isn't where we would like it to be, there was some improvement in 2016 at key stage 4, but it has been disappointing. Do we know what's been happening in 2019? Kirsty Williams AM: The 2019 data will be published next month, and there has been significant activity. You are right: in recent years, the data have been poor and not where we would want it to be. That's why we have had a reformed approach to PDG LAC; the employment of PDG LAC co-ordinators across the regions. We've identified new resource in the new financial year to test new approaches, so, for instance, virtual school approaches, where we know, in other systems, that has worked. But, we expect the next set of data around the performance of this particular group of learners in March. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay, and you hope to see progress. Kirsty Williams AM: I don't want to speculate, but I hope so. Sian Gwenllian AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you very much. We have come to the end of our time, so can I thank you, Minister, and your official for attending this morning? We have had a wide-ranging and very detailed discussion that will be very useful for the committee. As usual, you will be sent a transcript following the meeting to check for accuracy, but thank you again, both of you, for your attendance this morning. Diolch yn fawr. Okay. Item 3 is papers to note. Paper to note 1 is a letter from ERW providing additional information following the evidence session on 16 January. Paper to note 2 is a letter from Central South Consortium, similarly providing additional information following the evidence session. Paper to note 3 is a letter from the Noah's Ark Children's Hospital for Wales regarding children's rights in Wales, following up on some additional information there. Paper to note 4 is a letter from Qualifications Wales, providing additional information following the annual report scrutiny session in January. Item 4, then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting? Are Members content? Thank you.

Kirsty believed that it was really important for them to understand how Neath Port Talbot intended to support their schools and their teachers if they were to withdraw from ERW, especially at what was a critical time. They wanted to know from Neath Port Talbot how they were going to do that without being part of the organization. Additionally, Kirsty was curious about how they were going to safeguard their schools and make sure that the children who were receiving their education in Neath Port Talbot were not disadvantaged if they were to follow through on that decision.

tr-sq-1235

tr-sq-1235_0

What's their role in intervening Neath Port Talbot and ERW about addressing the issue of safeguarding their schools? Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received apologies for absence from Janet Finch-Saunders, and also from Dawn Bowden, and I'd like to welcome Huw Irranca-Davies, who is substituting for Dawn Bowden. Can I ask Members if there are any declarations of interest, please? No. Okay. We'll move on, then, to our evidence session for our inquiry on school improvement and raising standards. I'd like to welcome Kirsty Williams AM, Minister for Education, and Steve Davies, director of education. Thank you both for attending and for your detailed paper in advance of the meeting. We've got a lot of ground to cover, so we'll go straight into questions, if that's okay. If I can just start by asking you: to what extent is the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development still involved in the Welsh Government's school improvement journey? Kirsty Williams AM: First of all, can I thank the committee for their invitation this morning, and their interest in this particular area? As you will be aware, on coming into office, the director and I agreed to ask the OECD to do a rapid review of the state of Welsh education at the beginning of this Assembly term. They did that, and the feedback from that work informed the publication and content of the national mission. I was very clear in the national mission that I would invite the OECD back to review our progress against that mission, and that has happened in the tail end of last year, and the OECD will publish their latest report on Welsh education next month now, in March. So, the expectation is that the report will be published on 23 March, and my intention is to make a statement to the Chamber on 24 March. The nature of that review is part of our ongoing development of self-evaluation. So, we talk a lot about self-evaluation in the school system. Actually, the continuing relationship with OECD is about self-evaluation of the entirety of the system and Welsh Government. We don't want to accept our own orthodoxy and just be in a bubble where we are constantly listening to ourselves and those people who might want to agree with us or tell us what we want to hear. So, the OECD is our best attempt of having some external verification of where we are. That's a risk for Ministers and for Government, because we want them to give an honest evaluation of where we are, but that's a really important tool for me, to ensure that we're constantly testing ourselves. The nature of that review is that the OECD were able to talk to whoever they felt it was important to talk to, so that included practitioners on the ground, elements of the middle tier, as well as Welsh Government. And I know, Chair--I hope you'll be pleased to hear this--that the reports of this committee have formed parts of their review, looking at how the Senedd itself has contributed to and has held the Government to account. So, as I said, we expect our report to be published towards the end of March. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you, Minister. Can I ask about the powers under the School Standards and Organisation (Wales) Act 2013, to ask you to tell us about the use of those powers either by Welsh Government or by local authorities, and how effective you feel that legislation has been? Kirsty Williams AM: Okay. Well, as you'll be aware, local authorities have quite extensive powers of intervention in schools if they feel that is necessary. If I'm honest, I think there's a mixed picture, with some local authorities using those powers not on a regular basis, but obviously demonstrating a willingness to use those powers. There are other local authorities who don't seem to have used them. Since that legislation came into being, there have been a number of reasons, because of course a local authority has to give a reason for using those powers of intervention. They usually focus on standards, but sometimes they focus on a breakdown in governance arrangements, perhaps, or a failure or a breakdown in financial management. So, sometimes the budgetary issues trigger an intervention power. And the types of interventions that have been used have included, in some cases, appointing additional governors to governing bodies, or suspending a school's delegated budget so the local authority takes on, then, financial control of that particular school, or sometimes applying to the Welsh Government to entirely replace a governing body and establish an intervention board. So, if I can give you an example of where that's been used and has been successful, in Flintshire. They applied to Welsh Government for two interim executive boards, in Sir Richard Gwyn Catholic High School and in Ysgol Trefonnen. They applied to us. Those governing bodies were dissolved. The IEBs were put in place and both of those schools, which had been in special measures, moved quite rapidly, actually, out of special measures. Perhaps the most recent example of this is one that the Chair will know very well in her own constituency of Torfaen, in Cwmbran High School, where Torfaen has intervened in that case. The Welsh Government has not used those powers to date. My expectation always is that local authorities should be the first port of call, and I would encourage--and we always encourage--local authorities to take a proactive approach to intervention and to use those powers. But it's my belief that it is they who are best placed initially to do that. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you, Minister. Can I ask, then, about the national evaluation and improvement resource and how significant a role that will play in the raising of school standards, and how you feel it's evolved since it was first conceived? Kirsty Williams AM: So, this brings us back to the principle of self-evaluation and something, if we're honest, we've not been very good at. If you look at a number of chief inspectors'reports into the Welsh education system, self-evaluation has always been identified as something that is missing or underdeveloped in our system to date, hence, then, the work to establish not a new approach, but a more robust approach to self-evaluation. We've done that in conjunction, again, with the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. It's really important, throughout the entirety of our reform journey that that's done in co-construction, because we want this resource to be usable in schools. So, it's all very well having a conceptual idea and people outside the classroom working on it, but if it's of no practical use to a school leadership team, then we won't see the impact. So, it's--. We're in phase 2 at the moment, where we're doing--. So, the initial resource has been developed by the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. We're in the testing phase at the moment and having it evaluated itself, with a view to introducing that resource across the system at the start of the new academic year, in September 2020. I truly believe that, if we're to make progress in Welsh education, we have to develop the skills within our system to have robust self-evaluation. This resource gives us continuity of approach right the way across Wales. So, it's not left to an individual school to come up with a system; it's right the way across the system. My hope would be that those principles could then be applied to local education authorities, to regional school improvement services and Welsh Government as part of a whole-system approach to self-evaluation. I don't know if there's anything more you want to add, Steve. Steve Davies: Just to add that the other critical partners are Estyn themselves. Kirsty Williams AM: Oh, yes, sorry. Steve Davies: So, they have played a critical role and, as we know, as the Minister has said in the past, she may introduce policy and practice, but if Estyn are part of it then schools, usually, because they recognise that it will be part of the inspection process--it gives it greater push and support around it. So, they've been key players within it. Kirsty Williams AM: And I think, if I just say as well, that the external perception of what that's about is really important. It's not a test of school readiness for reform, it is a genuine attempt for a school to evaluate their strengths, their weaknesses and where they need to go next. It's not an Estyn checklist. And because of the word'toolkit'--the feedback was that it gave the impression of a checklist,'Just do this and check list'. So, we're actually going to change the name of that resource. So, it'll be called the national evaluation and improvement resource, rather than the toolkit, because, as I said, the feedback was that'toolkit'gave the impression of a checklist exercise, and it's got to be about more than that if it's going to be meaningful. So, it'll be changed to an'improvement resource'. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Before I bring Suzy in, can I just welcome Sian Gwenllian, who is joining us via video-conference in north Wales? Morning, Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Good morning. Can you hear me? Lynne Neagle AM: We can, yes. We can hear you very nicely, thank you. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Yes. Only a very quick one. It's about the development of the-- Kirsty Williams AM: The resource. Suzy Davies AM: Yes, the resource, thank you--about whether there were any conflicting ideas in the process of development that made it quite difficult to zone in on something that school leadership teams, in particular, could rely on. Were there differences of opinion on what this should look like? Kirsty Williams AM: Not that I'm aware of from the practitioners that I've spoken to who have been part of that. So, for instance, Suzy, you will know the very small school of Gladestry. The head of Gladestry has been involved in this process, and she said that she'd really enjoyed the process of working alongside Estyn and the OECD as a school leader to be able to shape it. But I'm not aware that there's been conflict in that process. Suzy Davies AM: I'm not suggesting that there has been; I'm just interested as to how it had worked, that's all. Steve Davies: Chair, I think, inevitably, when you bring stakeholders together, they're not going to be in total agreement as to how it's going to work, and I think initially one of the challenges was having Estyn there as part of the facilitation group. There are always some concerns that, actually, it's coming from a to inspect, oral, judgmental tick box. So, we had some early day challenges where we had to convince--and, ultimately, Estyn convinced them--that they were there to help and support as opposed to to inspect, and that the model that was developed, as the Minister said, was not going to be a tick box,'You are good at this part of self-evaluation', it was to build the skillsets up. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. So, it's got their full confidence. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, and I think again, also, what--. You know, four years into the job, what I've reflected on as well is there is this sometimes a feeling out there that the Minister says all the right stuff, but you're not actually going to do it, so, when you talk about a new approach to doing things, you're not actually serious about it. So, trying to build that confidence that we are serious about developing a new system around self-improvement, which is different from accountability--sometimes, the practitioners are like,'Oh, yes, we've heard it all before but it never actually happens.'And I think that's been a part of the constant--not pressure, but the responsibility on Welsh Government is in following through. So, we said that we were going to do this in the national mission, and we are going to do it. I'm really proud that there or thereabouts, a few months either way, we've actually kept to the timetable as outlined in the national mission, and that helps build confidence within the sector that we are committed to that programme and we're going to do what we say we're going to do. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: And a final question from me: how effective do you think the investment in school standards has been in this Assembly term, as opposed to the approach taken in the last Assembly term, where there was the protection put in place for core school budgets? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think, first of all, it's important that, whilst this additional resource is specifically targeted at school standards, that is only a part of a much wider education budget, a budget that--you know--is incredibly complex. And so it is really challenging to be able to draw straight lines--you know,'We did this and it's resulted in that'--given that we're looking at the entirety of school funding here. What's been really important is that, if you drill down into what that money has been spent on, 50 per cent of it has been directed towards professional learning in one form or another to support our teaching professionals. And that's been really important to me. I've said it time and time again: an education system cannot exceed the quality of the people who stand in front of our children day in, day out to work with them and teach them. Therefore, that investment in staff and investment in the professional learning of our staff and support for them I think is making a difference already but, importantly, will continue to make a difference. But I think it is really challenging to be able to say,'Well, we spent this bit of money and it definitely led to that', because it's such a complex picture. But that money, the way it's been spent, has been driven by evidence. And, again, what we do know from international best practice, what do we know that works in driving up standards, and then how can we align the money that we've got to supporting that? And, as I said, 50 per cent of that money has gone directly to simply supporting the professional learning of those who work with our children. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you very much. We're going to talk now a bit about schools causing concern with questions from Huw Irranca-Davies. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Thank you, Chair. If I can, just first of all, zoom in on the way in which we actually decide which schools need what support. So, one of the interesting questions for us is how do we use the different systems out there. So, we've got the school categorisation system, which we're familiar with. We've also got Estyn inspection reports, then we've got other intelligence, including local intelligence on the ground. How do you decide from that? How is it decided what schools need support, need challenge? How do we do that? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, you're right: what we have is a variety of ways in which we can identify schools that need support, or need to be challenged on their practice. But it's important not to confuse them either. So, our primary route to doing this is our school categorisation system. Sometimes, and perhaps this is inevitable--. That system is primarily there as a triage system around identifying where our resource should be spent. So, our school improvement service--it's a risk-based approach, so they can evaluate where they need to put their time, effort and resource. Sometimes, it's used by other people for other things, but that is not its primary purpose; its primary purpose there is not one of accountability, it is one of identifying risk and aligning that then to the support that is available. Estyn--now that is part of that accountability system. That is our method of holding schools and their governing bodies to account for their practice and for the work that they do. Both systems, of course, are evolving. So, how we do categorisation has changed over a period of time. The elements that go into making that judgment around the levels of support have changed, and, of course, the Estyn inspection regime is also changing. At the moment, schools are only inspected once every seven years. We're moving to a system where Estyn will be more regularly in schools. So, they are two systems, but they are different and they look at different things. But our categorisation system is how we look for those ways of identifying support for schools. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: And you've made, with feedback over the last few years, adjustments to the way that the categorisation system works. Are you content with where it is now, or do you see more adjustments being made? Have you got things in front of you that you're getting feedback on saying'Well, we need to tweak this again a little bit'? Kirsty Williams AM: So, that system has evolved over time. So, when it started, it was just a tool around secondary schools. Now, it covers the breadth of schools. Initially, on coming into office, when I first came in, it was purely driven by data, and it was also done in quartiles. So, there was a certain number of schools that had to be in the bottom, which drove practitioners mad. They were like'Ah, every year, there's going to be some of us that have to be in the bottom quartile', because of the way in which it was arranged, which seemed very unfair to them. So, we've changed that. It's not just purely driven on data now; there are other judgments--the professional judgments of our challenge advisers are taken into account. And I would expect that situation to continue to evolve to align itself to our curriculum reform, and our changes in self-evaluation. So, it's not a fixed point. I expect that that system will continue to evolve and change, so that it complements and assists in the reform journey as other parts of the system change. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Thanks for that. I think, for any impartial reader of the way that the trends have been going on this, there is some good news within that, in that, certainly, those schools that might have been identified as have been okay but coasting along, seem to be moving up the categories, although we still do have that--. Well, it's what the system is there to do, it's to identify those schools that do need that additional support. And I like your analogy of a triage system--'You're fit; keep on doing what you're doing and do it well; you need more support, we'll put the support in.'But, can I turn to those schools that are causing significant concern, and how we identify them? The Estyn chief inspector's conclusions at the end of the 2017-18 report that these schools are not being identified early enough--there's a need to do something urgently about these concerns, particularly in secondary schools. Have we addressed that? Are you content that we've addressed that concern? Was he right? Kirsty Williams AM: No, the chief inspector is absolutely right--absolutely right. I've got no beef with that statement at all. In some ways, when a school goes into special measures, in a way, that's a failure of the system, because that should have been identified sooner. So I've got no beef, as I said, with the chief inspector saying that. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: So just to ask, bearing in mind the earlier discussion we were having, how is it that we don't identify those schools? Kirsty Williams AM: That's it--you're quite right. Undoubtedly, what categorisation has done is led to a greater understanding, I think, on behalf of local education authorities'and school improvement services'knowledge about their schools. I think knowledge around schools is greatly enhanced by that process. But we are not there yet in terms of necessarily, then, moving those schools more quickly, once they've been identified as needing the highest level of support to see improvement. And secondary schools is a particular, particular challenge. So you will have seen from the last publication of categorisation data that our primary sector continues to improve--more and more and more of our primary schools are in a green rating, which is very satisfying to me. But we have got more of an issue with secondary schools, and we have a particular issue with the same schools being identified in that level of categorisation. So even though we've identified them as needing that extra help, they are not moving at pace away from that system. So there are two things that we are doing at the moment. The first is, we are, again, looking at different sets of data that can give us even earlier warning systems that things are going wrong in a school--and perhaps Steve will explain later. For instance, staff sickness, and carefully monitoring staff sickness, because there is a direct correlation between high levels of staff sickness in a school and what is going on in the school. And Steve can explain some of this work later. But we're piloting a new approach to those schools that are causing concern. Each local authority has been asked to identify two of their high schools that they are particularly worried about. And we have a new multi-agency approach, working with those schools to try and move them more forward. So it's two from each region, a multi-agency panel, working with the school. And that multi-agency panel includes the school itself, the local authority, the regional consortia school improvement staff, Estyn and Welsh Government--as a multi-agency panel to support improvement in that school. So, for instance, what would normally happen, Estyn would come in, Estyn would make a judgment on the school--requiring special measures or urgent improvement--and Estyn would go away. They'd go away for six months, and then they'd come back in six months, and they'd make another judgment,'No, still not good enough', and disappear for six months. We're saying--Estyn and the Welsh Government have agreed that's not the best approach; Estyn need to be part of the solution, rather than just coming and making a judgment. The initial feedback from this trial is very, very positive. Actually, we've had local authorities coming to us and saying,'Can we put more schools in? Rather than just having two of our high schools, can we engage more in this project and this pilot?'It's being evaluated by Cardiff Metropolitan University and Swansea University, so we're having some academic overview to see, actually, does this approach work, can we evidence it--that it actually makes a difference? And it's actually--I'd like to claim all the credit for it, but it's actually not dissimilar to something that's happening in Scotland as well. But we knew that carrying on doing the same old thing clearly wasn't moving these schools, we needed a new approach, and this is what we're doing at the moment. So it's relatively new, but the initial feedback is positive. Steve, I don't know-- Steve Davies: I think your important point is about,'What about the schools that are sliding in that direction?'And it's bringing together what we know from Estyn, but also, critically, local authorities have knowledge of their schools, and so do consortia. We've got to be better at bringing those together. So, the Minister gave the example of staff sickness--not always a trigger, but it's one of those. If you look at movement of pupils out of a school, you can look at complaints, you can look at, actually, emerging increased use of HR resources that a school pulls on a local authority. None of these have been pushed up into the public domain, but they're important antennae. The point the Minister made about Estyn as well is, historically, when they go into special measures, Estyn, at the end of that week, call in, historically, either the region or the local authority, they will feed back to one of them, and then they go away. So, they are staying with it. So, we are brining together the knowledge. But, as the Minister said, we want to keep a very clear distinction between the accountability and the transparency to the public, to parents, with the very detailed collective work of that multi-agency group to actually make that difference over time. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Okay. So, does that--. I'd love to go further, but time is against us. Does that deal with the issue of the schools that have been identified in those categories of requiring significant improvement and requiring special measures? Are those the ones that will be identified now, or is that above and beyond that again? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, those are the ones that are primarily at the forefront of our minds, but this way of sharing data better, to step in earlier, is part of our attempt to address what the chief inspector says about stepping in early--not waiting until a school gets into special measures and a formal judgment from Estyn of that, but actually using that intelligence to get support in there earlier. The three elements that that multi-agency approach look at are: what are the fundamentals that need addressing in this school? What is the capacity of the school itself to be able to address those fundamentals? And, what extra support needs to go into that senior management team and the governing body to get those fundamentals addressed? And actually, what does sustainable improvement look like? Because, again, one of the issues, sometimes, that happens is, a school goes into a category with Estyn, there's a big push and a big,'We must do something'and the school comes out, but actually, that improvement is not sustainable. It's the low-hanging fruit; it's the easy wins that have been achieved, but actually, perhaps some of the fundamental challenges underlying in that school haven't been addressed in that process. So, this is about what will sustainable improvement look like in six months, what's it going to look like in 12 months and what's it going to look like in 18 months. So, actually, a more strategic, longer term approach to real change in a school rather than, perhaps, some of the easy-to-fix items that make a school as if it's doing better, but we really haven't tackled some of the underlying problems that make that school vulnerable to slipping back. Does that make sense? Lynne Neagle AM: I've got a couple of supplementaries on--. Sorry? Kirsty Williams AM: Does that make sense? Lynne Neagle AM: Yes. We've got a couple of supplementaries on this, first from Suzy and then from Sian. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you for that, Chair. Obviously, I'm pleased to hear that this work is being done, but I'm wondering--. What strikes me, in the recent past, at least, particularly as we've got the usual suspects in this category--. I've got to ask myself why it is that councils have been reluctant, perhaps, to step in with these schools earlier, particularly as they've got consortia or middle-tier support as well. Has there been a deficit in that space that has meant that councils don't feel equipped to step in? I just don't really get it why they've been reluctant to step in so far. If they've been nervous about doing it, because they don't feel that they've got the tools to do it, then I think that's pretty important, because as you were saying, we were talking about fundamentals; surely, councils have been able to deal with fundamentals, and more importantly, consortia up until now. Because, obviously, we're asking these players to give us evidence at some point, so perhaps I'd like to challenge them on how come we're here now. Kirsty Williams AM: And rightly so. Suzy Davies AM: I'm not laying this at your door. Kirsty Williams AM: And rightly so. I guess each local authority will have an explanation for each individual school, I suspect. What's crucial to me is that we have to--. I see our job as corralling the collective effort, and I think, for too long in the system, there has been a lack of co-ordination. So, this is about bringing and corralling a collective effort to address this, going forward, in more sustainable way. And I think it does come back to this issue around self-evaluation and a willingness to be open, honest and upfront about some of the challenges that we've got. It's not easy, is it? It's not easy to accept or to acknowledge sometimes when things are-- Suzy Davies AM: That they don't know how to do this. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, that they're going badly, or perhaps they don't know exactly how to make the difference. So this approach, as I said, is a new way of trying to coral that collective effort across the board. But, I don't know if Steve--because you've done other roles in the system, so perhaps you've got a different insight. Steve Davies: I think you're right. The variation across the country, across local authorities--. There are some local authorities that we've worked with and we identify have taken the appropriate action. There are others that we're working with, and yes, at its best, it's done as a joint exercise where they use their regional school improvement service to help in the identification that there is a need for this. They take advice as to what the action is, whether it is, as the Minister said, in the more significant areas, a board, or whether a warning notice comes in terms of standards or finance. So, we're working with them and we're working with the Welsh Local Government Association to share that practice. An example of that work is: we have done a development training session for cabinet members for education, and scrutiny leads for education across Wales, and all 22 local authorities came to that and engaged with that. That was partly about self-improvement, but it was also about where significant issues arise, you have to constructively confront them. And that comes with what the region knows, and increasingly, we're looking to have it consistently across 22 local authorities, so they are collecting all the additional data that we referred to earlier, so they can legitimately hold a mirror up and say,'This is a real concern that we have. We're not punishing you, but we're registering the seriousness, and we want you to address it.'And we're making progress. I believe it's genuinely more consistent now, but I'd be lying if I said that there was consistency across all 22 local authorities. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. I'm conscious of time. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. I've got a supplementary from Sian, then back to Huw. Sian Gwenllian AM: Because you are moving to a more sophisticated approach in terms of identifying problems sooner, and so can offer the support earlier, is it time to think about moving away from the system of categorisation entirely? That is, has the categorisation system reached the end of its usefulness, and is the multi-agency approach, this more sophisticated approach, a better way, ultimately, of being able to assist schools in moving forward? Kirsty Williams AM: I think, Sian, as I said earlier, the categorisation system has evolved over time, and my expectation is that it will continue to evolve, because it has to be consistent with our overall approach to school improvement and raising standards. I expect OECD will have feedback for us on this important part of our system, and we'll wait to see exactly what they say about it, but as I said in answer to Huw Irranca-Davies earlier, I haven't got a closed mind; we've demonstrated over the last four years our willingness to change the system to make it a smarter system, and we will continue to keep that under review, as we move forward. If I could just go back briefly, it doesn't sound like a very exciting thing, does it, when we say we've been doing work with the WLGA, with cabinet members, but also scrutiny, because that's a really important part of the jigsaw as well, is actually local government scrutiny of the performance of your education portfolio holder and the leadership of your council. So this is about trying to up the ante on all sides, so that those issues around'What are you doing in your local authority to use the powers that you have?'You know, sometimes, making sure that everybody in that authority--those in power and those who are there to hold those in power to account--have the necessary skills, knowledge and understanding to do that appropriately. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Huw, briefly. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Yes, briefly. I only have one final question. We've talked a lot about early identification; getting in there and then managing the improvement, this triage approach there, and then getting some grip of it, as well, in doing all of that. But my question now is on what we currently have. I won't touch on the primary schools, but let's just look at secondary schools--11 per cent of secondary schools inspected in the last two academic years judged as unsatisfactory, needing urgent improvement. There will always be secondary schools and primary schools that hit moments of crisis for one reason or another, but 11 per cent to me, and to any layperson, would seem unreasonably high. Are you--? It would be daft to ask you if you're content. What is a level that you would be content with of having schools in red category in Wales? Kirsty Williams AM: You're right. Schools will need different levels of support at different points, and sometimes, it's not because of a crisis. So, for instance, in my region, we do have an increase in the number of schools in the amber category. That's because we've seen in that particular region a number of headteachers retire because they've reached retirement age, and there are new headteachers. Well, that is a moment of risk in the school--when senior leadership changes. Nothing else has changed in that school, but the simple fact that you have a new leader, sometimes in those cases it might be their first headship. That means that that school is going to need a little bit of extra support, so it isn't always just a crisis that needs extra support, there are just general things that happen in the life of a school that could lead to it. But you're absolutely right--we have a particular challenge in the secondary sector where we have not been able to move individual schools forward at pace. And 11 per cent is not acceptable to me, Huw, which is why we have introduced this new pilot to address those schools where, persistently, we have concerns about their ability to move forward. If we'd have carried on doing the same thing, I suspect we would have just carried on getting the same result--hence the need for a new approach to those schools that are causing concern. Steve Davies: Very briefly, the things we talked about earlier was how we measure the performance of schools, particularly at GCSEs, with a narrow focus. As was said earlier, some of these are the same groups--they trip in and then they don't come out. Our belief is, from research, that they concentrate on squeezing the pips to get the grades up in some small areas for a period of time, and you can do that by targeting and immersing them. Estyn can tick the box to say your grades have got better, but we haven't handled the serious underpinning issues--leadership, teaching and learning, and bringing those together. As the Minister said, what does sustainable improvement look like in six, 12,18 months? It isn't just, as important as they are, getting those exam grades up a bit. They're the fundamental--. And if they're all agreed as the indicators at the outset, we're more likely--. So it's multi-agency; it's not a little activity, it's a major strategy. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Hefin David has some questions now on the middle tier. Hefin David AM: I'd like to consider the work of the consortia. In 2016, your election manifesto very clearly said that you wanted to abolish regional consortia--three words in it. Why haven't you done it? Kirsty Williams AM: Because, given that you're such a keen student of my manifesto, you'll also know that-- Hefin David AM: It was only three words. Kirsty Williams AM: The Liberal Democrat manifesto also said that we supported major local government reform and a major reduction in the number of local government units. That hasn't happened. I have to say genuinely, my experience over the last four years has proven to me the value of regional working, and in the absence of significant local government reform, I think it's absolutely vital that we have scale in school improvement services--scale that I don't think can be delivered across 22 individual local authorities. Hefin David AM: Okay. So, if there was local government reform, you would abolish the consortia. Kirsty Williams AM: I think if there was significant local government reform and we could demonstrate that those units had such a scale that they could perform the functions of regional consortia, then I think it would be inevitable that any education Minister would look to see whether there was an opportunity to change structures. But in the absence of that, Hefin, I have been absolutely convinced whilst doing this job that you need larger units to be able to carry out successful school improvement work, and I think it would be reckless to advocate the system going back to school improvement being organised in 22 different ways. Hefin David AM: Okay. Do you think that the work of the four consortia has been consistent and effective? Kirsty Williams AM: The school improvement services? Hefin David AM: The four consortia. Kirsty Williams AM: I think, as with individual local education authorities, there are some regional consortia services that have performed really highly--and that's not me saying that, that's Estyn, but gives us assurance around that--and there are others that need to improve. I think the consortia themselves would admit that they, since their establishment, have found new ways of working. Initially, they were very separate entities that did things their own way. Increasingly, over recent years, we have seen those consortia working together on a national approach, but delivered on a regional basis. So I think they themselves have evolved over time. But we are constantly looking for optimum delivery from those particular organisations, but as I said, I think it would be absolutely reckless to go back to a situation where school improvement services were being delivered individually on 22 different bases. Hefin David AM: Okay. I'm happy to accept that you've changed your opinion there; that's no problem at all. But with regard to the four consortia, and we'll take Education through Regional Working as an example, it does things differently to the other three. Is that a cause for concern, or do you think that's entirely appropriate? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, ERW does things differently, but then so does the Education Achievement Service. EAS is constituted in a different way to the Central South Consortium. What I'm interested in is not necessarily how they are constituted and organised, I'm interested in the effectiveness of that organisation to deliver for children and for teachers. ERW has got particular challenges, and we continue to work with those in ERW to address those, but increasingly, as I said, what we are seeing the regional consortia do is develop a national approach to school improvement services but deliver that on a regional basis so that there is greater consistency in terms of delivery. Hefin David AM: Are you happy that, within the ERW area, local authorities employ their own improvement advisers, rather than doing it in the way that the others do? Kirsty Williams AM: We have discussed this at length with them. My preference would be for school improvement officers to be employed in the centre, and we continue to have those discussions, but what's really important to understand is that the regional consortia are not a beast of the Government; they are a beast of the local authorities that have worked together to create a school improvement service that meets their needs. So we can't impose that solution, and we continue to discuss with ERW what is the optimal way, and they continue to discuss with their constituent local authorities about how that should be organised. Hefin David AM: Are you concerned that Neath Port Talbot have given notice that they want to withdraw from regional working? Kirsty Williams AM: I think it's really disappointing that Neath Port Talbot have published that notice. What's important for me is to understand--not for me, it will be important for Estyn. It will be really important for us to understand how Neath Port Talbot intend to support their schools and their teachers if they were to withdraw from ERW, especially at what is a very, very critical time. The regional consortia have a key role to play in supporting systems with the introduction of the curriculum. I would want to know from Neath Port Talbot how they are going to do that without being part of that organisation. And, of course, there's the added complexity that so much of our money is channelled through to schools via the regional consortia. So, I would want to understand from Neath Port Talbot how they're going to safeguard their schools and make sure that the children who are receiving their education in Neath Port Talbot are not disadvantaged if they were to follow through on that decision. Hefin David AM: Do you feel that it's your role to intervene in that area and instruct Neath Port Talbot and ERW as to how they should resolve this issue? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, as I said, I would be seeking assurances-- Hefin David AM: What does that mean, though,'seeking assurances'? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, Neath Port Talbot would need to demonstrate to me how they're going to address these issues. If they're not part of ERW and their schools and their children are not going to be in receipt of the support from ERW, as I said, especially at this critical time, how are they intending to do that? I haven't seen those plans, but if they were to push forward and follow through on the notice, I would want to see them and I suspect Estyn would want to see them also. Hefin David AM: Okay, just last issue on that: you're just waiting to see what Neath Port Talbot do next, then. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, we have written to Neath Port Talbot to ask them to demonstrate to us, if they were to pull out of ERW, how they're going to meet their functions. I have not heard back from them. Hefin David AM: Steve, did you want to say something? Steve Davies: Obviously--[Inaudible. ]--that point. We wrote to them last Friday, and we are awaiting their response now. Hefin David AM: Okay. So, that's where we are. Okay. There was the document in 2015--'National model for regional working'. Is that the current document? Are there plans to change or update it, or is that exactly where we stand? Kirsty Williams AM: So, that is the current model. Some work was undertaken in 2017 and 2018 to look to update that model and revise that model. Some specific recommendations were put forward about additional services that could be organised on a regional basis; primarily, that is a specialist human resources resource. We know that, because of austerity in some local authorities, HR departments have been really stretched. Education HR is a specialist service, it's not generic. It's often a service that--. I see that as part of a school improvement service. Support for governors also has been stretched within individual local authorities. So, a proposal was put forward to include specialist HR and governor support as part of the regional model. That was rejected by local government. Our local authorities did not want to include that in the regional model. However, I must say, having presented that evidence, some of our local authorities, even though there wasn't a national agreement to put that into the national model, have pooled their resources, and those services are being delivered and supported on a regional basis. So, for instance, the Education Achievement Service now provide specialist HR resource, and EAS and Central South provide governor support. So, although we weren't successful in persuading local government to adopt a new national model, local authorities in those areas saw the value of moving that way. Hefin David AM: So, with that in mind, and perhaps I'll put this to Steve Davies, everything the Minister just said, and also the line in the document--'The implementation of this model will change over time'-- is it time to go back to that document and review it from a procedural point of view? Steve Davies: I don't think it's necessarily timely to go back and have a complete review of it. But, certainly, we are in ongoing discussions with the Welsh Local Government Association, both in terms of work with local authorities, and the type of intervention in schools. So, we keep a constant watch as to which areas that we believe we could develop further. We are not currently intending to do a wholesale review of that. As the Minister touched on earlier, there is some work to get consistency across the current area, particularly, as we just mentioned, in relation to ERW work. So, it's getting a consistent approach at that level, and sharing the practice. I think what is emerging, as the Minister said, is that there are two regions who have already made this shift to pool services. I think the two other regions are seeing and will see the benefits of that, and instead of forcing it through, we'd expect that to evolve. But we're not, at this stage, looking to a wholesale review of the national model. Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin. Hefin David AM: And Professor Dylan Jones's strategic delivery group seems to have had quite a warm welcome in the sector. Is it fair to say that? Kirsty Williams AM: I believe so. I'm very grateful to Dylan for his hard work and his skill in chairing that group, and I think it's been welcomed by all, so that we can get that clarity and consistency about the roles and responsibilities of the individual partners and players in the middle tier. Hefin David AM: And when will the work be completed, and what will the outcomes be? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, the group is currently engaging with Steve and other officials on agreeing a plan, but also, crucially, that plan is there to support the successful implementation of the curriculum, so that we're very clear about the roles and responsibilities in the middle tier in this crucial phase following the publication. We have to move now from the publication into a relentless focus on implementation. The history of devolution is full of fantastic documents, and, shall I say, patchy implementation. The work that has gone into that curriculum is too important for implementation to be left to chance. It's too important. It's too good to be left to chance. So, everything now is a relentless focus on successful implementation. Hefin David AM: Yes, but I'm thinking that the strategic delivery is reviewing the role of the middle tier. So, you know, what do we expect to see from it, notwithstanding the kind of softly, softly approach that you've already talked about? Steve Davies: It was set up, actually, about 18 months ago--just under. It was set up to build collective efficacy, because what people out there are seeing is that there's a confusion of roles, in what the regions are doing, and it was building that collective efficacy so everyone was behind the wheel. So, they've been looking at who is doing what for the last 18 months, and exploring and making some changes themselves. It's not just what they do with Government or what they do with each other; it's just happened that it's timely, because one of the key bits of feedback we believe we will get from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development is we have had co-construction, we'd had collective effort, but we need to do more, particularly within the middle tier. This is not controlled by Government, it is arm's length from Government, and it's not their job to get it ready for the new curriculum--that's a key part of it. This group will have an ongoing role; it's not a task and finish group. It does feed back in to the Minister but there's no formal mechanism by which they have to report. Hefin David AM: Okay, that's very clear. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. I've got supplementaries from Suzy, then Sian. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Briefly, please. Suzy Davies AM: I think this is a really interesting evidence session. What I'm about to say, I say it even though I'm a big localist: it all seems to be heading in one direction of a national service. Is the strategic group even thinking in these terms, obviously building in local accountability? But it'll just make it so much easier in terms of accountability and consistency to monitor what the middle tier does, if it's a national service, like the National Adoption Service. Local delivery, national service--is it heading in that direction? Kirsty Williams AM: That's not the intention of setting the group up. As Steve just said, I receive feedback from Dylan, because I meet Dylan in this particular capacity on a planned basis. He is there to give me advice on the middle tier, and to give me advice on what he thinks Welsh Government needs to do. But I've not had that conversation with him about a national service. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Well, thank you for that. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: What I was going to raise has been answered already, that is that, from what I can see, the work that Professor Dylan Jones is doing has evolved somewhat. I felt that, originally, the idea was to look at the middle tier in terms of any kind of duplication that was happening, and where it was possible to tighten up the people going into schools from different directions. But it appears that it has evolved to be something that's much more than that, and that it is placing a focus on the curriculum and other aspects of the educational system. Is there a risk for them to lose focus in that sense? Kirsty Williams AM: No, not at all. I think they are very, very clear around establishing roles and responsibilities for each of the players and to be very clear about the expectations that each part of the middle tier can have of each other, as to what they can expect from their partners in the middle tier. And absolutely, it is about making sure that there isn't duplication, that people aren't second-guessing each other's work, and there are clear demarcations about who does what in the system, and, as I said, knowing that you can rely on your colleague in the middle tier to do the bit that they are responsible for. So, I don't think there's a question of it losing focus. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We've got a lot of areas to cover so we are going to have to pick up our pace a bit. The next questions are from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Thinking about you as a Minister trying to see what the long-term trends are with regard to raising standards and improving educational attainment, is that difficult, because the performance measures have changed, haven't they? We can't compare like-for-like now, because of the changes that have been made in the way that performance is measured. So, to begin with, is that a challenge, to see whether progress has been made? And secondly, what evidence do you as Minister use to look at the long-term trends? Kirsty Williams AM: The first thing to say, with regard to changes to performance measures--you're right that change to those does make it, in some cases, more difficult to look at trends over a period of time. But those changes are made for really good reasons. If we change a performance measure, it is done to ensure that it is in the best interests of learners. And I think the best interests of learners always trumps the ease of comparison. I understand that, for researchers and for opposition Members, even for Ministers, it would be simpler to have the same set of measures over a period of time. But if we know that those things are driving behaviours that are unhelpful to children, and not in the best interests of children, then we have to change them, even thought that then does create challenges in different areas. With regard to what do we look at, there are a number of ways that we gain data and look at data in the system: everything from the categorisation system we spoke of earlier, and trends in categorisation; we look at Estyn reports; we continue to look at examination results. But we're trying to develop a broader range of data and statistics that give us a whole picture of the education performance, rather than narrowing down on one simple indicator that tells you one thing but doesn't tell you everything. But I don't know, Steve, if there's anything further that you'd like to add. Steve Davies: It's going back to what the Member raised earlier, in terms of the range of things that you look at--things that can make a difference. So, when Estyn review schools, or we're looking to develop national frameworks for things like mental health and well-being, which look to the practice that enables raising standards, it's collecting that information, both at a national level, through the annual review of Estyn, as well as our engagement with regions and local authorities. So, it's looking at the evidence base that goes beyond, but impacts on data. And, inevitably, we will use the Programme for International Student Assessment, and any other external assessments that come through organisations like the OECD. And even where we've changed the performance measures, we still have, at national level, the ongoing data. So, if you looked at level 2 plus, we believe it is important that children get five good GCSEs--for higher education and for employment. So, we've not lost sight of those at a national level--we're not using them as a narrow set of performance measures for individual schools. Kirsty Williams AM: So, if we look at--level 2 plus is a good example. We know that a relentless focus on that single measure, as a way of judging the system, leads to a set of behaviours in schools. It narrows the focus onto a certain part of the cohort, it narrows the curriculum, when we know that children-- Sian Gwenllian AM: I'm not challenging the fact that you've changed the performance measures--I understand that, and having a broader way of looking is better in the long run. I'm just saying, because there's been this change, it makes it more of a challenge--whilst accepting why you've made the changes, but it does present more of a challenge, presumably, because you have to look at more indicators, and take evidence from different places. But I take it that you're confident that the trajectory is going in the right way. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, I think we are making improvements. But you're right: it does make it more challenging. But those changes are being made for the right reasons, as I said, whether that be at level 2 plus. Look at English literature. I understand why perhaps a performance measure around English was introduced, but the effect of that was that significant numbers of children--and, it must be said, usually children who are entitled to free school meals--were suddenly not sitting English literature GCSE. We've changed that performance measure, and guess what? Last year, we saw a significant increase in the number of children that were sitting English literature GCSE. For standards of literacy and oracy, I think studying literature is really, really important, before we even get into the joy of introducing children to the written word and the love of reading. So, we make changes. Yes, it causes challenges, but we're making those changes because we believe that they are in the best interest of children, and that has to trump ease of comparison. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Why have you decided to ask the consortia, Estyn and so on not to report on local data or regional level data? How do we then come to conclusions about what is working if it isn't presented on a local authority and regional basis? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think the thing to say about the communications from Welsh Government, Estyn, and the WLGA is it's not about not communicating the data, it's about challenging people on how that data should be used. So, the data is still available, but it's a challenge to them about how to use that data. So, for instance, when we're presenting data that compares local authority to local authority, you could have a local authority that says,'There we go, I'm above the national average. I don't need to worry about the education in my local authority, because I'm above the average, or I'm better than my neighbour.'That doesn't necessarily mean that everything is right in your local education authority. Perhaps your children should be doing even better than what you're presented with. So, actually, it's not about hiding data; it's about how you use the data appropriately. And sometimes, how we were presenting data in the past was lulling some people into a false sense of security about the performance of their system. So, it's about how you use data, and that's what the communication from Welsh Government and the WLGA and Estyn was about: think very carefully about this data and what it's telling you about your system, and don't be lulled into a false sense of security that you may be doing brilliantly. Or, perhaps, looking at your data, you may think,'Oh, my goodness me, we're not doing very well at all', but, actually, more careful consideration of that might show that your school's impact on those children is really, really a positive one. So, you've got to use that data in the context. So, it's not about less data. If anything, it's about more data and, crucially for me, it's about more intelligent use and interrogation of that data, about truly what it's telling you about your system. Sian Gwenllian AM: But again, the Welsh Government--. You have continued to publish the local and regional level data. So, doesn't that contradict what you've been telling the consortia and everyone else? Kirsty Williams AM: No, not at all. As I said, we're not in the business of trying to hide data--I believe absolutely in full transparency. And in terms of level 2 data, I think I'm not moving away from the point that I think it's really important that more and more children get five really good GCSEs. I think it's important for their life chances. It is about how that data is used, not about hiding data or making that data not available. Steve Davies: Can I, very briefly--? We didn't just send a letter out collectively. We've now carried out training jointly with WLGA and Estyn on how to use that data. So, it's not just looking where your LA is; it's also not looking at whether your school's better than average for the authority. And it is well received, and it should broaden the approach of scrutiny committees to beyond what historically was, if I'm honest, looking at the league table for their authority or looking at the league table of local authorities. It's not that they shouldn't be looking at that, but they need to dig much, much deeper underneath it. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. We're going to go on now to Suzy. I'm going to appeal for brief questions and brief answers so that we can cover the rest of the questions. Suzy Davies AM: I'll shorten these questions, okay. We know why you got rid of the old measures. We've got interim measures now. What are they telling you about the success you've had in trying to avoid the bad behaviour? Short answers. Kirsty Williams AM: It's impossible. [Laughter. ] I think it's inevitable: whatever kind of measures we put in place, people will look to maximise their success in those measures, and I don't think we'll ever come up with a system where those measures are absolutely perfect. What's really important to me is that we're really, really, really challenging schools to look at the performance of all of their children, rather than just at a very, very narrow cohort around those C/D boundaries, which we knew was detrimental, potentially, to more able and talented children and really pushing those Bs to As and those As to A*s, and children for whom actually just getting in to school on a daily basis is an achievement, and the school has done well to provide that. So, our new capped 9 makes sure that there is breadth across a range of subjects, rather than just focusing on a narrower and narrower bunch of subject opportunities for children, and our new third-third-third system enables schools to really look at their performance. So if their capped 9 score is high, what's driving that? Is it because the bottom third of the cohort is doing really well, and the impact on those children is above and beyond what could be expected, but actually, you're not doing very well for your more able and talented; you're not pushing them on? Alternatively, maybe your capped 9 score is because your MAT children are doing incredibly well, but actually, you're not really making the progress for the middle tier of those children. It allows us to have a greater focus on the performance of our FSM children--where they really are within that system. So, it's a much more granular--. And crucially for me, it looks at the impact for every child, because every child has to matter in the system, and what we had before was a narrowing of curriculum choice and a narrowing on a certain cohort of children. Suzy Davies AM: So are the permanent measures likely to be pretty similar to what you've got now? Because the research--I don't know if the research is complete yet. When will you be publishing the new permanent evaluation? Kirsty Williams AM: Sue, you're right: they're interim measures at the moment, and we will need to make sure that the performance measures are aligned to the new curriculum. That, potentially, of course--. Because Wales's review of qualifications potentially has an impact on what those finally will look like, so that work is ongoing at the moment, and unless Steve can tell me off the top of his head when we expect that to be completed by, I will send you a note. But they're interim at the moment, because we need to align them to the new curriculum. Suzy Davies AM: I think we understand that. [Inaudible. ]--date. Steve Davies: No, no. This is not a quick fix. This is a two to three-year research base. The new qualifications for the new curriculum will not start until 2025. They have to be in place for 2022. There's a three-year roll on. I would expect the broad structure of the interim measures to continue over that time. There will be some tweaks for consistency. It's what's wrapped around those interim measures that I touched on earlier: the other evidence that we bring to bear about the effectiveness of a school, but we do want to say to schools that on the whole, broadly speaking, the interim measures will carry on for two, three years. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, and the reason I asked that is right at the beginning of this session, the Minister said to the Chair that this PS100 million that's going into school improvements will be going into things that work. We need some evidence that the interim measures are going to work as well, so when are they going to be evaluated? Steve Davies: Well, we've only just used them for one year. Suzy Davies AM: That's what I'm asking you. Steve Davies: We've signalled that they're only going to be in place for three years. We are carrying out our own review of the impact of those and that's been built in, but I expect the OECD report--because it is an extensive report--to give us feedback on how those things are working now, and some steer, as they did with the last report, as to the direction we would want to go into. Kirsty Williams AM: And what I'm also interested in is those performance management measures around schools. Yes, they're about outcomes for children, but actually are about a broader suite of behaviours within that school, so, yes, qualifications and grades are an important part of a performance measure, but actually, I have other expectations of schools, above and beyond simply qualifications. And so, we would want our permanent set of performance measures to look at a wider set of behaviours within a school, and I think because--. Exams are important--of course they are, qualifications are important--but the way in which those schools achieve those results are also important. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Would you anticipate that including well-being, then? Suzy Davies AM: In a whole-school approach. Kirsty Williams AM: I absolutely--and we need to find a way of how we can truly measure that. Sometimes, children's well-being is influenced by lots of things outside the control of a school. So, I don't want schools to be held accountable for things that they have no control over, because of the circumstances in which a child may be living. But, absolutely: well-being and how the culture of the school addresses well-being is really important to me. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Suzy. Move on to PISA, please. Suzy Davies AM: How useful is PISA for you in helping school improvement? I know that it's not always the thing that you enjoy watching or looking out for. But, genuinely, how useful is it? Kirsty Williams AM: It is one of a range of tools that we need to look at. Sian, quite rightly, talked about consistency. PISA is one thing where there is a level of consistency, so it will continue to be, I think, an important part of how we test how our system is doing. Suzy Davies AM: We know that you are a little bit encouraged, but we are not out of the woods yet. You mentioned this in Plenary when we talked about PISA. How confident are you that we are on track for meeting these targets that were set before your time, or do you think that having those targets is helpful? Is it setting up aspirations that are incapable of being met within a period of time? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, those long-term targets of a score around 500 are part of'Our National Mission', and we have to keep the pressure on to strive. They are testing, but we have to keep the pressure on to strive to reach them. In some cases, I can be quite encouraged. If we look at reading scores for girls, we are almost there, but that just demonstrates what a journey we've got with our boys to address. For me, one of the ways in which we will reach those targets and achieve them is further progress on our more able and talented children. Although we are now performing at an OECD average, I will be the first person to admit that, although we have seen an improvement in the higher level skills of our more able and talented children, we do not perform at an OECD average with regard to those level 6 and level 5 scores. Suzy Davies AM: Even within the UK, really, we are quite far behind. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes. So, I think that's where we really need to push on. That's one of the reasons why we have introduced a more able and talented budget to support that, and our Seren programme, which is delivering fantastic results post-16. That's why we're introducing the principles of Seren earlier into children's careers, bringing it down from year 9 upwards, to be able to drive improvements. So, I think that that's the area that we are particularly keen to work on: making sure that more of our children perform at the OECD average at level 5 and level 6. Clearly, we've got more work to do on reading. We are working with southern Ireland, who have consistently done well with reading scores, to look to see what lessons we can learn to press on with there with reading. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. My final question on this. You recognise it as a priority, particularly for boys. Does that mean that the focus will then drift slightly from maths, where there has been some success; and drift from science, where the encouragement of more people to take GCSE science has reduced the number of high-level passes? Kirsty Williams AM: First, we have to have a system that is capable of doing all of those of things at the same time. We can't accept a system that says,'Well, we can do a bit over here, but that means we have to--.'We have to have a system, Suzy, that can drive improvements at all levels. That's my expectation. Suzy Davies AM: The balloon needs to be bigger not just squeezing it at one end. Kirsty Williams AM: Absolutely, yes. That's my expectation of this system. You have to deliver across all of these. We have seen some progress. As I've said, it's far from perfect, and we've got more work to do, but we have to deliver across all three domains, as we did last time. And I'm not going to make any apologies for changing the performance indicators around science. It was a travesty that there were children who never had the opportunity to sit a science GCSE. We don't have to make assumptions about the nature of many, many, many of those children. We have seen a significant increase in the number of children who are having the opportunity to sit GCSE science and who are passing GCSE science. So, I'm not going to make any apologies about that. One of the reasons that I suspect we have ended up with poor science scores is because of the previous policy around science entries and science qualifications. Again, one of the reasons that we have changed it isn't just solely because we need to do better in PISA, but I think that by changing it, we will see an impact on PISA. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you for that. Lynne Neagle AM: The final set of questions is from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: I just want to discuss an issue that I know is important to you, namely closing the attainment gap between pupils who are eligible for free school meals and those who are not eligible for free school meals. Unfortunately, the problem persists, doesn't it? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes. We are not where we need to be in terms of the performance, not only of our children on free school meals, but the performance of our looked-after children, and the performance of some children from some ethnic minority groups. So, we will continue to look to support those learners in a variety of ways, again looking to amend our practice on the basis of evidence that is given to us from our experts who are there to advise us. There is clearly more that we need to do. There has been some progress in some areas, but it is not where I would want it to be. Sian Gwenllian AM: But, this is despite the fact that there is PS475 million that has been invested in the pupil development grant, for this exact purpose of closing the attainment gap. But, the problem persists, and in some places, it's deteriorating. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think that, as I said, I am not shying away from any assumption or declaration that we need to do better. But, I do think that we need to acknowledge where progress has been made. If we go back to look at what PISA has said about our performance, the PISA results show that pupils in Wales are relatively more able to overcome the disadvantage of their background than is the average in OECD countries. So, our children are doing better in that, and that gives me encouragement. That's not me saying that; that's there. If we look at pupils who are eligible for free school meals, they do score below their better-off counterparts in PISA by some 34 points. The gap in England is 40 points. So, again, that gap is smaller here in Wales. If we look at basic levels of qualifications, back in--. It's difficult to make comparisons because of all the reasons we have talked about, but if we look back to 2006 and we look at the very basic level of qualifications, which is a level 1 qualification, we have seen a jump from 9. 4 per cent of children in 2006 achieving a level 1 qualification to over 18 per cent. So, there is progress. There is evidence that the resources that we are spending are making a difference. But, clearly, we are not where we would want to be. That's why we will continue to focus those resources on those children, where we need it. But, we need to do that earlier. Sticking plasters in years 10 and 11 aren't going to cut it. We need to get this right for those children, the moment that they come into a nursery and the moment that they start their formal education at the age of 5. That's how we are going to make the difference. Providing catch-up, of course, we need to do for those kids; we can't throw those year 10s and year 11s to the wind. We have to support those children. But, we will see real improvement when we get in there earlier. Sian Gwenllian AM: But I'm sure that that is a disappointment to you, because it has been a personal priority for you as well. In terms of minority ethnic learners, while there are some groups within that category who are achieving, there is underachievement happening here as well, isn't there? It's not consistent across the minority ethnic group. Is that something that you will be focusing upon? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, and that's why we have committed to maintaining a ring-fenced grant to local authorities of some PS10 million, to support education of our minority ethnic children. But, again, you are right, you are absolutely right, Sian. We need a much more sophisticated conversation about what is really going on in attainment across minority ethnic groups so that we can best target that resource and have a conversation about what the differences are. You are absolutely correct: there is a real mixed picture. If we look at black Welsh girls entitled to free school meals, they perform almost at the national average for all children--not FSM children; the national average for all children. Black Welsh boys don't, but neither do white Welsh boys. So, there is a really complex picture here, and I really welcome a debate about acknowledging the various levels of performance of BAME children, and where the gaps in performance lie. You are quite right: it is a complex picture in the system. I'm committed to continuing to support educational opportunities, and that's why have ring-fenced the minority ethnic achievement grant. There are some interesting data there. Some children are doing very, very well; others, we need to concentrate on. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian, this will need to be the last question, I'm afraid. Sian Gwenllian AM: Sorry? Lynne Neagle AM: This is going to have to be the last question. Sian Gwenllian AM: The last question. Lynne Neagle AM: Yes. Sian Gwenllian AM: Fine. In terms of looked-after children, which is one of the groups where attainment isn't where we would like it to be, there was some improvement in 2016 at key stage 4, but it has been disappointing. Do we know what's been happening in 2019? Kirsty Williams AM: The 2019 data will be published next month, and there has been significant activity. You are right: in recent years, the data have been poor and not where we would want it to be. That's why we have had a reformed approach to PDG LAC; the employment of PDG LAC co-ordinators across the regions. We've identified new resource in the new financial year to test new approaches, so, for instance, virtual school approaches, where we know, in other systems, that has worked. But, we expect the next set of data around the performance of this particular group of learners in March. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay, and you hope to see progress. Kirsty Williams AM: I don't want to speculate, but I hope so. Sian Gwenllian AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you very much. We have come to the end of our time, so can I thank you, Minister, and your official for attending this morning? We have had a wide-ranging and very detailed discussion that will be very useful for the committee. As usual, you will be sent a transcript following the meeting to check for accuracy, but thank you again, both of you, for your attendance this morning. Diolch yn fawr. Okay. Item 3 is papers to note. Paper to note 1 is a letter from ERW providing additional information following the evidence session on 16 January. Paper to note 2 is a letter from Central South Consortium, similarly providing additional information following the evidence session. Paper to note 3 is a letter from the Noah's Ark Children's Hospital for Wales regarding children's rights in Wales, following up on some additional information there. Paper to note 4 is a letter from Qualifications Wales, providing additional information following the annual report scrutiny session in January. Item 4, then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting? Are Members content? Thank you.

According to Kirsty, they would be" seeking assurances" . It meant that Neath Port Talbot would need to demonstrate to them how they were going to address these problems. However, so far, they had not seen the plans. But if Neath Port Talbot were to push forward and follow on the notice, they would want to see. Now, what they were doing was waiting for their responses.

tr-sq-1236

tr-sq-1236_0

Summarize the discussion about actions towards the document in 2015-" National model for regional working" . Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received apologies for absence from Janet Finch-Saunders, and also from Dawn Bowden, and I'd like to welcome Huw Irranca-Davies, who is substituting for Dawn Bowden. Can I ask Members if there are any declarations of interest, please? No. Okay. We'll move on, then, to our evidence session for our inquiry on school improvement and raising standards. I'd like to welcome Kirsty Williams AM, Minister for Education, and Steve Davies, director of education. Thank you both for attending and for your detailed paper in advance of the meeting. We've got a lot of ground to cover, so we'll go straight into questions, if that's okay. If I can just start by asking you: to what extent is the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development still involved in the Welsh Government's school improvement journey? Kirsty Williams AM: First of all, can I thank the committee for their invitation this morning, and their interest in this particular area? As you will be aware, on coming into office, the director and I agreed to ask the OECD to do a rapid review of the state of Welsh education at the beginning of this Assembly term. They did that, and the feedback from that work informed the publication and content of the national mission. I was very clear in the national mission that I would invite the OECD back to review our progress against that mission, and that has happened in the tail end of last year, and the OECD will publish their latest report on Welsh education next month now, in March. So, the expectation is that the report will be published on 23 March, and my intention is to make a statement to the Chamber on 24 March. The nature of that review is part of our ongoing development of self-evaluation. So, we talk a lot about self-evaluation in the school system. Actually, the continuing relationship with OECD is about self-evaluation of the entirety of the system and Welsh Government. We don't want to accept our own orthodoxy and just be in a bubble where we are constantly listening to ourselves and those people who might want to agree with us or tell us what we want to hear. So, the OECD is our best attempt of having some external verification of where we are. That's a risk for Ministers and for Government, because we want them to give an honest evaluation of where we are, but that's a really important tool for me, to ensure that we're constantly testing ourselves. The nature of that review is that the OECD were able to talk to whoever they felt it was important to talk to, so that included practitioners on the ground, elements of the middle tier, as well as Welsh Government. And I know, Chair--I hope you'll be pleased to hear this--that the reports of this committee have formed parts of their review, looking at how the Senedd itself has contributed to and has held the Government to account. So, as I said, we expect our report to be published towards the end of March. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you, Minister. Can I ask about the powers under the School Standards and Organisation (Wales) Act 2013, to ask you to tell us about the use of those powers either by Welsh Government or by local authorities, and how effective you feel that legislation has been? Kirsty Williams AM: Okay. Well, as you'll be aware, local authorities have quite extensive powers of intervention in schools if they feel that is necessary. If I'm honest, I think there's a mixed picture, with some local authorities using those powers not on a regular basis, but obviously demonstrating a willingness to use those powers. There are other local authorities who don't seem to have used them. Since that legislation came into being, there have been a number of reasons, because of course a local authority has to give a reason for using those powers of intervention. They usually focus on standards, but sometimes they focus on a breakdown in governance arrangements, perhaps, or a failure or a breakdown in financial management. So, sometimes the budgetary issues trigger an intervention power. And the types of interventions that have been used have included, in some cases, appointing additional governors to governing bodies, or suspending a school's delegated budget so the local authority takes on, then, financial control of that particular school, or sometimes applying to the Welsh Government to entirely replace a governing body and establish an intervention board. So, if I can give you an example of where that's been used and has been successful, in Flintshire. They applied to Welsh Government for two interim executive boards, in Sir Richard Gwyn Catholic High School and in Ysgol Trefonnen. They applied to us. Those governing bodies were dissolved. The IEBs were put in place and both of those schools, which had been in special measures, moved quite rapidly, actually, out of special measures. Perhaps the most recent example of this is one that the Chair will know very well in her own constituency of Torfaen, in Cwmbran High School, where Torfaen has intervened in that case. The Welsh Government has not used those powers to date. My expectation always is that local authorities should be the first port of call, and I would encourage--and we always encourage--local authorities to take a proactive approach to intervention and to use those powers. But it's my belief that it is they who are best placed initially to do that. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you, Minister. Can I ask, then, about the national evaluation and improvement resource and how significant a role that will play in the raising of school standards, and how you feel it's evolved since it was first conceived? Kirsty Williams AM: So, this brings us back to the principle of self-evaluation and something, if we're honest, we've not been very good at. If you look at a number of chief inspectors'reports into the Welsh education system, self-evaluation has always been identified as something that is missing or underdeveloped in our system to date, hence, then, the work to establish not a new approach, but a more robust approach to self-evaluation. We've done that in conjunction, again, with the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. It's really important, throughout the entirety of our reform journey that that's done in co-construction, because we want this resource to be usable in schools. So, it's all very well having a conceptual idea and people outside the classroom working on it, but if it's of no practical use to a school leadership team, then we won't see the impact. So, it's--. We're in phase 2 at the moment, where we're doing--. So, the initial resource has been developed by the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. We're in the testing phase at the moment and having it evaluated itself, with a view to introducing that resource across the system at the start of the new academic year, in September 2020. I truly believe that, if we're to make progress in Welsh education, we have to develop the skills within our system to have robust self-evaluation. This resource gives us continuity of approach right the way across Wales. So, it's not left to an individual school to come up with a system; it's right the way across the system. My hope would be that those principles could then be applied to local education authorities, to regional school improvement services and Welsh Government as part of a whole-system approach to self-evaluation. I don't know if there's anything more you want to add, Steve. Steve Davies: Just to add that the other critical partners are Estyn themselves. Kirsty Williams AM: Oh, yes, sorry. Steve Davies: So, they have played a critical role and, as we know, as the Minister has said in the past, she may introduce policy and practice, but if Estyn are part of it then schools, usually, because they recognise that it will be part of the inspection process--it gives it greater push and support around it. So, they've been key players within it. Kirsty Williams AM: And I think, if I just say as well, that the external perception of what that's about is really important. It's not a test of school readiness for reform, it is a genuine attempt for a school to evaluate their strengths, their weaknesses and where they need to go next. It's not an Estyn checklist. And because of the word'toolkit'--the feedback was that it gave the impression of a checklist,'Just do this and check list'. So, we're actually going to change the name of that resource. So, it'll be called the national evaluation and improvement resource, rather than the toolkit, because, as I said, the feedback was that'toolkit'gave the impression of a checklist exercise, and it's got to be about more than that if it's going to be meaningful. So, it'll be changed to an'improvement resource'. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Before I bring Suzy in, can I just welcome Sian Gwenllian, who is joining us via video-conference in north Wales? Morning, Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Good morning. Can you hear me? Lynne Neagle AM: We can, yes. We can hear you very nicely, thank you. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Yes. Only a very quick one. It's about the development of the-- Kirsty Williams AM: The resource. Suzy Davies AM: Yes, the resource, thank you--about whether there were any conflicting ideas in the process of development that made it quite difficult to zone in on something that school leadership teams, in particular, could rely on. Were there differences of opinion on what this should look like? Kirsty Williams AM: Not that I'm aware of from the practitioners that I've spoken to who have been part of that. So, for instance, Suzy, you will know the very small school of Gladestry. The head of Gladestry has been involved in this process, and she said that she'd really enjoyed the process of working alongside Estyn and the OECD as a school leader to be able to shape it. But I'm not aware that there's been conflict in that process. Suzy Davies AM: I'm not suggesting that there has been; I'm just interested as to how it had worked, that's all. Steve Davies: Chair, I think, inevitably, when you bring stakeholders together, they're not going to be in total agreement as to how it's going to work, and I think initially one of the challenges was having Estyn there as part of the facilitation group. There are always some concerns that, actually, it's coming from a to inspect, oral, judgmental tick box. So, we had some early day challenges where we had to convince--and, ultimately, Estyn convinced them--that they were there to help and support as opposed to to inspect, and that the model that was developed, as the Minister said, was not going to be a tick box,'You are good at this part of self-evaluation', it was to build the skillsets up. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. So, it's got their full confidence. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, and I think again, also, what--. You know, four years into the job, what I've reflected on as well is there is this sometimes a feeling out there that the Minister says all the right stuff, but you're not actually going to do it, so, when you talk about a new approach to doing things, you're not actually serious about it. So, trying to build that confidence that we are serious about developing a new system around self-improvement, which is different from accountability--sometimes, the practitioners are like,'Oh, yes, we've heard it all before but it never actually happens.'And I think that's been a part of the constant--not pressure, but the responsibility on Welsh Government is in following through. So, we said that we were going to do this in the national mission, and we are going to do it. I'm really proud that there or thereabouts, a few months either way, we've actually kept to the timetable as outlined in the national mission, and that helps build confidence within the sector that we are committed to that programme and we're going to do what we say we're going to do. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: And a final question from me: how effective do you think the investment in school standards has been in this Assembly term, as opposed to the approach taken in the last Assembly term, where there was the protection put in place for core school budgets? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think, first of all, it's important that, whilst this additional resource is specifically targeted at school standards, that is only a part of a much wider education budget, a budget that--you know--is incredibly complex. And so it is really challenging to be able to draw straight lines--you know,'We did this and it's resulted in that'--given that we're looking at the entirety of school funding here. What's been really important is that, if you drill down into what that money has been spent on, 50 per cent of it has been directed towards professional learning in one form or another to support our teaching professionals. And that's been really important to me. I've said it time and time again: an education system cannot exceed the quality of the people who stand in front of our children day in, day out to work with them and teach them. Therefore, that investment in staff and investment in the professional learning of our staff and support for them I think is making a difference already but, importantly, will continue to make a difference. But I think it is really challenging to be able to say,'Well, we spent this bit of money and it definitely led to that', because it's such a complex picture. But that money, the way it's been spent, has been driven by evidence. And, again, what we do know from international best practice, what do we know that works in driving up standards, and then how can we align the money that we've got to supporting that? And, as I said, 50 per cent of that money has gone directly to simply supporting the professional learning of those who work with our children. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you very much. We're going to talk now a bit about schools causing concern with questions from Huw Irranca-Davies. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Thank you, Chair. If I can, just first of all, zoom in on the way in which we actually decide which schools need what support. So, one of the interesting questions for us is how do we use the different systems out there. So, we've got the school categorisation system, which we're familiar with. We've also got Estyn inspection reports, then we've got other intelligence, including local intelligence on the ground. How do you decide from that? How is it decided what schools need support, need challenge? How do we do that? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, you're right: what we have is a variety of ways in which we can identify schools that need support, or need to be challenged on their practice. But it's important not to confuse them either. So, our primary route to doing this is our school categorisation system. Sometimes, and perhaps this is inevitable--. That system is primarily there as a triage system around identifying where our resource should be spent. So, our school improvement service--it's a risk-based approach, so they can evaluate where they need to put their time, effort and resource. Sometimes, it's used by other people for other things, but that is not its primary purpose; its primary purpose there is not one of accountability, it is one of identifying risk and aligning that then to the support that is available. Estyn--now that is part of that accountability system. That is our method of holding schools and their governing bodies to account for their practice and for the work that they do. Both systems, of course, are evolving. So, how we do categorisation has changed over a period of time. The elements that go into making that judgment around the levels of support have changed, and, of course, the Estyn inspection regime is also changing. At the moment, schools are only inspected once every seven years. We're moving to a system where Estyn will be more regularly in schools. So, they are two systems, but they are different and they look at different things. But our categorisation system is how we look for those ways of identifying support for schools. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: And you've made, with feedback over the last few years, adjustments to the way that the categorisation system works. Are you content with where it is now, or do you see more adjustments being made? Have you got things in front of you that you're getting feedback on saying'Well, we need to tweak this again a little bit'? Kirsty Williams AM: So, that system has evolved over time. So, when it started, it was just a tool around secondary schools. Now, it covers the breadth of schools. Initially, on coming into office, when I first came in, it was purely driven by data, and it was also done in quartiles. So, there was a certain number of schools that had to be in the bottom, which drove practitioners mad. They were like'Ah, every year, there's going to be some of us that have to be in the bottom quartile', because of the way in which it was arranged, which seemed very unfair to them. So, we've changed that. It's not just purely driven on data now; there are other judgments--the professional judgments of our challenge advisers are taken into account. And I would expect that situation to continue to evolve to align itself to our curriculum reform, and our changes in self-evaluation. So, it's not a fixed point. I expect that that system will continue to evolve and change, so that it complements and assists in the reform journey as other parts of the system change. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Thanks for that. I think, for any impartial reader of the way that the trends have been going on this, there is some good news within that, in that, certainly, those schools that might have been identified as have been okay but coasting along, seem to be moving up the categories, although we still do have that--. Well, it's what the system is there to do, it's to identify those schools that do need that additional support. And I like your analogy of a triage system--'You're fit; keep on doing what you're doing and do it well; you need more support, we'll put the support in.'But, can I turn to those schools that are causing significant concern, and how we identify them? The Estyn chief inspector's conclusions at the end of the 2017-18 report that these schools are not being identified early enough--there's a need to do something urgently about these concerns, particularly in secondary schools. Have we addressed that? Are you content that we've addressed that concern? Was he right? Kirsty Williams AM: No, the chief inspector is absolutely right--absolutely right. I've got no beef with that statement at all. In some ways, when a school goes into special measures, in a way, that's a failure of the system, because that should have been identified sooner. So I've got no beef, as I said, with the chief inspector saying that. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: So just to ask, bearing in mind the earlier discussion we were having, how is it that we don't identify those schools? Kirsty Williams AM: That's it--you're quite right. Undoubtedly, what categorisation has done is led to a greater understanding, I think, on behalf of local education authorities'and school improvement services'knowledge about their schools. I think knowledge around schools is greatly enhanced by that process. But we are not there yet in terms of necessarily, then, moving those schools more quickly, once they've been identified as needing the highest level of support to see improvement. And secondary schools is a particular, particular challenge. So you will have seen from the last publication of categorisation data that our primary sector continues to improve--more and more and more of our primary schools are in a green rating, which is very satisfying to me. But we have got more of an issue with secondary schools, and we have a particular issue with the same schools being identified in that level of categorisation. So even though we've identified them as needing that extra help, they are not moving at pace away from that system. So there are two things that we are doing at the moment. The first is, we are, again, looking at different sets of data that can give us even earlier warning systems that things are going wrong in a school--and perhaps Steve will explain later. For instance, staff sickness, and carefully monitoring staff sickness, because there is a direct correlation between high levels of staff sickness in a school and what is going on in the school. And Steve can explain some of this work later. But we're piloting a new approach to those schools that are causing concern. Each local authority has been asked to identify two of their high schools that they are particularly worried about. And we have a new multi-agency approach, working with those schools to try and move them more forward. So it's two from each region, a multi-agency panel, working with the school. And that multi-agency panel includes the school itself, the local authority, the regional consortia school improvement staff, Estyn and Welsh Government--as a multi-agency panel to support improvement in that school. So, for instance, what would normally happen, Estyn would come in, Estyn would make a judgment on the school--requiring special measures or urgent improvement--and Estyn would go away. They'd go away for six months, and then they'd come back in six months, and they'd make another judgment,'No, still not good enough', and disappear for six months. We're saying--Estyn and the Welsh Government have agreed that's not the best approach; Estyn need to be part of the solution, rather than just coming and making a judgment. The initial feedback from this trial is very, very positive. Actually, we've had local authorities coming to us and saying,'Can we put more schools in? Rather than just having two of our high schools, can we engage more in this project and this pilot?'It's being evaluated by Cardiff Metropolitan University and Swansea University, so we're having some academic overview to see, actually, does this approach work, can we evidence it--that it actually makes a difference? And it's actually--I'd like to claim all the credit for it, but it's actually not dissimilar to something that's happening in Scotland as well. But we knew that carrying on doing the same old thing clearly wasn't moving these schools, we needed a new approach, and this is what we're doing at the moment. So it's relatively new, but the initial feedback is positive. Steve, I don't know-- Steve Davies: I think your important point is about,'What about the schools that are sliding in that direction?'And it's bringing together what we know from Estyn, but also, critically, local authorities have knowledge of their schools, and so do consortia. We've got to be better at bringing those together. So, the Minister gave the example of staff sickness--not always a trigger, but it's one of those. If you look at movement of pupils out of a school, you can look at complaints, you can look at, actually, emerging increased use of HR resources that a school pulls on a local authority. None of these have been pushed up into the public domain, but they're important antennae. The point the Minister made about Estyn as well is, historically, when they go into special measures, Estyn, at the end of that week, call in, historically, either the region or the local authority, they will feed back to one of them, and then they go away. So, they are staying with it. So, we are brining together the knowledge. But, as the Minister said, we want to keep a very clear distinction between the accountability and the transparency to the public, to parents, with the very detailed collective work of that multi-agency group to actually make that difference over time. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Okay. So, does that--. I'd love to go further, but time is against us. Does that deal with the issue of the schools that have been identified in those categories of requiring significant improvement and requiring special measures? Are those the ones that will be identified now, or is that above and beyond that again? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, those are the ones that are primarily at the forefront of our minds, but this way of sharing data better, to step in earlier, is part of our attempt to address what the chief inspector says about stepping in early--not waiting until a school gets into special measures and a formal judgment from Estyn of that, but actually using that intelligence to get support in there earlier. The three elements that that multi-agency approach look at are: what are the fundamentals that need addressing in this school? What is the capacity of the school itself to be able to address those fundamentals? And, what extra support needs to go into that senior management team and the governing body to get those fundamentals addressed? And actually, what does sustainable improvement look like? Because, again, one of the issues, sometimes, that happens is, a school goes into a category with Estyn, there's a big push and a big,'We must do something'and the school comes out, but actually, that improvement is not sustainable. It's the low-hanging fruit; it's the easy wins that have been achieved, but actually, perhaps some of the fundamental challenges underlying in that school haven't been addressed in that process. So, this is about what will sustainable improvement look like in six months, what's it going to look like in 12 months and what's it going to look like in 18 months. So, actually, a more strategic, longer term approach to real change in a school rather than, perhaps, some of the easy-to-fix items that make a school as if it's doing better, but we really haven't tackled some of the underlying problems that make that school vulnerable to slipping back. Does that make sense? Lynne Neagle AM: I've got a couple of supplementaries on--. Sorry? Kirsty Williams AM: Does that make sense? Lynne Neagle AM: Yes. We've got a couple of supplementaries on this, first from Suzy and then from Sian. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you for that, Chair. Obviously, I'm pleased to hear that this work is being done, but I'm wondering--. What strikes me, in the recent past, at least, particularly as we've got the usual suspects in this category--. I've got to ask myself why it is that councils have been reluctant, perhaps, to step in with these schools earlier, particularly as they've got consortia or middle-tier support as well. Has there been a deficit in that space that has meant that councils don't feel equipped to step in? I just don't really get it why they've been reluctant to step in so far. If they've been nervous about doing it, because they don't feel that they've got the tools to do it, then I think that's pretty important, because as you were saying, we were talking about fundamentals; surely, councils have been able to deal with fundamentals, and more importantly, consortia up until now. Because, obviously, we're asking these players to give us evidence at some point, so perhaps I'd like to challenge them on how come we're here now. Kirsty Williams AM: And rightly so. Suzy Davies AM: I'm not laying this at your door. Kirsty Williams AM: And rightly so. I guess each local authority will have an explanation for each individual school, I suspect. What's crucial to me is that we have to--. I see our job as corralling the collective effort, and I think, for too long in the system, there has been a lack of co-ordination. So, this is about bringing and corralling a collective effort to address this, going forward, in more sustainable way. And I think it does come back to this issue around self-evaluation and a willingness to be open, honest and upfront about some of the challenges that we've got. It's not easy, is it? It's not easy to accept or to acknowledge sometimes when things are-- Suzy Davies AM: That they don't know how to do this. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, that they're going badly, or perhaps they don't know exactly how to make the difference. So this approach, as I said, is a new way of trying to coral that collective effort across the board. But, I don't know if Steve--because you've done other roles in the system, so perhaps you've got a different insight. Steve Davies: I think you're right. The variation across the country, across local authorities--. There are some local authorities that we've worked with and we identify have taken the appropriate action. There are others that we're working with, and yes, at its best, it's done as a joint exercise where they use their regional school improvement service to help in the identification that there is a need for this. They take advice as to what the action is, whether it is, as the Minister said, in the more significant areas, a board, or whether a warning notice comes in terms of standards or finance. So, we're working with them and we're working with the Welsh Local Government Association to share that practice. An example of that work is: we have done a development training session for cabinet members for education, and scrutiny leads for education across Wales, and all 22 local authorities came to that and engaged with that. That was partly about self-improvement, but it was also about where significant issues arise, you have to constructively confront them. And that comes with what the region knows, and increasingly, we're looking to have it consistently across 22 local authorities, so they are collecting all the additional data that we referred to earlier, so they can legitimately hold a mirror up and say,'This is a real concern that we have. We're not punishing you, but we're registering the seriousness, and we want you to address it.'And we're making progress. I believe it's genuinely more consistent now, but I'd be lying if I said that there was consistency across all 22 local authorities. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. I'm conscious of time. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. I've got a supplementary from Sian, then back to Huw. Sian Gwenllian AM: Because you are moving to a more sophisticated approach in terms of identifying problems sooner, and so can offer the support earlier, is it time to think about moving away from the system of categorisation entirely? That is, has the categorisation system reached the end of its usefulness, and is the multi-agency approach, this more sophisticated approach, a better way, ultimately, of being able to assist schools in moving forward? Kirsty Williams AM: I think, Sian, as I said earlier, the categorisation system has evolved over time, and my expectation is that it will continue to evolve, because it has to be consistent with our overall approach to school improvement and raising standards. I expect OECD will have feedback for us on this important part of our system, and we'll wait to see exactly what they say about it, but as I said in answer to Huw Irranca-Davies earlier, I haven't got a closed mind; we've demonstrated over the last four years our willingness to change the system to make it a smarter system, and we will continue to keep that under review, as we move forward. If I could just go back briefly, it doesn't sound like a very exciting thing, does it, when we say we've been doing work with the WLGA, with cabinet members, but also scrutiny, because that's a really important part of the jigsaw as well, is actually local government scrutiny of the performance of your education portfolio holder and the leadership of your council. So this is about trying to up the ante on all sides, so that those issues around'What are you doing in your local authority to use the powers that you have?'You know, sometimes, making sure that everybody in that authority--those in power and those who are there to hold those in power to account--have the necessary skills, knowledge and understanding to do that appropriately. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Huw, briefly. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Yes, briefly. I only have one final question. We've talked a lot about early identification; getting in there and then managing the improvement, this triage approach there, and then getting some grip of it, as well, in doing all of that. But my question now is on what we currently have. I won't touch on the primary schools, but let's just look at secondary schools--11 per cent of secondary schools inspected in the last two academic years judged as unsatisfactory, needing urgent improvement. There will always be secondary schools and primary schools that hit moments of crisis for one reason or another, but 11 per cent to me, and to any layperson, would seem unreasonably high. Are you--? It would be daft to ask you if you're content. What is a level that you would be content with of having schools in red category in Wales? Kirsty Williams AM: You're right. Schools will need different levels of support at different points, and sometimes, it's not because of a crisis. So, for instance, in my region, we do have an increase in the number of schools in the amber category. That's because we've seen in that particular region a number of headteachers retire because they've reached retirement age, and there are new headteachers. Well, that is a moment of risk in the school--when senior leadership changes. Nothing else has changed in that school, but the simple fact that you have a new leader, sometimes in those cases it might be their first headship. That means that that school is going to need a little bit of extra support, so it isn't always just a crisis that needs extra support, there are just general things that happen in the life of a school that could lead to it. But you're absolutely right--we have a particular challenge in the secondary sector where we have not been able to move individual schools forward at pace. And 11 per cent is not acceptable to me, Huw, which is why we have introduced this new pilot to address those schools where, persistently, we have concerns about their ability to move forward. If we'd have carried on doing the same thing, I suspect we would have just carried on getting the same result--hence the need for a new approach to those schools that are causing concern. Steve Davies: Very briefly, the things we talked about earlier was how we measure the performance of schools, particularly at GCSEs, with a narrow focus. As was said earlier, some of these are the same groups--they trip in and then they don't come out. Our belief is, from research, that they concentrate on squeezing the pips to get the grades up in some small areas for a period of time, and you can do that by targeting and immersing them. Estyn can tick the box to say your grades have got better, but we haven't handled the serious underpinning issues--leadership, teaching and learning, and bringing those together. As the Minister said, what does sustainable improvement look like in six, 12,18 months? It isn't just, as important as they are, getting those exam grades up a bit. They're the fundamental--. And if they're all agreed as the indicators at the outset, we're more likely--. So it's multi-agency; it's not a little activity, it's a major strategy. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Hefin David has some questions now on the middle tier. Hefin David AM: I'd like to consider the work of the consortia. In 2016, your election manifesto very clearly said that you wanted to abolish regional consortia--three words in it. Why haven't you done it? Kirsty Williams AM: Because, given that you're such a keen student of my manifesto, you'll also know that-- Hefin David AM: It was only three words. Kirsty Williams AM: The Liberal Democrat manifesto also said that we supported major local government reform and a major reduction in the number of local government units. That hasn't happened. I have to say genuinely, my experience over the last four years has proven to me the value of regional working, and in the absence of significant local government reform, I think it's absolutely vital that we have scale in school improvement services--scale that I don't think can be delivered across 22 individual local authorities. Hefin David AM: Okay. So, if there was local government reform, you would abolish the consortia. Kirsty Williams AM: I think if there was significant local government reform and we could demonstrate that those units had such a scale that they could perform the functions of regional consortia, then I think it would be inevitable that any education Minister would look to see whether there was an opportunity to change structures. But in the absence of that, Hefin, I have been absolutely convinced whilst doing this job that you need larger units to be able to carry out successful school improvement work, and I think it would be reckless to advocate the system going back to school improvement being organised in 22 different ways. Hefin David AM: Okay. Do you think that the work of the four consortia has been consistent and effective? Kirsty Williams AM: The school improvement services? Hefin David AM: The four consortia. Kirsty Williams AM: I think, as with individual local education authorities, there are some regional consortia services that have performed really highly--and that's not me saying that, that's Estyn, but gives us assurance around that--and there are others that need to improve. I think the consortia themselves would admit that they, since their establishment, have found new ways of working. Initially, they were very separate entities that did things their own way. Increasingly, over recent years, we have seen those consortia working together on a national approach, but delivered on a regional basis. So I think they themselves have evolved over time. But we are constantly looking for optimum delivery from those particular organisations, but as I said, I think it would be absolutely reckless to go back to a situation where school improvement services were being delivered individually on 22 different bases. Hefin David AM: Okay. I'm happy to accept that you've changed your opinion there; that's no problem at all. But with regard to the four consortia, and we'll take Education through Regional Working as an example, it does things differently to the other three. Is that a cause for concern, or do you think that's entirely appropriate? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, ERW does things differently, but then so does the Education Achievement Service. EAS is constituted in a different way to the Central South Consortium. What I'm interested in is not necessarily how they are constituted and organised, I'm interested in the effectiveness of that organisation to deliver for children and for teachers. ERW has got particular challenges, and we continue to work with those in ERW to address those, but increasingly, as I said, what we are seeing the regional consortia do is develop a national approach to school improvement services but deliver that on a regional basis so that there is greater consistency in terms of delivery. Hefin David AM: Are you happy that, within the ERW area, local authorities employ their own improvement advisers, rather than doing it in the way that the others do? Kirsty Williams AM: We have discussed this at length with them. My preference would be for school improvement officers to be employed in the centre, and we continue to have those discussions, but what's really important to understand is that the regional consortia are not a beast of the Government; they are a beast of the local authorities that have worked together to create a school improvement service that meets their needs. So we can't impose that solution, and we continue to discuss with ERW what is the optimal way, and they continue to discuss with their constituent local authorities about how that should be organised. Hefin David AM: Are you concerned that Neath Port Talbot have given notice that they want to withdraw from regional working? Kirsty Williams AM: I think it's really disappointing that Neath Port Talbot have published that notice. What's important for me is to understand--not for me, it will be important for Estyn. It will be really important for us to understand how Neath Port Talbot intend to support their schools and their teachers if they were to withdraw from ERW, especially at what is a very, very critical time. The regional consortia have a key role to play in supporting systems with the introduction of the curriculum. I would want to know from Neath Port Talbot how they are going to do that without being part of that organisation. And, of course, there's the added complexity that so much of our money is channelled through to schools via the regional consortia. So, I would want to understand from Neath Port Talbot how they're going to safeguard their schools and make sure that the children who are receiving their education in Neath Port Talbot are not disadvantaged if they were to follow through on that decision. Hefin David AM: Do you feel that it's your role to intervene in that area and instruct Neath Port Talbot and ERW as to how they should resolve this issue? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, as I said, I would be seeking assurances-- Hefin David AM: What does that mean, though,'seeking assurances'? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, Neath Port Talbot would need to demonstrate to me how they're going to address these issues. If they're not part of ERW and their schools and their children are not going to be in receipt of the support from ERW, as I said, especially at this critical time, how are they intending to do that? I haven't seen those plans, but if they were to push forward and follow through on the notice, I would want to see them and I suspect Estyn would want to see them also. Hefin David AM: Okay, just last issue on that: you're just waiting to see what Neath Port Talbot do next, then. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, we have written to Neath Port Talbot to ask them to demonstrate to us, if they were to pull out of ERW, how they're going to meet their functions. I have not heard back from them. Hefin David AM: Steve, did you want to say something? Steve Davies: Obviously--[Inaudible. ]--that point. We wrote to them last Friday, and we are awaiting their response now. Hefin David AM: Okay. So, that's where we are. Okay. There was the document in 2015--'National model for regional working'. Is that the current document? Are there plans to change or update it, or is that exactly where we stand? Kirsty Williams AM: So, that is the current model. Some work was undertaken in 2017 and 2018 to look to update that model and revise that model. Some specific recommendations were put forward about additional services that could be organised on a regional basis; primarily, that is a specialist human resources resource. We know that, because of austerity in some local authorities, HR departments have been really stretched. Education HR is a specialist service, it's not generic. It's often a service that--. I see that as part of a school improvement service. Support for governors also has been stretched within individual local authorities. So, a proposal was put forward to include specialist HR and governor support as part of the regional model. That was rejected by local government. Our local authorities did not want to include that in the regional model. However, I must say, having presented that evidence, some of our local authorities, even though there wasn't a national agreement to put that into the national model, have pooled their resources, and those services are being delivered and supported on a regional basis. So, for instance, the Education Achievement Service now provide specialist HR resource, and EAS and Central South provide governor support. So, although we weren't successful in persuading local government to adopt a new national model, local authorities in those areas saw the value of moving that way. Hefin David AM: So, with that in mind, and perhaps I'll put this to Steve Davies, everything the Minister just said, and also the line in the document--'The implementation of this model will change over time'-- is it time to go back to that document and review it from a procedural point of view? Steve Davies: I don't think it's necessarily timely to go back and have a complete review of it. But, certainly, we are in ongoing discussions with the Welsh Local Government Association, both in terms of work with local authorities, and the type of intervention in schools. So, we keep a constant watch as to which areas that we believe we could develop further. We are not currently intending to do a wholesale review of that. As the Minister touched on earlier, there is some work to get consistency across the current area, particularly, as we just mentioned, in relation to ERW work. So, it's getting a consistent approach at that level, and sharing the practice. I think what is emerging, as the Minister said, is that there are two regions who have already made this shift to pool services. I think the two other regions are seeing and will see the benefits of that, and instead of forcing it through, we'd expect that to evolve. But we're not, at this stage, looking to a wholesale review of the national model. Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin. Hefin David AM: And Professor Dylan Jones's strategic delivery group seems to have had quite a warm welcome in the sector. Is it fair to say that? Kirsty Williams AM: I believe so. I'm very grateful to Dylan for his hard work and his skill in chairing that group, and I think it's been welcomed by all, so that we can get that clarity and consistency about the roles and responsibilities of the individual partners and players in the middle tier. Hefin David AM: And when will the work be completed, and what will the outcomes be? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, the group is currently engaging with Steve and other officials on agreeing a plan, but also, crucially, that plan is there to support the successful implementation of the curriculum, so that we're very clear about the roles and responsibilities in the middle tier in this crucial phase following the publication. We have to move now from the publication into a relentless focus on implementation. The history of devolution is full of fantastic documents, and, shall I say, patchy implementation. The work that has gone into that curriculum is too important for implementation to be left to chance. It's too important. It's too good to be left to chance. So, everything now is a relentless focus on successful implementation. Hefin David AM: Yes, but I'm thinking that the strategic delivery is reviewing the role of the middle tier. So, you know, what do we expect to see from it, notwithstanding the kind of softly, softly approach that you've already talked about? Steve Davies: It was set up, actually, about 18 months ago--just under. It was set up to build collective efficacy, because what people out there are seeing is that there's a confusion of roles, in what the regions are doing, and it was building that collective efficacy so everyone was behind the wheel. So, they've been looking at who is doing what for the last 18 months, and exploring and making some changes themselves. It's not just what they do with Government or what they do with each other; it's just happened that it's timely, because one of the key bits of feedback we believe we will get from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development is we have had co-construction, we'd had collective effort, but we need to do more, particularly within the middle tier. This is not controlled by Government, it is arm's length from Government, and it's not their job to get it ready for the new curriculum--that's a key part of it. This group will have an ongoing role; it's not a task and finish group. It does feed back in to the Minister but there's no formal mechanism by which they have to report. Hefin David AM: Okay, that's very clear. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. I've got supplementaries from Suzy, then Sian. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Briefly, please. Suzy Davies AM: I think this is a really interesting evidence session. What I'm about to say, I say it even though I'm a big localist: it all seems to be heading in one direction of a national service. Is the strategic group even thinking in these terms, obviously building in local accountability? But it'll just make it so much easier in terms of accountability and consistency to monitor what the middle tier does, if it's a national service, like the National Adoption Service. Local delivery, national service--is it heading in that direction? Kirsty Williams AM: That's not the intention of setting the group up. As Steve just said, I receive feedback from Dylan, because I meet Dylan in this particular capacity on a planned basis. He is there to give me advice on the middle tier, and to give me advice on what he thinks Welsh Government needs to do. But I've not had that conversation with him about a national service. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Well, thank you for that. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: What I was going to raise has been answered already, that is that, from what I can see, the work that Professor Dylan Jones is doing has evolved somewhat. I felt that, originally, the idea was to look at the middle tier in terms of any kind of duplication that was happening, and where it was possible to tighten up the people going into schools from different directions. But it appears that it has evolved to be something that's much more than that, and that it is placing a focus on the curriculum and other aspects of the educational system. Is there a risk for them to lose focus in that sense? Kirsty Williams AM: No, not at all. I think they are very, very clear around establishing roles and responsibilities for each of the players and to be very clear about the expectations that each part of the middle tier can have of each other, as to what they can expect from their partners in the middle tier. And absolutely, it is about making sure that there isn't duplication, that people aren't second-guessing each other's work, and there are clear demarcations about who does what in the system, and, as I said, knowing that you can rely on your colleague in the middle tier to do the bit that they are responsible for. So, I don't think there's a question of it losing focus. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We've got a lot of areas to cover so we are going to have to pick up our pace a bit. The next questions are from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Thinking about you as a Minister trying to see what the long-term trends are with regard to raising standards and improving educational attainment, is that difficult, because the performance measures have changed, haven't they? We can't compare like-for-like now, because of the changes that have been made in the way that performance is measured. So, to begin with, is that a challenge, to see whether progress has been made? And secondly, what evidence do you as Minister use to look at the long-term trends? Kirsty Williams AM: The first thing to say, with regard to changes to performance measures--you're right that change to those does make it, in some cases, more difficult to look at trends over a period of time. But those changes are made for really good reasons. If we change a performance measure, it is done to ensure that it is in the best interests of learners. And I think the best interests of learners always trumps the ease of comparison. I understand that, for researchers and for opposition Members, even for Ministers, it would be simpler to have the same set of measures over a period of time. But if we know that those things are driving behaviours that are unhelpful to children, and not in the best interests of children, then we have to change them, even thought that then does create challenges in different areas. With regard to what do we look at, there are a number of ways that we gain data and look at data in the system: everything from the categorisation system we spoke of earlier, and trends in categorisation; we look at Estyn reports; we continue to look at examination results. But we're trying to develop a broader range of data and statistics that give us a whole picture of the education performance, rather than narrowing down on one simple indicator that tells you one thing but doesn't tell you everything. But I don't know, Steve, if there's anything further that you'd like to add. Steve Davies: It's going back to what the Member raised earlier, in terms of the range of things that you look at--things that can make a difference. So, when Estyn review schools, or we're looking to develop national frameworks for things like mental health and well-being, which look to the practice that enables raising standards, it's collecting that information, both at a national level, through the annual review of Estyn, as well as our engagement with regions and local authorities. So, it's looking at the evidence base that goes beyond, but impacts on data. And, inevitably, we will use the Programme for International Student Assessment, and any other external assessments that come through organisations like the OECD. And even where we've changed the performance measures, we still have, at national level, the ongoing data. So, if you looked at level 2 plus, we believe it is important that children get five good GCSEs--for higher education and for employment. So, we've not lost sight of those at a national level--we're not using them as a narrow set of performance measures for individual schools. Kirsty Williams AM: So, if we look at--level 2 plus is a good example. We know that a relentless focus on that single measure, as a way of judging the system, leads to a set of behaviours in schools. It narrows the focus onto a certain part of the cohort, it narrows the curriculum, when we know that children-- Sian Gwenllian AM: I'm not challenging the fact that you've changed the performance measures--I understand that, and having a broader way of looking is better in the long run. I'm just saying, because there's been this change, it makes it more of a challenge--whilst accepting why you've made the changes, but it does present more of a challenge, presumably, because you have to look at more indicators, and take evidence from different places. But I take it that you're confident that the trajectory is going in the right way. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, I think we are making improvements. But you're right: it does make it more challenging. But those changes are being made for the right reasons, as I said, whether that be at level 2 plus. Look at English literature. I understand why perhaps a performance measure around English was introduced, but the effect of that was that significant numbers of children--and, it must be said, usually children who are entitled to free school meals--were suddenly not sitting English literature GCSE. We've changed that performance measure, and guess what? Last year, we saw a significant increase in the number of children that were sitting English literature GCSE. For standards of literacy and oracy, I think studying literature is really, really important, before we even get into the joy of introducing children to the written word and the love of reading. So, we make changes. Yes, it causes challenges, but we're making those changes because we believe that they are in the best interest of children, and that has to trump ease of comparison. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Why have you decided to ask the consortia, Estyn and so on not to report on local data or regional level data? How do we then come to conclusions about what is working if it isn't presented on a local authority and regional basis? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think the thing to say about the communications from Welsh Government, Estyn, and the WLGA is it's not about not communicating the data, it's about challenging people on how that data should be used. So, the data is still available, but it's a challenge to them about how to use that data. So, for instance, when we're presenting data that compares local authority to local authority, you could have a local authority that says,'There we go, I'm above the national average. I don't need to worry about the education in my local authority, because I'm above the average, or I'm better than my neighbour.'That doesn't necessarily mean that everything is right in your local education authority. Perhaps your children should be doing even better than what you're presented with. So, actually, it's not about hiding data; it's about how you use the data appropriately. And sometimes, how we were presenting data in the past was lulling some people into a false sense of security about the performance of their system. So, it's about how you use data, and that's what the communication from Welsh Government and the WLGA and Estyn was about: think very carefully about this data and what it's telling you about your system, and don't be lulled into a false sense of security that you may be doing brilliantly. Or, perhaps, looking at your data, you may think,'Oh, my goodness me, we're not doing very well at all', but, actually, more careful consideration of that might show that your school's impact on those children is really, really a positive one. So, you've got to use that data in the context. So, it's not about less data. If anything, it's about more data and, crucially for me, it's about more intelligent use and interrogation of that data, about truly what it's telling you about your system. Sian Gwenllian AM: But again, the Welsh Government--. You have continued to publish the local and regional level data. So, doesn't that contradict what you've been telling the consortia and everyone else? Kirsty Williams AM: No, not at all. As I said, we're not in the business of trying to hide data--I believe absolutely in full transparency. And in terms of level 2 data, I think I'm not moving away from the point that I think it's really important that more and more children get five really good GCSEs. I think it's important for their life chances. It is about how that data is used, not about hiding data or making that data not available. Steve Davies: Can I, very briefly--? We didn't just send a letter out collectively. We've now carried out training jointly with WLGA and Estyn on how to use that data. So, it's not just looking where your LA is; it's also not looking at whether your school's better than average for the authority. And it is well received, and it should broaden the approach of scrutiny committees to beyond what historically was, if I'm honest, looking at the league table for their authority or looking at the league table of local authorities. It's not that they shouldn't be looking at that, but they need to dig much, much deeper underneath it. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. We're going to go on now to Suzy. I'm going to appeal for brief questions and brief answers so that we can cover the rest of the questions. Suzy Davies AM: I'll shorten these questions, okay. We know why you got rid of the old measures. We've got interim measures now. What are they telling you about the success you've had in trying to avoid the bad behaviour? Short answers. Kirsty Williams AM: It's impossible. [Laughter. ] I think it's inevitable: whatever kind of measures we put in place, people will look to maximise their success in those measures, and I don't think we'll ever come up with a system where those measures are absolutely perfect. What's really important to me is that we're really, really, really challenging schools to look at the performance of all of their children, rather than just at a very, very narrow cohort around those C/D boundaries, which we knew was detrimental, potentially, to more able and talented children and really pushing those Bs to As and those As to A*s, and children for whom actually just getting in to school on a daily basis is an achievement, and the school has done well to provide that. So, our new capped 9 makes sure that there is breadth across a range of subjects, rather than just focusing on a narrower and narrower bunch of subject opportunities for children, and our new third-third-third system enables schools to really look at their performance. So if their capped 9 score is high, what's driving that? Is it because the bottom third of the cohort is doing really well, and the impact on those children is above and beyond what could be expected, but actually, you're not doing very well for your more able and talented; you're not pushing them on? Alternatively, maybe your capped 9 score is because your MAT children are doing incredibly well, but actually, you're not really making the progress for the middle tier of those children. It allows us to have a greater focus on the performance of our FSM children--where they really are within that system. So, it's a much more granular--. And crucially for me, it looks at the impact for every child, because every child has to matter in the system, and what we had before was a narrowing of curriculum choice and a narrowing on a certain cohort of children. Suzy Davies AM: So are the permanent measures likely to be pretty similar to what you've got now? Because the research--I don't know if the research is complete yet. When will you be publishing the new permanent evaluation? Kirsty Williams AM: Sue, you're right: they're interim measures at the moment, and we will need to make sure that the performance measures are aligned to the new curriculum. That, potentially, of course--. Because Wales's review of qualifications potentially has an impact on what those finally will look like, so that work is ongoing at the moment, and unless Steve can tell me off the top of his head when we expect that to be completed by, I will send you a note. But they're interim at the moment, because we need to align them to the new curriculum. Suzy Davies AM: I think we understand that. [Inaudible. ]--date. Steve Davies: No, no. This is not a quick fix. This is a two to three-year research base. The new qualifications for the new curriculum will not start until 2025. They have to be in place for 2022. There's a three-year roll on. I would expect the broad structure of the interim measures to continue over that time. There will be some tweaks for consistency. It's what's wrapped around those interim measures that I touched on earlier: the other evidence that we bring to bear about the effectiveness of a school, but we do want to say to schools that on the whole, broadly speaking, the interim measures will carry on for two, three years. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, and the reason I asked that is right at the beginning of this session, the Minister said to the Chair that this PS100 million that's going into school improvements will be going into things that work. We need some evidence that the interim measures are going to work as well, so when are they going to be evaluated? Steve Davies: Well, we've only just used them for one year. Suzy Davies AM: That's what I'm asking you. Steve Davies: We've signalled that they're only going to be in place for three years. We are carrying out our own review of the impact of those and that's been built in, but I expect the OECD report--because it is an extensive report--to give us feedback on how those things are working now, and some steer, as they did with the last report, as to the direction we would want to go into. Kirsty Williams AM: And what I'm also interested in is those performance management measures around schools. Yes, they're about outcomes for children, but actually are about a broader suite of behaviours within that school, so, yes, qualifications and grades are an important part of a performance measure, but actually, I have other expectations of schools, above and beyond simply qualifications. And so, we would want our permanent set of performance measures to look at a wider set of behaviours within a school, and I think because--. Exams are important--of course they are, qualifications are important--but the way in which those schools achieve those results are also important. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Would you anticipate that including well-being, then? Suzy Davies AM: In a whole-school approach. Kirsty Williams AM: I absolutely--and we need to find a way of how we can truly measure that. Sometimes, children's well-being is influenced by lots of things outside the control of a school. So, I don't want schools to be held accountable for things that they have no control over, because of the circumstances in which a child may be living. But, absolutely: well-being and how the culture of the school addresses well-being is really important to me. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Suzy. Move on to PISA, please. Suzy Davies AM: How useful is PISA for you in helping school improvement? I know that it's not always the thing that you enjoy watching or looking out for. But, genuinely, how useful is it? Kirsty Williams AM: It is one of a range of tools that we need to look at. Sian, quite rightly, talked about consistency. PISA is one thing where there is a level of consistency, so it will continue to be, I think, an important part of how we test how our system is doing. Suzy Davies AM: We know that you are a little bit encouraged, but we are not out of the woods yet. You mentioned this in Plenary when we talked about PISA. How confident are you that we are on track for meeting these targets that were set before your time, or do you think that having those targets is helpful? Is it setting up aspirations that are incapable of being met within a period of time? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, those long-term targets of a score around 500 are part of'Our National Mission', and we have to keep the pressure on to strive. They are testing, but we have to keep the pressure on to strive to reach them. In some cases, I can be quite encouraged. If we look at reading scores for girls, we are almost there, but that just demonstrates what a journey we've got with our boys to address. For me, one of the ways in which we will reach those targets and achieve them is further progress on our more able and talented children. Although we are now performing at an OECD average, I will be the first person to admit that, although we have seen an improvement in the higher level skills of our more able and talented children, we do not perform at an OECD average with regard to those level 6 and level 5 scores. Suzy Davies AM: Even within the UK, really, we are quite far behind. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes. So, I think that's where we really need to push on. That's one of the reasons why we have introduced a more able and talented budget to support that, and our Seren programme, which is delivering fantastic results post-16. That's why we're introducing the principles of Seren earlier into children's careers, bringing it down from year 9 upwards, to be able to drive improvements. So, I think that that's the area that we are particularly keen to work on: making sure that more of our children perform at the OECD average at level 5 and level 6. Clearly, we've got more work to do on reading. We are working with southern Ireland, who have consistently done well with reading scores, to look to see what lessons we can learn to press on with there with reading. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. My final question on this. You recognise it as a priority, particularly for boys. Does that mean that the focus will then drift slightly from maths, where there has been some success; and drift from science, where the encouragement of more people to take GCSE science has reduced the number of high-level passes? Kirsty Williams AM: First, we have to have a system that is capable of doing all of those of things at the same time. We can't accept a system that says,'Well, we can do a bit over here, but that means we have to--.'We have to have a system, Suzy, that can drive improvements at all levels. That's my expectation. Suzy Davies AM: The balloon needs to be bigger not just squeezing it at one end. Kirsty Williams AM: Absolutely, yes. That's my expectation of this system. You have to deliver across all of these. We have seen some progress. As I've said, it's far from perfect, and we've got more work to do, but we have to deliver across all three domains, as we did last time. And I'm not going to make any apologies for changing the performance indicators around science. It was a travesty that there were children who never had the opportunity to sit a science GCSE. We don't have to make assumptions about the nature of many, many, many of those children. We have seen a significant increase in the number of children who are having the opportunity to sit GCSE science and who are passing GCSE science. So, I'm not going to make any apologies about that. One of the reasons that I suspect we have ended up with poor science scores is because of the previous policy around science entries and science qualifications. Again, one of the reasons that we have changed it isn't just solely because we need to do better in PISA, but I think that by changing it, we will see an impact on PISA. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you for that. Lynne Neagle AM: The final set of questions is from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: I just want to discuss an issue that I know is important to you, namely closing the attainment gap between pupils who are eligible for free school meals and those who are not eligible for free school meals. Unfortunately, the problem persists, doesn't it? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes. We are not where we need to be in terms of the performance, not only of our children on free school meals, but the performance of our looked-after children, and the performance of some children from some ethnic minority groups. So, we will continue to look to support those learners in a variety of ways, again looking to amend our practice on the basis of evidence that is given to us from our experts who are there to advise us. There is clearly more that we need to do. There has been some progress in some areas, but it is not where I would want it to be. Sian Gwenllian AM: But, this is despite the fact that there is PS475 million that has been invested in the pupil development grant, for this exact purpose of closing the attainment gap. But, the problem persists, and in some places, it's deteriorating. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think that, as I said, I am not shying away from any assumption or declaration that we need to do better. But, I do think that we need to acknowledge where progress has been made. If we go back to look at what PISA has said about our performance, the PISA results show that pupils in Wales are relatively more able to overcome the disadvantage of their background than is the average in OECD countries. So, our children are doing better in that, and that gives me encouragement. That's not me saying that; that's there. If we look at pupils who are eligible for free school meals, they do score below their better-off counterparts in PISA by some 34 points. The gap in England is 40 points. So, again, that gap is smaller here in Wales. If we look at basic levels of qualifications, back in--. It's difficult to make comparisons because of all the reasons we have talked about, but if we look back to 2006 and we look at the very basic level of qualifications, which is a level 1 qualification, we have seen a jump from 9. 4 per cent of children in 2006 achieving a level 1 qualification to over 18 per cent. So, there is progress. There is evidence that the resources that we are spending are making a difference. But, clearly, we are not where we would want to be. That's why we will continue to focus those resources on those children, where we need it. But, we need to do that earlier. Sticking plasters in years 10 and 11 aren't going to cut it. We need to get this right for those children, the moment that they come into a nursery and the moment that they start their formal education at the age of 5. That's how we are going to make the difference. Providing catch-up, of course, we need to do for those kids; we can't throw those year 10s and year 11s to the wind. We have to support those children. But, we will see real improvement when we get in there earlier. Sian Gwenllian AM: But I'm sure that that is a disappointment to you, because it has been a personal priority for you as well. In terms of minority ethnic learners, while there are some groups within that category who are achieving, there is underachievement happening here as well, isn't there? It's not consistent across the minority ethnic group. Is that something that you will be focusing upon? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, and that's why we have committed to maintaining a ring-fenced grant to local authorities of some PS10 million, to support education of our minority ethnic children. But, again, you are right, you are absolutely right, Sian. We need a much more sophisticated conversation about what is really going on in attainment across minority ethnic groups so that we can best target that resource and have a conversation about what the differences are. You are absolutely correct: there is a real mixed picture. If we look at black Welsh girls entitled to free school meals, they perform almost at the national average for all children--not FSM children; the national average for all children. Black Welsh boys don't, but neither do white Welsh boys. So, there is a really complex picture here, and I really welcome a debate about acknowledging the various levels of performance of BAME children, and where the gaps in performance lie. You are quite right: it is a complex picture in the system. I'm committed to continuing to support educational opportunities, and that's why have ring-fenced the minority ethnic achievement grant. There are some interesting data there. Some children are doing very, very well; others, we need to concentrate on. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian, this will need to be the last question, I'm afraid. Sian Gwenllian AM: Sorry? Lynne Neagle AM: This is going to have to be the last question. Sian Gwenllian AM: The last question. Lynne Neagle AM: Yes. Sian Gwenllian AM: Fine. In terms of looked-after children, which is one of the groups where attainment isn't where we would like it to be, there was some improvement in 2016 at key stage 4, but it has been disappointing. Do we know what's been happening in 2019? Kirsty Williams AM: The 2019 data will be published next month, and there has been significant activity. You are right: in recent years, the data have been poor and not where we would want it to be. That's why we have had a reformed approach to PDG LAC; the employment of PDG LAC co-ordinators across the regions. We've identified new resource in the new financial year to test new approaches, so, for instance, virtual school approaches, where we know, in other systems, that has worked. But, we expect the next set of data around the performance of this particular group of learners in March. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay, and you hope to see progress. Kirsty Williams AM: I don't want to speculate, but I hope so. Sian Gwenllian AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you very much. We have come to the end of our time, so can I thank you, Minister, and your official for attending this morning? We have had a wide-ranging and very detailed discussion that will be very useful for the committee. As usual, you will be sent a transcript following the meeting to check for accuracy, but thank you again, both of you, for your attendance this morning. Diolch yn fawr. Okay. Item 3 is papers to note. Paper to note 1 is a letter from ERW providing additional information following the evidence session on 16 January. Paper to note 2 is a letter from Central South Consortium, similarly providing additional information following the evidence session. Paper to note 3 is a letter from the Noah's Ark Children's Hospital for Wales regarding children's rights in Wales, following up on some additional information there. Paper to note 4 is a letter from Qualifications Wales, providing additional information following the annual report scrutiny session in January. Item 4, then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting? Are Members content? Thank you.

According to Kirsty, it was the current model. Although they failed to persuade the local government to adopt a new national model, the local authorities had already seen the value in it. However, they were at the stage looking to a wholesale review of the national model. Now they were all focusing on the work of implementation. At the same time, they had the risk of losing focus because of the emphasis on the curriculum and other aspects of the educational system.

tr-sq-1237

tr-sq-1237_0

When would the work of implementation be completed? Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received apologies for absence from Janet Finch-Saunders, and also from Dawn Bowden, and I'd like to welcome Huw Irranca-Davies, who is substituting for Dawn Bowden. Can I ask Members if there are any declarations of interest, please? No. Okay. We'll move on, then, to our evidence session for our inquiry on school improvement and raising standards. I'd like to welcome Kirsty Williams AM, Minister for Education, and Steve Davies, director of education. Thank you both for attending and for your detailed paper in advance of the meeting. We've got a lot of ground to cover, so we'll go straight into questions, if that's okay. If I can just start by asking you: to what extent is the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development still involved in the Welsh Government's school improvement journey? Kirsty Williams AM: First of all, can I thank the committee for their invitation this morning, and their interest in this particular area? As you will be aware, on coming into office, the director and I agreed to ask the OECD to do a rapid review of the state of Welsh education at the beginning of this Assembly term. They did that, and the feedback from that work informed the publication and content of the national mission. I was very clear in the national mission that I would invite the OECD back to review our progress against that mission, and that has happened in the tail end of last year, and the OECD will publish their latest report on Welsh education next month now, in March. So, the expectation is that the report will be published on 23 March, and my intention is to make a statement to the Chamber on 24 March. The nature of that review is part of our ongoing development of self-evaluation. So, we talk a lot about self-evaluation in the school system. Actually, the continuing relationship with OECD is about self-evaluation of the entirety of the system and Welsh Government. We don't want to accept our own orthodoxy and just be in a bubble where we are constantly listening to ourselves and those people who might want to agree with us or tell us what we want to hear. So, the OECD is our best attempt of having some external verification of where we are. That's a risk for Ministers and for Government, because we want them to give an honest evaluation of where we are, but that's a really important tool for me, to ensure that we're constantly testing ourselves. The nature of that review is that the OECD were able to talk to whoever they felt it was important to talk to, so that included practitioners on the ground, elements of the middle tier, as well as Welsh Government. And I know, Chair--I hope you'll be pleased to hear this--that the reports of this committee have formed parts of their review, looking at how the Senedd itself has contributed to and has held the Government to account. So, as I said, we expect our report to be published towards the end of March. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you, Minister. Can I ask about the powers under the School Standards and Organisation (Wales) Act 2013, to ask you to tell us about the use of those powers either by Welsh Government or by local authorities, and how effective you feel that legislation has been? Kirsty Williams AM: Okay. Well, as you'll be aware, local authorities have quite extensive powers of intervention in schools if they feel that is necessary. If I'm honest, I think there's a mixed picture, with some local authorities using those powers not on a regular basis, but obviously demonstrating a willingness to use those powers. There are other local authorities who don't seem to have used them. Since that legislation came into being, there have been a number of reasons, because of course a local authority has to give a reason for using those powers of intervention. They usually focus on standards, but sometimes they focus on a breakdown in governance arrangements, perhaps, or a failure or a breakdown in financial management. So, sometimes the budgetary issues trigger an intervention power. And the types of interventions that have been used have included, in some cases, appointing additional governors to governing bodies, or suspending a school's delegated budget so the local authority takes on, then, financial control of that particular school, or sometimes applying to the Welsh Government to entirely replace a governing body and establish an intervention board. So, if I can give you an example of where that's been used and has been successful, in Flintshire. They applied to Welsh Government for two interim executive boards, in Sir Richard Gwyn Catholic High School and in Ysgol Trefonnen. They applied to us. Those governing bodies were dissolved. The IEBs were put in place and both of those schools, which had been in special measures, moved quite rapidly, actually, out of special measures. Perhaps the most recent example of this is one that the Chair will know very well in her own constituency of Torfaen, in Cwmbran High School, where Torfaen has intervened in that case. The Welsh Government has not used those powers to date. My expectation always is that local authorities should be the first port of call, and I would encourage--and we always encourage--local authorities to take a proactive approach to intervention and to use those powers. But it's my belief that it is they who are best placed initially to do that. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you, Minister. Can I ask, then, about the national evaluation and improvement resource and how significant a role that will play in the raising of school standards, and how you feel it's evolved since it was first conceived? Kirsty Williams AM: So, this brings us back to the principle of self-evaluation and something, if we're honest, we've not been very good at. If you look at a number of chief inspectors'reports into the Welsh education system, self-evaluation has always been identified as something that is missing or underdeveloped in our system to date, hence, then, the work to establish not a new approach, but a more robust approach to self-evaluation. We've done that in conjunction, again, with the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. It's really important, throughout the entirety of our reform journey that that's done in co-construction, because we want this resource to be usable in schools. So, it's all very well having a conceptual idea and people outside the classroom working on it, but if it's of no practical use to a school leadership team, then we won't see the impact. So, it's--. We're in phase 2 at the moment, where we're doing--. So, the initial resource has been developed by the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. We're in the testing phase at the moment and having it evaluated itself, with a view to introducing that resource across the system at the start of the new academic year, in September 2020. I truly believe that, if we're to make progress in Welsh education, we have to develop the skills within our system to have robust self-evaluation. This resource gives us continuity of approach right the way across Wales. So, it's not left to an individual school to come up with a system; it's right the way across the system. My hope would be that those principles could then be applied to local education authorities, to regional school improvement services and Welsh Government as part of a whole-system approach to self-evaluation. I don't know if there's anything more you want to add, Steve. Steve Davies: Just to add that the other critical partners are Estyn themselves. Kirsty Williams AM: Oh, yes, sorry. Steve Davies: So, they have played a critical role and, as we know, as the Minister has said in the past, she may introduce policy and practice, but if Estyn are part of it then schools, usually, because they recognise that it will be part of the inspection process--it gives it greater push and support around it. So, they've been key players within it. Kirsty Williams AM: And I think, if I just say as well, that the external perception of what that's about is really important. It's not a test of school readiness for reform, it is a genuine attempt for a school to evaluate their strengths, their weaknesses and where they need to go next. It's not an Estyn checklist. And because of the word'toolkit'--the feedback was that it gave the impression of a checklist,'Just do this and check list'. So, we're actually going to change the name of that resource. So, it'll be called the national evaluation and improvement resource, rather than the toolkit, because, as I said, the feedback was that'toolkit'gave the impression of a checklist exercise, and it's got to be about more than that if it's going to be meaningful. So, it'll be changed to an'improvement resource'. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Before I bring Suzy in, can I just welcome Sian Gwenllian, who is joining us via video-conference in north Wales? Morning, Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Good morning. Can you hear me? Lynne Neagle AM: We can, yes. We can hear you very nicely, thank you. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Yes. Only a very quick one. It's about the development of the-- Kirsty Williams AM: The resource. Suzy Davies AM: Yes, the resource, thank you--about whether there were any conflicting ideas in the process of development that made it quite difficult to zone in on something that school leadership teams, in particular, could rely on. Were there differences of opinion on what this should look like? Kirsty Williams AM: Not that I'm aware of from the practitioners that I've spoken to who have been part of that. So, for instance, Suzy, you will know the very small school of Gladestry. The head of Gladestry has been involved in this process, and she said that she'd really enjoyed the process of working alongside Estyn and the OECD as a school leader to be able to shape it. But I'm not aware that there's been conflict in that process. Suzy Davies AM: I'm not suggesting that there has been; I'm just interested as to how it had worked, that's all. Steve Davies: Chair, I think, inevitably, when you bring stakeholders together, they're not going to be in total agreement as to how it's going to work, and I think initially one of the challenges was having Estyn there as part of the facilitation group. There are always some concerns that, actually, it's coming from a to inspect, oral, judgmental tick box. So, we had some early day challenges where we had to convince--and, ultimately, Estyn convinced them--that they were there to help and support as opposed to to inspect, and that the model that was developed, as the Minister said, was not going to be a tick box,'You are good at this part of self-evaluation', it was to build the skillsets up. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. So, it's got their full confidence. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, and I think again, also, what--. You know, four years into the job, what I've reflected on as well is there is this sometimes a feeling out there that the Minister says all the right stuff, but you're not actually going to do it, so, when you talk about a new approach to doing things, you're not actually serious about it. So, trying to build that confidence that we are serious about developing a new system around self-improvement, which is different from accountability--sometimes, the practitioners are like,'Oh, yes, we've heard it all before but it never actually happens.'And I think that's been a part of the constant--not pressure, but the responsibility on Welsh Government is in following through. So, we said that we were going to do this in the national mission, and we are going to do it. I'm really proud that there or thereabouts, a few months either way, we've actually kept to the timetable as outlined in the national mission, and that helps build confidence within the sector that we are committed to that programme and we're going to do what we say we're going to do. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: And a final question from me: how effective do you think the investment in school standards has been in this Assembly term, as opposed to the approach taken in the last Assembly term, where there was the protection put in place for core school budgets? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think, first of all, it's important that, whilst this additional resource is specifically targeted at school standards, that is only a part of a much wider education budget, a budget that--you know--is incredibly complex. And so it is really challenging to be able to draw straight lines--you know,'We did this and it's resulted in that'--given that we're looking at the entirety of school funding here. What's been really important is that, if you drill down into what that money has been spent on, 50 per cent of it has been directed towards professional learning in one form or another to support our teaching professionals. And that's been really important to me. I've said it time and time again: an education system cannot exceed the quality of the people who stand in front of our children day in, day out to work with them and teach them. Therefore, that investment in staff and investment in the professional learning of our staff and support for them I think is making a difference already but, importantly, will continue to make a difference. But I think it is really challenging to be able to say,'Well, we spent this bit of money and it definitely led to that', because it's such a complex picture. But that money, the way it's been spent, has been driven by evidence. And, again, what we do know from international best practice, what do we know that works in driving up standards, and then how can we align the money that we've got to supporting that? And, as I said, 50 per cent of that money has gone directly to simply supporting the professional learning of those who work with our children. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you very much. We're going to talk now a bit about schools causing concern with questions from Huw Irranca-Davies. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Thank you, Chair. If I can, just first of all, zoom in on the way in which we actually decide which schools need what support. So, one of the interesting questions for us is how do we use the different systems out there. So, we've got the school categorisation system, which we're familiar with. We've also got Estyn inspection reports, then we've got other intelligence, including local intelligence on the ground. How do you decide from that? How is it decided what schools need support, need challenge? How do we do that? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, you're right: what we have is a variety of ways in which we can identify schools that need support, or need to be challenged on their practice. But it's important not to confuse them either. So, our primary route to doing this is our school categorisation system. Sometimes, and perhaps this is inevitable--. That system is primarily there as a triage system around identifying where our resource should be spent. So, our school improvement service--it's a risk-based approach, so they can evaluate where they need to put their time, effort and resource. Sometimes, it's used by other people for other things, but that is not its primary purpose; its primary purpose there is not one of accountability, it is one of identifying risk and aligning that then to the support that is available. Estyn--now that is part of that accountability system. That is our method of holding schools and their governing bodies to account for their practice and for the work that they do. Both systems, of course, are evolving. So, how we do categorisation has changed over a period of time. The elements that go into making that judgment around the levels of support have changed, and, of course, the Estyn inspection regime is also changing. At the moment, schools are only inspected once every seven years. We're moving to a system where Estyn will be more regularly in schools. So, they are two systems, but they are different and they look at different things. But our categorisation system is how we look for those ways of identifying support for schools. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: And you've made, with feedback over the last few years, adjustments to the way that the categorisation system works. Are you content with where it is now, or do you see more adjustments being made? Have you got things in front of you that you're getting feedback on saying'Well, we need to tweak this again a little bit'? Kirsty Williams AM: So, that system has evolved over time. So, when it started, it was just a tool around secondary schools. Now, it covers the breadth of schools. Initially, on coming into office, when I first came in, it was purely driven by data, and it was also done in quartiles. So, there was a certain number of schools that had to be in the bottom, which drove practitioners mad. They were like'Ah, every year, there's going to be some of us that have to be in the bottom quartile', because of the way in which it was arranged, which seemed very unfair to them. So, we've changed that. It's not just purely driven on data now; there are other judgments--the professional judgments of our challenge advisers are taken into account. And I would expect that situation to continue to evolve to align itself to our curriculum reform, and our changes in self-evaluation. So, it's not a fixed point. I expect that that system will continue to evolve and change, so that it complements and assists in the reform journey as other parts of the system change. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Thanks for that. I think, for any impartial reader of the way that the trends have been going on this, there is some good news within that, in that, certainly, those schools that might have been identified as have been okay but coasting along, seem to be moving up the categories, although we still do have that--. Well, it's what the system is there to do, it's to identify those schools that do need that additional support. And I like your analogy of a triage system--'You're fit; keep on doing what you're doing and do it well; you need more support, we'll put the support in.'But, can I turn to those schools that are causing significant concern, and how we identify them? The Estyn chief inspector's conclusions at the end of the 2017-18 report that these schools are not being identified early enough--there's a need to do something urgently about these concerns, particularly in secondary schools. Have we addressed that? Are you content that we've addressed that concern? Was he right? Kirsty Williams AM: No, the chief inspector is absolutely right--absolutely right. I've got no beef with that statement at all. In some ways, when a school goes into special measures, in a way, that's a failure of the system, because that should have been identified sooner. So I've got no beef, as I said, with the chief inspector saying that. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: So just to ask, bearing in mind the earlier discussion we were having, how is it that we don't identify those schools? Kirsty Williams AM: That's it--you're quite right. Undoubtedly, what categorisation has done is led to a greater understanding, I think, on behalf of local education authorities'and school improvement services'knowledge about their schools. I think knowledge around schools is greatly enhanced by that process. But we are not there yet in terms of necessarily, then, moving those schools more quickly, once they've been identified as needing the highest level of support to see improvement. And secondary schools is a particular, particular challenge. So you will have seen from the last publication of categorisation data that our primary sector continues to improve--more and more and more of our primary schools are in a green rating, which is very satisfying to me. But we have got more of an issue with secondary schools, and we have a particular issue with the same schools being identified in that level of categorisation. So even though we've identified them as needing that extra help, they are not moving at pace away from that system. So there are two things that we are doing at the moment. The first is, we are, again, looking at different sets of data that can give us even earlier warning systems that things are going wrong in a school--and perhaps Steve will explain later. For instance, staff sickness, and carefully monitoring staff sickness, because there is a direct correlation between high levels of staff sickness in a school and what is going on in the school. And Steve can explain some of this work later. But we're piloting a new approach to those schools that are causing concern. Each local authority has been asked to identify two of their high schools that they are particularly worried about. And we have a new multi-agency approach, working with those schools to try and move them more forward. So it's two from each region, a multi-agency panel, working with the school. And that multi-agency panel includes the school itself, the local authority, the regional consortia school improvement staff, Estyn and Welsh Government--as a multi-agency panel to support improvement in that school. So, for instance, what would normally happen, Estyn would come in, Estyn would make a judgment on the school--requiring special measures or urgent improvement--and Estyn would go away. They'd go away for six months, and then they'd come back in six months, and they'd make another judgment,'No, still not good enough', and disappear for six months. We're saying--Estyn and the Welsh Government have agreed that's not the best approach; Estyn need to be part of the solution, rather than just coming and making a judgment. The initial feedback from this trial is very, very positive. Actually, we've had local authorities coming to us and saying,'Can we put more schools in? Rather than just having two of our high schools, can we engage more in this project and this pilot?'It's being evaluated by Cardiff Metropolitan University and Swansea University, so we're having some academic overview to see, actually, does this approach work, can we evidence it--that it actually makes a difference? And it's actually--I'd like to claim all the credit for it, but it's actually not dissimilar to something that's happening in Scotland as well. But we knew that carrying on doing the same old thing clearly wasn't moving these schools, we needed a new approach, and this is what we're doing at the moment. So it's relatively new, but the initial feedback is positive. Steve, I don't know-- Steve Davies: I think your important point is about,'What about the schools that are sliding in that direction?'And it's bringing together what we know from Estyn, but also, critically, local authorities have knowledge of their schools, and so do consortia. We've got to be better at bringing those together. So, the Minister gave the example of staff sickness--not always a trigger, but it's one of those. If you look at movement of pupils out of a school, you can look at complaints, you can look at, actually, emerging increased use of HR resources that a school pulls on a local authority. None of these have been pushed up into the public domain, but they're important antennae. The point the Minister made about Estyn as well is, historically, when they go into special measures, Estyn, at the end of that week, call in, historically, either the region or the local authority, they will feed back to one of them, and then they go away. So, they are staying with it. So, we are brining together the knowledge. But, as the Minister said, we want to keep a very clear distinction between the accountability and the transparency to the public, to parents, with the very detailed collective work of that multi-agency group to actually make that difference over time. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Okay. So, does that--. I'd love to go further, but time is against us. Does that deal with the issue of the schools that have been identified in those categories of requiring significant improvement and requiring special measures? Are those the ones that will be identified now, or is that above and beyond that again? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, those are the ones that are primarily at the forefront of our minds, but this way of sharing data better, to step in earlier, is part of our attempt to address what the chief inspector says about stepping in early--not waiting until a school gets into special measures and a formal judgment from Estyn of that, but actually using that intelligence to get support in there earlier. The three elements that that multi-agency approach look at are: what are the fundamentals that need addressing in this school? What is the capacity of the school itself to be able to address those fundamentals? And, what extra support needs to go into that senior management team and the governing body to get those fundamentals addressed? And actually, what does sustainable improvement look like? Because, again, one of the issues, sometimes, that happens is, a school goes into a category with Estyn, there's a big push and a big,'We must do something'and the school comes out, but actually, that improvement is not sustainable. It's the low-hanging fruit; it's the easy wins that have been achieved, but actually, perhaps some of the fundamental challenges underlying in that school haven't been addressed in that process. So, this is about what will sustainable improvement look like in six months, what's it going to look like in 12 months and what's it going to look like in 18 months. So, actually, a more strategic, longer term approach to real change in a school rather than, perhaps, some of the easy-to-fix items that make a school as if it's doing better, but we really haven't tackled some of the underlying problems that make that school vulnerable to slipping back. Does that make sense? Lynne Neagle AM: I've got a couple of supplementaries on--. Sorry? Kirsty Williams AM: Does that make sense? Lynne Neagle AM: Yes. We've got a couple of supplementaries on this, first from Suzy and then from Sian. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you for that, Chair. Obviously, I'm pleased to hear that this work is being done, but I'm wondering--. What strikes me, in the recent past, at least, particularly as we've got the usual suspects in this category--. I've got to ask myself why it is that councils have been reluctant, perhaps, to step in with these schools earlier, particularly as they've got consortia or middle-tier support as well. Has there been a deficit in that space that has meant that councils don't feel equipped to step in? I just don't really get it why they've been reluctant to step in so far. If they've been nervous about doing it, because they don't feel that they've got the tools to do it, then I think that's pretty important, because as you were saying, we were talking about fundamentals; surely, councils have been able to deal with fundamentals, and more importantly, consortia up until now. Because, obviously, we're asking these players to give us evidence at some point, so perhaps I'd like to challenge them on how come we're here now. Kirsty Williams AM: And rightly so. Suzy Davies AM: I'm not laying this at your door. Kirsty Williams AM: And rightly so. I guess each local authority will have an explanation for each individual school, I suspect. What's crucial to me is that we have to--. I see our job as corralling the collective effort, and I think, for too long in the system, there has been a lack of co-ordination. So, this is about bringing and corralling a collective effort to address this, going forward, in more sustainable way. And I think it does come back to this issue around self-evaluation and a willingness to be open, honest and upfront about some of the challenges that we've got. It's not easy, is it? It's not easy to accept or to acknowledge sometimes when things are-- Suzy Davies AM: That they don't know how to do this. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, that they're going badly, or perhaps they don't know exactly how to make the difference. So this approach, as I said, is a new way of trying to coral that collective effort across the board. But, I don't know if Steve--because you've done other roles in the system, so perhaps you've got a different insight. Steve Davies: I think you're right. The variation across the country, across local authorities--. There are some local authorities that we've worked with and we identify have taken the appropriate action. There are others that we're working with, and yes, at its best, it's done as a joint exercise where they use their regional school improvement service to help in the identification that there is a need for this. They take advice as to what the action is, whether it is, as the Minister said, in the more significant areas, a board, or whether a warning notice comes in terms of standards or finance. So, we're working with them and we're working with the Welsh Local Government Association to share that practice. An example of that work is: we have done a development training session for cabinet members for education, and scrutiny leads for education across Wales, and all 22 local authorities came to that and engaged with that. That was partly about self-improvement, but it was also about where significant issues arise, you have to constructively confront them. And that comes with what the region knows, and increasingly, we're looking to have it consistently across 22 local authorities, so they are collecting all the additional data that we referred to earlier, so they can legitimately hold a mirror up and say,'This is a real concern that we have. We're not punishing you, but we're registering the seriousness, and we want you to address it.'And we're making progress. I believe it's genuinely more consistent now, but I'd be lying if I said that there was consistency across all 22 local authorities. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. I'm conscious of time. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. I've got a supplementary from Sian, then back to Huw. Sian Gwenllian AM: Because you are moving to a more sophisticated approach in terms of identifying problems sooner, and so can offer the support earlier, is it time to think about moving away from the system of categorisation entirely? That is, has the categorisation system reached the end of its usefulness, and is the multi-agency approach, this more sophisticated approach, a better way, ultimately, of being able to assist schools in moving forward? Kirsty Williams AM: I think, Sian, as I said earlier, the categorisation system has evolved over time, and my expectation is that it will continue to evolve, because it has to be consistent with our overall approach to school improvement and raising standards. I expect OECD will have feedback for us on this important part of our system, and we'll wait to see exactly what they say about it, but as I said in answer to Huw Irranca-Davies earlier, I haven't got a closed mind; we've demonstrated over the last four years our willingness to change the system to make it a smarter system, and we will continue to keep that under review, as we move forward. If I could just go back briefly, it doesn't sound like a very exciting thing, does it, when we say we've been doing work with the WLGA, with cabinet members, but also scrutiny, because that's a really important part of the jigsaw as well, is actually local government scrutiny of the performance of your education portfolio holder and the leadership of your council. So this is about trying to up the ante on all sides, so that those issues around'What are you doing in your local authority to use the powers that you have?'You know, sometimes, making sure that everybody in that authority--those in power and those who are there to hold those in power to account--have the necessary skills, knowledge and understanding to do that appropriately. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Huw, briefly. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Yes, briefly. I only have one final question. We've talked a lot about early identification; getting in there and then managing the improvement, this triage approach there, and then getting some grip of it, as well, in doing all of that. But my question now is on what we currently have. I won't touch on the primary schools, but let's just look at secondary schools--11 per cent of secondary schools inspected in the last two academic years judged as unsatisfactory, needing urgent improvement. There will always be secondary schools and primary schools that hit moments of crisis for one reason or another, but 11 per cent to me, and to any layperson, would seem unreasonably high. Are you--? It would be daft to ask you if you're content. What is a level that you would be content with of having schools in red category in Wales? Kirsty Williams AM: You're right. Schools will need different levels of support at different points, and sometimes, it's not because of a crisis. So, for instance, in my region, we do have an increase in the number of schools in the amber category. That's because we've seen in that particular region a number of headteachers retire because they've reached retirement age, and there are new headteachers. Well, that is a moment of risk in the school--when senior leadership changes. Nothing else has changed in that school, but the simple fact that you have a new leader, sometimes in those cases it might be their first headship. That means that that school is going to need a little bit of extra support, so it isn't always just a crisis that needs extra support, there are just general things that happen in the life of a school that could lead to it. But you're absolutely right--we have a particular challenge in the secondary sector where we have not been able to move individual schools forward at pace. And 11 per cent is not acceptable to me, Huw, which is why we have introduced this new pilot to address those schools where, persistently, we have concerns about their ability to move forward. If we'd have carried on doing the same thing, I suspect we would have just carried on getting the same result--hence the need for a new approach to those schools that are causing concern. Steve Davies: Very briefly, the things we talked about earlier was how we measure the performance of schools, particularly at GCSEs, with a narrow focus. As was said earlier, some of these are the same groups--they trip in and then they don't come out. Our belief is, from research, that they concentrate on squeezing the pips to get the grades up in some small areas for a period of time, and you can do that by targeting and immersing them. Estyn can tick the box to say your grades have got better, but we haven't handled the serious underpinning issues--leadership, teaching and learning, and bringing those together. As the Minister said, what does sustainable improvement look like in six, 12,18 months? It isn't just, as important as they are, getting those exam grades up a bit. They're the fundamental--. And if they're all agreed as the indicators at the outset, we're more likely--. So it's multi-agency; it's not a little activity, it's a major strategy. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Hefin David has some questions now on the middle tier. Hefin David AM: I'd like to consider the work of the consortia. In 2016, your election manifesto very clearly said that you wanted to abolish regional consortia--three words in it. Why haven't you done it? Kirsty Williams AM: Because, given that you're such a keen student of my manifesto, you'll also know that-- Hefin David AM: It was only three words. Kirsty Williams AM: The Liberal Democrat manifesto also said that we supported major local government reform and a major reduction in the number of local government units. That hasn't happened. I have to say genuinely, my experience over the last four years has proven to me the value of regional working, and in the absence of significant local government reform, I think it's absolutely vital that we have scale in school improvement services--scale that I don't think can be delivered across 22 individual local authorities. Hefin David AM: Okay. So, if there was local government reform, you would abolish the consortia. Kirsty Williams AM: I think if there was significant local government reform and we could demonstrate that those units had such a scale that they could perform the functions of regional consortia, then I think it would be inevitable that any education Minister would look to see whether there was an opportunity to change structures. But in the absence of that, Hefin, I have been absolutely convinced whilst doing this job that you need larger units to be able to carry out successful school improvement work, and I think it would be reckless to advocate the system going back to school improvement being organised in 22 different ways. Hefin David AM: Okay. Do you think that the work of the four consortia has been consistent and effective? Kirsty Williams AM: The school improvement services? Hefin David AM: The four consortia. Kirsty Williams AM: I think, as with individual local education authorities, there are some regional consortia services that have performed really highly--and that's not me saying that, that's Estyn, but gives us assurance around that--and there are others that need to improve. I think the consortia themselves would admit that they, since their establishment, have found new ways of working. Initially, they were very separate entities that did things their own way. Increasingly, over recent years, we have seen those consortia working together on a national approach, but delivered on a regional basis. So I think they themselves have evolved over time. But we are constantly looking for optimum delivery from those particular organisations, but as I said, I think it would be absolutely reckless to go back to a situation where school improvement services were being delivered individually on 22 different bases. Hefin David AM: Okay. I'm happy to accept that you've changed your opinion there; that's no problem at all. But with regard to the four consortia, and we'll take Education through Regional Working as an example, it does things differently to the other three. Is that a cause for concern, or do you think that's entirely appropriate? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, ERW does things differently, but then so does the Education Achievement Service. EAS is constituted in a different way to the Central South Consortium. What I'm interested in is not necessarily how they are constituted and organised, I'm interested in the effectiveness of that organisation to deliver for children and for teachers. ERW has got particular challenges, and we continue to work with those in ERW to address those, but increasingly, as I said, what we are seeing the regional consortia do is develop a national approach to school improvement services but deliver that on a regional basis so that there is greater consistency in terms of delivery. Hefin David AM: Are you happy that, within the ERW area, local authorities employ their own improvement advisers, rather than doing it in the way that the others do? Kirsty Williams AM: We have discussed this at length with them. My preference would be for school improvement officers to be employed in the centre, and we continue to have those discussions, but what's really important to understand is that the regional consortia are not a beast of the Government; they are a beast of the local authorities that have worked together to create a school improvement service that meets their needs. So we can't impose that solution, and we continue to discuss with ERW what is the optimal way, and they continue to discuss with their constituent local authorities about how that should be organised. Hefin David AM: Are you concerned that Neath Port Talbot have given notice that they want to withdraw from regional working? Kirsty Williams AM: I think it's really disappointing that Neath Port Talbot have published that notice. What's important for me is to understand--not for me, it will be important for Estyn. It will be really important for us to understand how Neath Port Talbot intend to support their schools and their teachers if they were to withdraw from ERW, especially at what is a very, very critical time. The regional consortia have a key role to play in supporting systems with the introduction of the curriculum. I would want to know from Neath Port Talbot how they are going to do that without being part of that organisation. And, of course, there's the added complexity that so much of our money is channelled through to schools via the regional consortia. So, I would want to understand from Neath Port Talbot how they're going to safeguard their schools and make sure that the children who are receiving their education in Neath Port Talbot are not disadvantaged if they were to follow through on that decision. Hefin David AM: Do you feel that it's your role to intervene in that area and instruct Neath Port Talbot and ERW as to how they should resolve this issue? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, as I said, I would be seeking assurances-- Hefin David AM: What does that mean, though,'seeking assurances'? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, Neath Port Talbot would need to demonstrate to me how they're going to address these issues. If they're not part of ERW and their schools and their children are not going to be in receipt of the support from ERW, as I said, especially at this critical time, how are they intending to do that? I haven't seen those plans, but if they were to push forward and follow through on the notice, I would want to see them and I suspect Estyn would want to see them also. Hefin David AM: Okay, just last issue on that: you're just waiting to see what Neath Port Talbot do next, then. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, we have written to Neath Port Talbot to ask them to demonstrate to us, if they were to pull out of ERW, how they're going to meet their functions. I have not heard back from them. Hefin David AM: Steve, did you want to say something? Steve Davies: Obviously--[Inaudible. ]--that point. We wrote to them last Friday, and we are awaiting their response now. Hefin David AM: Okay. So, that's where we are. Okay. There was the document in 2015--'National model for regional working'. Is that the current document? Are there plans to change or update it, or is that exactly where we stand? Kirsty Williams AM: So, that is the current model. Some work was undertaken in 2017 and 2018 to look to update that model and revise that model. Some specific recommendations were put forward about additional services that could be organised on a regional basis; primarily, that is a specialist human resources resource. We know that, because of austerity in some local authorities, HR departments have been really stretched. Education HR is a specialist service, it's not generic. It's often a service that--. I see that as part of a school improvement service. Support for governors also has been stretched within individual local authorities. So, a proposal was put forward to include specialist HR and governor support as part of the regional model. That was rejected by local government. Our local authorities did not want to include that in the regional model. However, I must say, having presented that evidence, some of our local authorities, even though there wasn't a national agreement to put that into the national model, have pooled their resources, and those services are being delivered and supported on a regional basis. So, for instance, the Education Achievement Service now provide specialist HR resource, and EAS and Central South provide governor support. So, although we weren't successful in persuading local government to adopt a new national model, local authorities in those areas saw the value of moving that way. Hefin David AM: So, with that in mind, and perhaps I'll put this to Steve Davies, everything the Minister just said, and also the line in the document--'The implementation of this model will change over time'-- is it time to go back to that document and review it from a procedural point of view? Steve Davies: I don't think it's necessarily timely to go back and have a complete review of it. But, certainly, we are in ongoing discussions with the Welsh Local Government Association, both in terms of work with local authorities, and the type of intervention in schools. So, we keep a constant watch as to which areas that we believe we could develop further. We are not currently intending to do a wholesale review of that. As the Minister touched on earlier, there is some work to get consistency across the current area, particularly, as we just mentioned, in relation to ERW work. So, it's getting a consistent approach at that level, and sharing the practice. I think what is emerging, as the Minister said, is that there are two regions who have already made this shift to pool services. I think the two other regions are seeing and will see the benefits of that, and instead of forcing it through, we'd expect that to evolve. But we're not, at this stage, looking to a wholesale review of the national model. Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin. Hefin David AM: And Professor Dylan Jones's strategic delivery group seems to have had quite a warm welcome in the sector. Is it fair to say that? Kirsty Williams AM: I believe so. I'm very grateful to Dylan for his hard work and his skill in chairing that group, and I think it's been welcomed by all, so that we can get that clarity and consistency about the roles and responsibilities of the individual partners and players in the middle tier. Hefin David AM: And when will the work be completed, and what will the outcomes be? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, the group is currently engaging with Steve and other officials on agreeing a plan, but also, crucially, that plan is there to support the successful implementation of the curriculum, so that we're very clear about the roles and responsibilities in the middle tier in this crucial phase following the publication. We have to move now from the publication into a relentless focus on implementation. The history of devolution is full of fantastic documents, and, shall I say, patchy implementation. The work that has gone into that curriculum is too important for implementation to be left to chance. It's too important. It's too good to be left to chance. So, everything now is a relentless focus on successful implementation. Hefin David AM: Yes, but I'm thinking that the strategic delivery is reviewing the role of the middle tier. So, you know, what do we expect to see from it, notwithstanding the kind of softly, softly approach that you've already talked about? Steve Davies: It was set up, actually, about 18 months ago--just under. It was set up to build collective efficacy, because what people out there are seeing is that there's a confusion of roles, in what the regions are doing, and it was building that collective efficacy so everyone was behind the wheel. So, they've been looking at who is doing what for the last 18 months, and exploring and making some changes themselves. It's not just what they do with Government or what they do with each other; it's just happened that it's timely, because one of the key bits of feedback we believe we will get from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development is we have had co-construction, we'd had collective effort, but we need to do more, particularly within the middle tier. This is not controlled by Government, it is arm's length from Government, and it's not their job to get it ready for the new curriculum--that's a key part of it. This group will have an ongoing role; it's not a task and finish group. It does feed back in to the Minister but there's no formal mechanism by which they have to report. Hefin David AM: Okay, that's very clear. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. I've got supplementaries from Suzy, then Sian. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Briefly, please. Suzy Davies AM: I think this is a really interesting evidence session. What I'm about to say, I say it even though I'm a big localist: it all seems to be heading in one direction of a national service. Is the strategic group even thinking in these terms, obviously building in local accountability? But it'll just make it so much easier in terms of accountability and consistency to monitor what the middle tier does, if it's a national service, like the National Adoption Service. Local delivery, national service--is it heading in that direction? Kirsty Williams AM: That's not the intention of setting the group up. As Steve just said, I receive feedback from Dylan, because I meet Dylan in this particular capacity on a planned basis. He is there to give me advice on the middle tier, and to give me advice on what he thinks Welsh Government needs to do. But I've not had that conversation with him about a national service. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Well, thank you for that. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: What I was going to raise has been answered already, that is that, from what I can see, the work that Professor Dylan Jones is doing has evolved somewhat. I felt that, originally, the idea was to look at the middle tier in terms of any kind of duplication that was happening, and where it was possible to tighten up the people going into schools from different directions. But it appears that it has evolved to be something that's much more than that, and that it is placing a focus on the curriculum and other aspects of the educational system. Is there a risk for them to lose focus in that sense? Kirsty Williams AM: No, not at all. I think they are very, very clear around establishing roles and responsibilities for each of the players and to be very clear about the expectations that each part of the middle tier can have of each other, as to what they can expect from their partners in the middle tier. And absolutely, it is about making sure that there isn't duplication, that people aren't second-guessing each other's work, and there are clear demarcations about who does what in the system, and, as I said, knowing that you can rely on your colleague in the middle tier to do the bit that they are responsible for. So, I don't think there's a question of it losing focus. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We've got a lot of areas to cover so we are going to have to pick up our pace a bit. The next questions are from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Thinking about you as a Minister trying to see what the long-term trends are with regard to raising standards and improving educational attainment, is that difficult, because the performance measures have changed, haven't they? We can't compare like-for-like now, because of the changes that have been made in the way that performance is measured. So, to begin with, is that a challenge, to see whether progress has been made? And secondly, what evidence do you as Minister use to look at the long-term trends? Kirsty Williams AM: The first thing to say, with regard to changes to performance measures--you're right that change to those does make it, in some cases, more difficult to look at trends over a period of time. But those changes are made for really good reasons. If we change a performance measure, it is done to ensure that it is in the best interests of learners. And I think the best interests of learners always trumps the ease of comparison. I understand that, for researchers and for opposition Members, even for Ministers, it would be simpler to have the same set of measures over a period of time. But if we know that those things are driving behaviours that are unhelpful to children, and not in the best interests of children, then we have to change them, even thought that then does create challenges in different areas. With regard to what do we look at, there are a number of ways that we gain data and look at data in the system: everything from the categorisation system we spoke of earlier, and trends in categorisation; we look at Estyn reports; we continue to look at examination results. But we're trying to develop a broader range of data and statistics that give us a whole picture of the education performance, rather than narrowing down on one simple indicator that tells you one thing but doesn't tell you everything. But I don't know, Steve, if there's anything further that you'd like to add. Steve Davies: It's going back to what the Member raised earlier, in terms of the range of things that you look at--things that can make a difference. So, when Estyn review schools, or we're looking to develop national frameworks for things like mental health and well-being, which look to the practice that enables raising standards, it's collecting that information, both at a national level, through the annual review of Estyn, as well as our engagement with regions and local authorities. So, it's looking at the evidence base that goes beyond, but impacts on data. And, inevitably, we will use the Programme for International Student Assessment, and any other external assessments that come through organisations like the OECD. And even where we've changed the performance measures, we still have, at national level, the ongoing data. So, if you looked at level 2 plus, we believe it is important that children get five good GCSEs--for higher education and for employment. So, we've not lost sight of those at a national level--we're not using them as a narrow set of performance measures for individual schools. Kirsty Williams AM: So, if we look at--level 2 plus is a good example. We know that a relentless focus on that single measure, as a way of judging the system, leads to a set of behaviours in schools. It narrows the focus onto a certain part of the cohort, it narrows the curriculum, when we know that children-- Sian Gwenllian AM: I'm not challenging the fact that you've changed the performance measures--I understand that, and having a broader way of looking is better in the long run. I'm just saying, because there's been this change, it makes it more of a challenge--whilst accepting why you've made the changes, but it does present more of a challenge, presumably, because you have to look at more indicators, and take evidence from different places. But I take it that you're confident that the trajectory is going in the right way. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, I think we are making improvements. But you're right: it does make it more challenging. But those changes are being made for the right reasons, as I said, whether that be at level 2 plus. Look at English literature. I understand why perhaps a performance measure around English was introduced, but the effect of that was that significant numbers of children--and, it must be said, usually children who are entitled to free school meals--were suddenly not sitting English literature GCSE. We've changed that performance measure, and guess what? Last year, we saw a significant increase in the number of children that were sitting English literature GCSE. For standards of literacy and oracy, I think studying literature is really, really important, before we even get into the joy of introducing children to the written word and the love of reading. So, we make changes. Yes, it causes challenges, but we're making those changes because we believe that they are in the best interest of children, and that has to trump ease of comparison. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Why have you decided to ask the consortia, Estyn and so on not to report on local data or regional level data? How do we then come to conclusions about what is working if it isn't presented on a local authority and regional basis? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think the thing to say about the communications from Welsh Government, Estyn, and the WLGA is it's not about not communicating the data, it's about challenging people on how that data should be used. So, the data is still available, but it's a challenge to them about how to use that data. So, for instance, when we're presenting data that compares local authority to local authority, you could have a local authority that says,'There we go, I'm above the national average. I don't need to worry about the education in my local authority, because I'm above the average, or I'm better than my neighbour.'That doesn't necessarily mean that everything is right in your local education authority. Perhaps your children should be doing even better than what you're presented with. So, actually, it's not about hiding data; it's about how you use the data appropriately. And sometimes, how we were presenting data in the past was lulling some people into a false sense of security about the performance of their system. So, it's about how you use data, and that's what the communication from Welsh Government and the WLGA and Estyn was about: think very carefully about this data and what it's telling you about your system, and don't be lulled into a false sense of security that you may be doing brilliantly. Or, perhaps, looking at your data, you may think,'Oh, my goodness me, we're not doing very well at all', but, actually, more careful consideration of that might show that your school's impact on those children is really, really a positive one. So, you've got to use that data in the context. So, it's not about less data. If anything, it's about more data and, crucially for me, it's about more intelligent use and interrogation of that data, about truly what it's telling you about your system. Sian Gwenllian AM: But again, the Welsh Government--. You have continued to publish the local and regional level data. So, doesn't that contradict what you've been telling the consortia and everyone else? Kirsty Williams AM: No, not at all. As I said, we're not in the business of trying to hide data--I believe absolutely in full transparency. And in terms of level 2 data, I think I'm not moving away from the point that I think it's really important that more and more children get five really good GCSEs. I think it's important for their life chances. It is about how that data is used, not about hiding data or making that data not available. Steve Davies: Can I, very briefly--? We didn't just send a letter out collectively. We've now carried out training jointly with WLGA and Estyn on how to use that data. So, it's not just looking where your LA is; it's also not looking at whether your school's better than average for the authority. And it is well received, and it should broaden the approach of scrutiny committees to beyond what historically was, if I'm honest, looking at the league table for their authority or looking at the league table of local authorities. It's not that they shouldn't be looking at that, but they need to dig much, much deeper underneath it. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. We're going to go on now to Suzy. I'm going to appeal for brief questions and brief answers so that we can cover the rest of the questions. Suzy Davies AM: I'll shorten these questions, okay. We know why you got rid of the old measures. We've got interim measures now. What are they telling you about the success you've had in trying to avoid the bad behaviour? Short answers. Kirsty Williams AM: It's impossible. [Laughter. ] I think it's inevitable: whatever kind of measures we put in place, people will look to maximise their success in those measures, and I don't think we'll ever come up with a system where those measures are absolutely perfect. What's really important to me is that we're really, really, really challenging schools to look at the performance of all of their children, rather than just at a very, very narrow cohort around those C/D boundaries, which we knew was detrimental, potentially, to more able and talented children and really pushing those Bs to As and those As to A*s, and children for whom actually just getting in to school on a daily basis is an achievement, and the school has done well to provide that. So, our new capped 9 makes sure that there is breadth across a range of subjects, rather than just focusing on a narrower and narrower bunch of subject opportunities for children, and our new third-third-third system enables schools to really look at their performance. So if their capped 9 score is high, what's driving that? Is it because the bottom third of the cohort is doing really well, and the impact on those children is above and beyond what could be expected, but actually, you're not doing very well for your more able and talented; you're not pushing them on? Alternatively, maybe your capped 9 score is because your MAT children are doing incredibly well, but actually, you're not really making the progress for the middle tier of those children. It allows us to have a greater focus on the performance of our FSM children--where they really are within that system. So, it's a much more granular--. And crucially for me, it looks at the impact for every child, because every child has to matter in the system, and what we had before was a narrowing of curriculum choice and a narrowing on a certain cohort of children. Suzy Davies AM: So are the permanent measures likely to be pretty similar to what you've got now? Because the research--I don't know if the research is complete yet. When will you be publishing the new permanent evaluation? Kirsty Williams AM: Sue, you're right: they're interim measures at the moment, and we will need to make sure that the performance measures are aligned to the new curriculum. That, potentially, of course--. Because Wales's review of qualifications potentially has an impact on what those finally will look like, so that work is ongoing at the moment, and unless Steve can tell me off the top of his head when we expect that to be completed by, I will send you a note. But they're interim at the moment, because we need to align them to the new curriculum. Suzy Davies AM: I think we understand that. [Inaudible. ]--date. Steve Davies: No, no. This is not a quick fix. This is a two to three-year research base. The new qualifications for the new curriculum will not start until 2025. They have to be in place for 2022. There's a three-year roll on. I would expect the broad structure of the interim measures to continue over that time. There will be some tweaks for consistency. It's what's wrapped around those interim measures that I touched on earlier: the other evidence that we bring to bear about the effectiveness of a school, but we do want to say to schools that on the whole, broadly speaking, the interim measures will carry on for two, three years. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, and the reason I asked that is right at the beginning of this session, the Minister said to the Chair that this PS100 million that's going into school improvements will be going into things that work. We need some evidence that the interim measures are going to work as well, so when are they going to be evaluated? Steve Davies: Well, we've only just used them for one year. Suzy Davies AM: That's what I'm asking you. Steve Davies: We've signalled that they're only going to be in place for three years. We are carrying out our own review of the impact of those and that's been built in, but I expect the OECD report--because it is an extensive report--to give us feedback on how those things are working now, and some steer, as they did with the last report, as to the direction we would want to go into. Kirsty Williams AM: And what I'm also interested in is those performance management measures around schools. Yes, they're about outcomes for children, but actually are about a broader suite of behaviours within that school, so, yes, qualifications and grades are an important part of a performance measure, but actually, I have other expectations of schools, above and beyond simply qualifications. And so, we would want our permanent set of performance measures to look at a wider set of behaviours within a school, and I think because--. Exams are important--of course they are, qualifications are important--but the way in which those schools achieve those results are also important. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Would you anticipate that including well-being, then? Suzy Davies AM: In a whole-school approach. Kirsty Williams AM: I absolutely--and we need to find a way of how we can truly measure that. Sometimes, children's well-being is influenced by lots of things outside the control of a school. So, I don't want schools to be held accountable for things that they have no control over, because of the circumstances in which a child may be living. But, absolutely: well-being and how the culture of the school addresses well-being is really important to me. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Suzy. Move on to PISA, please. Suzy Davies AM: How useful is PISA for you in helping school improvement? I know that it's not always the thing that you enjoy watching or looking out for. But, genuinely, how useful is it? Kirsty Williams AM: It is one of a range of tools that we need to look at. Sian, quite rightly, talked about consistency. PISA is one thing where there is a level of consistency, so it will continue to be, I think, an important part of how we test how our system is doing. Suzy Davies AM: We know that you are a little bit encouraged, but we are not out of the woods yet. You mentioned this in Plenary when we talked about PISA. How confident are you that we are on track for meeting these targets that were set before your time, or do you think that having those targets is helpful? Is it setting up aspirations that are incapable of being met within a period of time? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, those long-term targets of a score around 500 are part of'Our National Mission', and we have to keep the pressure on to strive. They are testing, but we have to keep the pressure on to strive to reach them. In some cases, I can be quite encouraged. If we look at reading scores for girls, we are almost there, but that just demonstrates what a journey we've got with our boys to address. For me, one of the ways in which we will reach those targets and achieve them is further progress on our more able and talented children. Although we are now performing at an OECD average, I will be the first person to admit that, although we have seen an improvement in the higher level skills of our more able and talented children, we do not perform at an OECD average with regard to those level 6 and level 5 scores. Suzy Davies AM: Even within the UK, really, we are quite far behind. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes. So, I think that's where we really need to push on. That's one of the reasons why we have introduced a more able and talented budget to support that, and our Seren programme, which is delivering fantastic results post-16. That's why we're introducing the principles of Seren earlier into children's careers, bringing it down from year 9 upwards, to be able to drive improvements. So, I think that that's the area that we are particularly keen to work on: making sure that more of our children perform at the OECD average at level 5 and level 6. Clearly, we've got more work to do on reading. We are working with southern Ireland, who have consistently done well with reading scores, to look to see what lessons we can learn to press on with there with reading. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. My final question on this. You recognise it as a priority, particularly for boys. Does that mean that the focus will then drift slightly from maths, where there has been some success; and drift from science, where the encouragement of more people to take GCSE science has reduced the number of high-level passes? Kirsty Williams AM: First, we have to have a system that is capable of doing all of those of things at the same time. We can't accept a system that says,'Well, we can do a bit over here, but that means we have to--.'We have to have a system, Suzy, that can drive improvements at all levels. That's my expectation. Suzy Davies AM: The balloon needs to be bigger not just squeezing it at one end. Kirsty Williams AM: Absolutely, yes. That's my expectation of this system. You have to deliver across all of these. We have seen some progress. As I've said, it's far from perfect, and we've got more work to do, but we have to deliver across all three domains, as we did last time. And I'm not going to make any apologies for changing the performance indicators around science. It was a travesty that there were children who never had the opportunity to sit a science GCSE. We don't have to make assumptions about the nature of many, many, many of those children. We have seen a significant increase in the number of children who are having the opportunity to sit GCSE science and who are passing GCSE science. So, I'm not going to make any apologies about that. One of the reasons that I suspect we have ended up with poor science scores is because of the previous policy around science entries and science qualifications. Again, one of the reasons that we have changed it isn't just solely because we need to do better in PISA, but I think that by changing it, we will see an impact on PISA. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you for that. Lynne Neagle AM: The final set of questions is from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: I just want to discuss an issue that I know is important to you, namely closing the attainment gap between pupils who are eligible for free school meals and those who are not eligible for free school meals. Unfortunately, the problem persists, doesn't it? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes. We are not where we need to be in terms of the performance, not only of our children on free school meals, but the performance of our looked-after children, and the performance of some children from some ethnic minority groups. So, we will continue to look to support those learners in a variety of ways, again looking to amend our practice on the basis of evidence that is given to us from our experts who are there to advise us. There is clearly more that we need to do. There has been some progress in some areas, but it is not where I would want it to be. Sian Gwenllian AM: But, this is despite the fact that there is PS475 million that has been invested in the pupil development grant, for this exact purpose of closing the attainment gap. But, the problem persists, and in some places, it's deteriorating. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think that, as I said, I am not shying away from any assumption or declaration that we need to do better. But, I do think that we need to acknowledge where progress has been made. If we go back to look at what PISA has said about our performance, the PISA results show that pupils in Wales are relatively more able to overcome the disadvantage of their background than is the average in OECD countries. So, our children are doing better in that, and that gives me encouragement. That's not me saying that; that's there. If we look at pupils who are eligible for free school meals, they do score below their better-off counterparts in PISA by some 34 points. The gap in England is 40 points. So, again, that gap is smaller here in Wales. If we look at basic levels of qualifications, back in--. It's difficult to make comparisons because of all the reasons we have talked about, but if we look back to 2006 and we look at the very basic level of qualifications, which is a level 1 qualification, we have seen a jump from 9. 4 per cent of children in 2006 achieving a level 1 qualification to over 18 per cent. So, there is progress. There is evidence that the resources that we are spending are making a difference. But, clearly, we are not where we would want to be. That's why we will continue to focus those resources on those children, where we need it. But, we need to do that earlier. Sticking plasters in years 10 and 11 aren't going to cut it. We need to get this right for those children, the moment that they come into a nursery and the moment that they start their formal education at the age of 5. That's how we are going to make the difference. Providing catch-up, of course, we need to do for those kids; we can't throw those year 10s and year 11s to the wind. We have to support those children. But, we will see real improvement when we get in there earlier. Sian Gwenllian AM: But I'm sure that that is a disappointment to you, because it has been a personal priority for you as well. In terms of minority ethnic learners, while there are some groups within that category who are achieving, there is underachievement happening here as well, isn't there? It's not consistent across the minority ethnic group. Is that something that you will be focusing upon? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, and that's why we have committed to maintaining a ring-fenced grant to local authorities of some PS10 million, to support education of our minority ethnic children. But, again, you are right, you are absolutely right, Sian. We need a much more sophisticated conversation about what is really going on in attainment across minority ethnic groups so that we can best target that resource and have a conversation about what the differences are. You are absolutely correct: there is a real mixed picture. If we look at black Welsh girls entitled to free school meals, they perform almost at the national average for all children--not FSM children; the national average for all children. Black Welsh boys don't, but neither do white Welsh boys. So, there is a really complex picture here, and I really welcome a debate about acknowledging the various levels of performance of BAME children, and where the gaps in performance lie. You are quite right: it is a complex picture in the system. I'm committed to continuing to support educational opportunities, and that's why have ring-fenced the minority ethnic achievement grant. There are some interesting data there. Some children are doing very, very well; others, we need to concentrate on. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian, this will need to be the last question, I'm afraid. Sian Gwenllian AM: Sorry? Lynne Neagle AM: This is going to have to be the last question. Sian Gwenllian AM: The last question. Lynne Neagle AM: Yes. Sian Gwenllian AM: Fine. In terms of looked-after children, which is one of the groups where attainment isn't where we would like it to be, there was some improvement in 2016 at key stage 4, but it has been disappointing. Do we know what's been happening in 2019? Kirsty Williams AM: The 2019 data will be published next month, and there has been significant activity. You are right: in recent years, the data have been poor and not where we would want it to be. That's why we have had a reformed approach to PDG LAC; the employment of PDG LAC co-ordinators across the regions. We've identified new resource in the new financial year to test new approaches, so, for instance, virtual school approaches, where we know, in other systems, that has worked. But, we expect the next set of data around the performance of this particular group of learners in March. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay, and you hope to see progress. Kirsty Williams AM: I don't want to speculate, but I hope so. Sian Gwenllian AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you very much. We have come to the end of our time, so can I thank you, Minister, and your official for attending this morning? We have had a wide-ranging and very detailed discussion that will be very useful for the committee. As usual, you will be sent a transcript following the meeting to check for accuracy, but thank you again, both of you, for your attendance this morning. Diolch yn fawr. Okay. Item 3 is papers to note. Paper to note 1 is a letter from ERW providing additional information following the evidence session on 16 January. Paper to note 2 is a letter from Central South Consortium, similarly providing additional information following the evidence session. Paper to note 3 is a letter from the Noah's Ark Children's Hospital for Wales regarding children's rights in Wales, following up on some additional information there. Paper to note 4 is a letter from Qualifications Wales, providing additional information following the annual report scrutiny session in January. Item 4, then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting? Are Members content? Thank you.

Now the group was engaging with Steve and other officials on agreeing a plan, but also, that plan was there to support the successful implementation of the curriculum. Based on the words from Kirsty, they were very clear about the roles and responsibilities in the middle tier in this phrase following the publication. Now they had moved into a relentless focus on implementation. Basically, everything now was an emphasis on successful implementation.

tr-sq-1238

tr-sq-1238_0

What should be expected from reviewing the role of the middle tier? Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received apologies for absence from Janet Finch-Saunders, and also from Dawn Bowden, and I'd like to welcome Huw Irranca-Davies, who is substituting for Dawn Bowden. Can I ask Members if there are any declarations of interest, please? No. Okay. We'll move on, then, to our evidence session for our inquiry on school improvement and raising standards. I'd like to welcome Kirsty Williams AM, Minister for Education, and Steve Davies, director of education. Thank you both for attending and for your detailed paper in advance of the meeting. We've got a lot of ground to cover, so we'll go straight into questions, if that's okay. If I can just start by asking you: to what extent is the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development still involved in the Welsh Government's school improvement journey? Kirsty Williams AM: First of all, can I thank the committee for their invitation this morning, and their interest in this particular area? As you will be aware, on coming into office, the director and I agreed to ask the OECD to do a rapid review of the state of Welsh education at the beginning of this Assembly term. They did that, and the feedback from that work informed the publication and content of the national mission. I was very clear in the national mission that I would invite the OECD back to review our progress against that mission, and that has happened in the tail end of last year, and the OECD will publish their latest report on Welsh education next month now, in March. So, the expectation is that the report will be published on 23 March, and my intention is to make a statement to the Chamber on 24 March. The nature of that review is part of our ongoing development of self-evaluation. So, we talk a lot about self-evaluation in the school system. Actually, the continuing relationship with OECD is about self-evaluation of the entirety of the system and Welsh Government. We don't want to accept our own orthodoxy and just be in a bubble where we are constantly listening to ourselves and those people who might want to agree with us or tell us what we want to hear. So, the OECD is our best attempt of having some external verification of where we are. That's a risk for Ministers and for Government, because we want them to give an honest evaluation of where we are, but that's a really important tool for me, to ensure that we're constantly testing ourselves. The nature of that review is that the OECD were able to talk to whoever they felt it was important to talk to, so that included practitioners on the ground, elements of the middle tier, as well as Welsh Government. And I know, Chair--I hope you'll be pleased to hear this--that the reports of this committee have formed parts of their review, looking at how the Senedd itself has contributed to and has held the Government to account. So, as I said, we expect our report to be published towards the end of March. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you, Minister. Can I ask about the powers under the School Standards and Organisation (Wales) Act 2013, to ask you to tell us about the use of those powers either by Welsh Government or by local authorities, and how effective you feel that legislation has been? Kirsty Williams AM: Okay. Well, as you'll be aware, local authorities have quite extensive powers of intervention in schools if they feel that is necessary. If I'm honest, I think there's a mixed picture, with some local authorities using those powers not on a regular basis, but obviously demonstrating a willingness to use those powers. There are other local authorities who don't seem to have used them. Since that legislation came into being, there have been a number of reasons, because of course a local authority has to give a reason for using those powers of intervention. They usually focus on standards, but sometimes they focus on a breakdown in governance arrangements, perhaps, or a failure or a breakdown in financial management. So, sometimes the budgetary issues trigger an intervention power. And the types of interventions that have been used have included, in some cases, appointing additional governors to governing bodies, or suspending a school's delegated budget so the local authority takes on, then, financial control of that particular school, or sometimes applying to the Welsh Government to entirely replace a governing body and establish an intervention board. So, if I can give you an example of where that's been used and has been successful, in Flintshire. They applied to Welsh Government for two interim executive boards, in Sir Richard Gwyn Catholic High School and in Ysgol Trefonnen. They applied to us. Those governing bodies were dissolved. The IEBs were put in place and both of those schools, which had been in special measures, moved quite rapidly, actually, out of special measures. Perhaps the most recent example of this is one that the Chair will know very well in her own constituency of Torfaen, in Cwmbran High School, where Torfaen has intervened in that case. The Welsh Government has not used those powers to date. My expectation always is that local authorities should be the first port of call, and I would encourage--and we always encourage--local authorities to take a proactive approach to intervention and to use those powers. But it's my belief that it is they who are best placed initially to do that. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you, Minister. Can I ask, then, about the national evaluation and improvement resource and how significant a role that will play in the raising of school standards, and how you feel it's evolved since it was first conceived? Kirsty Williams AM: So, this brings us back to the principle of self-evaluation and something, if we're honest, we've not been very good at. If you look at a number of chief inspectors'reports into the Welsh education system, self-evaluation has always been identified as something that is missing or underdeveloped in our system to date, hence, then, the work to establish not a new approach, but a more robust approach to self-evaluation. We've done that in conjunction, again, with the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. It's really important, throughout the entirety of our reform journey that that's done in co-construction, because we want this resource to be usable in schools. So, it's all very well having a conceptual idea and people outside the classroom working on it, but if it's of no practical use to a school leadership team, then we won't see the impact. So, it's--. We're in phase 2 at the moment, where we're doing--. So, the initial resource has been developed by the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. We're in the testing phase at the moment and having it evaluated itself, with a view to introducing that resource across the system at the start of the new academic year, in September 2020. I truly believe that, if we're to make progress in Welsh education, we have to develop the skills within our system to have robust self-evaluation. This resource gives us continuity of approach right the way across Wales. So, it's not left to an individual school to come up with a system; it's right the way across the system. My hope would be that those principles could then be applied to local education authorities, to regional school improvement services and Welsh Government as part of a whole-system approach to self-evaluation. I don't know if there's anything more you want to add, Steve. Steve Davies: Just to add that the other critical partners are Estyn themselves. Kirsty Williams AM: Oh, yes, sorry. Steve Davies: So, they have played a critical role and, as we know, as the Minister has said in the past, she may introduce policy and practice, but if Estyn are part of it then schools, usually, because they recognise that it will be part of the inspection process--it gives it greater push and support around it. So, they've been key players within it. Kirsty Williams AM: And I think, if I just say as well, that the external perception of what that's about is really important. It's not a test of school readiness for reform, it is a genuine attempt for a school to evaluate their strengths, their weaknesses and where they need to go next. It's not an Estyn checklist. And because of the word'toolkit'--the feedback was that it gave the impression of a checklist,'Just do this and check list'. So, we're actually going to change the name of that resource. So, it'll be called the national evaluation and improvement resource, rather than the toolkit, because, as I said, the feedback was that'toolkit'gave the impression of a checklist exercise, and it's got to be about more than that if it's going to be meaningful. So, it'll be changed to an'improvement resource'. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Before I bring Suzy in, can I just welcome Sian Gwenllian, who is joining us via video-conference in north Wales? Morning, Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Good morning. Can you hear me? Lynne Neagle AM: We can, yes. We can hear you very nicely, thank you. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Yes. Only a very quick one. It's about the development of the-- Kirsty Williams AM: The resource. Suzy Davies AM: Yes, the resource, thank you--about whether there were any conflicting ideas in the process of development that made it quite difficult to zone in on something that school leadership teams, in particular, could rely on. Were there differences of opinion on what this should look like? Kirsty Williams AM: Not that I'm aware of from the practitioners that I've spoken to who have been part of that. So, for instance, Suzy, you will know the very small school of Gladestry. The head of Gladestry has been involved in this process, and she said that she'd really enjoyed the process of working alongside Estyn and the OECD as a school leader to be able to shape it. But I'm not aware that there's been conflict in that process. Suzy Davies AM: I'm not suggesting that there has been; I'm just interested as to how it had worked, that's all. Steve Davies: Chair, I think, inevitably, when you bring stakeholders together, they're not going to be in total agreement as to how it's going to work, and I think initially one of the challenges was having Estyn there as part of the facilitation group. There are always some concerns that, actually, it's coming from a to inspect, oral, judgmental tick box. So, we had some early day challenges where we had to convince--and, ultimately, Estyn convinced them--that they were there to help and support as opposed to to inspect, and that the model that was developed, as the Minister said, was not going to be a tick box,'You are good at this part of self-evaluation', it was to build the skillsets up. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. So, it's got their full confidence. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, and I think again, also, what--. You know, four years into the job, what I've reflected on as well is there is this sometimes a feeling out there that the Minister says all the right stuff, but you're not actually going to do it, so, when you talk about a new approach to doing things, you're not actually serious about it. So, trying to build that confidence that we are serious about developing a new system around self-improvement, which is different from accountability--sometimes, the practitioners are like,'Oh, yes, we've heard it all before but it never actually happens.'And I think that's been a part of the constant--not pressure, but the responsibility on Welsh Government is in following through. So, we said that we were going to do this in the national mission, and we are going to do it. I'm really proud that there or thereabouts, a few months either way, we've actually kept to the timetable as outlined in the national mission, and that helps build confidence within the sector that we are committed to that programme and we're going to do what we say we're going to do. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: And a final question from me: how effective do you think the investment in school standards has been in this Assembly term, as opposed to the approach taken in the last Assembly term, where there was the protection put in place for core school budgets? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think, first of all, it's important that, whilst this additional resource is specifically targeted at school standards, that is only a part of a much wider education budget, a budget that--you know--is incredibly complex. And so it is really challenging to be able to draw straight lines--you know,'We did this and it's resulted in that'--given that we're looking at the entirety of school funding here. What's been really important is that, if you drill down into what that money has been spent on, 50 per cent of it has been directed towards professional learning in one form or another to support our teaching professionals. And that's been really important to me. I've said it time and time again: an education system cannot exceed the quality of the people who stand in front of our children day in, day out to work with them and teach them. Therefore, that investment in staff and investment in the professional learning of our staff and support for them I think is making a difference already but, importantly, will continue to make a difference. But I think it is really challenging to be able to say,'Well, we spent this bit of money and it definitely led to that', because it's such a complex picture. But that money, the way it's been spent, has been driven by evidence. And, again, what we do know from international best practice, what do we know that works in driving up standards, and then how can we align the money that we've got to supporting that? And, as I said, 50 per cent of that money has gone directly to simply supporting the professional learning of those who work with our children. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you very much. We're going to talk now a bit about schools causing concern with questions from Huw Irranca-Davies. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Thank you, Chair. If I can, just first of all, zoom in on the way in which we actually decide which schools need what support. So, one of the interesting questions for us is how do we use the different systems out there. So, we've got the school categorisation system, which we're familiar with. We've also got Estyn inspection reports, then we've got other intelligence, including local intelligence on the ground. How do you decide from that? How is it decided what schools need support, need challenge? How do we do that? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, you're right: what we have is a variety of ways in which we can identify schools that need support, or need to be challenged on their practice. But it's important not to confuse them either. So, our primary route to doing this is our school categorisation system. Sometimes, and perhaps this is inevitable--. That system is primarily there as a triage system around identifying where our resource should be spent. So, our school improvement service--it's a risk-based approach, so they can evaluate where they need to put their time, effort and resource. Sometimes, it's used by other people for other things, but that is not its primary purpose; its primary purpose there is not one of accountability, it is one of identifying risk and aligning that then to the support that is available. Estyn--now that is part of that accountability system. That is our method of holding schools and their governing bodies to account for their practice and for the work that they do. Both systems, of course, are evolving. So, how we do categorisation has changed over a period of time. The elements that go into making that judgment around the levels of support have changed, and, of course, the Estyn inspection regime is also changing. At the moment, schools are only inspected once every seven years. We're moving to a system where Estyn will be more regularly in schools. So, they are two systems, but they are different and they look at different things. But our categorisation system is how we look for those ways of identifying support for schools. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: And you've made, with feedback over the last few years, adjustments to the way that the categorisation system works. Are you content with where it is now, or do you see more adjustments being made? Have you got things in front of you that you're getting feedback on saying'Well, we need to tweak this again a little bit'? Kirsty Williams AM: So, that system has evolved over time. So, when it started, it was just a tool around secondary schools. Now, it covers the breadth of schools. Initially, on coming into office, when I first came in, it was purely driven by data, and it was also done in quartiles. So, there was a certain number of schools that had to be in the bottom, which drove practitioners mad. They were like'Ah, every year, there's going to be some of us that have to be in the bottom quartile', because of the way in which it was arranged, which seemed very unfair to them. So, we've changed that. It's not just purely driven on data now; there are other judgments--the professional judgments of our challenge advisers are taken into account. And I would expect that situation to continue to evolve to align itself to our curriculum reform, and our changes in self-evaluation. So, it's not a fixed point. I expect that that system will continue to evolve and change, so that it complements and assists in the reform journey as other parts of the system change. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Thanks for that. I think, for any impartial reader of the way that the trends have been going on this, there is some good news within that, in that, certainly, those schools that might have been identified as have been okay but coasting along, seem to be moving up the categories, although we still do have that--. Well, it's what the system is there to do, it's to identify those schools that do need that additional support. And I like your analogy of a triage system--'You're fit; keep on doing what you're doing and do it well; you need more support, we'll put the support in.'But, can I turn to those schools that are causing significant concern, and how we identify them? The Estyn chief inspector's conclusions at the end of the 2017-18 report that these schools are not being identified early enough--there's a need to do something urgently about these concerns, particularly in secondary schools. Have we addressed that? Are you content that we've addressed that concern? Was he right? Kirsty Williams AM: No, the chief inspector is absolutely right--absolutely right. I've got no beef with that statement at all. In some ways, when a school goes into special measures, in a way, that's a failure of the system, because that should have been identified sooner. So I've got no beef, as I said, with the chief inspector saying that. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: So just to ask, bearing in mind the earlier discussion we were having, how is it that we don't identify those schools? Kirsty Williams AM: That's it--you're quite right. Undoubtedly, what categorisation has done is led to a greater understanding, I think, on behalf of local education authorities'and school improvement services'knowledge about their schools. I think knowledge around schools is greatly enhanced by that process. But we are not there yet in terms of necessarily, then, moving those schools more quickly, once they've been identified as needing the highest level of support to see improvement. And secondary schools is a particular, particular challenge. So you will have seen from the last publication of categorisation data that our primary sector continues to improve--more and more and more of our primary schools are in a green rating, which is very satisfying to me. But we have got more of an issue with secondary schools, and we have a particular issue with the same schools being identified in that level of categorisation. So even though we've identified them as needing that extra help, they are not moving at pace away from that system. So there are two things that we are doing at the moment. The first is, we are, again, looking at different sets of data that can give us even earlier warning systems that things are going wrong in a school--and perhaps Steve will explain later. For instance, staff sickness, and carefully monitoring staff sickness, because there is a direct correlation between high levels of staff sickness in a school and what is going on in the school. And Steve can explain some of this work later. But we're piloting a new approach to those schools that are causing concern. Each local authority has been asked to identify two of their high schools that they are particularly worried about. And we have a new multi-agency approach, working with those schools to try and move them more forward. So it's two from each region, a multi-agency panel, working with the school. And that multi-agency panel includes the school itself, the local authority, the regional consortia school improvement staff, Estyn and Welsh Government--as a multi-agency panel to support improvement in that school. So, for instance, what would normally happen, Estyn would come in, Estyn would make a judgment on the school--requiring special measures or urgent improvement--and Estyn would go away. They'd go away for six months, and then they'd come back in six months, and they'd make another judgment,'No, still not good enough', and disappear for six months. We're saying--Estyn and the Welsh Government have agreed that's not the best approach; Estyn need to be part of the solution, rather than just coming and making a judgment. The initial feedback from this trial is very, very positive. Actually, we've had local authorities coming to us and saying,'Can we put more schools in? Rather than just having two of our high schools, can we engage more in this project and this pilot?'It's being evaluated by Cardiff Metropolitan University and Swansea University, so we're having some academic overview to see, actually, does this approach work, can we evidence it--that it actually makes a difference? And it's actually--I'd like to claim all the credit for it, but it's actually not dissimilar to something that's happening in Scotland as well. But we knew that carrying on doing the same old thing clearly wasn't moving these schools, we needed a new approach, and this is what we're doing at the moment. So it's relatively new, but the initial feedback is positive. Steve, I don't know-- Steve Davies: I think your important point is about,'What about the schools that are sliding in that direction?'And it's bringing together what we know from Estyn, but also, critically, local authorities have knowledge of their schools, and so do consortia. We've got to be better at bringing those together. So, the Minister gave the example of staff sickness--not always a trigger, but it's one of those. If you look at movement of pupils out of a school, you can look at complaints, you can look at, actually, emerging increased use of HR resources that a school pulls on a local authority. None of these have been pushed up into the public domain, but they're important antennae. The point the Minister made about Estyn as well is, historically, when they go into special measures, Estyn, at the end of that week, call in, historically, either the region or the local authority, they will feed back to one of them, and then they go away. So, they are staying with it. So, we are brining together the knowledge. But, as the Minister said, we want to keep a very clear distinction between the accountability and the transparency to the public, to parents, with the very detailed collective work of that multi-agency group to actually make that difference over time. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Okay. So, does that--. I'd love to go further, but time is against us. Does that deal with the issue of the schools that have been identified in those categories of requiring significant improvement and requiring special measures? Are those the ones that will be identified now, or is that above and beyond that again? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, those are the ones that are primarily at the forefront of our minds, but this way of sharing data better, to step in earlier, is part of our attempt to address what the chief inspector says about stepping in early--not waiting until a school gets into special measures and a formal judgment from Estyn of that, but actually using that intelligence to get support in there earlier. The three elements that that multi-agency approach look at are: what are the fundamentals that need addressing in this school? What is the capacity of the school itself to be able to address those fundamentals? And, what extra support needs to go into that senior management team and the governing body to get those fundamentals addressed? And actually, what does sustainable improvement look like? Because, again, one of the issues, sometimes, that happens is, a school goes into a category with Estyn, there's a big push and a big,'We must do something'and the school comes out, but actually, that improvement is not sustainable. It's the low-hanging fruit; it's the easy wins that have been achieved, but actually, perhaps some of the fundamental challenges underlying in that school haven't been addressed in that process. So, this is about what will sustainable improvement look like in six months, what's it going to look like in 12 months and what's it going to look like in 18 months. So, actually, a more strategic, longer term approach to real change in a school rather than, perhaps, some of the easy-to-fix items that make a school as if it's doing better, but we really haven't tackled some of the underlying problems that make that school vulnerable to slipping back. Does that make sense? Lynne Neagle AM: I've got a couple of supplementaries on--. Sorry? Kirsty Williams AM: Does that make sense? Lynne Neagle AM: Yes. We've got a couple of supplementaries on this, first from Suzy and then from Sian. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you for that, Chair. Obviously, I'm pleased to hear that this work is being done, but I'm wondering--. What strikes me, in the recent past, at least, particularly as we've got the usual suspects in this category--. I've got to ask myself why it is that councils have been reluctant, perhaps, to step in with these schools earlier, particularly as they've got consortia or middle-tier support as well. Has there been a deficit in that space that has meant that councils don't feel equipped to step in? I just don't really get it why they've been reluctant to step in so far. If they've been nervous about doing it, because they don't feel that they've got the tools to do it, then I think that's pretty important, because as you were saying, we were talking about fundamentals; surely, councils have been able to deal with fundamentals, and more importantly, consortia up until now. Because, obviously, we're asking these players to give us evidence at some point, so perhaps I'd like to challenge them on how come we're here now. Kirsty Williams AM: And rightly so. Suzy Davies AM: I'm not laying this at your door. Kirsty Williams AM: And rightly so. I guess each local authority will have an explanation for each individual school, I suspect. What's crucial to me is that we have to--. I see our job as corralling the collective effort, and I think, for too long in the system, there has been a lack of co-ordination. So, this is about bringing and corralling a collective effort to address this, going forward, in more sustainable way. And I think it does come back to this issue around self-evaluation and a willingness to be open, honest and upfront about some of the challenges that we've got. It's not easy, is it? It's not easy to accept or to acknowledge sometimes when things are-- Suzy Davies AM: That they don't know how to do this. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, that they're going badly, or perhaps they don't know exactly how to make the difference. So this approach, as I said, is a new way of trying to coral that collective effort across the board. But, I don't know if Steve--because you've done other roles in the system, so perhaps you've got a different insight. Steve Davies: I think you're right. The variation across the country, across local authorities--. There are some local authorities that we've worked with and we identify have taken the appropriate action. There are others that we're working with, and yes, at its best, it's done as a joint exercise where they use their regional school improvement service to help in the identification that there is a need for this. They take advice as to what the action is, whether it is, as the Minister said, in the more significant areas, a board, or whether a warning notice comes in terms of standards or finance. So, we're working with them and we're working with the Welsh Local Government Association to share that practice. An example of that work is: we have done a development training session for cabinet members for education, and scrutiny leads for education across Wales, and all 22 local authorities came to that and engaged with that. That was partly about self-improvement, but it was also about where significant issues arise, you have to constructively confront them. And that comes with what the region knows, and increasingly, we're looking to have it consistently across 22 local authorities, so they are collecting all the additional data that we referred to earlier, so they can legitimately hold a mirror up and say,'This is a real concern that we have. We're not punishing you, but we're registering the seriousness, and we want you to address it.'And we're making progress. I believe it's genuinely more consistent now, but I'd be lying if I said that there was consistency across all 22 local authorities. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. I'm conscious of time. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. I've got a supplementary from Sian, then back to Huw. Sian Gwenllian AM: Because you are moving to a more sophisticated approach in terms of identifying problems sooner, and so can offer the support earlier, is it time to think about moving away from the system of categorisation entirely? That is, has the categorisation system reached the end of its usefulness, and is the multi-agency approach, this more sophisticated approach, a better way, ultimately, of being able to assist schools in moving forward? Kirsty Williams AM: I think, Sian, as I said earlier, the categorisation system has evolved over time, and my expectation is that it will continue to evolve, because it has to be consistent with our overall approach to school improvement and raising standards. I expect OECD will have feedback for us on this important part of our system, and we'll wait to see exactly what they say about it, but as I said in answer to Huw Irranca-Davies earlier, I haven't got a closed mind; we've demonstrated over the last four years our willingness to change the system to make it a smarter system, and we will continue to keep that under review, as we move forward. If I could just go back briefly, it doesn't sound like a very exciting thing, does it, when we say we've been doing work with the WLGA, with cabinet members, but also scrutiny, because that's a really important part of the jigsaw as well, is actually local government scrutiny of the performance of your education portfolio holder and the leadership of your council. So this is about trying to up the ante on all sides, so that those issues around'What are you doing in your local authority to use the powers that you have?'You know, sometimes, making sure that everybody in that authority--those in power and those who are there to hold those in power to account--have the necessary skills, knowledge and understanding to do that appropriately. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Huw, briefly. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Yes, briefly. I only have one final question. We've talked a lot about early identification; getting in there and then managing the improvement, this triage approach there, and then getting some grip of it, as well, in doing all of that. But my question now is on what we currently have. I won't touch on the primary schools, but let's just look at secondary schools--11 per cent of secondary schools inspected in the last two academic years judged as unsatisfactory, needing urgent improvement. There will always be secondary schools and primary schools that hit moments of crisis for one reason or another, but 11 per cent to me, and to any layperson, would seem unreasonably high. Are you--? It would be daft to ask you if you're content. What is a level that you would be content with of having schools in red category in Wales? Kirsty Williams AM: You're right. Schools will need different levels of support at different points, and sometimes, it's not because of a crisis. So, for instance, in my region, we do have an increase in the number of schools in the amber category. That's because we've seen in that particular region a number of headteachers retire because they've reached retirement age, and there are new headteachers. Well, that is a moment of risk in the school--when senior leadership changes. Nothing else has changed in that school, but the simple fact that you have a new leader, sometimes in those cases it might be their first headship. That means that that school is going to need a little bit of extra support, so it isn't always just a crisis that needs extra support, there are just general things that happen in the life of a school that could lead to it. But you're absolutely right--we have a particular challenge in the secondary sector where we have not been able to move individual schools forward at pace. And 11 per cent is not acceptable to me, Huw, which is why we have introduced this new pilot to address those schools where, persistently, we have concerns about their ability to move forward. If we'd have carried on doing the same thing, I suspect we would have just carried on getting the same result--hence the need for a new approach to those schools that are causing concern. Steve Davies: Very briefly, the things we talked about earlier was how we measure the performance of schools, particularly at GCSEs, with a narrow focus. As was said earlier, some of these are the same groups--they trip in and then they don't come out. Our belief is, from research, that they concentrate on squeezing the pips to get the grades up in some small areas for a period of time, and you can do that by targeting and immersing them. Estyn can tick the box to say your grades have got better, but we haven't handled the serious underpinning issues--leadership, teaching and learning, and bringing those together. As the Minister said, what does sustainable improvement look like in six, 12,18 months? It isn't just, as important as they are, getting those exam grades up a bit. They're the fundamental--. And if they're all agreed as the indicators at the outset, we're more likely--. So it's multi-agency; it's not a little activity, it's a major strategy. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Hefin David has some questions now on the middle tier. Hefin David AM: I'd like to consider the work of the consortia. In 2016, your election manifesto very clearly said that you wanted to abolish regional consortia--three words in it. Why haven't you done it? Kirsty Williams AM: Because, given that you're such a keen student of my manifesto, you'll also know that-- Hefin David AM: It was only three words. Kirsty Williams AM: The Liberal Democrat manifesto also said that we supported major local government reform and a major reduction in the number of local government units. That hasn't happened. I have to say genuinely, my experience over the last four years has proven to me the value of regional working, and in the absence of significant local government reform, I think it's absolutely vital that we have scale in school improvement services--scale that I don't think can be delivered across 22 individual local authorities. Hefin David AM: Okay. So, if there was local government reform, you would abolish the consortia. Kirsty Williams AM: I think if there was significant local government reform and we could demonstrate that those units had such a scale that they could perform the functions of regional consortia, then I think it would be inevitable that any education Minister would look to see whether there was an opportunity to change structures. But in the absence of that, Hefin, I have been absolutely convinced whilst doing this job that you need larger units to be able to carry out successful school improvement work, and I think it would be reckless to advocate the system going back to school improvement being organised in 22 different ways. Hefin David AM: Okay. Do you think that the work of the four consortia has been consistent and effective? Kirsty Williams AM: The school improvement services? Hefin David AM: The four consortia. Kirsty Williams AM: I think, as with individual local education authorities, there are some regional consortia services that have performed really highly--and that's not me saying that, that's Estyn, but gives us assurance around that--and there are others that need to improve. I think the consortia themselves would admit that they, since their establishment, have found new ways of working. Initially, they were very separate entities that did things their own way. Increasingly, over recent years, we have seen those consortia working together on a national approach, but delivered on a regional basis. So I think they themselves have evolved over time. But we are constantly looking for optimum delivery from those particular organisations, but as I said, I think it would be absolutely reckless to go back to a situation where school improvement services were being delivered individually on 22 different bases. Hefin David AM: Okay. I'm happy to accept that you've changed your opinion there; that's no problem at all. But with regard to the four consortia, and we'll take Education through Regional Working as an example, it does things differently to the other three. Is that a cause for concern, or do you think that's entirely appropriate? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, ERW does things differently, but then so does the Education Achievement Service. EAS is constituted in a different way to the Central South Consortium. What I'm interested in is not necessarily how they are constituted and organised, I'm interested in the effectiveness of that organisation to deliver for children and for teachers. ERW has got particular challenges, and we continue to work with those in ERW to address those, but increasingly, as I said, what we are seeing the regional consortia do is develop a national approach to school improvement services but deliver that on a regional basis so that there is greater consistency in terms of delivery. Hefin David AM: Are you happy that, within the ERW area, local authorities employ their own improvement advisers, rather than doing it in the way that the others do? Kirsty Williams AM: We have discussed this at length with them. My preference would be for school improvement officers to be employed in the centre, and we continue to have those discussions, but what's really important to understand is that the regional consortia are not a beast of the Government; they are a beast of the local authorities that have worked together to create a school improvement service that meets their needs. So we can't impose that solution, and we continue to discuss with ERW what is the optimal way, and they continue to discuss with their constituent local authorities about how that should be organised. Hefin David AM: Are you concerned that Neath Port Talbot have given notice that they want to withdraw from regional working? Kirsty Williams AM: I think it's really disappointing that Neath Port Talbot have published that notice. What's important for me is to understand--not for me, it will be important for Estyn. It will be really important for us to understand how Neath Port Talbot intend to support their schools and their teachers if they were to withdraw from ERW, especially at what is a very, very critical time. The regional consortia have a key role to play in supporting systems with the introduction of the curriculum. I would want to know from Neath Port Talbot how they are going to do that without being part of that organisation. And, of course, there's the added complexity that so much of our money is channelled through to schools via the regional consortia. So, I would want to understand from Neath Port Talbot how they're going to safeguard their schools and make sure that the children who are receiving their education in Neath Port Talbot are not disadvantaged if they were to follow through on that decision. Hefin David AM: Do you feel that it's your role to intervene in that area and instruct Neath Port Talbot and ERW as to how they should resolve this issue? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, as I said, I would be seeking assurances-- Hefin David AM: What does that mean, though,'seeking assurances'? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, Neath Port Talbot would need to demonstrate to me how they're going to address these issues. If they're not part of ERW and their schools and their children are not going to be in receipt of the support from ERW, as I said, especially at this critical time, how are they intending to do that? I haven't seen those plans, but if they were to push forward and follow through on the notice, I would want to see them and I suspect Estyn would want to see them also. Hefin David AM: Okay, just last issue on that: you're just waiting to see what Neath Port Talbot do next, then. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, we have written to Neath Port Talbot to ask them to demonstrate to us, if they were to pull out of ERW, how they're going to meet their functions. I have not heard back from them. Hefin David AM: Steve, did you want to say something? Steve Davies: Obviously--[Inaudible. ]--that point. We wrote to them last Friday, and we are awaiting their response now. Hefin David AM: Okay. So, that's where we are. Okay. There was the document in 2015--'National model for regional working'. Is that the current document? Are there plans to change or update it, or is that exactly where we stand? Kirsty Williams AM: So, that is the current model. Some work was undertaken in 2017 and 2018 to look to update that model and revise that model. Some specific recommendations were put forward about additional services that could be organised on a regional basis; primarily, that is a specialist human resources resource. We know that, because of austerity in some local authorities, HR departments have been really stretched. Education HR is a specialist service, it's not generic. It's often a service that--. I see that as part of a school improvement service. Support for governors also has been stretched within individual local authorities. So, a proposal was put forward to include specialist HR and governor support as part of the regional model. That was rejected by local government. Our local authorities did not want to include that in the regional model. However, I must say, having presented that evidence, some of our local authorities, even though there wasn't a national agreement to put that into the national model, have pooled their resources, and those services are being delivered and supported on a regional basis. So, for instance, the Education Achievement Service now provide specialist HR resource, and EAS and Central South provide governor support. So, although we weren't successful in persuading local government to adopt a new national model, local authorities in those areas saw the value of moving that way. Hefin David AM: So, with that in mind, and perhaps I'll put this to Steve Davies, everything the Minister just said, and also the line in the document--'The implementation of this model will change over time'-- is it time to go back to that document and review it from a procedural point of view? Steve Davies: I don't think it's necessarily timely to go back and have a complete review of it. But, certainly, we are in ongoing discussions with the Welsh Local Government Association, both in terms of work with local authorities, and the type of intervention in schools. So, we keep a constant watch as to which areas that we believe we could develop further. We are not currently intending to do a wholesale review of that. As the Minister touched on earlier, there is some work to get consistency across the current area, particularly, as we just mentioned, in relation to ERW work. So, it's getting a consistent approach at that level, and sharing the practice. I think what is emerging, as the Minister said, is that there are two regions who have already made this shift to pool services. I think the two other regions are seeing and will see the benefits of that, and instead of forcing it through, we'd expect that to evolve. But we're not, at this stage, looking to a wholesale review of the national model. Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin. Hefin David AM: And Professor Dylan Jones's strategic delivery group seems to have had quite a warm welcome in the sector. Is it fair to say that? Kirsty Williams AM: I believe so. I'm very grateful to Dylan for his hard work and his skill in chairing that group, and I think it's been welcomed by all, so that we can get that clarity and consistency about the roles and responsibilities of the individual partners and players in the middle tier. Hefin David AM: And when will the work be completed, and what will the outcomes be? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, the group is currently engaging with Steve and other officials on agreeing a plan, but also, crucially, that plan is there to support the successful implementation of the curriculum, so that we're very clear about the roles and responsibilities in the middle tier in this crucial phase following the publication. We have to move now from the publication into a relentless focus on implementation. The history of devolution is full of fantastic documents, and, shall I say, patchy implementation. The work that has gone into that curriculum is too important for implementation to be left to chance. It's too important. It's too good to be left to chance. So, everything now is a relentless focus on successful implementation. Hefin David AM: Yes, but I'm thinking that the strategic delivery is reviewing the role of the middle tier. So, you know, what do we expect to see from it, notwithstanding the kind of softly, softly approach that you've already talked about? Steve Davies: It was set up, actually, about 18 months ago--just under. It was set up to build collective efficacy, because what people out there are seeing is that there's a confusion of roles, in what the regions are doing, and it was building that collective efficacy so everyone was behind the wheel. So, they've been looking at who is doing what for the last 18 months, and exploring and making some changes themselves. It's not just what they do with Government or what they do with each other; it's just happened that it's timely, because one of the key bits of feedback we believe we will get from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development is we have had co-construction, we'd had collective effort, but we need to do more, particularly within the middle tier. This is not controlled by Government, it is arm's length from Government, and it's not their job to get it ready for the new curriculum--that's a key part of it. This group will have an ongoing role; it's not a task and finish group. It does feed back in to the Minister but there's no formal mechanism by which they have to report. Hefin David AM: Okay, that's very clear. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. I've got supplementaries from Suzy, then Sian. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Briefly, please. Suzy Davies AM: I think this is a really interesting evidence session. What I'm about to say, I say it even though I'm a big localist: it all seems to be heading in one direction of a national service. Is the strategic group even thinking in these terms, obviously building in local accountability? But it'll just make it so much easier in terms of accountability and consistency to monitor what the middle tier does, if it's a national service, like the National Adoption Service. Local delivery, national service--is it heading in that direction? Kirsty Williams AM: That's not the intention of setting the group up. As Steve just said, I receive feedback from Dylan, because I meet Dylan in this particular capacity on a planned basis. He is there to give me advice on the middle tier, and to give me advice on what he thinks Welsh Government needs to do. But I've not had that conversation with him about a national service. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Well, thank you for that. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: What I was going to raise has been answered already, that is that, from what I can see, the work that Professor Dylan Jones is doing has evolved somewhat. I felt that, originally, the idea was to look at the middle tier in terms of any kind of duplication that was happening, and where it was possible to tighten up the people going into schools from different directions. But it appears that it has evolved to be something that's much more than that, and that it is placing a focus on the curriculum and other aspects of the educational system. Is there a risk for them to lose focus in that sense? Kirsty Williams AM: No, not at all. I think they are very, very clear around establishing roles and responsibilities for each of the players and to be very clear about the expectations that each part of the middle tier can have of each other, as to what they can expect from their partners in the middle tier. And absolutely, it is about making sure that there isn't duplication, that people aren't second-guessing each other's work, and there are clear demarcations about who does what in the system, and, as I said, knowing that you can rely on your colleague in the middle tier to do the bit that they are responsible for. So, I don't think there's a question of it losing focus. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We've got a lot of areas to cover so we are going to have to pick up our pace a bit. The next questions are from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Thinking about you as a Minister trying to see what the long-term trends are with regard to raising standards and improving educational attainment, is that difficult, because the performance measures have changed, haven't they? We can't compare like-for-like now, because of the changes that have been made in the way that performance is measured. So, to begin with, is that a challenge, to see whether progress has been made? And secondly, what evidence do you as Minister use to look at the long-term trends? Kirsty Williams AM: The first thing to say, with regard to changes to performance measures--you're right that change to those does make it, in some cases, more difficult to look at trends over a period of time. But those changes are made for really good reasons. If we change a performance measure, it is done to ensure that it is in the best interests of learners. And I think the best interests of learners always trumps the ease of comparison. I understand that, for researchers and for opposition Members, even for Ministers, it would be simpler to have the same set of measures over a period of time. But if we know that those things are driving behaviours that are unhelpful to children, and not in the best interests of children, then we have to change them, even thought that then does create challenges in different areas. With regard to what do we look at, there are a number of ways that we gain data and look at data in the system: everything from the categorisation system we spoke of earlier, and trends in categorisation; we look at Estyn reports; we continue to look at examination results. But we're trying to develop a broader range of data and statistics that give us a whole picture of the education performance, rather than narrowing down on one simple indicator that tells you one thing but doesn't tell you everything. But I don't know, Steve, if there's anything further that you'd like to add. Steve Davies: It's going back to what the Member raised earlier, in terms of the range of things that you look at--things that can make a difference. So, when Estyn review schools, or we're looking to develop national frameworks for things like mental health and well-being, which look to the practice that enables raising standards, it's collecting that information, both at a national level, through the annual review of Estyn, as well as our engagement with regions and local authorities. So, it's looking at the evidence base that goes beyond, but impacts on data. And, inevitably, we will use the Programme for International Student Assessment, and any other external assessments that come through organisations like the OECD. And even where we've changed the performance measures, we still have, at national level, the ongoing data. So, if you looked at level 2 plus, we believe it is important that children get five good GCSEs--for higher education and for employment. So, we've not lost sight of those at a national level--we're not using them as a narrow set of performance measures for individual schools. Kirsty Williams AM: So, if we look at--level 2 plus is a good example. We know that a relentless focus on that single measure, as a way of judging the system, leads to a set of behaviours in schools. It narrows the focus onto a certain part of the cohort, it narrows the curriculum, when we know that children-- Sian Gwenllian AM: I'm not challenging the fact that you've changed the performance measures--I understand that, and having a broader way of looking is better in the long run. I'm just saying, because there's been this change, it makes it more of a challenge--whilst accepting why you've made the changes, but it does present more of a challenge, presumably, because you have to look at more indicators, and take evidence from different places. But I take it that you're confident that the trajectory is going in the right way. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, I think we are making improvements. But you're right: it does make it more challenging. But those changes are being made for the right reasons, as I said, whether that be at level 2 plus. Look at English literature. I understand why perhaps a performance measure around English was introduced, but the effect of that was that significant numbers of children--and, it must be said, usually children who are entitled to free school meals--were suddenly not sitting English literature GCSE. We've changed that performance measure, and guess what? Last year, we saw a significant increase in the number of children that were sitting English literature GCSE. For standards of literacy and oracy, I think studying literature is really, really important, before we even get into the joy of introducing children to the written word and the love of reading. So, we make changes. Yes, it causes challenges, but we're making those changes because we believe that they are in the best interest of children, and that has to trump ease of comparison. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Why have you decided to ask the consortia, Estyn and so on not to report on local data or regional level data? How do we then come to conclusions about what is working if it isn't presented on a local authority and regional basis? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think the thing to say about the communications from Welsh Government, Estyn, and the WLGA is it's not about not communicating the data, it's about challenging people on how that data should be used. So, the data is still available, but it's a challenge to them about how to use that data. So, for instance, when we're presenting data that compares local authority to local authority, you could have a local authority that says,'There we go, I'm above the national average. I don't need to worry about the education in my local authority, because I'm above the average, or I'm better than my neighbour.'That doesn't necessarily mean that everything is right in your local education authority. Perhaps your children should be doing even better than what you're presented with. So, actually, it's not about hiding data; it's about how you use the data appropriately. And sometimes, how we were presenting data in the past was lulling some people into a false sense of security about the performance of their system. So, it's about how you use data, and that's what the communication from Welsh Government and the WLGA and Estyn was about: think very carefully about this data and what it's telling you about your system, and don't be lulled into a false sense of security that you may be doing brilliantly. Or, perhaps, looking at your data, you may think,'Oh, my goodness me, we're not doing very well at all', but, actually, more careful consideration of that might show that your school's impact on those children is really, really a positive one. So, you've got to use that data in the context. So, it's not about less data. If anything, it's about more data and, crucially for me, it's about more intelligent use and interrogation of that data, about truly what it's telling you about your system. Sian Gwenllian AM: But again, the Welsh Government--. You have continued to publish the local and regional level data. So, doesn't that contradict what you've been telling the consortia and everyone else? Kirsty Williams AM: No, not at all. As I said, we're not in the business of trying to hide data--I believe absolutely in full transparency. And in terms of level 2 data, I think I'm not moving away from the point that I think it's really important that more and more children get five really good GCSEs. I think it's important for their life chances. It is about how that data is used, not about hiding data or making that data not available. Steve Davies: Can I, very briefly--? We didn't just send a letter out collectively. We've now carried out training jointly with WLGA and Estyn on how to use that data. So, it's not just looking where your LA is; it's also not looking at whether your school's better than average for the authority. And it is well received, and it should broaden the approach of scrutiny committees to beyond what historically was, if I'm honest, looking at the league table for their authority or looking at the league table of local authorities. It's not that they shouldn't be looking at that, but they need to dig much, much deeper underneath it. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. We're going to go on now to Suzy. I'm going to appeal for brief questions and brief answers so that we can cover the rest of the questions. Suzy Davies AM: I'll shorten these questions, okay. We know why you got rid of the old measures. We've got interim measures now. What are they telling you about the success you've had in trying to avoid the bad behaviour? Short answers. Kirsty Williams AM: It's impossible. [Laughter. ] I think it's inevitable: whatever kind of measures we put in place, people will look to maximise their success in those measures, and I don't think we'll ever come up with a system where those measures are absolutely perfect. What's really important to me is that we're really, really, really challenging schools to look at the performance of all of their children, rather than just at a very, very narrow cohort around those C/D boundaries, which we knew was detrimental, potentially, to more able and talented children and really pushing those Bs to As and those As to A*s, and children for whom actually just getting in to school on a daily basis is an achievement, and the school has done well to provide that. So, our new capped 9 makes sure that there is breadth across a range of subjects, rather than just focusing on a narrower and narrower bunch of subject opportunities for children, and our new third-third-third system enables schools to really look at their performance. So if their capped 9 score is high, what's driving that? Is it because the bottom third of the cohort is doing really well, and the impact on those children is above and beyond what could be expected, but actually, you're not doing very well for your more able and talented; you're not pushing them on? Alternatively, maybe your capped 9 score is because your MAT children are doing incredibly well, but actually, you're not really making the progress for the middle tier of those children. It allows us to have a greater focus on the performance of our FSM children--where they really are within that system. So, it's a much more granular--. And crucially for me, it looks at the impact for every child, because every child has to matter in the system, and what we had before was a narrowing of curriculum choice and a narrowing on a certain cohort of children. Suzy Davies AM: So are the permanent measures likely to be pretty similar to what you've got now? Because the research--I don't know if the research is complete yet. When will you be publishing the new permanent evaluation? Kirsty Williams AM: Sue, you're right: they're interim measures at the moment, and we will need to make sure that the performance measures are aligned to the new curriculum. That, potentially, of course--. Because Wales's review of qualifications potentially has an impact on what those finally will look like, so that work is ongoing at the moment, and unless Steve can tell me off the top of his head when we expect that to be completed by, I will send you a note. But they're interim at the moment, because we need to align them to the new curriculum. Suzy Davies AM: I think we understand that. [Inaudible. ]--date. Steve Davies: No, no. This is not a quick fix. This is a two to three-year research base. The new qualifications for the new curriculum will not start until 2025. They have to be in place for 2022. There's a three-year roll on. I would expect the broad structure of the interim measures to continue over that time. There will be some tweaks for consistency. It's what's wrapped around those interim measures that I touched on earlier: the other evidence that we bring to bear about the effectiveness of a school, but we do want to say to schools that on the whole, broadly speaking, the interim measures will carry on for two, three years. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, and the reason I asked that is right at the beginning of this session, the Minister said to the Chair that this PS100 million that's going into school improvements will be going into things that work. We need some evidence that the interim measures are going to work as well, so when are they going to be evaluated? Steve Davies: Well, we've only just used them for one year. Suzy Davies AM: That's what I'm asking you. Steve Davies: We've signalled that they're only going to be in place for three years. We are carrying out our own review of the impact of those and that's been built in, but I expect the OECD report--because it is an extensive report--to give us feedback on how those things are working now, and some steer, as they did with the last report, as to the direction we would want to go into. Kirsty Williams AM: And what I'm also interested in is those performance management measures around schools. Yes, they're about outcomes for children, but actually are about a broader suite of behaviours within that school, so, yes, qualifications and grades are an important part of a performance measure, but actually, I have other expectations of schools, above and beyond simply qualifications. And so, we would want our permanent set of performance measures to look at a wider set of behaviours within a school, and I think because--. Exams are important--of course they are, qualifications are important--but the way in which those schools achieve those results are also important. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Would you anticipate that including well-being, then? Suzy Davies AM: In a whole-school approach. Kirsty Williams AM: I absolutely--and we need to find a way of how we can truly measure that. Sometimes, children's well-being is influenced by lots of things outside the control of a school. So, I don't want schools to be held accountable for things that they have no control over, because of the circumstances in which a child may be living. But, absolutely: well-being and how the culture of the school addresses well-being is really important to me. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Suzy. Move on to PISA, please. Suzy Davies AM: How useful is PISA for you in helping school improvement? I know that it's not always the thing that you enjoy watching or looking out for. But, genuinely, how useful is it? Kirsty Williams AM: It is one of a range of tools that we need to look at. Sian, quite rightly, talked about consistency. PISA is one thing where there is a level of consistency, so it will continue to be, I think, an important part of how we test how our system is doing. Suzy Davies AM: We know that you are a little bit encouraged, but we are not out of the woods yet. You mentioned this in Plenary when we talked about PISA. How confident are you that we are on track for meeting these targets that were set before your time, or do you think that having those targets is helpful? Is it setting up aspirations that are incapable of being met within a period of time? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, those long-term targets of a score around 500 are part of'Our National Mission', and we have to keep the pressure on to strive. They are testing, but we have to keep the pressure on to strive to reach them. In some cases, I can be quite encouraged. If we look at reading scores for girls, we are almost there, but that just demonstrates what a journey we've got with our boys to address. For me, one of the ways in which we will reach those targets and achieve them is further progress on our more able and talented children. Although we are now performing at an OECD average, I will be the first person to admit that, although we have seen an improvement in the higher level skills of our more able and talented children, we do not perform at an OECD average with regard to those level 6 and level 5 scores. Suzy Davies AM: Even within the UK, really, we are quite far behind. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes. So, I think that's where we really need to push on. That's one of the reasons why we have introduced a more able and talented budget to support that, and our Seren programme, which is delivering fantastic results post-16. That's why we're introducing the principles of Seren earlier into children's careers, bringing it down from year 9 upwards, to be able to drive improvements. So, I think that that's the area that we are particularly keen to work on: making sure that more of our children perform at the OECD average at level 5 and level 6. Clearly, we've got more work to do on reading. We are working with southern Ireland, who have consistently done well with reading scores, to look to see what lessons we can learn to press on with there with reading. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. My final question on this. You recognise it as a priority, particularly for boys. Does that mean that the focus will then drift slightly from maths, where there has been some success; and drift from science, where the encouragement of more people to take GCSE science has reduced the number of high-level passes? Kirsty Williams AM: First, we have to have a system that is capable of doing all of those of things at the same time. We can't accept a system that says,'Well, we can do a bit over here, but that means we have to--.'We have to have a system, Suzy, that can drive improvements at all levels. That's my expectation. Suzy Davies AM: The balloon needs to be bigger not just squeezing it at one end. Kirsty Williams AM: Absolutely, yes. That's my expectation of this system. You have to deliver across all of these. We have seen some progress. As I've said, it's far from perfect, and we've got more work to do, but we have to deliver across all three domains, as we did last time. And I'm not going to make any apologies for changing the performance indicators around science. It was a travesty that there were children who never had the opportunity to sit a science GCSE. We don't have to make assumptions about the nature of many, many, many of those children. We have seen a significant increase in the number of children who are having the opportunity to sit GCSE science and who are passing GCSE science. So, I'm not going to make any apologies about that. One of the reasons that I suspect we have ended up with poor science scores is because of the previous policy around science entries and science qualifications. Again, one of the reasons that we have changed it isn't just solely because we need to do better in PISA, but I think that by changing it, we will see an impact on PISA. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you for that. Lynne Neagle AM: The final set of questions is from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: I just want to discuss an issue that I know is important to you, namely closing the attainment gap between pupils who are eligible for free school meals and those who are not eligible for free school meals. Unfortunately, the problem persists, doesn't it? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes. We are not where we need to be in terms of the performance, not only of our children on free school meals, but the performance of our looked-after children, and the performance of some children from some ethnic minority groups. So, we will continue to look to support those learners in a variety of ways, again looking to amend our practice on the basis of evidence that is given to us from our experts who are there to advise us. There is clearly more that we need to do. There has been some progress in some areas, but it is not where I would want it to be. Sian Gwenllian AM: But, this is despite the fact that there is PS475 million that has been invested in the pupil development grant, for this exact purpose of closing the attainment gap. But, the problem persists, and in some places, it's deteriorating. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think that, as I said, I am not shying away from any assumption or declaration that we need to do better. But, I do think that we need to acknowledge where progress has been made. If we go back to look at what PISA has said about our performance, the PISA results show that pupils in Wales are relatively more able to overcome the disadvantage of their background than is the average in OECD countries. So, our children are doing better in that, and that gives me encouragement. That's not me saying that; that's there. If we look at pupils who are eligible for free school meals, they do score below their better-off counterparts in PISA by some 34 points. The gap in England is 40 points. So, again, that gap is smaller here in Wales. If we look at basic levels of qualifications, back in--. It's difficult to make comparisons because of all the reasons we have talked about, but if we look back to 2006 and we look at the very basic level of qualifications, which is a level 1 qualification, we have seen a jump from 9. 4 per cent of children in 2006 achieving a level 1 qualification to over 18 per cent. So, there is progress. There is evidence that the resources that we are spending are making a difference. But, clearly, we are not where we would want to be. That's why we will continue to focus those resources on those children, where we need it. But, we need to do that earlier. Sticking plasters in years 10 and 11 aren't going to cut it. We need to get this right for those children, the moment that they come into a nursery and the moment that they start their formal education at the age of 5. That's how we are going to make the difference. Providing catch-up, of course, we need to do for those kids; we can't throw those year 10s and year 11s to the wind. We have to support those children. But, we will see real improvement when we get in there earlier. Sian Gwenllian AM: But I'm sure that that is a disappointment to you, because it has been a personal priority for you as well. In terms of minority ethnic learners, while there are some groups within that category who are achieving, there is underachievement happening here as well, isn't there? It's not consistent across the minority ethnic group. Is that something that you will be focusing upon? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, and that's why we have committed to maintaining a ring-fenced grant to local authorities of some PS10 million, to support education of our minority ethnic children. But, again, you are right, you are absolutely right, Sian. We need a much more sophisticated conversation about what is really going on in attainment across minority ethnic groups so that we can best target that resource and have a conversation about what the differences are. You are absolutely correct: there is a real mixed picture. If we look at black Welsh girls entitled to free school meals, they perform almost at the national average for all children--not FSM children; the national average for all children. Black Welsh boys don't, but neither do white Welsh boys. So, there is a really complex picture here, and I really welcome a debate about acknowledging the various levels of performance of BAME children, and where the gaps in performance lie. You are quite right: it is a complex picture in the system. I'm committed to continuing to support educational opportunities, and that's why have ring-fenced the minority ethnic achievement grant. There are some interesting data there. Some children are doing very, very well; others, we need to concentrate on. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian, this will need to be the last question, I'm afraid. Sian Gwenllian AM: Sorry? Lynne Neagle AM: This is going to have to be the last question. Sian Gwenllian AM: The last question. Lynne Neagle AM: Yes. Sian Gwenllian AM: Fine. In terms of looked-after children, which is one of the groups where attainment isn't where we would like it to be, there was some improvement in 2016 at key stage 4, but it has been disappointing. Do we know what's been happening in 2019? Kirsty Williams AM: The 2019 data will be published next month, and there has been significant activity. You are right: in recent years, the data have been poor and not where we would want it to be. That's why we have had a reformed approach to PDG LAC; the employment of PDG LAC co-ordinators across the regions. We've identified new resource in the new financial year to test new approaches, so, for instance, virtual school approaches, where we know, in other systems, that has worked. But, we expect the next set of data around the performance of this particular group of learners in March. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay, and you hope to see progress. Kirsty Williams AM: I don't want to speculate, but I hope so. Sian Gwenllian AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you very much. We have come to the end of our time, so can I thank you, Minister, and your official for attending this morning? We have had a wide-ranging and very detailed discussion that will be very useful for the committee. As usual, you will be sent a transcript following the meeting to check for accuracy, but thank you again, both of you, for your attendance this morning. Diolch yn fawr. Okay. Item 3 is papers to note. Paper to note 1 is a letter from ERW providing additional information following the evidence session on 16 January. Paper to note 2 is a letter from Central South Consortium, similarly providing additional information following the evidence session. Paper to note 3 is a letter from the Noah's Ark Children's Hospital for Wales regarding children's rights in Wales, following up on some additional information there. Paper to note 4 is a letter from Qualifications Wales, providing additional information following the annual report scrutiny session in January. Item 4, then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting? Are Members content? Thank you.

Steve believed that it was set up to build collective efficacy because what people out there were seeing was a confusion of roles in what the regions were doing, and it was building that collective efficacy so everyone was behind the wheel. They would have collective effort, but they needed to do more within the middle tier.

tr-sq-1239

tr-sq-1239_0

What's their opinion about the risk of losing focus? Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received apologies for absence from Janet Finch-Saunders, and also from Dawn Bowden, and I'd like to welcome Huw Irranca-Davies, who is substituting for Dawn Bowden. Can I ask Members if there are any declarations of interest, please? No. Okay. We'll move on, then, to our evidence session for our inquiry on school improvement and raising standards. I'd like to welcome Kirsty Williams AM, Minister for Education, and Steve Davies, director of education. Thank you both for attending and for your detailed paper in advance of the meeting. We've got a lot of ground to cover, so we'll go straight into questions, if that's okay. If I can just start by asking you: to what extent is the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development still involved in the Welsh Government's school improvement journey? Kirsty Williams AM: First of all, can I thank the committee for their invitation this morning, and their interest in this particular area? As you will be aware, on coming into office, the director and I agreed to ask the OECD to do a rapid review of the state of Welsh education at the beginning of this Assembly term. They did that, and the feedback from that work informed the publication and content of the national mission. I was very clear in the national mission that I would invite the OECD back to review our progress against that mission, and that has happened in the tail end of last year, and the OECD will publish their latest report on Welsh education next month now, in March. So, the expectation is that the report will be published on 23 March, and my intention is to make a statement to the Chamber on 24 March. The nature of that review is part of our ongoing development of self-evaluation. So, we talk a lot about self-evaluation in the school system. Actually, the continuing relationship with OECD is about self-evaluation of the entirety of the system and Welsh Government. We don't want to accept our own orthodoxy and just be in a bubble where we are constantly listening to ourselves and those people who might want to agree with us or tell us what we want to hear. So, the OECD is our best attempt of having some external verification of where we are. That's a risk for Ministers and for Government, because we want them to give an honest evaluation of where we are, but that's a really important tool for me, to ensure that we're constantly testing ourselves. The nature of that review is that the OECD were able to talk to whoever they felt it was important to talk to, so that included practitioners on the ground, elements of the middle tier, as well as Welsh Government. And I know, Chair--I hope you'll be pleased to hear this--that the reports of this committee have formed parts of their review, looking at how the Senedd itself has contributed to and has held the Government to account. So, as I said, we expect our report to be published towards the end of March. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you, Minister. Can I ask about the powers under the School Standards and Organisation (Wales) Act 2013, to ask you to tell us about the use of those powers either by Welsh Government or by local authorities, and how effective you feel that legislation has been? Kirsty Williams AM: Okay. Well, as you'll be aware, local authorities have quite extensive powers of intervention in schools if they feel that is necessary. If I'm honest, I think there's a mixed picture, with some local authorities using those powers not on a regular basis, but obviously demonstrating a willingness to use those powers. There are other local authorities who don't seem to have used them. Since that legislation came into being, there have been a number of reasons, because of course a local authority has to give a reason for using those powers of intervention. They usually focus on standards, but sometimes they focus on a breakdown in governance arrangements, perhaps, or a failure or a breakdown in financial management. So, sometimes the budgetary issues trigger an intervention power. And the types of interventions that have been used have included, in some cases, appointing additional governors to governing bodies, or suspending a school's delegated budget so the local authority takes on, then, financial control of that particular school, or sometimes applying to the Welsh Government to entirely replace a governing body and establish an intervention board. So, if I can give you an example of where that's been used and has been successful, in Flintshire. They applied to Welsh Government for two interim executive boards, in Sir Richard Gwyn Catholic High School and in Ysgol Trefonnen. They applied to us. Those governing bodies were dissolved. The IEBs were put in place and both of those schools, which had been in special measures, moved quite rapidly, actually, out of special measures. Perhaps the most recent example of this is one that the Chair will know very well in her own constituency of Torfaen, in Cwmbran High School, where Torfaen has intervened in that case. The Welsh Government has not used those powers to date. My expectation always is that local authorities should be the first port of call, and I would encourage--and we always encourage--local authorities to take a proactive approach to intervention and to use those powers. But it's my belief that it is they who are best placed initially to do that. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you, Minister. Can I ask, then, about the national evaluation and improvement resource and how significant a role that will play in the raising of school standards, and how you feel it's evolved since it was first conceived? Kirsty Williams AM: So, this brings us back to the principle of self-evaluation and something, if we're honest, we've not been very good at. If you look at a number of chief inspectors'reports into the Welsh education system, self-evaluation has always been identified as something that is missing or underdeveloped in our system to date, hence, then, the work to establish not a new approach, but a more robust approach to self-evaluation. We've done that in conjunction, again, with the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. It's really important, throughout the entirety of our reform journey that that's done in co-construction, because we want this resource to be usable in schools. So, it's all very well having a conceptual idea and people outside the classroom working on it, but if it's of no practical use to a school leadership team, then we won't see the impact. So, it's--. We're in phase 2 at the moment, where we're doing--. So, the initial resource has been developed by the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. We're in the testing phase at the moment and having it evaluated itself, with a view to introducing that resource across the system at the start of the new academic year, in September 2020. I truly believe that, if we're to make progress in Welsh education, we have to develop the skills within our system to have robust self-evaluation. This resource gives us continuity of approach right the way across Wales. So, it's not left to an individual school to come up with a system; it's right the way across the system. My hope would be that those principles could then be applied to local education authorities, to regional school improvement services and Welsh Government as part of a whole-system approach to self-evaluation. I don't know if there's anything more you want to add, Steve. Steve Davies: Just to add that the other critical partners are Estyn themselves. Kirsty Williams AM: Oh, yes, sorry. Steve Davies: So, they have played a critical role and, as we know, as the Minister has said in the past, she may introduce policy and practice, but if Estyn are part of it then schools, usually, because they recognise that it will be part of the inspection process--it gives it greater push and support around it. So, they've been key players within it. Kirsty Williams AM: And I think, if I just say as well, that the external perception of what that's about is really important. It's not a test of school readiness for reform, it is a genuine attempt for a school to evaluate their strengths, their weaknesses and where they need to go next. It's not an Estyn checklist. And because of the word'toolkit'--the feedback was that it gave the impression of a checklist,'Just do this and check list'. So, we're actually going to change the name of that resource. So, it'll be called the national evaluation and improvement resource, rather than the toolkit, because, as I said, the feedback was that'toolkit'gave the impression of a checklist exercise, and it's got to be about more than that if it's going to be meaningful. So, it'll be changed to an'improvement resource'. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Before I bring Suzy in, can I just welcome Sian Gwenllian, who is joining us via video-conference in north Wales? Morning, Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Good morning. Can you hear me? Lynne Neagle AM: We can, yes. We can hear you very nicely, thank you. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Yes. Only a very quick one. It's about the development of the-- Kirsty Williams AM: The resource. Suzy Davies AM: Yes, the resource, thank you--about whether there were any conflicting ideas in the process of development that made it quite difficult to zone in on something that school leadership teams, in particular, could rely on. Were there differences of opinion on what this should look like? Kirsty Williams AM: Not that I'm aware of from the practitioners that I've spoken to who have been part of that. So, for instance, Suzy, you will know the very small school of Gladestry. The head of Gladestry has been involved in this process, and she said that she'd really enjoyed the process of working alongside Estyn and the OECD as a school leader to be able to shape it. But I'm not aware that there's been conflict in that process. Suzy Davies AM: I'm not suggesting that there has been; I'm just interested as to how it had worked, that's all. Steve Davies: Chair, I think, inevitably, when you bring stakeholders together, they're not going to be in total agreement as to how it's going to work, and I think initially one of the challenges was having Estyn there as part of the facilitation group. There are always some concerns that, actually, it's coming from a to inspect, oral, judgmental tick box. So, we had some early day challenges where we had to convince--and, ultimately, Estyn convinced them--that they were there to help and support as opposed to to inspect, and that the model that was developed, as the Minister said, was not going to be a tick box,'You are good at this part of self-evaluation', it was to build the skillsets up. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. So, it's got their full confidence. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, and I think again, also, what--. You know, four years into the job, what I've reflected on as well is there is this sometimes a feeling out there that the Minister says all the right stuff, but you're not actually going to do it, so, when you talk about a new approach to doing things, you're not actually serious about it. So, trying to build that confidence that we are serious about developing a new system around self-improvement, which is different from accountability--sometimes, the practitioners are like,'Oh, yes, we've heard it all before but it never actually happens.'And I think that's been a part of the constant--not pressure, but the responsibility on Welsh Government is in following through. So, we said that we were going to do this in the national mission, and we are going to do it. I'm really proud that there or thereabouts, a few months either way, we've actually kept to the timetable as outlined in the national mission, and that helps build confidence within the sector that we are committed to that programme and we're going to do what we say we're going to do. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: And a final question from me: how effective do you think the investment in school standards has been in this Assembly term, as opposed to the approach taken in the last Assembly term, where there was the protection put in place for core school budgets? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think, first of all, it's important that, whilst this additional resource is specifically targeted at school standards, that is only a part of a much wider education budget, a budget that--you know--is incredibly complex. And so it is really challenging to be able to draw straight lines--you know,'We did this and it's resulted in that'--given that we're looking at the entirety of school funding here. What's been really important is that, if you drill down into what that money has been spent on, 50 per cent of it has been directed towards professional learning in one form or another to support our teaching professionals. And that's been really important to me. I've said it time and time again: an education system cannot exceed the quality of the people who stand in front of our children day in, day out to work with them and teach them. Therefore, that investment in staff and investment in the professional learning of our staff and support for them I think is making a difference already but, importantly, will continue to make a difference. But I think it is really challenging to be able to say,'Well, we spent this bit of money and it definitely led to that', because it's such a complex picture. But that money, the way it's been spent, has been driven by evidence. And, again, what we do know from international best practice, what do we know that works in driving up standards, and then how can we align the money that we've got to supporting that? And, as I said, 50 per cent of that money has gone directly to simply supporting the professional learning of those who work with our children. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you very much. We're going to talk now a bit about schools causing concern with questions from Huw Irranca-Davies. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Thank you, Chair. If I can, just first of all, zoom in on the way in which we actually decide which schools need what support. So, one of the interesting questions for us is how do we use the different systems out there. So, we've got the school categorisation system, which we're familiar with. We've also got Estyn inspection reports, then we've got other intelligence, including local intelligence on the ground. How do you decide from that? How is it decided what schools need support, need challenge? How do we do that? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, you're right: what we have is a variety of ways in which we can identify schools that need support, or need to be challenged on their practice. But it's important not to confuse them either. So, our primary route to doing this is our school categorisation system. Sometimes, and perhaps this is inevitable--. That system is primarily there as a triage system around identifying where our resource should be spent. So, our school improvement service--it's a risk-based approach, so they can evaluate where they need to put their time, effort and resource. Sometimes, it's used by other people for other things, but that is not its primary purpose; its primary purpose there is not one of accountability, it is one of identifying risk and aligning that then to the support that is available. Estyn--now that is part of that accountability system. That is our method of holding schools and their governing bodies to account for their practice and for the work that they do. Both systems, of course, are evolving. So, how we do categorisation has changed over a period of time. The elements that go into making that judgment around the levels of support have changed, and, of course, the Estyn inspection regime is also changing. At the moment, schools are only inspected once every seven years. We're moving to a system where Estyn will be more regularly in schools. So, they are two systems, but they are different and they look at different things. But our categorisation system is how we look for those ways of identifying support for schools. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: And you've made, with feedback over the last few years, adjustments to the way that the categorisation system works. Are you content with where it is now, or do you see more adjustments being made? Have you got things in front of you that you're getting feedback on saying'Well, we need to tweak this again a little bit'? Kirsty Williams AM: So, that system has evolved over time. So, when it started, it was just a tool around secondary schools. Now, it covers the breadth of schools. Initially, on coming into office, when I first came in, it was purely driven by data, and it was also done in quartiles. So, there was a certain number of schools that had to be in the bottom, which drove practitioners mad. They were like'Ah, every year, there's going to be some of us that have to be in the bottom quartile', because of the way in which it was arranged, which seemed very unfair to them. So, we've changed that. It's not just purely driven on data now; there are other judgments--the professional judgments of our challenge advisers are taken into account. And I would expect that situation to continue to evolve to align itself to our curriculum reform, and our changes in self-evaluation. So, it's not a fixed point. I expect that that system will continue to evolve and change, so that it complements and assists in the reform journey as other parts of the system change. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Thanks for that. I think, for any impartial reader of the way that the trends have been going on this, there is some good news within that, in that, certainly, those schools that might have been identified as have been okay but coasting along, seem to be moving up the categories, although we still do have that--. Well, it's what the system is there to do, it's to identify those schools that do need that additional support. And I like your analogy of a triage system--'You're fit; keep on doing what you're doing and do it well; you need more support, we'll put the support in.'But, can I turn to those schools that are causing significant concern, and how we identify them? The Estyn chief inspector's conclusions at the end of the 2017-18 report that these schools are not being identified early enough--there's a need to do something urgently about these concerns, particularly in secondary schools. Have we addressed that? Are you content that we've addressed that concern? Was he right? Kirsty Williams AM: No, the chief inspector is absolutely right--absolutely right. I've got no beef with that statement at all. In some ways, when a school goes into special measures, in a way, that's a failure of the system, because that should have been identified sooner. So I've got no beef, as I said, with the chief inspector saying that. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: So just to ask, bearing in mind the earlier discussion we were having, how is it that we don't identify those schools? Kirsty Williams AM: That's it--you're quite right. Undoubtedly, what categorisation has done is led to a greater understanding, I think, on behalf of local education authorities'and school improvement services'knowledge about their schools. I think knowledge around schools is greatly enhanced by that process. But we are not there yet in terms of necessarily, then, moving those schools more quickly, once they've been identified as needing the highest level of support to see improvement. And secondary schools is a particular, particular challenge. So you will have seen from the last publication of categorisation data that our primary sector continues to improve--more and more and more of our primary schools are in a green rating, which is very satisfying to me. But we have got more of an issue with secondary schools, and we have a particular issue with the same schools being identified in that level of categorisation. So even though we've identified them as needing that extra help, they are not moving at pace away from that system. So there are two things that we are doing at the moment. The first is, we are, again, looking at different sets of data that can give us even earlier warning systems that things are going wrong in a school--and perhaps Steve will explain later. For instance, staff sickness, and carefully monitoring staff sickness, because there is a direct correlation between high levels of staff sickness in a school and what is going on in the school. And Steve can explain some of this work later. But we're piloting a new approach to those schools that are causing concern. Each local authority has been asked to identify two of their high schools that they are particularly worried about. And we have a new multi-agency approach, working with those schools to try and move them more forward. So it's two from each region, a multi-agency panel, working with the school. And that multi-agency panel includes the school itself, the local authority, the regional consortia school improvement staff, Estyn and Welsh Government--as a multi-agency panel to support improvement in that school. So, for instance, what would normally happen, Estyn would come in, Estyn would make a judgment on the school--requiring special measures or urgent improvement--and Estyn would go away. They'd go away for six months, and then they'd come back in six months, and they'd make another judgment,'No, still not good enough', and disappear for six months. We're saying--Estyn and the Welsh Government have agreed that's not the best approach; Estyn need to be part of the solution, rather than just coming and making a judgment. The initial feedback from this trial is very, very positive. Actually, we've had local authorities coming to us and saying,'Can we put more schools in? Rather than just having two of our high schools, can we engage more in this project and this pilot?'It's being evaluated by Cardiff Metropolitan University and Swansea University, so we're having some academic overview to see, actually, does this approach work, can we evidence it--that it actually makes a difference? And it's actually--I'd like to claim all the credit for it, but it's actually not dissimilar to something that's happening in Scotland as well. But we knew that carrying on doing the same old thing clearly wasn't moving these schools, we needed a new approach, and this is what we're doing at the moment. So it's relatively new, but the initial feedback is positive. Steve, I don't know-- Steve Davies: I think your important point is about,'What about the schools that are sliding in that direction?'And it's bringing together what we know from Estyn, but also, critically, local authorities have knowledge of their schools, and so do consortia. We've got to be better at bringing those together. So, the Minister gave the example of staff sickness--not always a trigger, but it's one of those. If you look at movement of pupils out of a school, you can look at complaints, you can look at, actually, emerging increased use of HR resources that a school pulls on a local authority. None of these have been pushed up into the public domain, but they're important antennae. The point the Minister made about Estyn as well is, historically, when they go into special measures, Estyn, at the end of that week, call in, historically, either the region or the local authority, they will feed back to one of them, and then they go away. So, they are staying with it. So, we are brining together the knowledge. But, as the Minister said, we want to keep a very clear distinction between the accountability and the transparency to the public, to parents, with the very detailed collective work of that multi-agency group to actually make that difference over time. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Okay. So, does that--. I'd love to go further, but time is against us. Does that deal with the issue of the schools that have been identified in those categories of requiring significant improvement and requiring special measures? Are those the ones that will be identified now, or is that above and beyond that again? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, those are the ones that are primarily at the forefront of our minds, but this way of sharing data better, to step in earlier, is part of our attempt to address what the chief inspector says about stepping in early--not waiting until a school gets into special measures and a formal judgment from Estyn of that, but actually using that intelligence to get support in there earlier. The three elements that that multi-agency approach look at are: what are the fundamentals that need addressing in this school? What is the capacity of the school itself to be able to address those fundamentals? And, what extra support needs to go into that senior management team and the governing body to get those fundamentals addressed? And actually, what does sustainable improvement look like? Because, again, one of the issues, sometimes, that happens is, a school goes into a category with Estyn, there's a big push and a big,'We must do something'and the school comes out, but actually, that improvement is not sustainable. It's the low-hanging fruit; it's the easy wins that have been achieved, but actually, perhaps some of the fundamental challenges underlying in that school haven't been addressed in that process. So, this is about what will sustainable improvement look like in six months, what's it going to look like in 12 months and what's it going to look like in 18 months. So, actually, a more strategic, longer term approach to real change in a school rather than, perhaps, some of the easy-to-fix items that make a school as if it's doing better, but we really haven't tackled some of the underlying problems that make that school vulnerable to slipping back. Does that make sense? Lynne Neagle AM: I've got a couple of supplementaries on--. Sorry? Kirsty Williams AM: Does that make sense? Lynne Neagle AM: Yes. We've got a couple of supplementaries on this, first from Suzy and then from Sian. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you for that, Chair. Obviously, I'm pleased to hear that this work is being done, but I'm wondering--. What strikes me, in the recent past, at least, particularly as we've got the usual suspects in this category--. I've got to ask myself why it is that councils have been reluctant, perhaps, to step in with these schools earlier, particularly as they've got consortia or middle-tier support as well. Has there been a deficit in that space that has meant that councils don't feel equipped to step in? I just don't really get it why they've been reluctant to step in so far. If they've been nervous about doing it, because they don't feel that they've got the tools to do it, then I think that's pretty important, because as you were saying, we were talking about fundamentals; surely, councils have been able to deal with fundamentals, and more importantly, consortia up until now. Because, obviously, we're asking these players to give us evidence at some point, so perhaps I'd like to challenge them on how come we're here now. Kirsty Williams AM: And rightly so. Suzy Davies AM: I'm not laying this at your door. Kirsty Williams AM: And rightly so. I guess each local authority will have an explanation for each individual school, I suspect. What's crucial to me is that we have to--. I see our job as corralling the collective effort, and I think, for too long in the system, there has been a lack of co-ordination. So, this is about bringing and corralling a collective effort to address this, going forward, in more sustainable way. And I think it does come back to this issue around self-evaluation and a willingness to be open, honest and upfront about some of the challenges that we've got. It's not easy, is it? It's not easy to accept or to acknowledge sometimes when things are-- Suzy Davies AM: That they don't know how to do this. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, that they're going badly, or perhaps they don't know exactly how to make the difference. So this approach, as I said, is a new way of trying to coral that collective effort across the board. But, I don't know if Steve--because you've done other roles in the system, so perhaps you've got a different insight. Steve Davies: I think you're right. The variation across the country, across local authorities--. There are some local authorities that we've worked with and we identify have taken the appropriate action. There are others that we're working with, and yes, at its best, it's done as a joint exercise where they use their regional school improvement service to help in the identification that there is a need for this. They take advice as to what the action is, whether it is, as the Minister said, in the more significant areas, a board, or whether a warning notice comes in terms of standards or finance. So, we're working with them and we're working with the Welsh Local Government Association to share that practice. An example of that work is: we have done a development training session for cabinet members for education, and scrutiny leads for education across Wales, and all 22 local authorities came to that and engaged with that. That was partly about self-improvement, but it was also about where significant issues arise, you have to constructively confront them. And that comes with what the region knows, and increasingly, we're looking to have it consistently across 22 local authorities, so they are collecting all the additional data that we referred to earlier, so they can legitimately hold a mirror up and say,'This is a real concern that we have. We're not punishing you, but we're registering the seriousness, and we want you to address it.'And we're making progress. I believe it's genuinely more consistent now, but I'd be lying if I said that there was consistency across all 22 local authorities. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. I'm conscious of time. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. I've got a supplementary from Sian, then back to Huw. Sian Gwenllian AM: Because you are moving to a more sophisticated approach in terms of identifying problems sooner, and so can offer the support earlier, is it time to think about moving away from the system of categorisation entirely? That is, has the categorisation system reached the end of its usefulness, and is the multi-agency approach, this more sophisticated approach, a better way, ultimately, of being able to assist schools in moving forward? Kirsty Williams AM: I think, Sian, as I said earlier, the categorisation system has evolved over time, and my expectation is that it will continue to evolve, because it has to be consistent with our overall approach to school improvement and raising standards. I expect OECD will have feedback for us on this important part of our system, and we'll wait to see exactly what they say about it, but as I said in answer to Huw Irranca-Davies earlier, I haven't got a closed mind; we've demonstrated over the last four years our willingness to change the system to make it a smarter system, and we will continue to keep that under review, as we move forward. If I could just go back briefly, it doesn't sound like a very exciting thing, does it, when we say we've been doing work with the WLGA, with cabinet members, but also scrutiny, because that's a really important part of the jigsaw as well, is actually local government scrutiny of the performance of your education portfolio holder and the leadership of your council. So this is about trying to up the ante on all sides, so that those issues around'What are you doing in your local authority to use the powers that you have?'You know, sometimes, making sure that everybody in that authority--those in power and those who are there to hold those in power to account--have the necessary skills, knowledge and understanding to do that appropriately. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Huw, briefly. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Yes, briefly. I only have one final question. We've talked a lot about early identification; getting in there and then managing the improvement, this triage approach there, and then getting some grip of it, as well, in doing all of that. But my question now is on what we currently have. I won't touch on the primary schools, but let's just look at secondary schools--11 per cent of secondary schools inspected in the last two academic years judged as unsatisfactory, needing urgent improvement. There will always be secondary schools and primary schools that hit moments of crisis for one reason or another, but 11 per cent to me, and to any layperson, would seem unreasonably high. Are you--? It would be daft to ask you if you're content. What is a level that you would be content with of having schools in red category in Wales? Kirsty Williams AM: You're right. Schools will need different levels of support at different points, and sometimes, it's not because of a crisis. So, for instance, in my region, we do have an increase in the number of schools in the amber category. That's because we've seen in that particular region a number of headteachers retire because they've reached retirement age, and there are new headteachers. Well, that is a moment of risk in the school--when senior leadership changes. Nothing else has changed in that school, but the simple fact that you have a new leader, sometimes in those cases it might be their first headship. That means that that school is going to need a little bit of extra support, so it isn't always just a crisis that needs extra support, there are just general things that happen in the life of a school that could lead to it. But you're absolutely right--we have a particular challenge in the secondary sector where we have not been able to move individual schools forward at pace. And 11 per cent is not acceptable to me, Huw, which is why we have introduced this new pilot to address those schools where, persistently, we have concerns about their ability to move forward. If we'd have carried on doing the same thing, I suspect we would have just carried on getting the same result--hence the need for a new approach to those schools that are causing concern. Steve Davies: Very briefly, the things we talked about earlier was how we measure the performance of schools, particularly at GCSEs, with a narrow focus. As was said earlier, some of these are the same groups--they trip in and then they don't come out. Our belief is, from research, that they concentrate on squeezing the pips to get the grades up in some small areas for a period of time, and you can do that by targeting and immersing them. Estyn can tick the box to say your grades have got better, but we haven't handled the serious underpinning issues--leadership, teaching and learning, and bringing those together. As the Minister said, what does sustainable improvement look like in six, 12,18 months? It isn't just, as important as they are, getting those exam grades up a bit. They're the fundamental--. And if they're all agreed as the indicators at the outset, we're more likely--. So it's multi-agency; it's not a little activity, it's a major strategy. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Hefin David has some questions now on the middle tier. Hefin David AM: I'd like to consider the work of the consortia. In 2016, your election manifesto very clearly said that you wanted to abolish regional consortia--three words in it. Why haven't you done it? Kirsty Williams AM: Because, given that you're such a keen student of my manifesto, you'll also know that-- Hefin David AM: It was only three words. Kirsty Williams AM: The Liberal Democrat manifesto also said that we supported major local government reform and a major reduction in the number of local government units. That hasn't happened. I have to say genuinely, my experience over the last four years has proven to me the value of regional working, and in the absence of significant local government reform, I think it's absolutely vital that we have scale in school improvement services--scale that I don't think can be delivered across 22 individual local authorities. Hefin David AM: Okay. So, if there was local government reform, you would abolish the consortia. Kirsty Williams AM: I think if there was significant local government reform and we could demonstrate that those units had such a scale that they could perform the functions of regional consortia, then I think it would be inevitable that any education Minister would look to see whether there was an opportunity to change structures. But in the absence of that, Hefin, I have been absolutely convinced whilst doing this job that you need larger units to be able to carry out successful school improvement work, and I think it would be reckless to advocate the system going back to school improvement being organised in 22 different ways. Hefin David AM: Okay. Do you think that the work of the four consortia has been consistent and effective? Kirsty Williams AM: The school improvement services? Hefin David AM: The four consortia. Kirsty Williams AM: I think, as with individual local education authorities, there are some regional consortia services that have performed really highly--and that's not me saying that, that's Estyn, but gives us assurance around that--and there are others that need to improve. I think the consortia themselves would admit that they, since their establishment, have found new ways of working. Initially, they were very separate entities that did things their own way. Increasingly, over recent years, we have seen those consortia working together on a national approach, but delivered on a regional basis. So I think they themselves have evolved over time. But we are constantly looking for optimum delivery from those particular organisations, but as I said, I think it would be absolutely reckless to go back to a situation where school improvement services were being delivered individually on 22 different bases. Hefin David AM: Okay. I'm happy to accept that you've changed your opinion there; that's no problem at all. But with regard to the four consortia, and we'll take Education through Regional Working as an example, it does things differently to the other three. Is that a cause for concern, or do you think that's entirely appropriate? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, ERW does things differently, but then so does the Education Achievement Service. EAS is constituted in a different way to the Central South Consortium. What I'm interested in is not necessarily how they are constituted and organised, I'm interested in the effectiveness of that organisation to deliver for children and for teachers. ERW has got particular challenges, and we continue to work with those in ERW to address those, but increasingly, as I said, what we are seeing the regional consortia do is develop a national approach to school improvement services but deliver that on a regional basis so that there is greater consistency in terms of delivery. Hefin David AM: Are you happy that, within the ERW area, local authorities employ their own improvement advisers, rather than doing it in the way that the others do? Kirsty Williams AM: We have discussed this at length with them. My preference would be for school improvement officers to be employed in the centre, and we continue to have those discussions, but what's really important to understand is that the regional consortia are not a beast of the Government; they are a beast of the local authorities that have worked together to create a school improvement service that meets their needs. So we can't impose that solution, and we continue to discuss with ERW what is the optimal way, and they continue to discuss with their constituent local authorities about how that should be organised. Hefin David AM: Are you concerned that Neath Port Talbot have given notice that they want to withdraw from regional working? Kirsty Williams AM: I think it's really disappointing that Neath Port Talbot have published that notice. What's important for me is to understand--not for me, it will be important for Estyn. It will be really important for us to understand how Neath Port Talbot intend to support their schools and their teachers if they were to withdraw from ERW, especially at what is a very, very critical time. The regional consortia have a key role to play in supporting systems with the introduction of the curriculum. I would want to know from Neath Port Talbot how they are going to do that without being part of that organisation. And, of course, there's the added complexity that so much of our money is channelled through to schools via the regional consortia. So, I would want to understand from Neath Port Talbot how they're going to safeguard their schools and make sure that the children who are receiving their education in Neath Port Talbot are not disadvantaged if they were to follow through on that decision. Hefin David AM: Do you feel that it's your role to intervene in that area and instruct Neath Port Talbot and ERW as to how they should resolve this issue? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, as I said, I would be seeking assurances-- Hefin David AM: What does that mean, though,'seeking assurances'? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, Neath Port Talbot would need to demonstrate to me how they're going to address these issues. If they're not part of ERW and their schools and their children are not going to be in receipt of the support from ERW, as I said, especially at this critical time, how are they intending to do that? I haven't seen those plans, but if they were to push forward and follow through on the notice, I would want to see them and I suspect Estyn would want to see them also. Hefin David AM: Okay, just last issue on that: you're just waiting to see what Neath Port Talbot do next, then. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, we have written to Neath Port Talbot to ask them to demonstrate to us, if they were to pull out of ERW, how they're going to meet their functions. I have not heard back from them. Hefin David AM: Steve, did you want to say something? Steve Davies: Obviously--[Inaudible. ]--that point. We wrote to them last Friday, and we are awaiting their response now. Hefin David AM: Okay. So, that's where we are. Okay. There was the document in 2015--'National model for regional working'. Is that the current document? Are there plans to change or update it, or is that exactly where we stand? Kirsty Williams AM: So, that is the current model. Some work was undertaken in 2017 and 2018 to look to update that model and revise that model. Some specific recommendations were put forward about additional services that could be organised on a regional basis; primarily, that is a specialist human resources resource. We know that, because of austerity in some local authorities, HR departments have been really stretched. Education HR is a specialist service, it's not generic. It's often a service that--. I see that as part of a school improvement service. Support for governors also has been stretched within individual local authorities. So, a proposal was put forward to include specialist HR and governor support as part of the regional model. That was rejected by local government. Our local authorities did not want to include that in the regional model. However, I must say, having presented that evidence, some of our local authorities, even though there wasn't a national agreement to put that into the national model, have pooled their resources, and those services are being delivered and supported on a regional basis. So, for instance, the Education Achievement Service now provide specialist HR resource, and EAS and Central South provide governor support. So, although we weren't successful in persuading local government to adopt a new national model, local authorities in those areas saw the value of moving that way. Hefin David AM: So, with that in mind, and perhaps I'll put this to Steve Davies, everything the Minister just said, and also the line in the document--'The implementation of this model will change over time'-- is it time to go back to that document and review it from a procedural point of view? Steve Davies: I don't think it's necessarily timely to go back and have a complete review of it. But, certainly, we are in ongoing discussions with the Welsh Local Government Association, both in terms of work with local authorities, and the type of intervention in schools. So, we keep a constant watch as to which areas that we believe we could develop further. We are not currently intending to do a wholesale review of that. As the Minister touched on earlier, there is some work to get consistency across the current area, particularly, as we just mentioned, in relation to ERW work. So, it's getting a consistent approach at that level, and sharing the practice. I think what is emerging, as the Minister said, is that there are two regions who have already made this shift to pool services. I think the two other regions are seeing and will see the benefits of that, and instead of forcing it through, we'd expect that to evolve. But we're not, at this stage, looking to a wholesale review of the national model. Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin. Hefin David AM: And Professor Dylan Jones's strategic delivery group seems to have had quite a warm welcome in the sector. Is it fair to say that? Kirsty Williams AM: I believe so. I'm very grateful to Dylan for his hard work and his skill in chairing that group, and I think it's been welcomed by all, so that we can get that clarity and consistency about the roles and responsibilities of the individual partners and players in the middle tier. Hefin David AM: And when will the work be completed, and what will the outcomes be? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, the group is currently engaging with Steve and other officials on agreeing a plan, but also, crucially, that plan is there to support the successful implementation of the curriculum, so that we're very clear about the roles and responsibilities in the middle tier in this crucial phase following the publication. We have to move now from the publication into a relentless focus on implementation. The history of devolution is full of fantastic documents, and, shall I say, patchy implementation. The work that has gone into that curriculum is too important for implementation to be left to chance. It's too important. It's too good to be left to chance. So, everything now is a relentless focus on successful implementation. Hefin David AM: Yes, but I'm thinking that the strategic delivery is reviewing the role of the middle tier. So, you know, what do we expect to see from it, notwithstanding the kind of softly, softly approach that you've already talked about? Steve Davies: It was set up, actually, about 18 months ago--just under. It was set up to build collective efficacy, because what people out there are seeing is that there's a confusion of roles, in what the regions are doing, and it was building that collective efficacy so everyone was behind the wheel. So, they've been looking at who is doing what for the last 18 months, and exploring and making some changes themselves. It's not just what they do with Government or what they do with each other; it's just happened that it's timely, because one of the key bits of feedback we believe we will get from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development is we have had co-construction, we'd had collective effort, but we need to do more, particularly within the middle tier. This is not controlled by Government, it is arm's length from Government, and it's not their job to get it ready for the new curriculum--that's a key part of it. This group will have an ongoing role; it's not a task and finish group. It does feed back in to the Minister but there's no formal mechanism by which they have to report. Hefin David AM: Okay, that's very clear. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. I've got supplementaries from Suzy, then Sian. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Briefly, please. Suzy Davies AM: I think this is a really interesting evidence session. What I'm about to say, I say it even though I'm a big localist: it all seems to be heading in one direction of a national service. Is the strategic group even thinking in these terms, obviously building in local accountability? But it'll just make it so much easier in terms of accountability and consistency to monitor what the middle tier does, if it's a national service, like the National Adoption Service. Local delivery, national service--is it heading in that direction? Kirsty Williams AM: That's not the intention of setting the group up. As Steve just said, I receive feedback from Dylan, because I meet Dylan in this particular capacity on a planned basis. He is there to give me advice on the middle tier, and to give me advice on what he thinks Welsh Government needs to do. But I've not had that conversation with him about a national service. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Well, thank you for that. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: What I was going to raise has been answered already, that is that, from what I can see, the work that Professor Dylan Jones is doing has evolved somewhat. I felt that, originally, the idea was to look at the middle tier in terms of any kind of duplication that was happening, and where it was possible to tighten up the people going into schools from different directions. But it appears that it has evolved to be something that's much more than that, and that it is placing a focus on the curriculum and other aspects of the educational system. Is there a risk for them to lose focus in that sense? Kirsty Williams AM: No, not at all. I think they are very, very clear around establishing roles and responsibilities for each of the players and to be very clear about the expectations that each part of the middle tier can have of each other, as to what they can expect from their partners in the middle tier. And absolutely, it is about making sure that there isn't duplication, that people aren't second-guessing each other's work, and there are clear demarcations about who does what in the system, and, as I said, knowing that you can rely on your colleague in the middle tier to do the bit that they are responsible for. So, I don't think there's a question of it losing focus. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We've got a lot of areas to cover so we are going to have to pick up our pace a bit. The next questions are from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Thinking about you as a Minister trying to see what the long-term trends are with regard to raising standards and improving educational attainment, is that difficult, because the performance measures have changed, haven't they? We can't compare like-for-like now, because of the changes that have been made in the way that performance is measured. So, to begin with, is that a challenge, to see whether progress has been made? And secondly, what evidence do you as Minister use to look at the long-term trends? Kirsty Williams AM: The first thing to say, with regard to changes to performance measures--you're right that change to those does make it, in some cases, more difficult to look at trends over a period of time. But those changes are made for really good reasons. If we change a performance measure, it is done to ensure that it is in the best interests of learners. And I think the best interests of learners always trumps the ease of comparison. I understand that, for researchers and for opposition Members, even for Ministers, it would be simpler to have the same set of measures over a period of time. But if we know that those things are driving behaviours that are unhelpful to children, and not in the best interests of children, then we have to change them, even thought that then does create challenges in different areas. With regard to what do we look at, there are a number of ways that we gain data and look at data in the system: everything from the categorisation system we spoke of earlier, and trends in categorisation; we look at Estyn reports; we continue to look at examination results. But we're trying to develop a broader range of data and statistics that give us a whole picture of the education performance, rather than narrowing down on one simple indicator that tells you one thing but doesn't tell you everything. But I don't know, Steve, if there's anything further that you'd like to add. Steve Davies: It's going back to what the Member raised earlier, in terms of the range of things that you look at--things that can make a difference. So, when Estyn review schools, or we're looking to develop national frameworks for things like mental health and well-being, which look to the practice that enables raising standards, it's collecting that information, both at a national level, through the annual review of Estyn, as well as our engagement with regions and local authorities. So, it's looking at the evidence base that goes beyond, but impacts on data. And, inevitably, we will use the Programme for International Student Assessment, and any other external assessments that come through organisations like the OECD. And even where we've changed the performance measures, we still have, at national level, the ongoing data. So, if you looked at level 2 plus, we believe it is important that children get five good GCSEs--for higher education and for employment. So, we've not lost sight of those at a national level--we're not using them as a narrow set of performance measures for individual schools. Kirsty Williams AM: So, if we look at--level 2 plus is a good example. We know that a relentless focus on that single measure, as a way of judging the system, leads to a set of behaviours in schools. It narrows the focus onto a certain part of the cohort, it narrows the curriculum, when we know that children-- Sian Gwenllian AM: I'm not challenging the fact that you've changed the performance measures--I understand that, and having a broader way of looking is better in the long run. I'm just saying, because there's been this change, it makes it more of a challenge--whilst accepting why you've made the changes, but it does present more of a challenge, presumably, because you have to look at more indicators, and take evidence from different places. But I take it that you're confident that the trajectory is going in the right way. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, I think we are making improvements. But you're right: it does make it more challenging. But those changes are being made for the right reasons, as I said, whether that be at level 2 plus. Look at English literature. I understand why perhaps a performance measure around English was introduced, but the effect of that was that significant numbers of children--and, it must be said, usually children who are entitled to free school meals--were suddenly not sitting English literature GCSE. We've changed that performance measure, and guess what? Last year, we saw a significant increase in the number of children that were sitting English literature GCSE. For standards of literacy and oracy, I think studying literature is really, really important, before we even get into the joy of introducing children to the written word and the love of reading. So, we make changes. Yes, it causes challenges, but we're making those changes because we believe that they are in the best interest of children, and that has to trump ease of comparison. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Why have you decided to ask the consortia, Estyn and so on not to report on local data or regional level data? How do we then come to conclusions about what is working if it isn't presented on a local authority and regional basis? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think the thing to say about the communications from Welsh Government, Estyn, and the WLGA is it's not about not communicating the data, it's about challenging people on how that data should be used. So, the data is still available, but it's a challenge to them about how to use that data. So, for instance, when we're presenting data that compares local authority to local authority, you could have a local authority that says,'There we go, I'm above the national average. I don't need to worry about the education in my local authority, because I'm above the average, or I'm better than my neighbour.'That doesn't necessarily mean that everything is right in your local education authority. Perhaps your children should be doing even better than what you're presented with. So, actually, it's not about hiding data; it's about how you use the data appropriately. And sometimes, how we were presenting data in the past was lulling some people into a false sense of security about the performance of their system. So, it's about how you use data, and that's what the communication from Welsh Government and the WLGA and Estyn was about: think very carefully about this data and what it's telling you about your system, and don't be lulled into a false sense of security that you may be doing brilliantly. Or, perhaps, looking at your data, you may think,'Oh, my goodness me, we're not doing very well at all', but, actually, more careful consideration of that might show that your school's impact on those children is really, really a positive one. So, you've got to use that data in the context. So, it's not about less data. If anything, it's about more data and, crucially for me, it's about more intelligent use and interrogation of that data, about truly what it's telling you about your system. Sian Gwenllian AM: But again, the Welsh Government--. You have continued to publish the local and regional level data. So, doesn't that contradict what you've been telling the consortia and everyone else? Kirsty Williams AM: No, not at all. As I said, we're not in the business of trying to hide data--I believe absolutely in full transparency. And in terms of level 2 data, I think I'm not moving away from the point that I think it's really important that more and more children get five really good GCSEs. I think it's important for their life chances. It is about how that data is used, not about hiding data or making that data not available. Steve Davies: Can I, very briefly--? We didn't just send a letter out collectively. We've now carried out training jointly with WLGA and Estyn on how to use that data. So, it's not just looking where your LA is; it's also not looking at whether your school's better than average for the authority. And it is well received, and it should broaden the approach of scrutiny committees to beyond what historically was, if I'm honest, looking at the league table for their authority or looking at the league table of local authorities. It's not that they shouldn't be looking at that, but they need to dig much, much deeper underneath it. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. We're going to go on now to Suzy. I'm going to appeal for brief questions and brief answers so that we can cover the rest of the questions. Suzy Davies AM: I'll shorten these questions, okay. We know why you got rid of the old measures. We've got interim measures now. What are they telling you about the success you've had in trying to avoid the bad behaviour? Short answers. Kirsty Williams AM: It's impossible. [Laughter. ] I think it's inevitable: whatever kind of measures we put in place, people will look to maximise their success in those measures, and I don't think we'll ever come up with a system where those measures are absolutely perfect. What's really important to me is that we're really, really, really challenging schools to look at the performance of all of their children, rather than just at a very, very narrow cohort around those C/D boundaries, which we knew was detrimental, potentially, to more able and talented children and really pushing those Bs to As and those As to A*s, and children for whom actually just getting in to school on a daily basis is an achievement, and the school has done well to provide that. So, our new capped 9 makes sure that there is breadth across a range of subjects, rather than just focusing on a narrower and narrower bunch of subject opportunities for children, and our new third-third-third system enables schools to really look at their performance. So if their capped 9 score is high, what's driving that? Is it because the bottom third of the cohort is doing really well, and the impact on those children is above and beyond what could be expected, but actually, you're not doing very well for your more able and talented; you're not pushing them on? Alternatively, maybe your capped 9 score is because your MAT children are doing incredibly well, but actually, you're not really making the progress for the middle tier of those children. It allows us to have a greater focus on the performance of our FSM children--where they really are within that system. So, it's a much more granular--. And crucially for me, it looks at the impact for every child, because every child has to matter in the system, and what we had before was a narrowing of curriculum choice and a narrowing on a certain cohort of children. Suzy Davies AM: So are the permanent measures likely to be pretty similar to what you've got now? Because the research--I don't know if the research is complete yet. When will you be publishing the new permanent evaluation? Kirsty Williams AM: Sue, you're right: they're interim measures at the moment, and we will need to make sure that the performance measures are aligned to the new curriculum. That, potentially, of course--. Because Wales's review of qualifications potentially has an impact on what those finally will look like, so that work is ongoing at the moment, and unless Steve can tell me off the top of his head when we expect that to be completed by, I will send you a note. But they're interim at the moment, because we need to align them to the new curriculum. Suzy Davies AM: I think we understand that. [Inaudible. ]--date. Steve Davies: No, no. This is not a quick fix. This is a two to three-year research base. The new qualifications for the new curriculum will not start until 2025. They have to be in place for 2022. There's a three-year roll on. I would expect the broad structure of the interim measures to continue over that time. There will be some tweaks for consistency. It's what's wrapped around those interim measures that I touched on earlier: the other evidence that we bring to bear about the effectiveness of a school, but we do want to say to schools that on the whole, broadly speaking, the interim measures will carry on for two, three years. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, and the reason I asked that is right at the beginning of this session, the Minister said to the Chair that this PS100 million that's going into school improvements will be going into things that work. We need some evidence that the interim measures are going to work as well, so when are they going to be evaluated? Steve Davies: Well, we've only just used them for one year. Suzy Davies AM: That's what I'm asking you. Steve Davies: We've signalled that they're only going to be in place for three years. We are carrying out our own review of the impact of those and that's been built in, but I expect the OECD report--because it is an extensive report--to give us feedback on how those things are working now, and some steer, as they did with the last report, as to the direction we would want to go into. Kirsty Williams AM: And what I'm also interested in is those performance management measures around schools. Yes, they're about outcomes for children, but actually are about a broader suite of behaviours within that school, so, yes, qualifications and grades are an important part of a performance measure, but actually, I have other expectations of schools, above and beyond simply qualifications. And so, we would want our permanent set of performance measures to look at a wider set of behaviours within a school, and I think because--. Exams are important--of course they are, qualifications are important--but the way in which those schools achieve those results are also important. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Would you anticipate that including well-being, then? Suzy Davies AM: In a whole-school approach. Kirsty Williams AM: I absolutely--and we need to find a way of how we can truly measure that. Sometimes, children's well-being is influenced by lots of things outside the control of a school. So, I don't want schools to be held accountable for things that they have no control over, because of the circumstances in which a child may be living. But, absolutely: well-being and how the culture of the school addresses well-being is really important to me. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Suzy. Move on to PISA, please. Suzy Davies AM: How useful is PISA for you in helping school improvement? I know that it's not always the thing that you enjoy watching or looking out for. But, genuinely, how useful is it? Kirsty Williams AM: It is one of a range of tools that we need to look at. Sian, quite rightly, talked about consistency. PISA is one thing where there is a level of consistency, so it will continue to be, I think, an important part of how we test how our system is doing. Suzy Davies AM: We know that you are a little bit encouraged, but we are not out of the woods yet. You mentioned this in Plenary when we talked about PISA. How confident are you that we are on track for meeting these targets that were set before your time, or do you think that having those targets is helpful? Is it setting up aspirations that are incapable of being met within a period of time? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, those long-term targets of a score around 500 are part of'Our National Mission', and we have to keep the pressure on to strive. They are testing, but we have to keep the pressure on to strive to reach them. In some cases, I can be quite encouraged. If we look at reading scores for girls, we are almost there, but that just demonstrates what a journey we've got with our boys to address. For me, one of the ways in which we will reach those targets and achieve them is further progress on our more able and talented children. Although we are now performing at an OECD average, I will be the first person to admit that, although we have seen an improvement in the higher level skills of our more able and talented children, we do not perform at an OECD average with regard to those level 6 and level 5 scores. Suzy Davies AM: Even within the UK, really, we are quite far behind. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes. So, I think that's where we really need to push on. That's one of the reasons why we have introduced a more able and talented budget to support that, and our Seren programme, which is delivering fantastic results post-16. That's why we're introducing the principles of Seren earlier into children's careers, bringing it down from year 9 upwards, to be able to drive improvements. So, I think that that's the area that we are particularly keen to work on: making sure that more of our children perform at the OECD average at level 5 and level 6. Clearly, we've got more work to do on reading. We are working with southern Ireland, who have consistently done well with reading scores, to look to see what lessons we can learn to press on with there with reading. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. My final question on this. You recognise it as a priority, particularly for boys. Does that mean that the focus will then drift slightly from maths, where there has been some success; and drift from science, where the encouragement of more people to take GCSE science has reduced the number of high-level passes? Kirsty Williams AM: First, we have to have a system that is capable of doing all of those of things at the same time. We can't accept a system that says,'Well, we can do a bit over here, but that means we have to--.'We have to have a system, Suzy, that can drive improvements at all levels. That's my expectation. Suzy Davies AM: The balloon needs to be bigger not just squeezing it at one end. Kirsty Williams AM: Absolutely, yes. That's my expectation of this system. You have to deliver across all of these. We have seen some progress. As I've said, it's far from perfect, and we've got more work to do, but we have to deliver across all three domains, as we did last time. And I'm not going to make any apologies for changing the performance indicators around science. It was a travesty that there were children who never had the opportunity to sit a science GCSE. We don't have to make assumptions about the nature of many, many, many of those children. We have seen a significant increase in the number of children who are having the opportunity to sit GCSE science and who are passing GCSE science. So, I'm not going to make any apologies about that. One of the reasons that I suspect we have ended up with poor science scores is because of the previous policy around science entries and science qualifications. Again, one of the reasons that we have changed it isn't just solely because we need to do better in PISA, but I think that by changing it, we will see an impact on PISA. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you for that. Lynne Neagle AM: The final set of questions is from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: I just want to discuss an issue that I know is important to you, namely closing the attainment gap between pupils who are eligible for free school meals and those who are not eligible for free school meals. Unfortunately, the problem persists, doesn't it? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes. We are not where we need to be in terms of the performance, not only of our children on free school meals, but the performance of our looked-after children, and the performance of some children from some ethnic minority groups. So, we will continue to look to support those learners in a variety of ways, again looking to amend our practice on the basis of evidence that is given to us from our experts who are there to advise us. There is clearly more that we need to do. There has been some progress in some areas, but it is not where I would want it to be. Sian Gwenllian AM: But, this is despite the fact that there is PS475 million that has been invested in the pupil development grant, for this exact purpose of closing the attainment gap. But, the problem persists, and in some places, it's deteriorating. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think that, as I said, I am not shying away from any assumption or declaration that we need to do better. But, I do think that we need to acknowledge where progress has been made. If we go back to look at what PISA has said about our performance, the PISA results show that pupils in Wales are relatively more able to overcome the disadvantage of their background than is the average in OECD countries. So, our children are doing better in that, and that gives me encouragement. That's not me saying that; that's there. If we look at pupils who are eligible for free school meals, they do score below their better-off counterparts in PISA by some 34 points. The gap in England is 40 points. So, again, that gap is smaller here in Wales. If we look at basic levels of qualifications, back in--. It's difficult to make comparisons because of all the reasons we have talked about, but if we look back to 2006 and we look at the very basic level of qualifications, which is a level 1 qualification, we have seen a jump from 9. 4 per cent of children in 2006 achieving a level 1 qualification to over 18 per cent. So, there is progress. There is evidence that the resources that we are spending are making a difference. But, clearly, we are not where we would want to be. That's why we will continue to focus those resources on those children, where we need it. But, we need to do that earlier. Sticking plasters in years 10 and 11 aren't going to cut it. We need to get this right for those children, the moment that they come into a nursery and the moment that they start their formal education at the age of 5. That's how we are going to make the difference. Providing catch-up, of course, we need to do for those kids; we can't throw those year 10s and year 11s to the wind. We have to support those children. But, we will see real improvement when we get in there earlier. Sian Gwenllian AM: But I'm sure that that is a disappointment to you, because it has been a personal priority for you as well. In terms of minority ethnic learners, while there are some groups within that category who are achieving, there is underachievement happening here as well, isn't there? It's not consistent across the minority ethnic group. Is that something that you will be focusing upon? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, and that's why we have committed to maintaining a ring-fenced grant to local authorities of some PS10 million, to support education of our minority ethnic children. But, again, you are right, you are absolutely right, Sian. We need a much more sophisticated conversation about what is really going on in attainment across minority ethnic groups so that we can best target that resource and have a conversation about what the differences are. You are absolutely correct: there is a real mixed picture. If we look at black Welsh girls entitled to free school meals, they perform almost at the national average for all children--not FSM children; the national average for all children. Black Welsh boys don't, but neither do white Welsh boys. So, there is a really complex picture here, and I really welcome a debate about acknowledging the various levels of performance of BAME children, and where the gaps in performance lie. You are quite right: it is a complex picture in the system. I'm committed to continuing to support educational opportunities, and that's why have ring-fenced the minority ethnic achievement grant. There are some interesting data there. Some children are doing very, very well; others, we need to concentrate on. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian, this will need to be the last question, I'm afraid. Sian Gwenllian AM: Sorry? Lynne Neagle AM: This is going to have to be the last question. Sian Gwenllian AM: The last question. Lynne Neagle AM: Yes. Sian Gwenllian AM: Fine. In terms of looked-after children, which is one of the groups where attainment isn't where we would like it to be, there was some improvement in 2016 at key stage 4, but it has been disappointing. Do we know what's been happening in 2019? Kirsty Williams AM: The 2019 data will be published next month, and there has been significant activity. You are right: in recent years, the data have been poor and not where we would want it to be. That's why we have had a reformed approach to PDG LAC; the employment of PDG LAC co-ordinators across the regions. We've identified new resource in the new financial year to test new approaches, so, for instance, virtual school approaches, where we know, in other systems, that has worked. But, we expect the next set of data around the performance of this particular group of learners in March. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay, and you hope to see progress. Kirsty Williams AM: I don't want to speculate, but I hope so. Sian Gwenllian AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you very much. We have come to the end of our time, so can I thank you, Minister, and your official for attending this morning? We have had a wide-ranging and very detailed discussion that will be very useful for the committee. As usual, you will be sent a transcript following the meeting to check for accuracy, but thank you again, both of you, for your attendance this morning. Diolch yn fawr. Okay. Item 3 is papers to note. Paper to note 1 is a letter from ERW providing additional information following the evidence session on 16 January. Paper to note 2 is a letter from Central South Consortium, similarly providing additional information following the evidence session. Paper to note 3 is a letter from the Noah's Ark Children's Hospital for Wales regarding children's rights in Wales, following up on some additional information there. Paper to note 4 is a letter from Qualifications Wales, providing additional information following the annual report scrutiny session in January. Item 4, then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting? Are Members content? Thank you.

In Kirsty's opinion, it appeared that it was placing a focus on the curriculum and other aspects of the educational system. However, there was not a risk from them to lose focus. Absolutely, it was about making sure that there was no duplication, that people were not second-guessing each other's work. There were clear demarcations about who does what in the system. Therefore, there was not a question of losing focus.

tr-sq-1240

tr-sq-1240_0

Summarize the discussion about the long-term trends with regard to raising standards and improving educational attainment. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received apologies for absence from Janet Finch-Saunders, and also from Dawn Bowden, and I'd like to welcome Huw Irranca-Davies, who is substituting for Dawn Bowden. Can I ask Members if there are any declarations of interest, please? No. Okay. We'll move on, then, to our evidence session for our inquiry on school improvement and raising standards. I'd like to welcome Kirsty Williams AM, Minister for Education, and Steve Davies, director of education. Thank you both for attending and for your detailed paper in advance of the meeting. We've got a lot of ground to cover, so we'll go straight into questions, if that's okay. If I can just start by asking you: to what extent is the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development still involved in the Welsh Government's school improvement journey? Kirsty Williams AM: First of all, can I thank the committee for their invitation this morning, and their interest in this particular area? As you will be aware, on coming into office, the director and I agreed to ask the OECD to do a rapid review of the state of Welsh education at the beginning of this Assembly term. They did that, and the feedback from that work informed the publication and content of the national mission. I was very clear in the national mission that I would invite the OECD back to review our progress against that mission, and that has happened in the tail end of last year, and the OECD will publish their latest report on Welsh education next month now, in March. So, the expectation is that the report will be published on 23 March, and my intention is to make a statement to the Chamber on 24 March. The nature of that review is part of our ongoing development of self-evaluation. So, we talk a lot about self-evaluation in the school system. Actually, the continuing relationship with OECD is about self-evaluation of the entirety of the system and Welsh Government. We don't want to accept our own orthodoxy and just be in a bubble where we are constantly listening to ourselves and those people who might want to agree with us or tell us what we want to hear. So, the OECD is our best attempt of having some external verification of where we are. That's a risk for Ministers and for Government, because we want them to give an honest evaluation of where we are, but that's a really important tool for me, to ensure that we're constantly testing ourselves. The nature of that review is that the OECD were able to talk to whoever they felt it was important to talk to, so that included practitioners on the ground, elements of the middle tier, as well as Welsh Government. And I know, Chair--I hope you'll be pleased to hear this--that the reports of this committee have formed parts of their review, looking at how the Senedd itself has contributed to and has held the Government to account. So, as I said, we expect our report to be published towards the end of March. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you, Minister. Can I ask about the powers under the School Standards and Organisation (Wales) Act 2013, to ask you to tell us about the use of those powers either by Welsh Government or by local authorities, and how effective you feel that legislation has been? Kirsty Williams AM: Okay. Well, as you'll be aware, local authorities have quite extensive powers of intervention in schools if they feel that is necessary. If I'm honest, I think there's a mixed picture, with some local authorities using those powers not on a regular basis, but obviously demonstrating a willingness to use those powers. There are other local authorities who don't seem to have used them. Since that legislation came into being, there have been a number of reasons, because of course a local authority has to give a reason for using those powers of intervention. They usually focus on standards, but sometimes they focus on a breakdown in governance arrangements, perhaps, or a failure or a breakdown in financial management. So, sometimes the budgetary issues trigger an intervention power. And the types of interventions that have been used have included, in some cases, appointing additional governors to governing bodies, or suspending a school's delegated budget so the local authority takes on, then, financial control of that particular school, or sometimes applying to the Welsh Government to entirely replace a governing body and establish an intervention board. So, if I can give you an example of where that's been used and has been successful, in Flintshire. They applied to Welsh Government for two interim executive boards, in Sir Richard Gwyn Catholic High School and in Ysgol Trefonnen. They applied to us. Those governing bodies were dissolved. The IEBs were put in place and both of those schools, which had been in special measures, moved quite rapidly, actually, out of special measures. Perhaps the most recent example of this is one that the Chair will know very well in her own constituency of Torfaen, in Cwmbran High School, where Torfaen has intervened in that case. The Welsh Government has not used those powers to date. My expectation always is that local authorities should be the first port of call, and I would encourage--and we always encourage--local authorities to take a proactive approach to intervention and to use those powers. But it's my belief that it is they who are best placed initially to do that. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you, Minister. Can I ask, then, about the national evaluation and improvement resource and how significant a role that will play in the raising of school standards, and how you feel it's evolved since it was first conceived? Kirsty Williams AM: So, this brings us back to the principle of self-evaluation and something, if we're honest, we've not been very good at. If you look at a number of chief inspectors'reports into the Welsh education system, self-evaluation has always been identified as something that is missing or underdeveloped in our system to date, hence, then, the work to establish not a new approach, but a more robust approach to self-evaluation. We've done that in conjunction, again, with the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. It's really important, throughout the entirety of our reform journey that that's done in co-construction, because we want this resource to be usable in schools. So, it's all very well having a conceptual idea and people outside the classroom working on it, but if it's of no practical use to a school leadership team, then we won't see the impact. So, it's--. We're in phase 2 at the moment, where we're doing--. So, the initial resource has been developed by the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. We're in the testing phase at the moment and having it evaluated itself, with a view to introducing that resource across the system at the start of the new academic year, in September 2020. I truly believe that, if we're to make progress in Welsh education, we have to develop the skills within our system to have robust self-evaluation. This resource gives us continuity of approach right the way across Wales. So, it's not left to an individual school to come up with a system; it's right the way across the system. My hope would be that those principles could then be applied to local education authorities, to regional school improvement services and Welsh Government as part of a whole-system approach to self-evaluation. I don't know if there's anything more you want to add, Steve. Steve Davies: Just to add that the other critical partners are Estyn themselves. Kirsty Williams AM: Oh, yes, sorry. Steve Davies: So, they have played a critical role and, as we know, as the Minister has said in the past, she may introduce policy and practice, but if Estyn are part of it then schools, usually, because they recognise that it will be part of the inspection process--it gives it greater push and support around it. So, they've been key players within it. Kirsty Williams AM: And I think, if I just say as well, that the external perception of what that's about is really important. It's not a test of school readiness for reform, it is a genuine attempt for a school to evaluate their strengths, their weaknesses and where they need to go next. It's not an Estyn checklist. And because of the word'toolkit'--the feedback was that it gave the impression of a checklist,'Just do this and check list'. So, we're actually going to change the name of that resource. So, it'll be called the national evaluation and improvement resource, rather than the toolkit, because, as I said, the feedback was that'toolkit'gave the impression of a checklist exercise, and it's got to be about more than that if it's going to be meaningful. So, it'll be changed to an'improvement resource'. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Before I bring Suzy in, can I just welcome Sian Gwenllian, who is joining us via video-conference in north Wales? Morning, Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Good morning. Can you hear me? Lynne Neagle AM: We can, yes. We can hear you very nicely, thank you. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Yes. Only a very quick one. It's about the development of the-- Kirsty Williams AM: The resource. Suzy Davies AM: Yes, the resource, thank you--about whether there were any conflicting ideas in the process of development that made it quite difficult to zone in on something that school leadership teams, in particular, could rely on. Were there differences of opinion on what this should look like? Kirsty Williams AM: Not that I'm aware of from the practitioners that I've spoken to who have been part of that. So, for instance, Suzy, you will know the very small school of Gladestry. The head of Gladestry has been involved in this process, and she said that she'd really enjoyed the process of working alongside Estyn and the OECD as a school leader to be able to shape it. But I'm not aware that there's been conflict in that process. Suzy Davies AM: I'm not suggesting that there has been; I'm just interested as to how it had worked, that's all. Steve Davies: Chair, I think, inevitably, when you bring stakeholders together, they're not going to be in total agreement as to how it's going to work, and I think initially one of the challenges was having Estyn there as part of the facilitation group. There are always some concerns that, actually, it's coming from a to inspect, oral, judgmental tick box. So, we had some early day challenges where we had to convince--and, ultimately, Estyn convinced them--that they were there to help and support as opposed to to inspect, and that the model that was developed, as the Minister said, was not going to be a tick box,'You are good at this part of self-evaluation', it was to build the skillsets up. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. So, it's got their full confidence. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, and I think again, also, what--. You know, four years into the job, what I've reflected on as well is there is this sometimes a feeling out there that the Minister says all the right stuff, but you're not actually going to do it, so, when you talk about a new approach to doing things, you're not actually serious about it. So, trying to build that confidence that we are serious about developing a new system around self-improvement, which is different from accountability--sometimes, the practitioners are like,'Oh, yes, we've heard it all before but it never actually happens.'And I think that's been a part of the constant--not pressure, but the responsibility on Welsh Government is in following through. So, we said that we were going to do this in the national mission, and we are going to do it. I'm really proud that there or thereabouts, a few months either way, we've actually kept to the timetable as outlined in the national mission, and that helps build confidence within the sector that we are committed to that programme and we're going to do what we say we're going to do. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: And a final question from me: how effective do you think the investment in school standards has been in this Assembly term, as opposed to the approach taken in the last Assembly term, where there was the protection put in place for core school budgets? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think, first of all, it's important that, whilst this additional resource is specifically targeted at school standards, that is only a part of a much wider education budget, a budget that--you know--is incredibly complex. And so it is really challenging to be able to draw straight lines--you know,'We did this and it's resulted in that'--given that we're looking at the entirety of school funding here. What's been really important is that, if you drill down into what that money has been spent on, 50 per cent of it has been directed towards professional learning in one form or another to support our teaching professionals. And that's been really important to me. I've said it time and time again: an education system cannot exceed the quality of the people who stand in front of our children day in, day out to work with them and teach them. Therefore, that investment in staff and investment in the professional learning of our staff and support for them I think is making a difference already but, importantly, will continue to make a difference. But I think it is really challenging to be able to say,'Well, we spent this bit of money and it definitely led to that', because it's such a complex picture. But that money, the way it's been spent, has been driven by evidence. And, again, what we do know from international best practice, what do we know that works in driving up standards, and then how can we align the money that we've got to supporting that? And, as I said, 50 per cent of that money has gone directly to simply supporting the professional learning of those who work with our children. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you very much. We're going to talk now a bit about schools causing concern with questions from Huw Irranca-Davies. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Thank you, Chair. If I can, just first of all, zoom in on the way in which we actually decide which schools need what support. So, one of the interesting questions for us is how do we use the different systems out there. So, we've got the school categorisation system, which we're familiar with. We've also got Estyn inspection reports, then we've got other intelligence, including local intelligence on the ground. How do you decide from that? How is it decided what schools need support, need challenge? How do we do that? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, you're right: what we have is a variety of ways in which we can identify schools that need support, or need to be challenged on their practice. But it's important not to confuse them either. So, our primary route to doing this is our school categorisation system. Sometimes, and perhaps this is inevitable--. That system is primarily there as a triage system around identifying where our resource should be spent. So, our school improvement service--it's a risk-based approach, so they can evaluate where they need to put their time, effort and resource. Sometimes, it's used by other people for other things, but that is not its primary purpose; its primary purpose there is not one of accountability, it is one of identifying risk and aligning that then to the support that is available. Estyn--now that is part of that accountability system. That is our method of holding schools and their governing bodies to account for their practice and for the work that they do. Both systems, of course, are evolving. So, how we do categorisation has changed over a period of time. The elements that go into making that judgment around the levels of support have changed, and, of course, the Estyn inspection regime is also changing. At the moment, schools are only inspected once every seven years. We're moving to a system where Estyn will be more regularly in schools. So, they are two systems, but they are different and they look at different things. But our categorisation system is how we look for those ways of identifying support for schools. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: And you've made, with feedback over the last few years, adjustments to the way that the categorisation system works. Are you content with where it is now, or do you see more adjustments being made? Have you got things in front of you that you're getting feedback on saying'Well, we need to tweak this again a little bit'? Kirsty Williams AM: So, that system has evolved over time. So, when it started, it was just a tool around secondary schools. Now, it covers the breadth of schools. Initially, on coming into office, when I first came in, it was purely driven by data, and it was also done in quartiles. So, there was a certain number of schools that had to be in the bottom, which drove practitioners mad. They were like'Ah, every year, there's going to be some of us that have to be in the bottom quartile', because of the way in which it was arranged, which seemed very unfair to them. So, we've changed that. It's not just purely driven on data now; there are other judgments--the professional judgments of our challenge advisers are taken into account. And I would expect that situation to continue to evolve to align itself to our curriculum reform, and our changes in self-evaluation. So, it's not a fixed point. I expect that that system will continue to evolve and change, so that it complements and assists in the reform journey as other parts of the system change. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Thanks for that. I think, for any impartial reader of the way that the trends have been going on this, there is some good news within that, in that, certainly, those schools that might have been identified as have been okay but coasting along, seem to be moving up the categories, although we still do have that--. Well, it's what the system is there to do, it's to identify those schools that do need that additional support. And I like your analogy of a triage system--'You're fit; keep on doing what you're doing and do it well; you need more support, we'll put the support in.'But, can I turn to those schools that are causing significant concern, and how we identify them? The Estyn chief inspector's conclusions at the end of the 2017-18 report that these schools are not being identified early enough--there's a need to do something urgently about these concerns, particularly in secondary schools. Have we addressed that? Are you content that we've addressed that concern? Was he right? Kirsty Williams AM: No, the chief inspector is absolutely right--absolutely right. I've got no beef with that statement at all. In some ways, when a school goes into special measures, in a way, that's a failure of the system, because that should have been identified sooner. So I've got no beef, as I said, with the chief inspector saying that. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: So just to ask, bearing in mind the earlier discussion we were having, how is it that we don't identify those schools? Kirsty Williams AM: That's it--you're quite right. Undoubtedly, what categorisation has done is led to a greater understanding, I think, on behalf of local education authorities'and school improvement services'knowledge about their schools. I think knowledge around schools is greatly enhanced by that process. But we are not there yet in terms of necessarily, then, moving those schools more quickly, once they've been identified as needing the highest level of support to see improvement. And secondary schools is a particular, particular challenge. So you will have seen from the last publication of categorisation data that our primary sector continues to improve--more and more and more of our primary schools are in a green rating, which is very satisfying to me. But we have got more of an issue with secondary schools, and we have a particular issue with the same schools being identified in that level of categorisation. So even though we've identified them as needing that extra help, they are not moving at pace away from that system. So there are two things that we are doing at the moment. The first is, we are, again, looking at different sets of data that can give us even earlier warning systems that things are going wrong in a school--and perhaps Steve will explain later. For instance, staff sickness, and carefully monitoring staff sickness, because there is a direct correlation between high levels of staff sickness in a school and what is going on in the school. And Steve can explain some of this work later. But we're piloting a new approach to those schools that are causing concern. Each local authority has been asked to identify two of their high schools that they are particularly worried about. And we have a new multi-agency approach, working with those schools to try and move them more forward. So it's two from each region, a multi-agency panel, working with the school. And that multi-agency panel includes the school itself, the local authority, the regional consortia school improvement staff, Estyn and Welsh Government--as a multi-agency panel to support improvement in that school. So, for instance, what would normally happen, Estyn would come in, Estyn would make a judgment on the school--requiring special measures or urgent improvement--and Estyn would go away. They'd go away for six months, and then they'd come back in six months, and they'd make another judgment,'No, still not good enough', and disappear for six months. We're saying--Estyn and the Welsh Government have agreed that's not the best approach; Estyn need to be part of the solution, rather than just coming and making a judgment. The initial feedback from this trial is very, very positive. Actually, we've had local authorities coming to us and saying,'Can we put more schools in? Rather than just having two of our high schools, can we engage more in this project and this pilot?'It's being evaluated by Cardiff Metropolitan University and Swansea University, so we're having some academic overview to see, actually, does this approach work, can we evidence it--that it actually makes a difference? And it's actually--I'd like to claim all the credit for it, but it's actually not dissimilar to something that's happening in Scotland as well. But we knew that carrying on doing the same old thing clearly wasn't moving these schools, we needed a new approach, and this is what we're doing at the moment. So it's relatively new, but the initial feedback is positive. Steve, I don't know-- Steve Davies: I think your important point is about,'What about the schools that are sliding in that direction?'And it's bringing together what we know from Estyn, but also, critically, local authorities have knowledge of their schools, and so do consortia. We've got to be better at bringing those together. So, the Minister gave the example of staff sickness--not always a trigger, but it's one of those. If you look at movement of pupils out of a school, you can look at complaints, you can look at, actually, emerging increased use of HR resources that a school pulls on a local authority. None of these have been pushed up into the public domain, but they're important antennae. The point the Minister made about Estyn as well is, historically, when they go into special measures, Estyn, at the end of that week, call in, historically, either the region or the local authority, they will feed back to one of them, and then they go away. So, they are staying with it. So, we are brining together the knowledge. But, as the Minister said, we want to keep a very clear distinction between the accountability and the transparency to the public, to parents, with the very detailed collective work of that multi-agency group to actually make that difference over time. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Okay. So, does that--. I'd love to go further, but time is against us. Does that deal with the issue of the schools that have been identified in those categories of requiring significant improvement and requiring special measures? Are those the ones that will be identified now, or is that above and beyond that again? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, those are the ones that are primarily at the forefront of our minds, but this way of sharing data better, to step in earlier, is part of our attempt to address what the chief inspector says about stepping in early--not waiting until a school gets into special measures and a formal judgment from Estyn of that, but actually using that intelligence to get support in there earlier. The three elements that that multi-agency approach look at are: what are the fundamentals that need addressing in this school? What is the capacity of the school itself to be able to address those fundamentals? And, what extra support needs to go into that senior management team and the governing body to get those fundamentals addressed? And actually, what does sustainable improvement look like? Because, again, one of the issues, sometimes, that happens is, a school goes into a category with Estyn, there's a big push and a big,'We must do something'and the school comes out, but actually, that improvement is not sustainable. It's the low-hanging fruit; it's the easy wins that have been achieved, but actually, perhaps some of the fundamental challenges underlying in that school haven't been addressed in that process. So, this is about what will sustainable improvement look like in six months, what's it going to look like in 12 months and what's it going to look like in 18 months. So, actually, a more strategic, longer term approach to real change in a school rather than, perhaps, some of the easy-to-fix items that make a school as if it's doing better, but we really haven't tackled some of the underlying problems that make that school vulnerable to slipping back. Does that make sense? Lynne Neagle AM: I've got a couple of supplementaries on--. Sorry? Kirsty Williams AM: Does that make sense? Lynne Neagle AM: Yes. We've got a couple of supplementaries on this, first from Suzy and then from Sian. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you for that, Chair. Obviously, I'm pleased to hear that this work is being done, but I'm wondering--. What strikes me, in the recent past, at least, particularly as we've got the usual suspects in this category--. I've got to ask myself why it is that councils have been reluctant, perhaps, to step in with these schools earlier, particularly as they've got consortia or middle-tier support as well. Has there been a deficit in that space that has meant that councils don't feel equipped to step in? I just don't really get it why they've been reluctant to step in so far. If they've been nervous about doing it, because they don't feel that they've got the tools to do it, then I think that's pretty important, because as you were saying, we were talking about fundamentals; surely, councils have been able to deal with fundamentals, and more importantly, consortia up until now. Because, obviously, we're asking these players to give us evidence at some point, so perhaps I'd like to challenge them on how come we're here now. Kirsty Williams AM: And rightly so. Suzy Davies AM: I'm not laying this at your door. Kirsty Williams AM: And rightly so. I guess each local authority will have an explanation for each individual school, I suspect. What's crucial to me is that we have to--. I see our job as corralling the collective effort, and I think, for too long in the system, there has been a lack of co-ordination. So, this is about bringing and corralling a collective effort to address this, going forward, in more sustainable way. And I think it does come back to this issue around self-evaluation and a willingness to be open, honest and upfront about some of the challenges that we've got. It's not easy, is it? It's not easy to accept or to acknowledge sometimes when things are-- Suzy Davies AM: That they don't know how to do this. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, that they're going badly, or perhaps they don't know exactly how to make the difference. So this approach, as I said, is a new way of trying to coral that collective effort across the board. But, I don't know if Steve--because you've done other roles in the system, so perhaps you've got a different insight. Steve Davies: I think you're right. The variation across the country, across local authorities--. There are some local authorities that we've worked with and we identify have taken the appropriate action. There are others that we're working with, and yes, at its best, it's done as a joint exercise where they use their regional school improvement service to help in the identification that there is a need for this. They take advice as to what the action is, whether it is, as the Minister said, in the more significant areas, a board, or whether a warning notice comes in terms of standards or finance. So, we're working with them and we're working with the Welsh Local Government Association to share that practice. An example of that work is: we have done a development training session for cabinet members for education, and scrutiny leads for education across Wales, and all 22 local authorities came to that and engaged with that. That was partly about self-improvement, but it was also about where significant issues arise, you have to constructively confront them. And that comes with what the region knows, and increasingly, we're looking to have it consistently across 22 local authorities, so they are collecting all the additional data that we referred to earlier, so they can legitimately hold a mirror up and say,'This is a real concern that we have. We're not punishing you, but we're registering the seriousness, and we want you to address it.'And we're making progress. I believe it's genuinely more consistent now, but I'd be lying if I said that there was consistency across all 22 local authorities. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. I'm conscious of time. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. I've got a supplementary from Sian, then back to Huw. Sian Gwenllian AM: Because you are moving to a more sophisticated approach in terms of identifying problems sooner, and so can offer the support earlier, is it time to think about moving away from the system of categorisation entirely? That is, has the categorisation system reached the end of its usefulness, and is the multi-agency approach, this more sophisticated approach, a better way, ultimately, of being able to assist schools in moving forward? Kirsty Williams AM: I think, Sian, as I said earlier, the categorisation system has evolved over time, and my expectation is that it will continue to evolve, because it has to be consistent with our overall approach to school improvement and raising standards. I expect OECD will have feedback for us on this important part of our system, and we'll wait to see exactly what they say about it, but as I said in answer to Huw Irranca-Davies earlier, I haven't got a closed mind; we've demonstrated over the last four years our willingness to change the system to make it a smarter system, and we will continue to keep that under review, as we move forward. If I could just go back briefly, it doesn't sound like a very exciting thing, does it, when we say we've been doing work with the WLGA, with cabinet members, but also scrutiny, because that's a really important part of the jigsaw as well, is actually local government scrutiny of the performance of your education portfolio holder and the leadership of your council. So this is about trying to up the ante on all sides, so that those issues around'What are you doing in your local authority to use the powers that you have?'You know, sometimes, making sure that everybody in that authority--those in power and those who are there to hold those in power to account--have the necessary skills, knowledge and understanding to do that appropriately. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Huw, briefly. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Yes, briefly. I only have one final question. We've talked a lot about early identification; getting in there and then managing the improvement, this triage approach there, and then getting some grip of it, as well, in doing all of that. But my question now is on what we currently have. I won't touch on the primary schools, but let's just look at secondary schools--11 per cent of secondary schools inspected in the last two academic years judged as unsatisfactory, needing urgent improvement. There will always be secondary schools and primary schools that hit moments of crisis for one reason or another, but 11 per cent to me, and to any layperson, would seem unreasonably high. Are you--? It would be daft to ask you if you're content. What is a level that you would be content with of having schools in red category in Wales? Kirsty Williams AM: You're right. Schools will need different levels of support at different points, and sometimes, it's not because of a crisis. So, for instance, in my region, we do have an increase in the number of schools in the amber category. That's because we've seen in that particular region a number of headteachers retire because they've reached retirement age, and there are new headteachers. Well, that is a moment of risk in the school--when senior leadership changes. Nothing else has changed in that school, but the simple fact that you have a new leader, sometimes in those cases it might be their first headship. That means that that school is going to need a little bit of extra support, so it isn't always just a crisis that needs extra support, there are just general things that happen in the life of a school that could lead to it. But you're absolutely right--we have a particular challenge in the secondary sector where we have not been able to move individual schools forward at pace. And 11 per cent is not acceptable to me, Huw, which is why we have introduced this new pilot to address those schools where, persistently, we have concerns about their ability to move forward. If we'd have carried on doing the same thing, I suspect we would have just carried on getting the same result--hence the need for a new approach to those schools that are causing concern. Steve Davies: Very briefly, the things we talked about earlier was how we measure the performance of schools, particularly at GCSEs, with a narrow focus. As was said earlier, some of these are the same groups--they trip in and then they don't come out. Our belief is, from research, that they concentrate on squeezing the pips to get the grades up in some small areas for a period of time, and you can do that by targeting and immersing them. Estyn can tick the box to say your grades have got better, but we haven't handled the serious underpinning issues--leadership, teaching and learning, and bringing those together. As the Minister said, what does sustainable improvement look like in six, 12,18 months? It isn't just, as important as they are, getting those exam grades up a bit. They're the fundamental--. And if they're all agreed as the indicators at the outset, we're more likely--. So it's multi-agency; it's not a little activity, it's a major strategy. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Hefin David has some questions now on the middle tier. Hefin David AM: I'd like to consider the work of the consortia. In 2016, your election manifesto very clearly said that you wanted to abolish regional consortia--three words in it. Why haven't you done it? Kirsty Williams AM: Because, given that you're such a keen student of my manifesto, you'll also know that-- Hefin David AM: It was only three words. Kirsty Williams AM: The Liberal Democrat manifesto also said that we supported major local government reform and a major reduction in the number of local government units. That hasn't happened. I have to say genuinely, my experience over the last four years has proven to me the value of regional working, and in the absence of significant local government reform, I think it's absolutely vital that we have scale in school improvement services--scale that I don't think can be delivered across 22 individual local authorities. Hefin David AM: Okay. So, if there was local government reform, you would abolish the consortia. Kirsty Williams AM: I think if there was significant local government reform and we could demonstrate that those units had such a scale that they could perform the functions of regional consortia, then I think it would be inevitable that any education Minister would look to see whether there was an opportunity to change structures. But in the absence of that, Hefin, I have been absolutely convinced whilst doing this job that you need larger units to be able to carry out successful school improvement work, and I think it would be reckless to advocate the system going back to school improvement being organised in 22 different ways. Hefin David AM: Okay. Do you think that the work of the four consortia has been consistent and effective? Kirsty Williams AM: The school improvement services? Hefin David AM: The four consortia. Kirsty Williams AM: I think, as with individual local education authorities, there are some regional consortia services that have performed really highly--and that's not me saying that, that's Estyn, but gives us assurance around that--and there are others that need to improve. I think the consortia themselves would admit that they, since their establishment, have found new ways of working. Initially, they were very separate entities that did things their own way. Increasingly, over recent years, we have seen those consortia working together on a national approach, but delivered on a regional basis. So I think they themselves have evolved over time. But we are constantly looking for optimum delivery from those particular organisations, but as I said, I think it would be absolutely reckless to go back to a situation where school improvement services were being delivered individually on 22 different bases. Hefin David AM: Okay. I'm happy to accept that you've changed your opinion there; that's no problem at all. But with regard to the four consortia, and we'll take Education through Regional Working as an example, it does things differently to the other three. Is that a cause for concern, or do you think that's entirely appropriate? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, ERW does things differently, but then so does the Education Achievement Service. EAS is constituted in a different way to the Central South Consortium. What I'm interested in is not necessarily how they are constituted and organised, I'm interested in the effectiveness of that organisation to deliver for children and for teachers. ERW has got particular challenges, and we continue to work with those in ERW to address those, but increasingly, as I said, what we are seeing the regional consortia do is develop a national approach to school improvement services but deliver that on a regional basis so that there is greater consistency in terms of delivery. Hefin David AM: Are you happy that, within the ERW area, local authorities employ their own improvement advisers, rather than doing it in the way that the others do? Kirsty Williams AM: We have discussed this at length with them. My preference would be for school improvement officers to be employed in the centre, and we continue to have those discussions, but what's really important to understand is that the regional consortia are not a beast of the Government; they are a beast of the local authorities that have worked together to create a school improvement service that meets their needs. So we can't impose that solution, and we continue to discuss with ERW what is the optimal way, and they continue to discuss with their constituent local authorities about how that should be organised. Hefin David AM: Are you concerned that Neath Port Talbot have given notice that they want to withdraw from regional working? Kirsty Williams AM: I think it's really disappointing that Neath Port Talbot have published that notice. What's important for me is to understand--not for me, it will be important for Estyn. It will be really important for us to understand how Neath Port Talbot intend to support their schools and their teachers if they were to withdraw from ERW, especially at what is a very, very critical time. The regional consortia have a key role to play in supporting systems with the introduction of the curriculum. I would want to know from Neath Port Talbot how they are going to do that without being part of that organisation. And, of course, there's the added complexity that so much of our money is channelled through to schools via the regional consortia. So, I would want to understand from Neath Port Talbot how they're going to safeguard their schools and make sure that the children who are receiving their education in Neath Port Talbot are not disadvantaged if they were to follow through on that decision. Hefin David AM: Do you feel that it's your role to intervene in that area and instruct Neath Port Talbot and ERW as to how they should resolve this issue? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, as I said, I would be seeking assurances-- Hefin David AM: What does that mean, though,'seeking assurances'? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, Neath Port Talbot would need to demonstrate to me how they're going to address these issues. If they're not part of ERW and their schools and their children are not going to be in receipt of the support from ERW, as I said, especially at this critical time, how are they intending to do that? I haven't seen those plans, but if they were to push forward and follow through on the notice, I would want to see them and I suspect Estyn would want to see them also. Hefin David AM: Okay, just last issue on that: you're just waiting to see what Neath Port Talbot do next, then. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, we have written to Neath Port Talbot to ask them to demonstrate to us, if they were to pull out of ERW, how they're going to meet their functions. I have not heard back from them. Hefin David AM: Steve, did you want to say something? Steve Davies: Obviously--[Inaudible. ]--that point. We wrote to them last Friday, and we are awaiting their response now. Hefin David AM: Okay. So, that's where we are. Okay. There was the document in 2015--'National model for regional working'. Is that the current document? Are there plans to change or update it, or is that exactly where we stand? Kirsty Williams AM: So, that is the current model. Some work was undertaken in 2017 and 2018 to look to update that model and revise that model. Some specific recommendations were put forward about additional services that could be organised on a regional basis; primarily, that is a specialist human resources resource. We know that, because of austerity in some local authorities, HR departments have been really stretched. Education HR is a specialist service, it's not generic. It's often a service that--. I see that as part of a school improvement service. Support for governors also has been stretched within individual local authorities. So, a proposal was put forward to include specialist HR and governor support as part of the regional model. That was rejected by local government. Our local authorities did not want to include that in the regional model. However, I must say, having presented that evidence, some of our local authorities, even though there wasn't a national agreement to put that into the national model, have pooled their resources, and those services are being delivered and supported on a regional basis. So, for instance, the Education Achievement Service now provide specialist HR resource, and EAS and Central South provide governor support. So, although we weren't successful in persuading local government to adopt a new national model, local authorities in those areas saw the value of moving that way. Hefin David AM: So, with that in mind, and perhaps I'll put this to Steve Davies, everything the Minister just said, and also the line in the document--'The implementation of this model will change over time'-- is it time to go back to that document and review it from a procedural point of view? Steve Davies: I don't think it's necessarily timely to go back and have a complete review of it. But, certainly, we are in ongoing discussions with the Welsh Local Government Association, both in terms of work with local authorities, and the type of intervention in schools. So, we keep a constant watch as to which areas that we believe we could develop further. We are not currently intending to do a wholesale review of that. As the Minister touched on earlier, there is some work to get consistency across the current area, particularly, as we just mentioned, in relation to ERW work. So, it's getting a consistent approach at that level, and sharing the practice. I think what is emerging, as the Minister said, is that there are two regions who have already made this shift to pool services. I think the two other regions are seeing and will see the benefits of that, and instead of forcing it through, we'd expect that to evolve. But we're not, at this stage, looking to a wholesale review of the national model. Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin. Hefin David AM: And Professor Dylan Jones's strategic delivery group seems to have had quite a warm welcome in the sector. Is it fair to say that? Kirsty Williams AM: I believe so. I'm very grateful to Dylan for his hard work and his skill in chairing that group, and I think it's been welcomed by all, so that we can get that clarity and consistency about the roles and responsibilities of the individual partners and players in the middle tier. Hefin David AM: And when will the work be completed, and what will the outcomes be? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, the group is currently engaging with Steve and other officials on agreeing a plan, but also, crucially, that plan is there to support the successful implementation of the curriculum, so that we're very clear about the roles and responsibilities in the middle tier in this crucial phase following the publication. We have to move now from the publication into a relentless focus on implementation. The history of devolution is full of fantastic documents, and, shall I say, patchy implementation. The work that has gone into that curriculum is too important for implementation to be left to chance. It's too important. It's too good to be left to chance. So, everything now is a relentless focus on successful implementation. Hefin David AM: Yes, but I'm thinking that the strategic delivery is reviewing the role of the middle tier. So, you know, what do we expect to see from it, notwithstanding the kind of softly, softly approach that you've already talked about? Steve Davies: It was set up, actually, about 18 months ago--just under. It was set up to build collective efficacy, because what people out there are seeing is that there's a confusion of roles, in what the regions are doing, and it was building that collective efficacy so everyone was behind the wheel. So, they've been looking at who is doing what for the last 18 months, and exploring and making some changes themselves. It's not just what they do with Government or what they do with each other; it's just happened that it's timely, because one of the key bits of feedback we believe we will get from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development is we have had co-construction, we'd had collective effort, but we need to do more, particularly within the middle tier. This is not controlled by Government, it is arm's length from Government, and it's not their job to get it ready for the new curriculum--that's a key part of it. This group will have an ongoing role; it's not a task and finish group. It does feed back in to the Minister but there's no formal mechanism by which they have to report. Hefin David AM: Okay, that's very clear. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. I've got supplementaries from Suzy, then Sian. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Briefly, please. Suzy Davies AM: I think this is a really interesting evidence session. What I'm about to say, I say it even though I'm a big localist: it all seems to be heading in one direction of a national service. Is the strategic group even thinking in these terms, obviously building in local accountability? But it'll just make it so much easier in terms of accountability and consistency to monitor what the middle tier does, if it's a national service, like the National Adoption Service. Local delivery, national service--is it heading in that direction? Kirsty Williams AM: That's not the intention of setting the group up. As Steve just said, I receive feedback from Dylan, because I meet Dylan in this particular capacity on a planned basis. He is there to give me advice on the middle tier, and to give me advice on what he thinks Welsh Government needs to do. But I've not had that conversation with him about a national service. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Well, thank you for that. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: What I was going to raise has been answered already, that is that, from what I can see, the work that Professor Dylan Jones is doing has evolved somewhat. I felt that, originally, the idea was to look at the middle tier in terms of any kind of duplication that was happening, and where it was possible to tighten up the people going into schools from different directions. But it appears that it has evolved to be something that's much more than that, and that it is placing a focus on the curriculum and other aspects of the educational system. Is there a risk for them to lose focus in that sense? Kirsty Williams AM: No, not at all. I think they are very, very clear around establishing roles and responsibilities for each of the players and to be very clear about the expectations that each part of the middle tier can have of each other, as to what they can expect from their partners in the middle tier. And absolutely, it is about making sure that there isn't duplication, that people aren't second-guessing each other's work, and there are clear demarcations about who does what in the system, and, as I said, knowing that you can rely on your colleague in the middle tier to do the bit that they are responsible for. So, I don't think there's a question of it losing focus. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We've got a lot of areas to cover so we are going to have to pick up our pace a bit. The next questions are from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Thinking about you as a Minister trying to see what the long-term trends are with regard to raising standards and improving educational attainment, is that difficult, because the performance measures have changed, haven't they? We can't compare like-for-like now, because of the changes that have been made in the way that performance is measured. So, to begin with, is that a challenge, to see whether progress has been made? And secondly, what evidence do you as Minister use to look at the long-term trends? Kirsty Williams AM: The first thing to say, with regard to changes to performance measures--you're right that change to those does make it, in some cases, more difficult to look at trends over a period of time. But those changes are made for really good reasons. If we change a performance measure, it is done to ensure that it is in the best interests of learners. And I think the best interests of learners always trumps the ease of comparison. I understand that, for researchers and for opposition Members, even for Ministers, it would be simpler to have the same set of measures over a period of time. But if we know that those things are driving behaviours that are unhelpful to children, and not in the best interests of children, then we have to change them, even thought that then does create challenges in different areas. With regard to what do we look at, there are a number of ways that we gain data and look at data in the system: everything from the categorisation system we spoke of earlier, and trends in categorisation; we look at Estyn reports; we continue to look at examination results. But we're trying to develop a broader range of data and statistics that give us a whole picture of the education performance, rather than narrowing down on one simple indicator that tells you one thing but doesn't tell you everything. But I don't know, Steve, if there's anything further that you'd like to add. Steve Davies: It's going back to what the Member raised earlier, in terms of the range of things that you look at--things that can make a difference. So, when Estyn review schools, or we're looking to develop national frameworks for things like mental health and well-being, which look to the practice that enables raising standards, it's collecting that information, both at a national level, through the annual review of Estyn, as well as our engagement with regions and local authorities. So, it's looking at the evidence base that goes beyond, but impacts on data. And, inevitably, we will use the Programme for International Student Assessment, and any other external assessments that come through organisations like the OECD. And even where we've changed the performance measures, we still have, at national level, the ongoing data. So, if you looked at level 2 plus, we believe it is important that children get five good GCSEs--for higher education and for employment. So, we've not lost sight of those at a national level--we're not using them as a narrow set of performance measures for individual schools. Kirsty Williams AM: So, if we look at--level 2 plus is a good example. We know that a relentless focus on that single measure, as a way of judging the system, leads to a set of behaviours in schools. It narrows the focus onto a certain part of the cohort, it narrows the curriculum, when we know that children-- Sian Gwenllian AM: I'm not challenging the fact that you've changed the performance measures--I understand that, and having a broader way of looking is better in the long run. I'm just saying, because there's been this change, it makes it more of a challenge--whilst accepting why you've made the changes, but it does present more of a challenge, presumably, because you have to look at more indicators, and take evidence from different places. But I take it that you're confident that the trajectory is going in the right way. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, I think we are making improvements. But you're right: it does make it more challenging. But those changes are being made for the right reasons, as I said, whether that be at level 2 plus. Look at English literature. I understand why perhaps a performance measure around English was introduced, but the effect of that was that significant numbers of children--and, it must be said, usually children who are entitled to free school meals--were suddenly not sitting English literature GCSE. We've changed that performance measure, and guess what? Last year, we saw a significant increase in the number of children that were sitting English literature GCSE. For standards of literacy and oracy, I think studying literature is really, really important, before we even get into the joy of introducing children to the written word and the love of reading. So, we make changes. Yes, it causes challenges, but we're making those changes because we believe that they are in the best interest of children, and that has to trump ease of comparison. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Why have you decided to ask the consortia, Estyn and so on not to report on local data or regional level data? How do we then come to conclusions about what is working if it isn't presented on a local authority and regional basis? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think the thing to say about the communications from Welsh Government, Estyn, and the WLGA is it's not about not communicating the data, it's about challenging people on how that data should be used. So, the data is still available, but it's a challenge to them about how to use that data. So, for instance, when we're presenting data that compares local authority to local authority, you could have a local authority that says,'There we go, I'm above the national average. I don't need to worry about the education in my local authority, because I'm above the average, or I'm better than my neighbour.'That doesn't necessarily mean that everything is right in your local education authority. Perhaps your children should be doing even better than what you're presented with. So, actually, it's not about hiding data; it's about how you use the data appropriately. And sometimes, how we were presenting data in the past was lulling some people into a false sense of security about the performance of their system. So, it's about how you use data, and that's what the communication from Welsh Government and the WLGA and Estyn was about: think very carefully about this data and what it's telling you about your system, and don't be lulled into a false sense of security that you may be doing brilliantly. Or, perhaps, looking at your data, you may think,'Oh, my goodness me, we're not doing very well at all', but, actually, more careful consideration of that might show that your school's impact on those children is really, really a positive one. So, you've got to use that data in the context. So, it's not about less data. If anything, it's about more data and, crucially for me, it's about more intelligent use and interrogation of that data, about truly what it's telling you about your system. Sian Gwenllian AM: But again, the Welsh Government--. You have continued to publish the local and regional level data. So, doesn't that contradict what you've been telling the consortia and everyone else? Kirsty Williams AM: No, not at all. As I said, we're not in the business of trying to hide data--I believe absolutely in full transparency. And in terms of level 2 data, I think I'm not moving away from the point that I think it's really important that more and more children get five really good GCSEs. I think it's important for their life chances. It is about how that data is used, not about hiding data or making that data not available. Steve Davies: Can I, very briefly--? We didn't just send a letter out collectively. We've now carried out training jointly with WLGA and Estyn on how to use that data. So, it's not just looking where your LA is; it's also not looking at whether your school's better than average for the authority. And it is well received, and it should broaden the approach of scrutiny committees to beyond what historically was, if I'm honest, looking at the league table for their authority or looking at the league table of local authorities. It's not that they shouldn't be looking at that, but they need to dig much, much deeper underneath it. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. We're going to go on now to Suzy. I'm going to appeal for brief questions and brief answers so that we can cover the rest of the questions. Suzy Davies AM: I'll shorten these questions, okay. We know why you got rid of the old measures. We've got interim measures now. What are they telling you about the success you've had in trying to avoid the bad behaviour? Short answers. Kirsty Williams AM: It's impossible. [Laughter. ] I think it's inevitable: whatever kind of measures we put in place, people will look to maximise their success in those measures, and I don't think we'll ever come up with a system where those measures are absolutely perfect. What's really important to me is that we're really, really, really challenging schools to look at the performance of all of their children, rather than just at a very, very narrow cohort around those C/D boundaries, which we knew was detrimental, potentially, to more able and talented children and really pushing those Bs to As and those As to A*s, and children for whom actually just getting in to school on a daily basis is an achievement, and the school has done well to provide that. So, our new capped 9 makes sure that there is breadth across a range of subjects, rather than just focusing on a narrower and narrower bunch of subject opportunities for children, and our new third-third-third system enables schools to really look at their performance. So if their capped 9 score is high, what's driving that? Is it because the bottom third of the cohort is doing really well, and the impact on those children is above and beyond what could be expected, but actually, you're not doing very well for your more able and talented; you're not pushing them on? Alternatively, maybe your capped 9 score is because your MAT children are doing incredibly well, but actually, you're not really making the progress for the middle tier of those children. It allows us to have a greater focus on the performance of our FSM children--where they really are within that system. So, it's a much more granular--. And crucially for me, it looks at the impact for every child, because every child has to matter in the system, and what we had before was a narrowing of curriculum choice and a narrowing on a certain cohort of children. Suzy Davies AM: So are the permanent measures likely to be pretty similar to what you've got now? Because the research--I don't know if the research is complete yet. When will you be publishing the new permanent evaluation? Kirsty Williams AM: Sue, you're right: they're interim measures at the moment, and we will need to make sure that the performance measures are aligned to the new curriculum. That, potentially, of course--. Because Wales's review of qualifications potentially has an impact on what those finally will look like, so that work is ongoing at the moment, and unless Steve can tell me off the top of his head when we expect that to be completed by, I will send you a note. But they're interim at the moment, because we need to align them to the new curriculum. Suzy Davies AM: I think we understand that. [Inaudible. ]--date. Steve Davies: No, no. This is not a quick fix. This is a two to three-year research base. The new qualifications for the new curriculum will not start until 2025. They have to be in place for 2022. There's a three-year roll on. I would expect the broad structure of the interim measures to continue over that time. There will be some tweaks for consistency. It's what's wrapped around those interim measures that I touched on earlier: the other evidence that we bring to bear about the effectiveness of a school, but we do want to say to schools that on the whole, broadly speaking, the interim measures will carry on for two, three years. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, and the reason I asked that is right at the beginning of this session, the Minister said to the Chair that this PS100 million that's going into school improvements will be going into things that work. We need some evidence that the interim measures are going to work as well, so when are they going to be evaluated? Steve Davies: Well, we've only just used them for one year. Suzy Davies AM: That's what I'm asking you. Steve Davies: We've signalled that they're only going to be in place for three years. We are carrying out our own review of the impact of those and that's been built in, but I expect the OECD report--because it is an extensive report--to give us feedback on how those things are working now, and some steer, as they did with the last report, as to the direction we would want to go into. Kirsty Williams AM: And what I'm also interested in is those performance management measures around schools. Yes, they're about outcomes for children, but actually are about a broader suite of behaviours within that school, so, yes, qualifications and grades are an important part of a performance measure, but actually, I have other expectations of schools, above and beyond simply qualifications. And so, we would want our permanent set of performance measures to look at a wider set of behaviours within a school, and I think because--. Exams are important--of course they are, qualifications are important--but the way in which those schools achieve those results are also important. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Would you anticipate that including well-being, then? Suzy Davies AM: In a whole-school approach. Kirsty Williams AM: I absolutely--and we need to find a way of how we can truly measure that. Sometimes, children's well-being is influenced by lots of things outside the control of a school. So, I don't want schools to be held accountable for things that they have no control over, because of the circumstances in which a child may be living. But, absolutely: well-being and how the culture of the school addresses well-being is really important to me. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Suzy. Move on to PISA, please. Suzy Davies AM: How useful is PISA for you in helping school improvement? I know that it's not always the thing that you enjoy watching or looking out for. But, genuinely, how useful is it? Kirsty Williams AM: It is one of a range of tools that we need to look at. Sian, quite rightly, talked about consistency. PISA is one thing where there is a level of consistency, so it will continue to be, I think, an important part of how we test how our system is doing. Suzy Davies AM: We know that you are a little bit encouraged, but we are not out of the woods yet. You mentioned this in Plenary when we talked about PISA. How confident are you that we are on track for meeting these targets that were set before your time, or do you think that having those targets is helpful? Is it setting up aspirations that are incapable of being met within a period of time? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, those long-term targets of a score around 500 are part of'Our National Mission', and we have to keep the pressure on to strive. They are testing, but we have to keep the pressure on to strive to reach them. In some cases, I can be quite encouraged. If we look at reading scores for girls, we are almost there, but that just demonstrates what a journey we've got with our boys to address. For me, one of the ways in which we will reach those targets and achieve them is further progress on our more able and talented children. Although we are now performing at an OECD average, I will be the first person to admit that, although we have seen an improvement in the higher level skills of our more able and talented children, we do not perform at an OECD average with regard to those level 6 and level 5 scores. Suzy Davies AM: Even within the UK, really, we are quite far behind. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes. So, I think that's where we really need to push on. That's one of the reasons why we have introduced a more able and talented budget to support that, and our Seren programme, which is delivering fantastic results post-16. That's why we're introducing the principles of Seren earlier into children's careers, bringing it down from year 9 upwards, to be able to drive improvements. So, I think that that's the area that we are particularly keen to work on: making sure that more of our children perform at the OECD average at level 5 and level 6. Clearly, we've got more work to do on reading. We are working with southern Ireland, who have consistently done well with reading scores, to look to see what lessons we can learn to press on with there with reading. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. My final question on this. You recognise it as a priority, particularly for boys. Does that mean that the focus will then drift slightly from maths, where there has been some success; and drift from science, where the encouragement of more people to take GCSE science has reduced the number of high-level passes? Kirsty Williams AM: First, we have to have a system that is capable of doing all of those of things at the same time. We can't accept a system that says,'Well, we can do a bit over here, but that means we have to--.'We have to have a system, Suzy, that can drive improvements at all levels. That's my expectation. Suzy Davies AM: The balloon needs to be bigger not just squeezing it at one end. Kirsty Williams AM: Absolutely, yes. That's my expectation of this system. You have to deliver across all of these. We have seen some progress. As I've said, it's far from perfect, and we've got more work to do, but we have to deliver across all three domains, as we did last time. And I'm not going to make any apologies for changing the performance indicators around science. It was a travesty that there were children who never had the opportunity to sit a science GCSE. We don't have to make assumptions about the nature of many, many, many of those children. We have seen a significant increase in the number of children who are having the opportunity to sit GCSE science and who are passing GCSE science. So, I'm not going to make any apologies about that. One of the reasons that I suspect we have ended up with poor science scores is because of the previous policy around science entries and science qualifications. Again, one of the reasons that we have changed it isn't just solely because we need to do better in PISA, but I think that by changing it, we will see an impact on PISA. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you for that. Lynne Neagle AM: The final set of questions is from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: I just want to discuss an issue that I know is important to you, namely closing the attainment gap between pupils who are eligible for free school meals and those who are not eligible for free school meals. Unfortunately, the problem persists, doesn't it? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes. We are not where we need to be in terms of the performance, not only of our children on free school meals, but the performance of our looked-after children, and the performance of some children from some ethnic minority groups. So, we will continue to look to support those learners in a variety of ways, again looking to amend our practice on the basis of evidence that is given to us from our experts who are there to advise us. There is clearly more that we need to do. There has been some progress in some areas, but it is not where I would want it to be. Sian Gwenllian AM: But, this is despite the fact that there is PS475 million that has been invested in the pupil development grant, for this exact purpose of closing the attainment gap. But, the problem persists, and in some places, it's deteriorating. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think that, as I said, I am not shying away from any assumption or declaration that we need to do better. But, I do think that we need to acknowledge where progress has been made. If we go back to look at what PISA has said about our performance, the PISA results show that pupils in Wales are relatively more able to overcome the disadvantage of their background than is the average in OECD countries. So, our children are doing better in that, and that gives me encouragement. That's not me saying that; that's there. If we look at pupils who are eligible for free school meals, they do score below their better-off counterparts in PISA by some 34 points. The gap in England is 40 points. So, again, that gap is smaller here in Wales. If we look at basic levels of qualifications, back in--. It's difficult to make comparisons because of all the reasons we have talked about, but if we look back to 2006 and we look at the very basic level of qualifications, which is a level 1 qualification, we have seen a jump from 9. 4 per cent of children in 2006 achieving a level 1 qualification to over 18 per cent. So, there is progress. There is evidence that the resources that we are spending are making a difference. But, clearly, we are not where we would want to be. That's why we will continue to focus those resources on those children, where we need it. But, we need to do that earlier. Sticking plasters in years 10 and 11 aren't going to cut it. We need to get this right for those children, the moment that they come into a nursery and the moment that they start their formal education at the age of 5. That's how we are going to make the difference. Providing catch-up, of course, we need to do for those kids; we can't throw those year 10s and year 11s to the wind. We have to support those children. But, we will see real improvement when we get in there earlier. Sian Gwenllian AM: But I'm sure that that is a disappointment to you, because it has been a personal priority for you as well. In terms of minority ethnic learners, while there are some groups within that category who are achieving, there is underachievement happening here as well, isn't there? It's not consistent across the minority ethnic group. Is that something that you will be focusing upon? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, and that's why we have committed to maintaining a ring-fenced grant to local authorities of some PS10 million, to support education of our minority ethnic children. But, again, you are right, you are absolutely right, Sian. We need a much more sophisticated conversation about what is really going on in attainment across minority ethnic groups so that we can best target that resource and have a conversation about what the differences are. You are absolutely correct: there is a real mixed picture. If we look at black Welsh girls entitled to free school meals, they perform almost at the national average for all children--not FSM children; the national average for all children. Black Welsh boys don't, but neither do white Welsh boys. So, there is a really complex picture here, and I really welcome a debate about acknowledging the various levels of performance of BAME children, and where the gaps in performance lie. You are quite right: it is a complex picture in the system. I'm committed to continuing to support educational opportunities, and that's why have ring-fenced the minority ethnic achievement grant. There are some interesting data there. Some children are doing very, very well; others, we need to concentrate on. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian, this will need to be the last question, I'm afraid. Sian Gwenllian AM: Sorry? Lynne Neagle AM: This is going to have to be the last question. Sian Gwenllian AM: The last question. Lynne Neagle AM: Yes. Sian Gwenllian AM: Fine. In terms of looked-after children, which is one of the groups where attainment isn't where we would like it to be, there was some improvement in 2016 at key stage 4, but it has been disappointing. Do we know what's been happening in 2019? Kirsty Williams AM: The 2019 data will be published next month, and there has been significant activity. You are right: in recent years, the data have been poor and not where we would want it to be. That's why we have had a reformed approach to PDG LAC; the employment of PDG LAC co-ordinators across the regions. We've identified new resource in the new financial year to test new approaches, so, for instance, virtual school approaches, where we know, in other systems, that has worked. But, we expect the next set of data around the performance of this particular group of learners in March. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay, and you hope to see progress. Kirsty Williams AM: I don't want to speculate, but I hope so. Sian Gwenllian AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you very much. We have come to the end of our time, so can I thank you, Minister, and your official for attending this morning? We have had a wide-ranging and very detailed discussion that will be very useful for the committee. As usual, you will be sent a transcript following the meeting to check for accuracy, but thank you again, both of you, for your attendance this morning. Diolch yn fawr. Okay. Item 3 is papers to note. Paper to note 1 is a letter from ERW providing additional information following the evidence session on 16 January. Paper to note 2 is a letter from Central South Consortium, similarly providing additional information following the evidence session. Paper to note 3 is a letter from the Noah's Ark Children's Hospital for Wales regarding children's rights in Wales, following up on some additional information there. Paper to note 4 is a letter from Qualifications Wales, providing additional information following the annual report scrutiny session in January. Item 4, then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting? Are Members content? Thank you.

According to Kirsty, they were trying to develop a broader range of data and statistics that gave them a whole picture of the education performance, rather than narrowing down on one simple indicator that told only one aspect. They would use the Program for International Student Assessment, and any other external assessments that came through organizations like OECD. In addition, they believed that all the challenges and changes involved were made for the right reasons. What was crucial was that it was about more intelligent use of data and what was truly telling about the system.

tr-sq-1241

tr-sq-1241_0

What did they think of making improvement but presenting more of a challenge? Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received apologies for absence from Janet Finch-Saunders, and also from Dawn Bowden, and I'd like to welcome Huw Irranca-Davies, who is substituting for Dawn Bowden. Can I ask Members if there are any declarations of interest, please? No. Okay. We'll move on, then, to our evidence session for our inquiry on school improvement and raising standards. I'd like to welcome Kirsty Williams AM, Minister for Education, and Steve Davies, director of education. Thank you both for attending and for your detailed paper in advance of the meeting. We've got a lot of ground to cover, so we'll go straight into questions, if that's okay. If I can just start by asking you: to what extent is the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development still involved in the Welsh Government's school improvement journey? Kirsty Williams AM: First of all, can I thank the committee for their invitation this morning, and their interest in this particular area? As you will be aware, on coming into office, the director and I agreed to ask the OECD to do a rapid review of the state of Welsh education at the beginning of this Assembly term. They did that, and the feedback from that work informed the publication and content of the national mission. I was very clear in the national mission that I would invite the OECD back to review our progress against that mission, and that has happened in the tail end of last year, and the OECD will publish their latest report on Welsh education next month now, in March. So, the expectation is that the report will be published on 23 March, and my intention is to make a statement to the Chamber on 24 March. The nature of that review is part of our ongoing development of self-evaluation. So, we talk a lot about self-evaluation in the school system. Actually, the continuing relationship with OECD is about self-evaluation of the entirety of the system and Welsh Government. We don't want to accept our own orthodoxy and just be in a bubble where we are constantly listening to ourselves and those people who might want to agree with us or tell us what we want to hear. So, the OECD is our best attempt of having some external verification of where we are. That's a risk for Ministers and for Government, because we want them to give an honest evaluation of where we are, but that's a really important tool for me, to ensure that we're constantly testing ourselves. The nature of that review is that the OECD were able to talk to whoever they felt it was important to talk to, so that included practitioners on the ground, elements of the middle tier, as well as Welsh Government. And I know, Chair--I hope you'll be pleased to hear this--that the reports of this committee have formed parts of their review, looking at how the Senedd itself has contributed to and has held the Government to account. So, as I said, we expect our report to be published towards the end of March. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you, Minister. Can I ask about the powers under the School Standards and Organisation (Wales) Act 2013, to ask you to tell us about the use of those powers either by Welsh Government or by local authorities, and how effective you feel that legislation has been? Kirsty Williams AM: Okay. Well, as you'll be aware, local authorities have quite extensive powers of intervention in schools if they feel that is necessary. If I'm honest, I think there's a mixed picture, with some local authorities using those powers not on a regular basis, but obviously demonstrating a willingness to use those powers. There are other local authorities who don't seem to have used them. Since that legislation came into being, there have been a number of reasons, because of course a local authority has to give a reason for using those powers of intervention. They usually focus on standards, but sometimes they focus on a breakdown in governance arrangements, perhaps, or a failure or a breakdown in financial management. So, sometimes the budgetary issues trigger an intervention power. And the types of interventions that have been used have included, in some cases, appointing additional governors to governing bodies, or suspending a school's delegated budget so the local authority takes on, then, financial control of that particular school, or sometimes applying to the Welsh Government to entirely replace a governing body and establish an intervention board. So, if I can give you an example of where that's been used and has been successful, in Flintshire. They applied to Welsh Government for two interim executive boards, in Sir Richard Gwyn Catholic High School and in Ysgol Trefonnen. They applied to us. Those governing bodies were dissolved. The IEBs were put in place and both of those schools, which had been in special measures, moved quite rapidly, actually, out of special measures. Perhaps the most recent example of this is one that the Chair will know very well in her own constituency of Torfaen, in Cwmbran High School, where Torfaen has intervened in that case. The Welsh Government has not used those powers to date. My expectation always is that local authorities should be the first port of call, and I would encourage--and we always encourage--local authorities to take a proactive approach to intervention and to use those powers. But it's my belief that it is they who are best placed initially to do that. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you, Minister. Can I ask, then, about the national evaluation and improvement resource and how significant a role that will play in the raising of school standards, and how you feel it's evolved since it was first conceived? Kirsty Williams AM: So, this brings us back to the principle of self-evaluation and something, if we're honest, we've not been very good at. If you look at a number of chief inspectors'reports into the Welsh education system, self-evaluation has always been identified as something that is missing or underdeveloped in our system to date, hence, then, the work to establish not a new approach, but a more robust approach to self-evaluation. We've done that in conjunction, again, with the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. It's really important, throughout the entirety of our reform journey that that's done in co-construction, because we want this resource to be usable in schools. So, it's all very well having a conceptual idea and people outside the classroom working on it, but if it's of no practical use to a school leadership team, then we won't see the impact. So, it's--. We're in phase 2 at the moment, where we're doing--. So, the initial resource has been developed by the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. We're in the testing phase at the moment and having it evaluated itself, with a view to introducing that resource across the system at the start of the new academic year, in September 2020. I truly believe that, if we're to make progress in Welsh education, we have to develop the skills within our system to have robust self-evaluation. This resource gives us continuity of approach right the way across Wales. So, it's not left to an individual school to come up with a system; it's right the way across the system. My hope would be that those principles could then be applied to local education authorities, to regional school improvement services and Welsh Government as part of a whole-system approach to self-evaluation. I don't know if there's anything more you want to add, Steve. Steve Davies: Just to add that the other critical partners are Estyn themselves. Kirsty Williams AM: Oh, yes, sorry. Steve Davies: So, they have played a critical role and, as we know, as the Minister has said in the past, she may introduce policy and practice, but if Estyn are part of it then schools, usually, because they recognise that it will be part of the inspection process--it gives it greater push and support around it. So, they've been key players within it. Kirsty Williams AM: And I think, if I just say as well, that the external perception of what that's about is really important. It's not a test of school readiness for reform, it is a genuine attempt for a school to evaluate their strengths, their weaknesses and where they need to go next. It's not an Estyn checklist. And because of the word'toolkit'--the feedback was that it gave the impression of a checklist,'Just do this and check list'. So, we're actually going to change the name of that resource. So, it'll be called the national evaluation and improvement resource, rather than the toolkit, because, as I said, the feedback was that'toolkit'gave the impression of a checklist exercise, and it's got to be about more than that if it's going to be meaningful. So, it'll be changed to an'improvement resource'. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Before I bring Suzy in, can I just welcome Sian Gwenllian, who is joining us via video-conference in north Wales? Morning, Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Good morning. Can you hear me? Lynne Neagle AM: We can, yes. We can hear you very nicely, thank you. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Yes. Only a very quick one. It's about the development of the-- Kirsty Williams AM: The resource. Suzy Davies AM: Yes, the resource, thank you--about whether there were any conflicting ideas in the process of development that made it quite difficult to zone in on something that school leadership teams, in particular, could rely on. Were there differences of opinion on what this should look like? Kirsty Williams AM: Not that I'm aware of from the practitioners that I've spoken to who have been part of that. So, for instance, Suzy, you will know the very small school of Gladestry. The head of Gladestry has been involved in this process, and she said that she'd really enjoyed the process of working alongside Estyn and the OECD as a school leader to be able to shape it. But I'm not aware that there's been conflict in that process. Suzy Davies AM: I'm not suggesting that there has been; I'm just interested as to how it had worked, that's all. Steve Davies: Chair, I think, inevitably, when you bring stakeholders together, they're not going to be in total agreement as to how it's going to work, and I think initially one of the challenges was having Estyn there as part of the facilitation group. There are always some concerns that, actually, it's coming from a to inspect, oral, judgmental tick box. So, we had some early day challenges where we had to convince--and, ultimately, Estyn convinced them--that they were there to help and support as opposed to to inspect, and that the model that was developed, as the Minister said, was not going to be a tick box,'You are good at this part of self-evaluation', it was to build the skillsets up. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. So, it's got their full confidence. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, and I think again, also, what--. You know, four years into the job, what I've reflected on as well is there is this sometimes a feeling out there that the Minister says all the right stuff, but you're not actually going to do it, so, when you talk about a new approach to doing things, you're not actually serious about it. So, trying to build that confidence that we are serious about developing a new system around self-improvement, which is different from accountability--sometimes, the practitioners are like,'Oh, yes, we've heard it all before but it never actually happens.'And I think that's been a part of the constant--not pressure, but the responsibility on Welsh Government is in following through. So, we said that we were going to do this in the national mission, and we are going to do it. I'm really proud that there or thereabouts, a few months either way, we've actually kept to the timetable as outlined in the national mission, and that helps build confidence within the sector that we are committed to that programme and we're going to do what we say we're going to do. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: And a final question from me: how effective do you think the investment in school standards has been in this Assembly term, as opposed to the approach taken in the last Assembly term, where there was the protection put in place for core school budgets? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think, first of all, it's important that, whilst this additional resource is specifically targeted at school standards, that is only a part of a much wider education budget, a budget that--you know--is incredibly complex. And so it is really challenging to be able to draw straight lines--you know,'We did this and it's resulted in that'--given that we're looking at the entirety of school funding here. What's been really important is that, if you drill down into what that money has been spent on, 50 per cent of it has been directed towards professional learning in one form or another to support our teaching professionals. And that's been really important to me. I've said it time and time again: an education system cannot exceed the quality of the people who stand in front of our children day in, day out to work with them and teach them. Therefore, that investment in staff and investment in the professional learning of our staff and support for them I think is making a difference already but, importantly, will continue to make a difference. But I think it is really challenging to be able to say,'Well, we spent this bit of money and it definitely led to that', because it's such a complex picture. But that money, the way it's been spent, has been driven by evidence. And, again, what we do know from international best practice, what do we know that works in driving up standards, and then how can we align the money that we've got to supporting that? And, as I said, 50 per cent of that money has gone directly to simply supporting the professional learning of those who work with our children. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you very much. We're going to talk now a bit about schools causing concern with questions from Huw Irranca-Davies. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Thank you, Chair. If I can, just first of all, zoom in on the way in which we actually decide which schools need what support. So, one of the interesting questions for us is how do we use the different systems out there. So, we've got the school categorisation system, which we're familiar with. We've also got Estyn inspection reports, then we've got other intelligence, including local intelligence on the ground. How do you decide from that? How is it decided what schools need support, need challenge? How do we do that? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, you're right: what we have is a variety of ways in which we can identify schools that need support, or need to be challenged on their practice. But it's important not to confuse them either. So, our primary route to doing this is our school categorisation system. Sometimes, and perhaps this is inevitable--. That system is primarily there as a triage system around identifying where our resource should be spent. So, our school improvement service--it's a risk-based approach, so they can evaluate where they need to put their time, effort and resource. Sometimes, it's used by other people for other things, but that is not its primary purpose; its primary purpose there is not one of accountability, it is one of identifying risk and aligning that then to the support that is available. Estyn--now that is part of that accountability system. That is our method of holding schools and their governing bodies to account for their practice and for the work that they do. Both systems, of course, are evolving. So, how we do categorisation has changed over a period of time. The elements that go into making that judgment around the levels of support have changed, and, of course, the Estyn inspection regime is also changing. At the moment, schools are only inspected once every seven years. We're moving to a system where Estyn will be more regularly in schools. So, they are two systems, but they are different and they look at different things. But our categorisation system is how we look for those ways of identifying support for schools. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: And you've made, with feedback over the last few years, adjustments to the way that the categorisation system works. Are you content with where it is now, or do you see more adjustments being made? Have you got things in front of you that you're getting feedback on saying'Well, we need to tweak this again a little bit'? Kirsty Williams AM: So, that system has evolved over time. So, when it started, it was just a tool around secondary schools. Now, it covers the breadth of schools. Initially, on coming into office, when I first came in, it was purely driven by data, and it was also done in quartiles. So, there was a certain number of schools that had to be in the bottom, which drove practitioners mad. They were like'Ah, every year, there's going to be some of us that have to be in the bottom quartile', because of the way in which it was arranged, which seemed very unfair to them. So, we've changed that. It's not just purely driven on data now; there are other judgments--the professional judgments of our challenge advisers are taken into account. And I would expect that situation to continue to evolve to align itself to our curriculum reform, and our changes in self-evaluation. So, it's not a fixed point. I expect that that system will continue to evolve and change, so that it complements and assists in the reform journey as other parts of the system change. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Thanks for that. I think, for any impartial reader of the way that the trends have been going on this, there is some good news within that, in that, certainly, those schools that might have been identified as have been okay but coasting along, seem to be moving up the categories, although we still do have that--. Well, it's what the system is there to do, it's to identify those schools that do need that additional support. And I like your analogy of a triage system--'You're fit; keep on doing what you're doing and do it well; you need more support, we'll put the support in.'But, can I turn to those schools that are causing significant concern, and how we identify them? The Estyn chief inspector's conclusions at the end of the 2017-18 report that these schools are not being identified early enough--there's a need to do something urgently about these concerns, particularly in secondary schools. Have we addressed that? Are you content that we've addressed that concern? Was he right? Kirsty Williams AM: No, the chief inspector is absolutely right--absolutely right. I've got no beef with that statement at all. In some ways, when a school goes into special measures, in a way, that's a failure of the system, because that should have been identified sooner. So I've got no beef, as I said, with the chief inspector saying that. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: So just to ask, bearing in mind the earlier discussion we were having, how is it that we don't identify those schools? Kirsty Williams AM: That's it--you're quite right. Undoubtedly, what categorisation has done is led to a greater understanding, I think, on behalf of local education authorities'and school improvement services'knowledge about their schools. I think knowledge around schools is greatly enhanced by that process. But we are not there yet in terms of necessarily, then, moving those schools more quickly, once they've been identified as needing the highest level of support to see improvement. And secondary schools is a particular, particular challenge. So you will have seen from the last publication of categorisation data that our primary sector continues to improve--more and more and more of our primary schools are in a green rating, which is very satisfying to me. But we have got more of an issue with secondary schools, and we have a particular issue with the same schools being identified in that level of categorisation. So even though we've identified them as needing that extra help, they are not moving at pace away from that system. So there are two things that we are doing at the moment. The first is, we are, again, looking at different sets of data that can give us even earlier warning systems that things are going wrong in a school--and perhaps Steve will explain later. For instance, staff sickness, and carefully monitoring staff sickness, because there is a direct correlation between high levels of staff sickness in a school and what is going on in the school. And Steve can explain some of this work later. But we're piloting a new approach to those schools that are causing concern. Each local authority has been asked to identify two of their high schools that they are particularly worried about. And we have a new multi-agency approach, working with those schools to try and move them more forward. So it's two from each region, a multi-agency panel, working with the school. And that multi-agency panel includes the school itself, the local authority, the regional consortia school improvement staff, Estyn and Welsh Government--as a multi-agency panel to support improvement in that school. So, for instance, what would normally happen, Estyn would come in, Estyn would make a judgment on the school--requiring special measures or urgent improvement--and Estyn would go away. They'd go away for six months, and then they'd come back in six months, and they'd make another judgment,'No, still not good enough', and disappear for six months. We're saying--Estyn and the Welsh Government have agreed that's not the best approach; Estyn need to be part of the solution, rather than just coming and making a judgment. The initial feedback from this trial is very, very positive. Actually, we've had local authorities coming to us and saying,'Can we put more schools in? Rather than just having two of our high schools, can we engage more in this project and this pilot?'It's being evaluated by Cardiff Metropolitan University and Swansea University, so we're having some academic overview to see, actually, does this approach work, can we evidence it--that it actually makes a difference? And it's actually--I'd like to claim all the credit for it, but it's actually not dissimilar to something that's happening in Scotland as well. But we knew that carrying on doing the same old thing clearly wasn't moving these schools, we needed a new approach, and this is what we're doing at the moment. So it's relatively new, but the initial feedback is positive. Steve, I don't know-- Steve Davies: I think your important point is about,'What about the schools that are sliding in that direction?'And it's bringing together what we know from Estyn, but also, critically, local authorities have knowledge of their schools, and so do consortia. We've got to be better at bringing those together. So, the Minister gave the example of staff sickness--not always a trigger, but it's one of those. If you look at movement of pupils out of a school, you can look at complaints, you can look at, actually, emerging increased use of HR resources that a school pulls on a local authority. None of these have been pushed up into the public domain, but they're important antennae. The point the Minister made about Estyn as well is, historically, when they go into special measures, Estyn, at the end of that week, call in, historically, either the region or the local authority, they will feed back to one of them, and then they go away. So, they are staying with it. So, we are brining together the knowledge. But, as the Minister said, we want to keep a very clear distinction between the accountability and the transparency to the public, to parents, with the very detailed collective work of that multi-agency group to actually make that difference over time. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Okay. So, does that--. I'd love to go further, but time is against us. Does that deal with the issue of the schools that have been identified in those categories of requiring significant improvement and requiring special measures? Are those the ones that will be identified now, or is that above and beyond that again? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, those are the ones that are primarily at the forefront of our minds, but this way of sharing data better, to step in earlier, is part of our attempt to address what the chief inspector says about stepping in early--not waiting until a school gets into special measures and a formal judgment from Estyn of that, but actually using that intelligence to get support in there earlier. The three elements that that multi-agency approach look at are: what are the fundamentals that need addressing in this school? What is the capacity of the school itself to be able to address those fundamentals? And, what extra support needs to go into that senior management team and the governing body to get those fundamentals addressed? And actually, what does sustainable improvement look like? Because, again, one of the issues, sometimes, that happens is, a school goes into a category with Estyn, there's a big push and a big,'We must do something'and the school comes out, but actually, that improvement is not sustainable. It's the low-hanging fruit; it's the easy wins that have been achieved, but actually, perhaps some of the fundamental challenges underlying in that school haven't been addressed in that process. So, this is about what will sustainable improvement look like in six months, what's it going to look like in 12 months and what's it going to look like in 18 months. So, actually, a more strategic, longer term approach to real change in a school rather than, perhaps, some of the easy-to-fix items that make a school as if it's doing better, but we really haven't tackled some of the underlying problems that make that school vulnerable to slipping back. Does that make sense? Lynne Neagle AM: I've got a couple of supplementaries on--. Sorry? Kirsty Williams AM: Does that make sense? Lynne Neagle AM: Yes. We've got a couple of supplementaries on this, first from Suzy and then from Sian. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you for that, Chair. Obviously, I'm pleased to hear that this work is being done, but I'm wondering--. What strikes me, in the recent past, at least, particularly as we've got the usual suspects in this category--. I've got to ask myself why it is that councils have been reluctant, perhaps, to step in with these schools earlier, particularly as they've got consortia or middle-tier support as well. Has there been a deficit in that space that has meant that councils don't feel equipped to step in? I just don't really get it why they've been reluctant to step in so far. If they've been nervous about doing it, because they don't feel that they've got the tools to do it, then I think that's pretty important, because as you were saying, we were talking about fundamentals; surely, councils have been able to deal with fundamentals, and more importantly, consortia up until now. Because, obviously, we're asking these players to give us evidence at some point, so perhaps I'd like to challenge them on how come we're here now. Kirsty Williams AM: And rightly so. Suzy Davies AM: I'm not laying this at your door. Kirsty Williams AM: And rightly so. I guess each local authority will have an explanation for each individual school, I suspect. What's crucial to me is that we have to--. I see our job as corralling the collective effort, and I think, for too long in the system, there has been a lack of co-ordination. So, this is about bringing and corralling a collective effort to address this, going forward, in more sustainable way. And I think it does come back to this issue around self-evaluation and a willingness to be open, honest and upfront about some of the challenges that we've got. It's not easy, is it? It's not easy to accept or to acknowledge sometimes when things are-- Suzy Davies AM: That they don't know how to do this. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, that they're going badly, or perhaps they don't know exactly how to make the difference. So this approach, as I said, is a new way of trying to coral that collective effort across the board. But, I don't know if Steve--because you've done other roles in the system, so perhaps you've got a different insight. Steve Davies: I think you're right. The variation across the country, across local authorities--. There are some local authorities that we've worked with and we identify have taken the appropriate action. There are others that we're working with, and yes, at its best, it's done as a joint exercise where they use their regional school improvement service to help in the identification that there is a need for this. They take advice as to what the action is, whether it is, as the Minister said, in the more significant areas, a board, or whether a warning notice comes in terms of standards or finance. So, we're working with them and we're working with the Welsh Local Government Association to share that practice. An example of that work is: we have done a development training session for cabinet members for education, and scrutiny leads for education across Wales, and all 22 local authorities came to that and engaged with that. That was partly about self-improvement, but it was also about where significant issues arise, you have to constructively confront them. And that comes with what the region knows, and increasingly, we're looking to have it consistently across 22 local authorities, so they are collecting all the additional data that we referred to earlier, so they can legitimately hold a mirror up and say,'This is a real concern that we have. We're not punishing you, but we're registering the seriousness, and we want you to address it.'And we're making progress. I believe it's genuinely more consistent now, but I'd be lying if I said that there was consistency across all 22 local authorities. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. I'm conscious of time. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. I've got a supplementary from Sian, then back to Huw. Sian Gwenllian AM: Because you are moving to a more sophisticated approach in terms of identifying problems sooner, and so can offer the support earlier, is it time to think about moving away from the system of categorisation entirely? That is, has the categorisation system reached the end of its usefulness, and is the multi-agency approach, this more sophisticated approach, a better way, ultimately, of being able to assist schools in moving forward? Kirsty Williams AM: I think, Sian, as I said earlier, the categorisation system has evolved over time, and my expectation is that it will continue to evolve, because it has to be consistent with our overall approach to school improvement and raising standards. I expect OECD will have feedback for us on this important part of our system, and we'll wait to see exactly what they say about it, but as I said in answer to Huw Irranca-Davies earlier, I haven't got a closed mind; we've demonstrated over the last four years our willingness to change the system to make it a smarter system, and we will continue to keep that under review, as we move forward. If I could just go back briefly, it doesn't sound like a very exciting thing, does it, when we say we've been doing work with the WLGA, with cabinet members, but also scrutiny, because that's a really important part of the jigsaw as well, is actually local government scrutiny of the performance of your education portfolio holder and the leadership of your council. So this is about trying to up the ante on all sides, so that those issues around'What are you doing in your local authority to use the powers that you have?'You know, sometimes, making sure that everybody in that authority--those in power and those who are there to hold those in power to account--have the necessary skills, knowledge and understanding to do that appropriately. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Huw, briefly. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Yes, briefly. I only have one final question. We've talked a lot about early identification; getting in there and then managing the improvement, this triage approach there, and then getting some grip of it, as well, in doing all of that. But my question now is on what we currently have. I won't touch on the primary schools, but let's just look at secondary schools--11 per cent of secondary schools inspected in the last two academic years judged as unsatisfactory, needing urgent improvement. There will always be secondary schools and primary schools that hit moments of crisis for one reason or another, but 11 per cent to me, and to any layperson, would seem unreasonably high. Are you--? It would be daft to ask you if you're content. What is a level that you would be content with of having schools in red category in Wales? Kirsty Williams AM: You're right. Schools will need different levels of support at different points, and sometimes, it's not because of a crisis. So, for instance, in my region, we do have an increase in the number of schools in the amber category. That's because we've seen in that particular region a number of headteachers retire because they've reached retirement age, and there are new headteachers. Well, that is a moment of risk in the school--when senior leadership changes. Nothing else has changed in that school, but the simple fact that you have a new leader, sometimes in those cases it might be their first headship. That means that that school is going to need a little bit of extra support, so it isn't always just a crisis that needs extra support, there are just general things that happen in the life of a school that could lead to it. But you're absolutely right--we have a particular challenge in the secondary sector where we have not been able to move individual schools forward at pace. And 11 per cent is not acceptable to me, Huw, which is why we have introduced this new pilot to address those schools where, persistently, we have concerns about their ability to move forward. If we'd have carried on doing the same thing, I suspect we would have just carried on getting the same result--hence the need for a new approach to those schools that are causing concern. Steve Davies: Very briefly, the things we talked about earlier was how we measure the performance of schools, particularly at GCSEs, with a narrow focus. As was said earlier, some of these are the same groups--they trip in and then they don't come out. Our belief is, from research, that they concentrate on squeezing the pips to get the grades up in some small areas for a period of time, and you can do that by targeting and immersing them. Estyn can tick the box to say your grades have got better, but we haven't handled the serious underpinning issues--leadership, teaching and learning, and bringing those together. As the Minister said, what does sustainable improvement look like in six, 12,18 months? It isn't just, as important as they are, getting those exam grades up a bit. They're the fundamental--. And if they're all agreed as the indicators at the outset, we're more likely--. So it's multi-agency; it's not a little activity, it's a major strategy. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Hefin David has some questions now on the middle tier. Hefin David AM: I'd like to consider the work of the consortia. In 2016, your election manifesto very clearly said that you wanted to abolish regional consortia--three words in it. Why haven't you done it? Kirsty Williams AM: Because, given that you're such a keen student of my manifesto, you'll also know that-- Hefin David AM: It was only three words. Kirsty Williams AM: The Liberal Democrat manifesto also said that we supported major local government reform and a major reduction in the number of local government units. That hasn't happened. I have to say genuinely, my experience over the last four years has proven to me the value of regional working, and in the absence of significant local government reform, I think it's absolutely vital that we have scale in school improvement services--scale that I don't think can be delivered across 22 individual local authorities. Hefin David AM: Okay. So, if there was local government reform, you would abolish the consortia. Kirsty Williams AM: I think if there was significant local government reform and we could demonstrate that those units had such a scale that they could perform the functions of regional consortia, then I think it would be inevitable that any education Minister would look to see whether there was an opportunity to change structures. But in the absence of that, Hefin, I have been absolutely convinced whilst doing this job that you need larger units to be able to carry out successful school improvement work, and I think it would be reckless to advocate the system going back to school improvement being organised in 22 different ways. Hefin David AM: Okay. Do you think that the work of the four consortia has been consistent and effective? Kirsty Williams AM: The school improvement services? Hefin David AM: The four consortia. Kirsty Williams AM: I think, as with individual local education authorities, there are some regional consortia services that have performed really highly--and that's not me saying that, that's Estyn, but gives us assurance around that--and there are others that need to improve. I think the consortia themselves would admit that they, since their establishment, have found new ways of working. Initially, they were very separate entities that did things their own way. Increasingly, over recent years, we have seen those consortia working together on a national approach, but delivered on a regional basis. So I think they themselves have evolved over time. But we are constantly looking for optimum delivery from those particular organisations, but as I said, I think it would be absolutely reckless to go back to a situation where school improvement services were being delivered individually on 22 different bases. Hefin David AM: Okay. I'm happy to accept that you've changed your opinion there; that's no problem at all. But with regard to the four consortia, and we'll take Education through Regional Working as an example, it does things differently to the other three. Is that a cause for concern, or do you think that's entirely appropriate? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, ERW does things differently, but then so does the Education Achievement Service. EAS is constituted in a different way to the Central South Consortium. What I'm interested in is not necessarily how they are constituted and organised, I'm interested in the effectiveness of that organisation to deliver for children and for teachers. ERW has got particular challenges, and we continue to work with those in ERW to address those, but increasingly, as I said, what we are seeing the regional consortia do is develop a national approach to school improvement services but deliver that on a regional basis so that there is greater consistency in terms of delivery. Hefin David AM: Are you happy that, within the ERW area, local authorities employ their own improvement advisers, rather than doing it in the way that the others do? Kirsty Williams AM: We have discussed this at length with them. My preference would be for school improvement officers to be employed in the centre, and we continue to have those discussions, but what's really important to understand is that the regional consortia are not a beast of the Government; they are a beast of the local authorities that have worked together to create a school improvement service that meets their needs. So we can't impose that solution, and we continue to discuss with ERW what is the optimal way, and they continue to discuss with their constituent local authorities about how that should be organised. Hefin David AM: Are you concerned that Neath Port Talbot have given notice that they want to withdraw from regional working? Kirsty Williams AM: I think it's really disappointing that Neath Port Talbot have published that notice. What's important for me is to understand--not for me, it will be important for Estyn. It will be really important for us to understand how Neath Port Talbot intend to support their schools and their teachers if they were to withdraw from ERW, especially at what is a very, very critical time. The regional consortia have a key role to play in supporting systems with the introduction of the curriculum. I would want to know from Neath Port Talbot how they are going to do that without being part of that organisation. And, of course, there's the added complexity that so much of our money is channelled through to schools via the regional consortia. So, I would want to understand from Neath Port Talbot how they're going to safeguard their schools and make sure that the children who are receiving their education in Neath Port Talbot are not disadvantaged if they were to follow through on that decision. Hefin David AM: Do you feel that it's your role to intervene in that area and instruct Neath Port Talbot and ERW as to how they should resolve this issue? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, as I said, I would be seeking assurances-- Hefin David AM: What does that mean, though,'seeking assurances'? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, Neath Port Talbot would need to demonstrate to me how they're going to address these issues. If they're not part of ERW and their schools and their children are not going to be in receipt of the support from ERW, as I said, especially at this critical time, how are they intending to do that? I haven't seen those plans, but if they were to push forward and follow through on the notice, I would want to see them and I suspect Estyn would want to see them also. Hefin David AM: Okay, just last issue on that: you're just waiting to see what Neath Port Talbot do next, then. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, we have written to Neath Port Talbot to ask them to demonstrate to us, if they were to pull out of ERW, how they're going to meet their functions. I have not heard back from them. Hefin David AM: Steve, did you want to say something? Steve Davies: Obviously--[Inaudible. ]--that point. We wrote to them last Friday, and we are awaiting their response now. Hefin David AM: Okay. So, that's where we are. Okay. There was the document in 2015--'National model for regional working'. Is that the current document? Are there plans to change or update it, or is that exactly where we stand? Kirsty Williams AM: So, that is the current model. Some work was undertaken in 2017 and 2018 to look to update that model and revise that model. Some specific recommendations were put forward about additional services that could be organised on a regional basis; primarily, that is a specialist human resources resource. We know that, because of austerity in some local authorities, HR departments have been really stretched. Education HR is a specialist service, it's not generic. It's often a service that--. I see that as part of a school improvement service. Support for governors also has been stretched within individual local authorities. So, a proposal was put forward to include specialist HR and governor support as part of the regional model. That was rejected by local government. Our local authorities did not want to include that in the regional model. However, I must say, having presented that evidence, some of our local authorities, even though there wasn't a national agreement to put that into the national model, have pooled their resources, and those services are being delivered and supported on a regional basis. So, for instance, the Education Achievement Service now provide specialist HR resource, and EAS and Central South provide governor support. So, although we weren't successful in persuading local government to adopt a new national model, local authorities in those areas saw the value of moving that way. Hefin David AM: So, with that in mind, and perhaps I'll put this to Steve Davies, everything the Minister just said, and also the line in the document--'The implementation of this model will change over time'-- is it time to go back to that document and review it from a procedural point of view? Steve Davies: I don't think it's necessarily timely to go back and have a complete review of it. But, certainly, we are in ongoing discussions with the Welsh Local Government Association, both in terms of work with local authorities, and the type of intervention in schools. So, we keep a constant watch as to which areas that we believe we could develop further. We are not currently intending to do a wholesale review of that. As the Minister touched on earlier, there is some work to get consistency across the current area, particularly, as we just mentioned, in relation to ERW work. So, it's getting a consistent approach at that level, and sharing the practice. I think what is emerging, as the Minister said, is that there are two regions who have already made this shift to pool services. I think the two other regions are seeing and will see the benefits of that, and instead of forcing it through, we'd expect that to evolve. But we're not, at this stage, looking to a wholesale review of the national model. Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin. Hefin David AM: And Professor Dylan Jones's strategic delivery group seems to have had quite a warm welcome in the sector. Is it fair to say that? Kirsty Williams AM: I believe so. I'm very grateful to Dylan for his hard work and his skill in chairing that group, and I think it's been welcomed by all, so that we can get that clarity and consistency about the roles and responsibilities of the individual partners and players in the middle tier. Hefin David AM: And when will the work be completed, and what will the outcomes be? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, the group is currently engaging with Steve and other officials on agreeing a plan, but also, crucially, that plan is there to support the successful implementation of the curriculum, so that we're very clear about the roles and responsibilities in the middle tier in this crucial phase following the publication. We have to move now from the publication into a relentless focus on implementation. The history of devolution is full of fantastic documents, and, shall I say, patchy implementation. The work that has gone into that curriculum is too important for implementation to be left to chance. It's too important. It's too good to be left to chance. So, everything now is a relentless focus on successful implementation. Hefin David AM: Yes, but I'm thinking that the strategic delivery is reviewing the role of the middle tier. So, you know, what do we expect to see from it, notwithstanding the kind of softly, softly approach that you've already talked about? Steve Davies: It was set up, actually, about 18 months ago--just under. It was set up to build collective efficacy, because what people out there are seeing is that there's a confusion of roles, in what the regions are doing, and it was building that collective efficacy so everyone was behind the wheel. So, they've been looking at who is doing what for the last 18 months, and exploring and making some changes themselves. It's not just what they do with Government or what they do with each other; it's just happened that it's timely, because one of the key bits of feedback we believe we will get from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development is we have had co-construction, we'd had collective effort, but we need to do more, particularly within the middle tier. This is not controlled by Government, it is arm's length from Government, and it's not their job to get it ready for the new curriculum--that's a key part of it. This group will have an ongoing role; it's not a task and finish group. It does feed back in to the Minister but there's no formal mechanism by which they have to report. Hefin David AM: Okay, that's very clear. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. I've got supplementaries from Suzy, then Sian. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Briefly, please. Suzy Davies AM: I think this is a really interesting evidence session. What I'm about to say, I say it even though I'm a big localist: it all seems to be heading in one direction of a national service. Is the strategic group even thinking in these terms, obviously building in local accountability? But it'll just make it so much easier in terms of accountability and consistency to monitor what the middle tier does, if it's a national service, like the National Adoption Service. Local delivery, national service--is it heading in that direction? Kirsty Williams AM: That's not the intention of setting the group up. As Steve just said, I receive feedback from Dylan, because I meet Dylan in this particular capacity on a planned basis. He is there to give me advice on the middle tier, and to give me advice on what he thinks Welsh Government needs to do. But I've not had that conversation with him about a national service. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Well, thank you for that. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: What I was going to raise has been answered already, that is that, from what I can see, the work that Professor Dylan Jones is doing has evolved somewhat. I felt that, originally, the idea was to look at the middle tier in terms of any kind of duplication that was happening, and where it was possible to tighten up the people going into schools from different directions. But it appears that it has evolved to be something that's much more than that, and that it is placing a focus on the curriculum and other aspects of the educational system. Is there a risk for them to lose focus in that sense? Kirsty Williams AM: No, not at all. I think they are very, very clear around establishing roles and responsibilities for each of the players and to be very clear about the expectations that each part of the middle tier can have of each other, as to what they can expect from their partners in the middle tier. And absolutely, it is about making sure that there isn't duplication, that people aren't second-guessing each other's work, and there are clear demarcations about who does what in the system, and, as I said, knowing that you can rely on your colleague in the middle tier to do the bit that they are responsible for. So, I don't think there's a question of it losing focus. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We've got a lot of areas to cover so we are going to have to pick up our pace a bit. The next questions are from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Thinking about you as a Minister trying to see what the long-term trends are with regard to raising standards and improving educational attainment, is that difficult, because the performance measures have changed, haven't they? We can't compare like-for-like now, because of the changes that have been made in the way that performance is measured. So, to begin with, is that a challenge, to see whether progress has been made? And secondly, what evidence do you as Minister use to look at the long-term trends? Kirsty Williams AM: The first thing to say, with regard to changes to performance measures--you're right that change to those does make it, in some cases, more difficult to look at trends over a period of time. But those changes are made for really good reasons. If we change a performance measure, it is done to ensure that it is in the best interests of learners. And I think the best interests of learners always trumps the ease of comparison. I understand that, for researchers and for opposition Members, even for Ministers, it would be simpler to have the same set of measures over a period of time. But if we know that those things are driving behaviours that are unhelpful to children, and not in the best interests of children, then we have to change them, even thought that then does create challenges in different areas. With regard to what do we look at, there are a number of ways that we gain data and look at data in the system: everything from the categorisation system we spoke of earlier, and trends in categorisation; we look at Estyn reports; we continue to look at examination results. But we're trying to develop a broader range of data and statistics that give us a whole picture of the education performance, rather than narrowing down on one simple indicator that tells you one thing but doesn't tell you everything. But I don't know, Steve, if there's anything further that you'd like to add. Steve Davies: It's going back to what the Member raised earlier, in terms of the range of things that you look at--things that can make a difference. So, when Estyn review schools, or we're looking to develop national frameworks for things like mental health and well-being, which look to the practice that enables raising standards, it's collecting that information, both at a national level, through the annual review of Estyn, as well as our engagement with regions and local authorities. So, it's looking at the evidence base that goes beyond, but impacts on data. And, inevitably, we will use the Programme for International Student Assessment, and any other external assessments that come through organisations like the OECD. And even where we've changed the performance measures, we still have, at national level, the ongoing data. So, if you looked at level 2 plus, we believe it is important that children get five good GCSEs--for higher education and for employment. So, we've not lost sight of those at a national level--we're not using them as a narrow set of performance measures for individual schools. Kirsty Williams AM: So, if we look at--level 2 plus is a good example. We know that a relentless focus on that single measure, as a way of judging the system, leads to a set of behaviours in schools. It narrows the focus onto a certain part of the cohort, it narrows the curriculum, when we know that children-- Sian Gwenllian AM: I'm not challenging the fact that you've changed the performance measures--I understand that, and having a broader way of looking is better in the long run. I'm just saying, because there's been this change, it makes it more of a challenge--whilst accepting why you've made the changes, but it does present more of a challenge, presumably, because you have to look at more indicators, and take evidence from different places. But I take it that you're confident that the trajectory is going in the right way. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, I think we are making improvements. But you're right: it does make it more challenging. But those changes are being made for the right reasons, as I said, whether that be at level 2 plus. Look at English literature. I understand why perhaps a performance measure around English was introduced, but the effect of that was that significant numbers of children--and, it must be said, usually children who are entitled to free school meals--were suddenly not sitting English literature GCSE. We've changed that performance measure, and guess what? Last year, we saw a significant increase in the number of children that were sitting English literature GCSE. For standards of literacy and oracy, I think studying literature is really, really important, before we even get into the joy of introducing children to the written word and the love of reading. So, we make changes. Yes, it causes challenges, but we're making those changes because we believe that they are in the best interest of children, and that has to trump ease of comparison. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Why have you decided to ask the consortia, Estyn and so on not to report on local data or regional level data? How do we then come to conclusions about what is working if it isn't presented on a local authority and regional basis? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think the thing to say about the communications from Welsh Government, Estyn, and the WLGA is it's not about not communicating the data, it's about challenging people on how that data should be used. So, the data is still available, but it's a challenge to them about how to use that data. So, for instance, when we're presenting data that compares local authority to local authority, you could have a local authority that says,'There we go, I'm above the national average. I don't need to worry about the education in my local authority, because I'm above the average, or I'm better than my neighbour.'That doesn't necessarily mean that everything is right in your local education authority. Perhaps your children should be doing even better than what you're presented with. So, actually, it's not about hiding data; it's about how you use the data appropriately. And sometimes, how we were presenting data in the past was lulling some people into a false sense of security about the performance of their system. So, it's about how you use data, and that's what the communication from Welsh Government and the WLGA and Estyn was about: think very carefully about this data and what it's telling you about your system, and don't be lulled into a false sense of security that you may be doing brilliantly. Or, perhaps, looking at your data, you may think,'Oh, my goodness me, we're not doing very well at all', but, actually, more careful consideration of that might show that your school's impact on those children is really, really a positive one. So, you've got to use that data in the context. So, it's not about less data. If anything, it's about more data and, crucially for me, it's about more intelligent use and interrogation of that data, about truly what it's telling you about your system. Sian Gwenllian AM: But again, the Welsh Government--. You have continued to publish the local and regional level data. So, doesn't that contradict what you've been telling the consortia and everyone else? Kirsty Williams AM: No, not at all. As I said, we're not in the business of trying to hide data--I believe absolutely in full transparency. And in terms of level 2 data, I think I'm not moving away from the point that I think it's really important that more and more children get five really good GCSEs. I think it's important for their life chances. It is about how that data is used, not about hiding data or making that data not available. Steve Davies: Can I, very briefly--? We didn't just send a letter out collectively. We've now carried out training jointly with WLGA and Estyn on how to use that data. So, it's not just looking where your LA is; it's also not looking at whether your school's better than average for the authority. And it is well received, and it should broaden the approach of scrutiny committees to beyond what historically was, if I'm honest, looking at the league table for their authority or looking at the league table of local authorities. It's not that they shouldn't be looking at that, but they need to dig much, much deeper underneath it. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. We're going to go on now to Suzy. I'm going to appeal for brief questions and brief answers so that we can cover the rest of the questions. Suzy Davies AM: I'll shorten these questions, okay. We know why you got rid of the old measures. We've got interim measures now. What are they telling you about the success you've had in trying to avoid the bad behaviour? Short answers. Kirsty Williams AM: It's impossible. [Laughter. ] I think it's inevitable: whatever kind of measures we put in place, people will look to maximise their success in those measures, and I don't think we'll ever come up with a system where those measures are absolutely perfect. What's really important to me is that we're really, really, really challenging schools to look at the performance of all of their children, rather than just at a very, very narrow cohort around those C/D boundaries, which we knew was detrimental, potentially, to more able and talented children and really pushing those Bs to As and those As to A*s, and children for whom actually just getting in to school on a daily basis is an achievement, and the school has done well to provide that. So, our new capped 9 makes sure that there is breadth across a range of subjects, rather than just focusing on a narrower and narrower bunch of subject opportunities for children, and our new third-third-third system enables schools to really look at their performance. So if their capped 9 score is high, what's driving that? Is it because the bottom third of the cohort is doing really well, and the impact on those children is above and beyond what could be expected, but actually, you're not doing very well for your more able and talented; you're not pushing them on? Alternatively, maybe your capped 9 score is because your MAT children are doing incredibly well, but actually, you're not really making the progress for the middle tier of those children. It allows us to have a greater focus on the performance of our FSM children--where they really are within that system. So, it's a much more granular--. And crucially for me, it looks at the impact for every child, because every child has to matter in the system, and what we had before was a narrowing of curriculum choice and a narrowing on a certain cohort of children. Suzy Davies AM: So are the permanent measures likely to be pretty similar to what you've got now? Because the research--I don't know if the research is complete yet. When will you be publishing the new permanent evaluation? Kirsty Williams AM: Sue, you're right: they're interim measures at the moment, and we will need to make sure that the performance measures are aligned to the new curriculum. That, potentially, of course--. Because Wales's review of qualifications potentially has an impact on what those finally will look like, so that work is ongoing at the moment, and unless Steve can tell me off the top of his head when we expect that to be completed by, I will send you a note. But they're interim at the moment, because we need to align them to the new curriculum. Suzy Davies AM: I think we understand that. [Inaudible. ]--date. Steve Davies: No, no. This is not a quick fix. This is a two to three-year research base. The new qualifications for the new curriculum will not start until 2025. They have to be in place for 2022. There's a three-year roll on. I would expect the broad structure of the interim measures to continue over that time. There will be some tweaks for consistency. It's what's wrapped around those interim measures that I touched on earlier: the other evidence that we bring to bear about the effectiveness of a school, but we do want to say to schools that on the whole, broadly speaking, the interim measures will carry on for two, three years. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, and the reason I asked that is right at the beginning of this session, the Minister said to the Chair that this PS100 million that's going into school improvements will be going into things that work. We need some evidence that the interim measures are going to work as well, so when are they going to be evaluated? Steve Davies: Well, we've only just used them for one year. Suzy Davies AM: That's what I'm asking you. Steve Davies: We've signalled that they're only going to be in place for three years. We are carrying out our own review of the impact of those and that's been built in, but I expect the OECD report--because it is an extensive report--to give us feedback on how those things are working now, and some steer, as they did with the last report, as to the direction we would want to go into. Kirsty Williams AM: And what I'm also interested in is those performance management measures around schools. Yes, they're about outcomes for children, but actually are about a broader suite of behaviours within that school, so, yes, qualifications and grades are an important part of a performance measure, but actually, I have other expectations of schools, above and beyond simply qualifications. And so, we would want our permanent set of performance measures to look at a wider set of behaviours within a school, and I think because--. Exams are important--of course they are, qualifications are important--but the way in which those schools achieve those results are also important. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Would you anticipate that including well-being, then? Suzy Davies AM: In a whole-school approach. Kirsty Williams AM: I absolutely--and we need to find a way of how we can truly measure that. Sometimes, children's well-being is influenced by lots of things outside the control of a school. So, I don't want schools to be held accountable for things that they have no control over, because of the circumstances in which a child may be living. But, absolutely: well-being and how the culture of the school addresses well-being is really important to me. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Suzy. Move on to PISA, please. Suzy Davies AM: How useful is PISA for you in helping school improvement? I know that it's not always the thing that you enjoy watching or looking out for. But, genuinely, how useful is it? Kirsty Williams AM: It is one of a range of tools that we need to look at. Sian, quite rightly, talked about consistency. PISA is one thing where there is a level of consistency, so it will continue to be, I think, an important part of how we test how our system is doing. Suzy Davies AM: We know that you are a little bit encouraged, but we are not out of the woods yet. You mentioned this in Plenary when we talked about PISA. How confident are you that we are on track for meeting these targets that were set before your time, or do you think that having those targets is helpful? Is it setting up aspirations that are incapable of being met within a period of time? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, those long-term targets of a score around 500 are part of'Our National Mission', and we have to keep the pressure on to strive. They are testing, but we have to keep the pressure on to strive to reach them. In some cases, I can be quite encouraged. If we look at reading scores for girls, we are almost there, but that just demonstrates what a journey we've got with our boys to address. For me, one of the ways in which we will reach those targets and achieve them is further progress on our more able and talented children. Although we are now performing at an OECD average, I will be the first person to admit that, although we have seen an improvement in the higher level skills of our more able and talented children, we do not perform at an OECD average with regard to those level 6 and level 5 scores. Suzy Davies AM: Even within the UK, really, we are quite far behind. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes. So, I think that's where we really need to push on. That's one of the reasons why we have introduced a more able and talented budget to support that, and our Seren programme, which is delivering fantastic results post-16. That's why we're introducing the principles of Seren earlier into children's careers, bringing it down from year 9 upwards, to be able to drive improvements. So, I think that that's the area that we are particularly keen to work on: making sure that more of our children perform at the OECD average at level 5 and level 6. Clearly, we've got more work to do on reading. We are working with southern Ireland, who have consistently done well with reading scores, to look to see what lessons we can learn to press on with there with reading. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. My final question on this. You recognise it as a priority, particularly for boys. Does that mean that the focus will then drift slightly from maths, where there has been some success; and drift from science, where the encouragement of more people to take GCSE science has reduced the number of high-level passes? Kirsty Williams AM: First, we have to have a system that is capable of doing all of those of things at the same time. We can't accept a system that says,'Well, we can do a bit over here, but that means we have to--.'We have to have a system, Suzy, that can drive improvements at all levels. That's my expectation. Suzy Davies AM: The balloon needs to be bigger not just squeezing it at one end. Kirsty Williams AM: Absolutely, yes. That's my expectation of this system. You have to deliver across all of these. We have seen some progress. As I've said, it's far from perfect, and we've got more work to do, but we have to deliver across all three domains, as we did last time. And I'm not going to make any apologies for changing the performance indicators around science. It was a travesty that there were children who never had the opportunity to sit a science GCSE. We don't have to make assumptions about the nature of many, many, many of those children. We have seen a significant increase in the number of children who are having the opportunity to sit GCSE science and who are passing GCSE science. So, I'm not going to make any apologies about that. One of the reasons that I suspect we have ended up with poor science scores is because of the previous policy around science entries and science qualifications. Again, one of the reasons that we have changed it isn't just solely because we need to do better in PISA, but I think that by changing it, we will see an impact on PISA. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you for that. Lynne Neagle AM: The final set of questions is from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: I just want to discuss an issue that I know is important to you, namely closing the attainment gap between pupils who are eligible for free school meals and those who are not eligible for free school meals. Unfortunately, the problem persists, doesn't it? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes. We are not where we need to be in terms of the performance, not only of our children on free school meals, but the performance of our looked-after children, and the performance of some children from some ethnic minority groups. So, we will continue to look to support those learners in a variety of ways, again looking to amend our practice on the basis of evidence that is given to us from our experts who are there to advise us. There is clearly more that we need to do. There has been some progress in some areas, but it is not where I would want it to be. Sian Gwenllian AM: But, this is despite the fact that there is PS475 million that has been invested in the pupil development grant, for this exact purpose of closing the attainment gap. But, the problem persists, and in some places, it's deteriorating. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think that, as I said, I am not shying away from any assumption or declaration that we need to do better. But, I do think that we need to acknowledge where progress has been made. If we go back to look at what PISA has said about our performance, the PISA results show that pupils in Wales are relatively more able to overcome the disadvantage of their background than is the average in OECD countries. So, our children are doing better in that, and that gives me encouragement. That's not me saying that; that's there. If we look at pupils who are eligible for free school meals, they do score below their better-off counterparts in PISA by some 34 points. The gap in England is 40 points. So, again, that gap is smaller here in Wales. If we look at basic levels of qualifications, back in--. It's difficult to make comparisons because of all the reasons we have talked about, but if we look back to 2006 and we look at the very basic level of qualifications, which is a level 1 qualification, we have seen a jump from 9. 4 per cent of children in 2006 achieving a level 1 qualification to over 18 per cent. So, there is progress. There is evidence that the resources that we are spending are making a difference. But, clearly, we are not where we would want to be. That's why we will continue to focus those resources on those children, where we need it. But, we need to do that earlier. Sticking plasters in years 10 and 11 aren't going to cut it. We need to get this right for those children, the moment that they come into a nursery and the moment that they start their formal education at the age of 5. That's how we are going to make the difference. Providing catch-up, of course, we need to do for those kids; we can't throw those year 10s and year 11s to the wind. We have to support those children. But, we will see real improvement when we get in there earlier. Sian Gwenllian AM: But I'm sure that that is a disappointment to you, because it has been a personal priority for you as well. In terms of minority ethnic learners, while there are some groups within that category who are achieving, there is underachievement happening here as well, isn't there? It's not consistent across the minority ethnic group. Is that something that you will be focusing upon? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, and that's why we have committed to maintaining a ring-fenced grant to local authorities of some PS10 million, to support education of our minority ethnic children. But, again, you are right, you are absolutely right, Sian. We need a much more sophisticated conversation about what is really going on in attainment across minority ethnic groups so that we can best target that resource and have a conversation about what the differences are. You are absolutely correct: there is a real mixed picture. If we look at black Welsh girls entitled to free school meals, they perform almost at the national average for all children--not FSM children; the national average for all children. Black Welsh boys don't, but neither do white Welsh boys. So, there is a really complex picture here, and I really welcome a debate about acknowledging the various levels of performance of BAME children, and where the gaps in performance lie. You are quite right: it is a complex picture in the system. I'm committed to continuing to support educational opportunities, and that's why have ring-fenced the minority ethnic achievement grant. There are some interesting data there. Some children are doing very, very well; others, we need to concentrate on. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian, this will need to be the last question, I'm afraid. Sian Gwenllian AM: Sorry? Lynne Neagle AM: This is going to have to be the last question. Sian Gwenllian AM: The last question. Lynne Neagle AM: Yes. Sian Gwenllian AM: Fine. In terms of looked-after children, which is one of the groups where attainment isn't where we would like it to be, there was some improvement in 2016 at key stage 4, but it has been disappointing. Do we know what's been happening in 2019? Kirsty Williams AM: The 2019 data will be published next month, and there has been significant activity. You are right: in recent years, the data have been poor and not where we would want it to be. That's why we have had a reformed approach to PDG LAC; the employment of PDG LAC co-ordinators across the regions. We've identified new resource in the new financial year to test new approaches, so, for instance, virtual school approaches, where we know, in other systems, that has worked. But, we expect the next set of data around the performance of this particular group of learners in March. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay, and you hope to see progress. Kirsty Williams AM: I don't want to speculate, but I hope so. Sian Gwenllian AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you very much. We have come to the end of our time, so can I thank you, Minister, and your official for attending this morning? We have had a wide-ranging and very detailed discussion that will be very useful for the committee. As usual, you will be sent a transcript following the meeting to check for accuracy, but thank you again, both of you, for your attendance this morning. Diolch yn fawr. Okay. Item 3 is papers to note. Paper to note 1 is a letter from ERW providing additional information following the evidence session on 16 January. Paper to note 2 is a letter from Central South Consortium, similarly providing additional information following the evidence session. Paper to note 3 is a letter from the Noah's Ark Children's Hospital for Wales regarding children's rights in Wales, following up on some additional information there. Paper to note 4 is a letter from Qualifications Wales, providing additional information following the annual report scrutiny session in January. Item 4, then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting? Are Members content? Thank you.

It was true that the change did make it more challenging. But the changes were made for the right reasons. By taking the example of learning English literature, they had come to a conclusion that they were making those changes because they believed that they were in the best interest of children, and that had to trump ease of comparison.

tr-sq-1242

tr-sq-1242_0

How do they come to conclusions about what was working if that was not presented on a local authority and regional basis? Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received apologies for absence from Janet Finch-Saunders, and also from Dawn Bowden, and I'd like to welcome Huw Irranca-Davies, who is substituting for Dawn Bowden. Can I ask Members if there are any declarations of interest, please? No. Okay. We'll move on, then, to our evidence session for our inquiry on school improvement and raising standards. I'd like to welcome Kirsty Williams AM, Minister for Education, and Steve Davies, director of education. Thank you both for attending and for your detailed paper in advance of the meeting. We've got a lot of ground to cover, so we'll go straight into questions, if that's okay. If I can just start by asking you: to what extent is the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development still involved in the Welsh Government's school improvement journey? Kirsty Williams AM: First of all, can I thank the committee for their invitation this morning, and their interest in this particular area? As you will be aware, on coming into office, the director and I agreed to ask the OECD to do a rapid review of the state of Welsh education at the beginning of this Assembly term. They did that, and the feedback from that work informed the publication and content of the national mission. I was very clear in the national mission that I would invite the OECD back to review our progress against that mission, and that has happened in the tail end of last year, and the OECD will publish their latest report on Welsh education next month now, in March. So, the expectation is that the report will be published on 23 March, and my intention is to make a statement to the Chamber on 24 March. The nature of that review is part of our ongoing development of self-evaluation. So, we talk a lot about self-evaluation in the school system. Actually, the continuing relationship with OECD is about self-evaluation of the entirety of the system and Welsh Government. We don't want to accept our own orthodoxy and just be in a bubble where we are constantly listening to ourselves and those people who might want to agree with us or tell us what we want to hear. So, the OECD is our best attempt of having some external verification of where we are. That's a risk for Ministers and for Government, because we want them to give an honest evaluation of where we are, but that's a really important tool for me, to ensure that we're constantly testing ourselves. The nature of that review is that the OECD were able to talk to whoever they felt it was important to talk to, so that included practitioners on the ground, elements of the middle tier, as well as Welsh Government. And I know, Chair--I hope you'll be pleased to hear this--that the reports of this committee have formed parts of their review, looking at how the Senedd itself has contributed to and has held the Government to account. So, as I said, we expect our report to be published towards the end of March. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you, Minister. Can I ask about the powers under the School Standards and Organisation (Wales) Act 2013, to ask you to tell us about the use of those powers either by Welsh Government or by local authorities, and how effective you feel that legislation has been? Kirsty Williams AM: Okay. Well, as you'll be aware, local authorities have quite extensive powers of intervention in schools if they feel that is necessary. If I'm honest, I think there's a mixed picture, with some local authorities using those powers not on a regular basis, but obviously demonstrating a willingness to use those powers. There are other local authorities who don't seem to have used them. Since that legislation came into being, there have been a number of reasons, because of course a local authority has to give a reason for using those powers of intervention. They usually focus on standards, but sometimes they focus on a breakdown in governance arrangements, perhaps, or a failure or a breakdown in financial management. So, sometimes the budgetary issues trigger an intervention power. And the types of interventions that have been used have included, in some cases, appointing additional governors to governing bodies, or suspending a school's delegated budget so the local authority takes on, then, financial control of that particular school, or sometimes applying to the Welsh Government to entirely replace a governing body and establish an intervention board. So, if I can give you an example of where that's been used and has been successful, in Flintshire. They applied to Welsh Government for two interim executive boards, in Sir Richard Gwyn Catholic High School and in Ysgol Trefonnen. They applied to us. Those governing bodies were dissolved. The IEBs were put in place and both of those schools, which had been in special measures, moved quite rapidly, actually, out of special measures. Perhaps the most recent example of this is one that the Chair will know very well in her own constituency of Torfaen, in Cwmbran High School, where Torfaen has intervened in that case. The Welsh Government has not used those powers to date. My expectation always is that local authorities should be the first port of call, and I would encourage--and we always encourage--local authorities to take a proactive approach to intervention and to use those powers. But it's my belief that it is they who are best placed initially to do that. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you, Minister. Can I ask, then, about the national evaluation and improvement resource and how significant a role that will play in the raising of school standards, and how you feel it's evolved since it was first conceived? Kirsty Williams AM: So, this brings us back to the principle of self-evaluation and something, if we're honest, we've not been very good at. If you look at a number of chief inspectors'reports into the Welsh education system, self-evaluation has always been identified as something that is missing or underdeveloped in our system to date, hence, then, the work to establish not a new approach, but a more robust approach to self-evaluation. We've done that in conjunction, again, with the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. It's really important, throughout the entirety of our reform journey that that's done in co-construction, because we want this resource to be usable in schools. So, it's all very well having a conceptual idea and people outside the classroom working on it, but if it's of no practical use to a school leadership team, then we won't see the impact. So, it's--. We're in phase 2 at the moment, where we're doing--. So, the initial resource has been developed by the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. We're in the testing phase at the moment and having it evaluated itself, with a view to introducing that resource across the system at the start of the new academic year, in September 2020. I truly believe that, if we're to make progress in Welsh education, we have to develop the skills within our system to have robust self-evaluation. This resource gives us continuity of approach right the way across Wales. So, it's not left to an individual school to come up with a system; it's right the way across the system. My hope would be that those principles could then be applied to local education authorities, to regional school improvement services and Welsh Government as part of a whole-system approach to self-evaluation. I don't know if there's anything more you want to add, Steve. Steve Davies: Just to add that the other critical partners are Estyn themselves. Kirsty Williams AM: Oh, yes, sorry. Steve Davies: So, they have played a critical role and, as we know, as the Minister has said in the past, she may introduce policy and practice, but if Estyn are part of it then schools, usually, because they recognise that it will be part of the inspection process--it gives it greater push and support around it. So, they've been key players within it. Kirsty Williams AM: And I think, if I just say as well, that the external perception of what that's about is really important. It's not a test of school readiness for reform, it is a genuine attempt for a school to evaluate their strengths, their weaknesses and where they need to go next. It's not an Estyn checklist. And because of the word'toolkit'--the feedback was that it gave the impression of a checklist,'Just do this and check list'. So, we're actually going to change the name of that resource. So, it'll be called the national evaluation and improvement resource, rather than the toolkit, because, as I said, the feedback was that'toolkit'gave the impression of a checklist exercise, and it's got to be about more than that if it's going to be meaningful. So, it'll be changed to an'improvement resource'. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Before I bring Suzy in, can I just welcome Sian Gwenllian, who is joining us via video-conference in north Wales? Morning, Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Good morning. Can you hear me? Lynne Neagle AM: We can, yes. We can hear you very nicely, thank you. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Yes. Only a very quick one. It's about the development of the-- Kirsty Williams AM: The resource. Suzy Davies AM: Yes, the resource, thank you--about whether there were any conflicting ideas in the process of development that made it quite difficult to zone in on something that school leadership teams, in particular, could rely on. Were there differences of opinion on what this should look like? Kirsty Williams AM: Not that I'm aware of from the practitioners that I've spoken to who have been part of that. So, for instance, Suzy, you will know the very small school of Gladestry. The head of Gladestry has been involved in this process, and she said that she'd really enjoyed the process of working alongside Estyn and the OECD as a school leader to be able to shape it. But I'm not aware that there's been conflict in that process. Suzy Davies AM: I'm not suggesting that there has been; I'm just interested as to how it had worked, that's all. Steve Davies: Chair, I think, inevitably, when you bring stakeholders together, they're not going to be in total agreement as to how it's going to work, and I think initially one of the challenges was having Estyn there as part of the facilitation group. There are always some concerns that, actually, it's coming from a to inspect, oral, judgmental tick box. So, we had some early day challenges where we had to convince--and, ultimately, Estyn convinced them--that they were there to help and support as opposed to to inspect, and that the model that was developed, as the Minister said, was not going to be a tick box,'You are good at this part of self-evaluation', it was to build the skillsets up. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. So, it's got their full confidence. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, and I think again, also, what--. You know, four years into the job, what I've reflected on as well is there is this sometimes a feeling out there that the Minister says all the right stuff, but you're not actually going to do it, so, when you talk about a new approach to doing things, you're not actually serious about it. So, trying to build that confidence that we are serious about developing a new system around self-improvement, which is different from accountability--sometimes, the practitioners are like,'Oh, yes, we've heard it all before but it never actually happens.'And I think that's been a part of the constant--not pressure, but the responsibility on Welsh Government is in following through. So, we said that we were going to do this in the national mission, and we are going to do it. I'm really proud that there or thereabouts, a few months either way, we've actually kept to the timetable as outlined in the national mission, and that helps build confidence within the sector that we are committed to that programme and we're going to do what we say we're going to do. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: And a final question from me: how effective do you think the investment in school standards has been in this Assembly term, as opposed to the approach taken in the last Assembly term, where there was the protection put in place for core school budgets? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think, first of all, it's important that, whilst this additional resource is specifically targeted at school standards, that is only a part of a much wider education budget, a budget that--you know--is incredibly complex. And so it is really challenging to be able to draw straight lines--you know,'We did this and it's resulted in that'--given that we're looking at the entirety of school funding here. What's been really important is that, if you drill down into what that money has been spent on, 50 per cent of it has been directed towards professional learning in one form or another to support our teaching professionals. And that's been really important to me. I've said it time and time again: an education system cannot exceed the quality of the people who stand in front of our children day in, day out to work with them and teach them. Therefore, that investment in staff and investment in the professional learning of our staff and support for them I think is making a difference already but, importantly, will continue to make a difference. But I think it is really challenging to be able to say,'Well, we spent this bit of money and it definitely led to that', because it's such a complex picture. But that money, the way it's been spent, has been driven by evidence. And, again, what we do know from international best practice, what do we know that works in driving up standards, and then how can we align the money that we've got to supporting that? And, as I said, 50 per cent of that money has gone directly to simply supporting the professional learning of those who work with our children. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you very much. We're going to talk now a bit about schools causing concern with questions from Huw Irranca-Davies. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Thank you, Chair. If I can, just first of all, zoom in on the way in which we actually decide which schools need what support. So, one of the interesting questions for us is how do we use the different systems out there. So, we've got the school categorisation system, which we're familiar with. We've also got Estyn inspection reports, then we've got other intelligence, including local intelligence on the ground. How do you decide from that? How is it decided what schools need support, need challenge? How do we do that? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, you're right: what we have is a variety of ways in which we can identify schools that need support, or need to be challenged on their practice. But it's important not to confuse them either. So, our primary route to doing this is our school categorisation system. Sometimes, and perhaps this is inevitable--. That system is primarily there as a triage system around identifying where our resource should be spent. So, our school improvement service--it's a risk-based approach, so they can evaluate where they need to put their time, effort and resource. Sometimes, it's used by other people for other things, but that is not its primary purpose; its primary purpose there is not one of accountability, it is one of identifying risk and aligning that then to the support that is available. Estyn--now that is part of that accountability system. That is our method of holding schools and their governing bodies to account for their practice and for the work that they do. Both systems, of course, are evolving. So, how we do categorisation has changed over a period of time. The elements that go into making that judgment around the levels of support have changed, and, of course, the Estyn inspection regime is also changing. At the moment, schools are only inspected once every seven years. We're moving to a system where Estyn will be more regularly in schools. So, they are two systems, but they are different and they look at different things. But our categorisation system is how we look for those ways of identifying support for schools. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: And you've made, with feedback over the last few years, adjustments to the way that the categorisation system works. Are you content with where it is now, or do you see more adjustments being made? Have you got things in front of you that you're getting feedback on saying'Well, we need to tweak this again a little bit'? Kirsty Williams AM: So, that system has evolved over time. So, when it started, it was just a tool around secondary schools. Now, it covers the breadth of schools. Initially, on coming into office, when I first came in, it was purely driven by data, and it was also done in quartiles. So, there was a certain number of schools that had to be in the bottom, which drove practitioners mad. They were like'Ah, every year, there's going to be some of us that have to be in the bottom quartile', because of the way in which it was arranged, which seemed very unfair to them. So, we've changed that. It's not just purely driven on data now; there are other judgments--the professional judgments of our challenge advisers are taken into account. And I would expect that situation to continue to evolve to align itself to our curriculum reform, and our changes in self-evaluation. So, it's not a fixed point. I expect that that system will continue to evolve and change, so that it complements and assists in the reform journey as other parts of the system change. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Thanks for that. I think, for any impartial reader of the way that the trends have been going on this, there is some good news within that, in that, certainly, those schools that might have been identified as have been okay but coasting along, seem to be moving up the categories, although we still do have that--. Well, it's what the system is there to do, it's to identify those schools that do need that additional support. And I like your analogy of a triage system--'You're fit; keep on doing what you're doing and do it well; you need more support, we'll put the support in.'But, can I turn to those schools that are causing significant concern, and how we identify them? The Estyn chief inspector's conclusions at the end of the 2017-18 report that these schools are not being identified early enough--there's a need to do something urgently about these concerns, particularly in secondary schools. Have we addressed that? Are you content that we've addressed that concern? Was he right? Kirsty Williams AM: No, the chief inspector is absolutely right--absolutely right. I've got no beef with that statement at all. In some ways, when a school goes into special measures, in a way, that's a failure of the system, because that should have been identified sooner. So I've got no beef, as I said, with the chief inspector saying that. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: So just to ask, bearing in mind the earlier discussion we were having, how is it that we don't identify those schools? Kirsty Williams AM: That's it--you're quite right. Undoubtedly, what categorisation has done is led to a greater understanding, I think, on behalf of local education authorities'and school improvement services'knowledge about their schools. I think knowledge around schools is greatly enhanced by that process. But we are not there yet in terms of necessarily, then, moving those schools more quickly, once they've been identified as needing the highest level of support to see improvement. And secondary schools is a particular, particular challenge. So you will have seen from the last publication of categorisation data that our primary sector continues to improve--more and more and more of our primary schools are in a green rating, which is very satisfying to me. But we have got more of an issue with secondary schools, and we have a particular issue with the same schools being identified in that level of categorisation. So even though we've identified them as needing that extra help, they are not moving at pace away from that system. So there are two things that we are doing at the moment. The first is, we are, again, looking at different sets of data that can give us even earlier warning systems that things are going wrong in a school--and perhaps Steve will explain later. For instance, staff sickness, and carefully monitoring staff sickness, because there is a direct correlation between high levels of staff sickness in a school and what is going on in the school. And Steve can explain some of this work later. But we're piloting a new approach to those schools that are causing concern. Each local authority has been asked to identify two of their high schools that they are particularly worried about. And we have a new multi-agency approach, working with those schools to try and move them more forward. So it's two from each region, a multi-agency panel, working with the school. And that multi-agency panel includes the school itself, the local authority, the regional consortia school improvement staff, Estyn and Welsh Government--as a multi-agency panel to support improvement in that school. So, for instance, what would normally happen, Estyn would come in, Estyn would make a judgment on the school--requiring special measures or urgent improvement--and Estyn would go away. They'd go away for six months, and then they'd come back in six months, and they'd make another judgment,'No, still not good enough', and disappear for six months. We're saying--Estyn and the Welsh Government have agreed that's not the best approach; Estyn need to be part of the solution, rather than just coming and making a judgment. The initial feedback from this trial is very, very positive. Actually, we've had local authorities coming to us and saying,'Can we put more schools in? Rather than just having two of our high schools, can we engage more in this project and this pilot?'It's being evaluated by Cardiff Metropolitan University and Swansea University, so we're having some academic overview to see, actually, does this approach work, can we evidence it--that it actually makes a difference? And it's actually--I'd like to claim all the credit for it, but it's actually not dissimilar to something that's happening in Scotland as well. But we knew that carrying on doing the same old thing clearly wasn't moving these schools, we needed a new approach, and this is what we're doing at the moment. So it's relatively new, but the initial feedback is positive. Steve, I don't know-- Steve Davies: I think your important point is about,'What about the schools that are sliding in that direction?'And it's bringing together what we know from Estyn, but also, critically, local authorities have knowledge of their schools, and so do consortia. We've got to be better at bringing those together. So, the Minister gave the example of staff sickness--not always a trigger, but it's one of those. If you look at movement of pupils out of a school, you can look at complaints, you can look at, actually, emerging increased use of HR resources that a school pulls on a local authority. None of these have been pushed up into the public domain, but they're important antennae. The point the Minister made about Estyn as well is, historically, when they go into special measures, Estyn, at the end of that week, call in, historically, either the region or the local authority, they will feed back to one of them, and then they go away. So, they are staying with it. So, we are brining together the knowledge. But, as the Minister said, we want to keep a very clear distinction between the accountability and the transparency to the public, to parents, with the very detailed collective work of that multi-agency group to actually make that difference over time. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Okay. So, does that--. I'd love to go further, but time is against us. Does that deal with the issue of the schools that have been identified in those categories of requiring significant improvement and requiring special measures? Are those the ones that will be identified now, or is that above and beyond that again? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, those are the ones that are primarily at the forefront of our minds, but this way of sharing data better, to step in earlier, is part of our attempt to address what the chief inspector says about stepping in early--not waiting until a school gets into special measures and a formal judgment from Estyn of that, but actually using that intelligence to get support in there earlier. The three elements that that multi-agency approach look at are: what are the fundamentals that need addressing in this school? What is the capacity of the school itself to be able to address those fundamentals? And, what extra support needs to go into that senior management team and the governing body to get those fundamentals addressed? And actually, what does sustainable improvement look like? Because, again, one of the issues, sometimes, that happens is, a school goes into a category with Estyn, there's a big push and a big,'We must do something'and the school comes out, but actually, that improvement is not sustainable. It's the low-hanging fruit; it's the easy wins that have been achieved, but actually, perhaps some of the fundamental challenges underlying in that school haven't been addressed in that process. So, this is about what will sustainable improvement look like in six months, what's it going to look like in 12 months and what's it going to look like in 18 months. So, actually, a more strategic, longer term approach to real change in a school rather than, perhaps, some of the easy-to-fix items that make a school as if it's doing better, but we really haven't tackled some of the underlying problems that make that school vulnerable to slipping back. Does that make sense? Lynne Neagle AM: I've got a couple of supplementaries on--. Sorry? Kirsty Williams AM: Does that make sense? Lynne Neagle AM: Yes. We've got a couple of supplementaries on this, first from Suzy and then from Sian. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you for that, Chair. Obviously, I'm pleased to hear that this work is being done, but I'm wondering--. What strikes me, in the recent past, at least, particularly as we've got the usual suspects in this category--. I've got to ask myself why it is that councils have been reluctant, perhaps, to step in with these schools earlier, particularly as they've got consortia or middle-tier support as well. Has there been a deficit in that space that has meant that councils don't feel equipped to step in? I just don't really get it why they've been reluctant to step in so far. If they've been nervous about doing it, because they don't feel that they've got the tools to do it, then I think that's pretty important, because as you were saying, we were talking about fundamentals; surely, councils have been able to deal with fundamentals, and more importantly, consortia up until now. Because, obviously, we're asking these players to give us evidence at some point, so perhaps I'd like to challenge them on how come we're here now. Kirsty Williams AM: And rightly so. Suzy Davies AM: I'm not laying this at your door. Kirsty Williams AM: And rightly so. I guess each local authority will have an explanation for each individual school, I suspect. What's crucial to me is that we have to--. I see our job as corralling the collective effort, and I think, for too long in the system, there has been a lack of co-ordination. So, this is about bringing and corralling a collective effort to address this, going forward, in more sustainable way. And I think it does come back to this issue around self-evaluation and a willingness to be open, honest and upfront about some of the challenges that we've got. It's not easy, is it? It's not easy to accept or to acknowledge sometimes when things are-- Suzy Davies AM: That they don't know how to do this. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, that they're going badly, or perhaps they don't know exactly how to make the difference. So this approach, as I said, is a new way of trying to coral that collective effort across the board. But, I don't know if Steve--because you've done other roles in the system, so perhaps you've got a different insight. Steve Davies: I think you're right. The variation across the country, across local authorities--. There are some local authorities that we've worked with and we identify have taken the appropriate action. There are others that we're working with, and yes, at its best, it's done as a joint exercise where they use their regional school improvement service to help in the identification that there is a need for this. They take advice as to what the action is, whether it is, as the Minister said, in the more significant areas, a board, or whether a warning notice comes in terms of standards or finance. So, we're working with them and we're working with the Welsh Local Government Association to share that practice. An example of that work is: we have done a development training session for cabinet members for education, and scrutiny leads for education across Wales, and all 22 local authorities came to that and engaged with that. That was partly about self-improvement, but it was also about where significant issues arise, you have to constructively confront them. And that comes with what the region knows, and increasingly, we're looking to have it consistently across 22 local authorities, so they are collecting all the additional data that we referred to earlier, so they can legitimately hold a mirror up and say,'This is a real concern that we have. We're not punishing you, but we're registering the seriousness, and we want you to address it.'And we're making progress. I believe it's genuinely more consistent now, but I'd be lying if I said that there was consistency across all 22 local authorities. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. I'm conscious of time. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. I've got a supplementary from Sian, then back to Huw. Sian Gwenllian AM: Because you are moving to a more sophisticated approach in terms of identifying problems sooner, and so can offer the support earlier, is it time to think about moving away from the system of categorisation entirely? That is, has the categorisation system reached the end of its usefulness, and is the multi-agency approach, this more sophisticated approach, a better way, ultimately, of being able to assist schools in moving forward? Kirsty Williams AM: I think, Sian, as I said earlier, the categorisation system has evolved over time, and my expectation is that it will continue to evolve, because it has to be consistent with our overall approach to school improvement and raising standards. I expect OECD will have feedback for us on this important part of our system, and we'll wait to see exactly what they say about it, but as I said in answer to Huw Irranca-Davies earlier, I haven't got a closed mind; we've demonstrated over the last four years our willingness to change the system to make it a smarter system, and we will continue to keep that under review, as we move forward. If I could just go back briefly, it doesn't sound like a very exciting thing, does it, when we say we've been doing work with the WLGA, with cabinet members, but also scrutiny, because that's a really important part of the jigsaw as well, is actually local government scrutiny of the performance of your education portfolio holder and the leadership of your council. So this is about trying to up the ante on all sides, so that those issues around'What are you doing in your local authority to use the powers that you have?'You know, sometimes, making sure that everybody in that authority--those in power and those who are there to hold those in power to account--have the necessary skills, knowledge and understanding to do that appropriately. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Huw, briefly. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Yes, briefly. I only have one final question. We've talked a lot about early identification; getting in there and then managing the improvement, this triage approach there, and then getting some grip of it, as well, in doing all of that. But my question now is on what we currently have. I won't touch on the primary schools, but let's just look at secondary schools--11 per cent of secondary schools inspected in the last two academic years judged as unsatisfactory, needing urgent improvement. There will always be secondary schools and primary schools that hit moments of crisis for one reason or another, but 11 per cent to me, and to any layperson, would seem unreasonably high. Are you--? It would be daft to ask you if you're content. What is a level that you would be content with of having schools in red category in Wales? Kirsty Williams AM: You're right. Schools will need different levels of support at different points, and sometimes, it's not because of a crisis. So, for instance, in my region, we do have an increase in the number of schools in the amber category. That's because we've seen in that particular region a number of headteachers retire because they've reached retirement age, and there are new headteachers. Well, that is a moment of risk in the school--when senior leadership changes. Nothing else has changed in that school, but the simple fact that you have a new leader, sometimes in those cases it might be their first headship. That means that that school is going to need a little bit of extra support, so it isn't always just a crisis that needs extra support, there are just general things that happen in the life of a school that could lead to it. But you're absolutely right--we have a particular challenge in the secondary sector where we have not been able to move individual schools forward at pace. And 11 per cent is not acceptable to me, Huw, which is why we have introduced this new pilot to address those schools where, persistently, we have concerns about their ability to move forward. If we'd have carried on doing the same thing, I suspect we would have just carried on getting the same result--hence the need for a new approach to those schools that are causing concern. Steve Davies: Very briefly, the things we talked about earlier was how we measure the performance of schools, particularly at GCSEs, with a narrow focus. As was said earlier, some of these are the same groups--they trip in and then they don't come out. Our belief is, from research, that they concentrate on squeezing the pips to get the grades up in some small areas for a period of time, and you can do that by targeting and immersing them. Estyn can tick the box to say your grades have got better, but we haven't handled the serious underpinning issues--leadership, teaching and learning, and bringing those together. As the Minister said, what does sustainable improvement look like in six, 12,18 months? It isn't just, as important as they are, getting those exam grades up a bit. They're the fundamental--. And if they're all agreed as the indicators at the outset, we're more likely--. So it's multi-agency; it's not a little activity, it's a major strategy. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Hefin David has some questions now on the middle tier. Hefin David AM: I'd like to consider the work of the consortia. In 2016, your election manifesto very clearly said that you wanted to abolish regional consortia--three words in it. Why haven't you done it? Kirsty Williams AM: Because, given that you're such a keen student of my manifesto, you'll also know that-- Hefin David AM: It was only three words. Kirsty Williams AM: The Liberal Democrat manifesto also said that we supported major local government reform and a major reduction in the number of local government units. That hasn't happened. I have to say genuinely, my experience over the last four years has proven to me the value of regional working, and in the absence of significant local government reform, I think it's absolutely vital that we have scale in school improvement services--scale that I don't think can be delivered across 22 individual local authorities. Hefin David AM: Okay. So, if there was local government reform, you would abolish the consortia. Kirsty Williams AM: I think if there was significant local government reform and we could demonstrate that those units had such a scale that they could perform the functions of regional consortia, then I think it would be inevitable that any education Minister would look to see whether there was an opportunity to change structures. But in the absence of that, Hefin, I have been absolutely convinced whilst doing this job that you need larger units to be able to carry out successful school improvement work, and I think it would be reckless to advocate the system going back to school improvement being organised in 22 different ways. Hefin David AM: Okay. Do you think that the work of the four consortia has been consistent and effective? Kirsty Williams AM: The school improvement services? Hefin David AM: The four consortia. Kirsty Williams AM: I think, as with individual local education authorities, there are some regional consortia services that have performed really highly--and that's not me saying that, that's Estyn, but gives us assurance around that--and there are others that need to improve. I think the consortia themselves would admit that they, since their establishment, have found new ways of working. Initially, they were very separate entities that did things their own way. Increasingly, over recent years, we have seen those consortia working together on a national approach, but delivered on a regional basis. So I think they themselves have evolved over time. But we are constantly looking for optimum delivery from those particular organisations, but as I said, I think it would be absolutely reckless to go back to a situation where school improvement services were being delivered individually on 22 different bases. Hefin David AM: Okay. I'm happy to accept that you've changed your opinion there; that's no problem at all. But with regard to the four consortia, and we'll take Education through Regional Working as an example, it does things differently to the other three. Is that a cause for concern, or do you think that's entirely appropriate? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, ERW does things differently, but then so does the Education Achievement Service. EAS is constituted in a different way to the Central South Consortium. What I'm interested in is not necessarily how they are constituted and organised, I'm interested in the effectiveness of that organisation to deliver for children and for teachers. ERW has got particular challenges, and we continue to work with those in ERW to address those, but increasingly, as I said, what we are seeing the regional consortia do is develop a national approach to school improvement services but deliver that on a regional basis so that there is greater consistency in terms of delivery. Hefin David AM: Are you happy that, within the ERW area, local authorities employ their own improvement advisers, rather than doing it in the way that the others do? Kirsty Williams AM: We have discussed this at length with them. My preference would be for school improvement officers to be employed in the centre, and we continue to have those discussions, but what's really important to understand is that the regional consortia are not a beast of the Government; they are a beast of the local authorities that have worked together to create a school improvement service that meets their needs. So we can't impose that solution, and we continue to discuss with ERW what is the optimal way, and they continue to discuss with their constituent local authorities about how that should be organised. Hefin David AM: Are you concerned that Neath Port Talbot have given notice that they want to withdraw from regional working? Kirsty Williams AM: I think it's really disappointing that Neath Port Talbot have published that notice. What's important for me is to understand--not for me, it will be important for Estyn. It will be really important for us to understand how Neath Port Talbot intend to support their schools and their teachers if they were to withdraw from ERW, especially at what is a very, very critical time. The regional consortia have a key role to play in supporting systems with the introduction of the curriculum. I would want to know from Neath Port Talbot how they are going to do that without being part of that organisation. And, of course, there's the added complexity that so much of our money is channelled through to schools via the regional consortia. So, I would want to understand from Neath Port Talbot how they're going to safeguard their schools and make sure that the children who are receiving their education in Neath Port Talbot are not disadvantaged if they were to follow through on that decision. Hefin David AM: Do you feel that it's your role to intervene in that area and instruct Neath Port Talbot and ERW as to how they should resolve this issue? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, as I said, I would be seeking assurances-- Hefin David AM: What does that mean, though,'seeking assurances'? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, Neath Port Talbot would need to demonstrate to me how they're going to address these issues. If they're not part of ERW and their schools and their children are not going to be in receipt of the support from ERW, as I said, especially at this critical time, how are they intending to do that? I haven't seen those plans, but if they were to push forward and follow through on the notice, I would want to see them and I suspect Estyn would want to see them also. Hefin David AM: Okay, just last issue on that: you're just waiting to see what Neath Port Talbot do next, then. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, we have written to Neath Port Talbot to ask them to demonstrate to us, if they were to pull out of ERW, how they're going to meet their functions. I have not heard back from them. Hefin David AM: Steve, did you want to say something? Steve Davies: Obviously--[Inaudible. ]--that point. We wrote to them last Friday, and we are awaiting their response now. Hefin David AM: Okay. So, that's where we are. Okay. There was the document in 2015--'National model for regional working'. Is that the current document? Are there plans to change or update it, or is that exactly where we stand? Kirsty Williams AM: So, that is the current model. Some work was undertaken in 2017 and 2018 to look to update that model and revise that model. Some specific recommendations were put forward about additional services that could be organised on a regional basis; primarily, that is a specialist human resources resource. We know that, because of austerity in some local authorities, HR departments have been really stretched. Education HR is a specialist service, it's not generic. It's often a service that--. I see that as part of a school improvement service. Support for governors also has been stretched within individual local authorities. So, a proposal was put forward to include specialist HR and governor support as part of the regional model. That was rejected by local government. Our local authorities did not want to include that in the regional model. However, I must say, having presented that evidence, some of our local authorities, even though there wasn't a national agreement to put that into the national model, have pooled their resources, and those services are being delivered and supported on a regional basis. So, for instance, the Education Achievement Service now provide specialist HR resource, and EAS and Central South provide governor support. So, although we weren't successful in persuading local government to adopt a new national model, local authorities in those areas saw the value of moving that way. Hefin David AM: So, with that in mind, and perhaps I'll put this to Steve Davies, everything the Minister just said, and also the line in the document--'The implementation of this model will change over time'-- is it time to go back to that document and review it from a procedural point of view? Steve Davies: I don't think it's necessarily timely to go back and have a complete review of it. But, certainly, we are in ongoing discussions with the Welsh Local Government Association, both in terms of work with local authorities, and the type of intervention in schools. So, we keep a constant watch as to which areas that we believe we could develop further. We are not currently intending to do a wholesale review of that. As the Minister touched on earlier, there is some work to get consistency across the current area, particularly, as we just mentioned, in relation to ERW work. So, it's getting a consistent approach at that level, and sharing the practice. I think what is emerging, as the Minister said, is that there are two regions who have already made this shift to pool services. I think the two other regions are seeing and will see the benefits of that, and instead of forcing it through, we'd expect that to evolve. But we're not, at this stage, looking to a wholesale review of the national model. Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin. Hefin David AM: And Professor Dylan Jones's strategic delivery group seems to have had quite a warm welcome in the sector. Is it fair to say that? Kirsty Williams AM: I believe so. I'm very grateful to Dylan for his hard work and his skill in chairing that group, and I think it's been welcomed by all, so that we can get that clarity and consistency about the roles and responsibilities of the individual partners and players in the middle tier. Hefin David AM: And when will the work be completed, and what will the outcomes be? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, the group is currently engaging with Steve and other officials on agreeing a plan, but also, crucially, that plan is there to support the successful implementation of the curriculum, so that we're very clear about the roles and responsibilities in the middle tier in this crucial phase following the publication. We have to move now from the publication into a relentless focus on implementation. The history of devolution is full of fantastic documents, and, shall I say, patchy implementation. The work that has gone into that curriculum is too important for implementation to be left to chance. It's too important. It's too good to be left to chance. So, everything now is a relentless focus on successful implementation. Hefin David AM: Yes, but I'm thinking that the strategic delivery is reviewing the role of the middle tier. So, you know, what do we expect to see from it, notwithstanding the kind of softly, softly approach that you've already talked about? Steve Davies: It was set up, actually, about 18 months ago--just under. It was set up to build collective efficacy, because what people out there are seeing is that there's a confusion of roles, in what the regions are doing, and it was building that collective efficacy so everyone was behind the wheel. So, they've been looking at who is doing what for the last 18 months, and exploring and making some changes themselves. It's not just what they do with Government or what they do with each other; it's just happened that it's timely, because one of the key bits of feedback we believe we will get from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development is we have had co-construction, we'd had collective effort, but we need to do more, particularly within the middle tier. This is not controlled by Government, it is arm's length from Government, and it's not their job to get it ready for the new curriculum--that's a key part of it. This group will have an ongoing role; it's not a task and finish group. It does feed back in to the Minister but there's no formal mechanism by which they have to report. Hefin David AM: Okay, that's very clear. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. I've got supplementaries from Suzy, then Sian. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Briefly, please. Suzy Davies AM: I think this is a really interesting evidence session. What I'm about to say, I say it even though I'm a big localist: it all seems to be heading in one direction of a national service. Is the strategic group even thinking in these terms, obviously building in local accountability? But it'll just make it so much easier in terms of accountability and consistency to monitor what the middle tier does, if it's a national service, like the National Adoption Service. Local delivery, national service--is it heading in that direction? Kirsty Williams AM: That's not the intention of setting the group up. As Steve just said, I receive feedback from Dylan, because I meet Dylan in this particular capacity on a planned basis. He is there to give me advice on the middle tier, and to give me advice on what he thinks Welsh Government needs to do. But I've not had that conversation with him about a national service. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Well, thank you for that. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: What I was going to raise has been answered already, that is that, from what I can see, the work that Professor Dylan Jones is doing has evolved somewhat. I felt that, originally, the idea was to look at the middle tier in terms of any kind of duplication that was happening, and where it was possible to tighten up the people going into schools from different directions. But it appears that it has evolved to be something that's much more than that, and that it is placing a focus on the curriculum and other aspects of the educational system. Is there a risk for them to lose focus in that sense? Kirsty Williams AM: No, not at all. I think they are very, very clear around establishing roles and responsibilities for each of the players and to be very clear about the expectations that each part of the middle tier can have of each other, as to what they can expect from their partners in the middle tier. And absolutely, it is about making sure that there isn't duplication, that people aren't second-guessing each other's work, and there are clear demarcations about who does what in the system, and, as I said, knowing that you can rely on your colleague in the middle tier to do the bit that they are responsible for. So, I don't think there's a question of it losing focus. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We've got a lot of areas to cover so we are going to have to pick up our pace a bit. The next questions are from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Thinking about you as a Minister trying to see what the long-term trends are with regard to raising standards and improving educational attainment, is that difficult, because the performance measures have changed, haven't they? We can't compare like-for-like now, because of the changes that have been made in the way that performance is measured. So, to begin with, is that a challenge, to see whether progress has been made? And secondly, what evidence do you as Minister use to look at the long-term trends? Kirsty Williams AM: The first thing to say, with regard to changes to performance measures--you're right that change to those does make it, in some cases, more difficult to look at trends over a period of time. But those changes are made for really good reasons. If we change a performance measure, it is done to ensure that it is in the best interests of learners. And I think the best interests of learners always trumps the ease of comparison. I understand that, for researchers and for opposition Members, even for Ministers, it would be simpler to have the same set of measures over a period of time. But if we know that those things are driving behaviours that are unhelpful to children, and not in the best interests of children, then we have to change them, even thought that then does create challenges in different areas. With regard to what do we look at, there are a number of ways that we gain data and look at data in the system: everything from the categorisation system we spoke of earlier, and trends in categorisation; we look at Estyn reports; we continue to look at examination results. But we're trying to develop a broader range of data and statistics that give us a whole picture of the education performance, rather than narrowing down on one simple indicator that tells you one thing but doesn't tell you everything. But I don't know, Steve, if there's anything further that you'd like to add. Steve Davies: It's going back to what the Member raised earlier, in terms of the range of things that you look at--things that can make a difference. So, when Estyn review schools, or we're looking to develop national frameworks for things like mental health and well-being, which look to the practice that enables raising standards, it's collecting that information, both at a national level, through the annual review of Estyn, as well as our engagement with regions and local authorities. So, it's looking at the evidence base that goes beyond, but impacts on data. And, inevitably, we will use the Programme for International Student Assessment, and any other external assessments that come through organisations like the OECD. And even where we've changed the performance measures, we still have, at national level, the ongoing data. So, if you looked at level 2 plus, we believe it is important that children get five good GCSEs--for higher education and for employment. So, we've not lost sight of those at a national level--we're not using them as a narrow set of performance measures for individual schools. Kirsty Williams AM: So, if we look at--level 2 plus is a good example. We know that a relentless focus on that single measure, as a way of judging the system, leads to a set of behaviours in schools. It narrows the focus onto a certain part of the cohort, it narrows the curriculum, when we know that children-- Sian Gwenllian AM: I'm not challenging the fact that you've changed the performance measures--I understand that, and having a broader way of looking is better in the long run. I'm just saying, because there's been this change, it makes it more of a challenge--whilst accepting why you've made the changes, but it does present more of a challenge, presumably, because you have to look at more indicators, and take evidence from different places. But I take it that you're confident that the trajectory is going in the right way. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, I think we are making improvements. But you're right: it does make it more challenging. But those changes are being made for the right reasons, as I said, whether that be at level 2 plus. Look at English literature. I understand why perhaps a performance measure around English was introduced, but the effect of that was that significant numbers of children--and, it must be said, usually children who are entitled to free school meals--were suddenly not sitting English literature GCSE. We've changed that performance measure, and guess what? Last year, we saw a significant increase in the number of children that were sitting English literature GCSE. For standards of literacy and oracy, I think studying literature is really, really important, before we even get into the joy of introducing children to the written word and the love of reading. So, we make changes. Yes, it causes challenges, but we're making those changes because we believe that they are in the best interest of children, and that has to trump ease of comparison. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Why have you decided to ask the consortia, Estyn and so on not to report on local data or regional level data? How do we then come to conclusions about what is working if it isn't presented on a local authority and regional basis? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think the thing to say about the communications from Welsh Government, Estyn, and the WLGA is it's not about not communicating the data, it's about challenging people on how that data should be used. So, the data is still available, but it's a challenge to them about how to use that data. So, for instance, when we're presenting data that compares local authority to local authority, you could have a local authority that says,'There we go, I'm above the national average. I don't need to worry about the education in my local authority, because I'm above the average, or I'm better than my neighbour.'That doesn't necessarily mean that everything is right in your local education authority. Perhaps your children should be doing even better than what you're presented with. So, actually, it's not about hiding data; it's about how you use the data appropriately. And sometimes, how we were presenting data in the past was lulling some people into a false sense of security about the performance of their system. So, it's about how you use data, and that's what the communication from Welsh Government and the WLGA and Estyn was about: think very carefully about this data and what it's telling you about your system, and don't be lulled into a false sense of security that you may be doing brilliantly. Or, perhaps, looking at your data, you may think,'Oh, my goodness me, we're not doing very well at all', but, actually, more careful consideration of that might show that your school's impact on those children is really, really a positive one. So, you've got to use that data in the context. So, it's not about less data. If anything, it's about more data and, crucially for me, it's about more intelligent use and interrogation of that data, about truly what it's telling you about your system. Sian Gwenllian AM: But again, the Welsh Government--. You have continued to publish the local and regional level data. So, doesn't that contradict what you've been telling the consortia and everyone else? Kirsty Williams AM: No, not at all. As I said, we're not in the business of trying to hide data--I believe absolutely in full transparency. And in terms of level 2 data, I think I'm not moving away from the point that I think it's really important that more and more children get five really good GCSEs. I think it's important for their life chances. It is about how that data is used, not about hiding data or making that data not available. Steve Davies: Can I, very briefly--? We didn't just send a letter out collectively. We've now carried out training jointly with WLGA and Estyn on how to use that data. So, it's not just looking where your LA is; it's also not looking at whether your school's better than average for the authority. And it is well received, and it should broaden the approach of scrutiny committees to beyond what historically was, if I'm honest, looking at the league table for their authority or looking at the league table of local authorities. It's not that they shouldn't be looking at that, but they need to dig much, much deeper underneath it. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. We're going to go on now to Suzy. I'm going to appeal for brief questions and brief answers so that we can cover the rest of the questions. Suzy Davies AM: I'll shorten these questions, okay. We know why you got rid of the old measures. We've got interim measures now. What are they telling you about the success you've had in trying to avoid the bad behaviour? Short answers. Kirsty Williams AM: It's impossible. [Laughter. ] I think it's inevitable: whatever kind of measures we put in place, people will look to maximise their success in those measures, and I don't think we'll ever come up with a system where those measures are absolutely perfect. What's really important to me is that we're really, really, really challenging schools to look at the performance of all of their children, rather than just at a very, very narrow cohort around those C/D boundaries, which we knew was detrimental, potentially, to more able and talented children and really pushing those Bs to As and those As to A*s, and children for whom actually just getting in to school on a daily basis is an achievement, and the school has done well to provide that. So, our new capped 9 makes sure that there is breadth across a range of subjects, rather than just focusing on a narrower and narrower bunch of subject opportunities for children, and our new third-third-third system enables schools to really look at their performance. So if their capped 9 score is high, what's driving that? Is it because the bottom third of the cohort is doing really well, and the impact on those children is above and beyond what could be expected, but actually, you're not doing very well for your more able and talented; you're not pushing them on? Alternatively, maybe your capped 9 score is because your MAT children are doing incredibly well, but actually, you're not really making the progress for the middle tier of those children. It allows us to have a greater focus on the performance of our FSM children--where they really are within that system. So, it's a much more granular--. And crucially for me, it looks at the impact for every child, because every child has to matter in the system, and what we had before was a narrowing of curriculum choice and a narrowing on a certain cohort of children. Suzy Davies AM: So are the permanent measures likely to be pretty similar to what you've got now? Because the research--I don't know if the research is complete yet. When will you be publishing the new permanent evaluation? Kirsty Williams AM: Sue, you're right: they're interim measures at the moment, and we will need to make sure that the performance measures are aligned to the new curriculum. That, potentially, of course--. Because Wales's review of qualifications potentially has an impact on what those finally will look like, so that work is ongoing at the moment, and unless Steve can tell me off the top of his head when we expect that to be completed by, I will send you a note. But they're interim at the moment, because we need to align them to the new curriculum. Suzy Davies AM: I think we understand that. [Inaudible. ]--date. Steve Davies: No, no. This is not a quick fix. This is a two to three-year research base. The new qualifications for the new curriculum will not start until 2025. They have to be in place for 2022. There's a three-year roll on. I would expect the broad structure of the interim measures to continue over that time. There will be some tweaks for consistency. It's what's wrapped around those interim measures that I touched on earlier: the other evidence that we bring to bear about the effectiveness of a school, but we do want to say to schools that on the whole, broadly speaking, the interim measures will carry on for two, three years. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, and the reason I asked that is right at the beginning of this session, the Minister said to the Chair that this PS100 million that's going into school improvements will be going into things that work. We need some evidence that the interim measures are going to work as well, so when are they going to be evaluated? Steve Davies: Well, we've only just used them for one year. Suzy Davies AM: That's what I'm asking you. Steve Davies: We've signalled that they're only going to be in place for three years. We are carrying out our own review of the impact of those and that's been built in, but I expect the OECD report--because it is an extensive report--to give us feedback on how those things are working now, and some steer, as they did with the last report, as to the direction we would want to go into. Kirsty Williams AM: And what I'm also interested in is those performance management measures around schools. Yes, they're about outcomes for children, but actually are about a broader suite of behaviours within that school, so, yes, qualifications and grades are an important part of a performance measure, but actually, I have other expectations of schools, above and beyond simply qualifications. And so, we would want our permanent set of performance measures to look at a wider set of behaviours within a school, and I think because--. Exams are important--of course they are, qualifications are important--but the way in which those schools achieve those results are also important. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Would you anticipate that including well-being, then? Suzy Davies AM: In a whole-school approach. Kirsty Williams AM: I absolutely--and we need to find a way of how we can truly measure that. Sometimes, children's well-being is influenced by lots of things outside the control of a school. So, I don't want schools to be held accountable for things that they have no control over, because of the circumstances in which a child may be living. But, absolutely: well-being and how the culture of the school addresses well-being is really important to me. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Suzy. Move on to PISA, please. Suzy Davies AM: How useful is PISA for you in helping school improvement? I know that it's not always the thing that you enjoy watching or looking out for. But, genuinely, how useful is it? Kirsty Williams AM: It is one of a range of tools that we need to look at. Sian, quite rightly, talked about consistency. PISA is one thing where there is a level of consistency, so it will continue to be, I think, an important part of how we test how our system is doing. Suzy Davies AM: We know that you are a little bit encouraged, but we are not out of the woods yet. You mentioned this in Plenary when we talked about PISA. How confident are you that we are on track for meeting these targets that were set before your time, or do you think that having those targets is helpful? Is it setting up aspirations that are incapable of being met within a period of time? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, those long-term targets of a score around 500 are part of'Our National Mission', and we have to keep the pressure on to strive. They are testing, but we have to keep the pressure on to strive to reach them. In some cases, I can be quite encouraged. If we look at reading scores for girls, we are almost there, but that just demonstrates what a journey we've got with our boys to address. For me, one of the ways in which we will reach those targets and achieve them is further progress on our more able and talented children. Although we are now performing at an OECD average, I will be the first person to admit that, although we have seen an improvement in the higher level skills of our more able and talented children, we do not perform at an OECD average with regard to those level 6 and level 5 scores. Suzy Davies AM: Even within the UK, really, we are quite far behind. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes. So, I think that's where we really need to push on. That's one of the reasons why we have introduced a more able and talented budget to support that, and our Seren programme, which is delivering fantastic results post-16. That's why we're introducing the principles of Seren earlier into children's careers, bringing it down from year 9 upwards, to be able to drive improvements. So, I think that that's the area that we are particularly keen to work on: making sure that more of our children perform at the OECD average at level 5 and level 6. Clearly, we've got more work to do on reading. We are working with southern Ireland, who have consistently done well with reading scores, to look to see what lessons we can learn to press on with there with reading. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. My final question on this. You recognise it as a priority, particularly for boys. Does that mean that the focus will then drift slightly from maths, where there has been some success; and drift from science, where the encouragement of more people to take GCSE science has reduced the number of high-level passes? Kirsty Williams AM: First, we have to have a system that is capable of doing all of those of things at the same time. We can't accept a system that says,'Well, we can do a bit over here, but that means we have to--.'We have to have a system, Suzy, that can drive improvements at all levels. That's my expectation. Suzy Davies AM: The balloon needs to be bigger not just squeezing it at one end. Kirsty Williams AM: Absolutely, yes. That's my expectation of this system. You have to deliver across all of these. We have seen some progress. As I've said, it's far from perfect, and we've got more work to do, but we have to deliver across all three domains, as we did last time. And I'm not going to make any apologies for changing the performance indicators around science. It was a travesty that there were children who never had the opportunity to sit a science GCSE. We don't have to make assumptions about the nature of many, many, many of those children. We have seen a significant increase in the number of children who are having the opportunity to sit GCSE science and who are passing GCSE science. So, I'm not going to make any apologies about that. One of the reasons that I suspect we have ended up with poor science scores is because of the previous policy around science entries and science qualifications. Again, one of the reasons that we have changed it isn't just solely because we need to do better in PISA, but I think that by changing it, we will see an impact on PISA. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you for that. Lynne Neagle AM: The final set of questions is from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: I just want to discuss an issue that I know is important to you, namely closing the attainment gap between pupils who are eligible for free school meals and those who are not eligible for free school meals. Unfortunately, the problem persists, doesn't it? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes. We are not where we need to be in terms of the performance, not only of our children on free school meals, but the performance of our looked-after children, and the performance of some children from some ethnic minority groups. So, we will continue to look to support those learners in a variety of ways, again looking to amend our practice on the basis of evidence that is given to us from our experts who are there to advise us. There is clearly more that we need to do. There has been some progress in some areas, but it is not where I would want it to be. Sian Gwenllian AM: But, this is despite the fact that there is PS475 million that has been invested in the pupil development grant, for this exact purpose of closing the attainment gap. But, the problem persists, and in some places, it's deteriorating. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think that, as I said, I am not shying away from any assumption or declaration that we need to do better. But, I do think that we need to acknowledge where progress has been made. If we go back to look at what PISA has said about our performance, the PISA results show that pupils in Wales are relatively more able to overcome the disadvantage of their background than is the average in OECD countries. So, our children are doing better in that, and that gives me encouragement. That's not me saying that; that's there. If we look at pupils who are eligible for free school meals, they do score below their better-off counterparts in PISA by some 34 points. The gap in England is 40 points. So, again, that gap is smaller here in Wales. If we look at basic levels of qualifications, back in--. It's difficult to make comparisons because of all the reasons we have talked about, but if we look back to 2006 and we look at the very basic level of qualifications, which is a level 1 qualification, we have seen a jump from 9. 4 per cent of children in 2006 achieving a level 1 qualification to over 18 per cent. So, there is progress. There is evidence that the resources that we are spending are making a difference. But, clearly, we are not where we would want to be. That's why we will continue to focus those resources on those children, where we need it. But, we need to do that earlier. Sticking plasters in years 10 and 11 aren't going to cut it. We need to get this right for those children, the moment that they come into a nursery and the moment that they start their formal education at the age of 5. That's how we are going to make the difference. Providing catch-up, of course, we need to do for those kids; we can't throw those year 10s and year 11s to the wind. We have to support those children. But, we will see real improvement when we get in there earlier. Sian Gwenllian AM: But I'm sure that that is a disappointment to you, because it has been a personal priority for you as well. In terms of minority ethnic learners, while there are some groups within that category who are achieving, there is underachievement happening here as well, isn't there? It's not consistent across the minority ethnic group. Is that something that you will be focusing upon? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, and that's why we have committed to maintaining a ring-fenced grant to local authorities of some PS10 million, to support education of our minority ethnic children. But, again, you are right, you are absolutely right, Sian. We need a much more sophisticated conversation about what is really going on in attainment across minority ethnic groups so that we can best target that resource and have a conversation about what the differences are. You are absolutely correct: there is a real mixed picture. If we look at black Welsh girls entitled to free school meals, they perform almost at the national average for all children--not FSM children; the national average for all children. Black Welsh boys don't, but neither do white Welsh boys. So, there is a really complex picture here, and I really welcome a debate about acknowledging the various levels of performance of BAME children, and where the gaps in performance lie. You are quite right: it is a complex picture in the system. I'm committed to continuing to support educational opportunities, and that's why have ring-fenced the minority ethnic achievement grant. There are some interesting data there. Some children are doing very, very well; others, we need to concentrate on. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian, this will need to be the last question, I'm afraid. Sian Gwenllian AM: Sorry? Lynne Neagle AM: This is going to have to be the last question. Sian Gwenllian AM: The last question. Lynne Neagle AM: Yes. Sian Gwenllian AM: Fine. In terms of looked-after children, which is one of the groups where attainment isn't where we would like it to be, there was some improvement in 2016 at key stage 4, but it has been disappointing. Do we know what's been happening in 2019? Kirsty Williams AM: The 2019 data will be published next month, and there has been significant activity. You are right: in recent years, the data have been poor and not where we would want it to be. That's why we have had a reformed approach to PDG LAC; the employment of PDG LAC co-ordinators across the regions. We've identified new resource in the new financial year to test new approaches, so, for instance, virtual school approaches, where we know, in other systems, that has worked. But, we expect the next set of data around the performance of this particular group of learners in March. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay, and you hope to see progress. Kirsty Williams AM: I don't want to speculate, but I hope so. Sian Gwenllian AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you very much. We have come to the end of our time, so can I thank you, Minister, and your official for attending this morning? We have had a wide-ranging and very detailed discussion that will be very useful for the committee. As usual, you will be sent a transcript following the meeting to check for accuracy, but thank you again, both of you, for your attendance this morning. Diolch yn fawr. Okay. Item 3 is papers to note. Paper to note 1 is a letter from ERW providing additional information following the evidence session on 16 January. Paper to note 2 is a letter from Central South Consortium, similarly providing additional information following the evidence session. Paper to note 3 is a letter from the Noah's Ark Children's Hospital for Wales regarding children's rights in Wales, following up on some additional information there. Paper to note 4 is a letter from Qualifications Wales, providing additional information following the annual report scrutiny session in January. Item 4, then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting? Are Members content? Thank you.

The real question was not about communicating the data, but about challenging people on how the data should be used. The data was still available, but it was a challenge to them about how to use the data. Sometimes, how they presented data in the past was lulling some people into a false sense of security about the performance of the system. Therefore, it was about how they used the data. The focus shall be on the more intelligent use and interrogation of the data, and about truly what it was telling us about the system.

tr-sq-1243

tr-sq-1243_0

Was the continuing to publish the local and regional level data contraindicated to what they had said about consortia? Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received apologies for absence from Janet Finch-Saunders, and also from Dawn Bowden, and I'd like to welcome Huw Irranca-Davies, who is substituting for Dawn Bowden. Can I ask Members if there are any declarations of interest, please? No. Okay. We'll move on, then, to our evidence session for our inquiry on school improvement and raising standards. I'd like to welcome Kirsty Williams AM, Minister for Education, and Steve Davies, director of education. Thank you both for attending and for your detailed paper in advance of the meeting. We've got a lot of ground to cover, so we'll go straight into questions, if that's okay. If I can just start by asking you: to what extent is the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development still involved in the Welsh Government's school improvement journey? Kirsty Williams AM: First of all, can I thank the committee for their invitation this morning, and their interest in this particular area? As you will be aware, on coming into office, the director and I agreed to ask the OECD to do a rapid review of the state of Welsh education at the beginning of this Assembly term. They did that, and the feedback from that work informed the publication and content of the national mission. I was very clear in the national mission that I would invite the OECD back to review our progress against that mission, and that has happened in the tail end of last year, and the OECD will publish their latest report on Welsh education next month now, in March. So, the expectation is that the report will be published on 23 March, and my intention is to make a statement to the Chamber on 24 March. The nature of that review is part of our ongoing development of self-evaluation. So, we talk a lot about self-evaluation in the school system. Actually, the continuing relationship with OECD is about self-evaluation of the entirety of the system and Welsh Government. We don't want to accept our own orthodoxy and just be in a bubble where we are constantly listening to ourselves and those people who might want to agree with us or tell us what we want to hear. So, the OECD is our best attempt of having some external verification of where we are. That's a risk for Ministers and for Government, because we want them to give an honest evaluation of where we are, but that's a really important tool for me, to ensure that we're constantly testing ourselves. The nature of that review is that the OECD were able to talk to whoever they felt it was important to talk to, so that included practitioners on the ground, elements of the middle tier, as well as Welsh Government. And I know, Chair--I hope you'll be pleased to hear this--that the reports of this committee have formed parts of their review, looking at how the Senedd itself has contributed to and has held the Government to account. So, as I said, we expect our report to be published towards the end of March. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you, Minister. Can I ask about the powers under the School Standards and Organisation (Wales) Act 2013, to ask you to tell us about the use of those powers either by Welsh Government or by local authorities, and how effective you feel that legislation has been? Kirsty Williams AM: Okay. Well, as you'll be aware, local authorities have quite extensive powers of intervention in schools if they feel that is necessary. If I'm honest, I think there's a mixed picture, with some local authorities using those powers not on a regular basis, but obviously demonstrating a willingness to use those powers. There are other local authorities who don't seem to have used them. Since that legislation came into being, there have been a number of reasons, because of course a local authority has to give a reason for using those powers of intervention. They usually focus on standards, but sometimes they focus on a breakdown in governance arrangements, perhaps, or a failure or a breakdown in financial management. So, sometimes the budgetary issues trigger an intervention power. And the types of interventions that have been used have included, in some cases, appointing additional governors to governing bodies, or suspending a school's delegated budget so the local authority takes on, then, financial control of that particular school, or sometimes applying to the Welsh Government to entirely replace a governing body and establish an intervention board. So, if I can give you an example of where that's been used and has been successful, in Flintshire. They applied to Welsh Government for two interim executive boards, in Sir Richard Gwyn Catholic High School and in Ysgol Trefonnen. They applied to us. Those governing bodies were dissolved. The IEBs were put in place and both of those schools, which had been in special measures, moved quite rapidly, actually, out of special measures. Perhaps the most recent example of this is one that the Chair will know very well in her own constituency of Torfaen, in Cwmbran High School, where Torfaen has intervened in that case. The Welsh Government has not used those powers to date. My expectation always is that local authorities should be the first port of call, and I would encourage--and we always encourage--local authorities to take a proactive approach to intervention and to use those powers. But it's my belief that it is they who are best placed initially to do that. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you, Minister. Can I ask, then, about the national evaluation and improvement resource and how significant a role that will play in the raising of school standards, and how you feel it's evolved since it was first conceived? Kirsty Williams AM: So, this brings us back to the principle of self-evaluation and something, if we're honest, we've not been very good at. If you look at a number of chief inspectors'reports into the Welsh education system, self-evaluation has always been identified as something that is missing or underdeveloped in our system to date, hence, then, the work to establish not a new approach, but a more robust approach to self-evaluation. We've done that in conjunction, again, with the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. It's really important, throughout the entirety of our reform journey that that's done in co-construction, because we want this resource to be usable in schools. So, it's all very well having a conceptual idea and people outside the classroom working on it, but if it's of no practical use to a school leadership team, then we won't see the impact. So, it's--. We're in phase 2 at the moment, where we're doing--. So, the initial resource has been developed by the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. We're in the testing phase at the moment and having it evaluated itself, with a view to introducing that resource across the system at the start of the new academic year, in September 2020. I truly believe that, if we're to make progress in Welsh education, we have to develop the skills within our system to have robust self-evaluation. This resource gives us continuity of approach right the way across Wales. So, it's not left to an individual school to come up with a system; it's right the way across the system. My hope would be that those principles could then be applied to local education authorities, to regional school improvement services and Welsh Government as part of a whole-system approach to self-evaluation. I don't know if there's anything more you want to add, Steve. Steve Davies: Just to add that the other critical partners are Estyn themselves. Kirsty Williams AM: Oh, yes, sorry. Steve Davies: So, they have played a critical role and, as we know, as the Minister has said in the past, she may introduce policy and practice, but if Estyn are part of it then schools, usually, because they recognise that it will be part of the inspection process--it gives it greater push and support around it. So, they've been key players within it. Kirsty Williams AM: And I think, if I just say as well, that the external perception of what that's about is really important. It's not a test of school readiness for reform, it is a genuine attempt for a school to evaluate their strengths, their weaknesses and where they need to go next. It's not an Estyn checklist. And because of the word'toolkit'--the feedback was that it gave the impression of a checklist,'Just do this and check list'. So, we're actually going to change the name of that resource. So, it'll be called the national evaluation and improvement resource, rather than the toolkit, because, as I said, the feedback was that'toolkit'gave the impression of a checklist exercise, and it's got to be about more than that if it's going to be meaningful. So, it'll be changed to an'improvement resource'. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Before I bring Suzy in, can I just welcome Sian Gwenllian, who is joining us via video-conference in north Wales? Morning, Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Good morning. Can you hear me? Lynne Neagle AM: We can, yes. We can hear you very nicely, thank you. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Yes. Only a very quick one. It's about the development of the-- Kirsty Williams AM: The resource. Suzy Davies AM: Yes, the resource, thank you--about whether there were any conflicting ideas in the process of development that made it quite difficult to zone in on something that school leadership teams, in particular, could rely on. Were there differences of opinion on what this should look like? Kirsty Williams AM: Not that I'm aware of from the practitioners that I've spoken to who have been part of that. So, for instance, Suzy, you will know the very small school of Gladestry. The head of Gladestry has been involved in this process, and she said that she'd really enjoyed the process of working alongside Estyn and the OECD as a school leader to be able to shape it. But I'm not aware that there's been conflict in that process. Suzy Davies AM: I'm not suggesting that there has been; I'm just interested as to how it had worked, that's all. Steve Davies: Chair, I think, inevitably, when you bring stakeholders together, they're not going to be in total agreement as to how it's going to work, and I think initially one of the challenges was having Estyn there as part of the facilitation group. There are always some concerns that, actually, it's coming from a to inspect, oral, judgmental tick box. So, we had some early day challenges where we had to convince--and, ultimately, Estyn convinced them--that they were there to help and support as opposed to to inspect, and that the model that was developed, as the Minister said, was not going to be a tick box,'You are good at this part of self-evaluation', it was to build the skillsets up. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. So, it's got their full confidence. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, and I think again, also, what--. You know, four years into the job, what I've reflected on as well is there is this sometimes a feeling out there that the Minister says all the right stuff, but you're not actually going to do it, so, when you talk about a new approach to doing things, you're not actually serious about it. So, trying to build that confidence that we are serious about developing a new system around self-improvement, which is different from accountability--sometimes, the practitioners are like,'Oh, yes, we've heard it all before but it never actually happens.'And I think that's been a part of the constant--not pressure, but the responsibility on Welsh Government is in following through. So, we said that we were going to do this in the national mission, and we are going to do it. I'm really proud that there or thereabouts, a few months either way, we've actually kept to the timetable as outlined in the national mission, and that helps build confidence within the sector that we are committed to that programme and we're going to do what we say we're going to do. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: And a final question from me: how effective do you think the investment in school standards has been in this Assembly term, as opposed to the approach taken in the last Assembly term, where there was the protection put in place for core school budgets? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think, first of all, it's important that, whilst this additional resource is specifically targeted at school standards, that is only a part of a much wider education budget, a budget that--you know--is incredibly complex. And so it is really challenging to be able to draw straight lines--you know,'We did this and it's resulted in that'--given that we're looking at the entirety of school funding here. What's been really important is that, if you drill down into what that money has been spent on, 50 per cent of it has been directed towards professional learning in one form or another to support our teaching professionals. And that's been really important to me. I've said it time and time again: an education system cannot exceed the quality of the people who stand in front of our children day in, day out to work with them and teach them. Therefore, that investment in staff and investment in the professional learning of our staff and support for them I think is making a difference already but, importantly, will continue to make a difference. But I think it is really challenging to be able to say,'Well, we spent this bit of money and it definitely led to that', because it's such a complex picture. But that money, the way it's been spent, has been driven by evidence. And, again, what we do know from international best practice, what do we know that works in driving up standards, and then how can we align the money that we've got to supporting that? And, as I said, 50 per cent of that money has gone directly to simply supporting the professional learning of those who work with our children. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you very much. We're going to talk now a bit about schools causing concern with questions from Huw Irranca-Davies. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Thank you, Chair. If I can, just first of all, zoom in on the way in which we actually decide which schools need what support. So, one of the interesting questions for us is how do we use the different systems out there. So, we've got the school categorisation system, which we're familiar with. We've also got Estyn inspection reports, then we've got other intelligence, including local intelligence on the ground. How do you decide from that? How is it decided what schools need support, need challenge? How do we do that? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, you're right: what we have is a variety of ways in which we can identify schools that need support, or need to be challenged on their practice. But it's important not to confuse them either. So, our primary route to doing this is our school categorisation system. Sometimes, and perhaps this is inevitable--. That system is primarily there as a triage system around identifying where our resource should be spent. So, our school improvement service--it's a risk-based approach, so they can evaluate where they need to put their time, effort and resource. Sometimes, it's used by other people for other things, but that is not its primary purpose; its primary purpose there is not one of accountability, it is one of identifying risk and aligning that then to the support that is available. Estyn--now that is part of that accountability system. That is our method of holding schools and their governing bodies to account for their practice and for the work that they do. Both systems, of course, are evolving. So, how we do categorisation has changed over a period of time. The elements that go into making that judgment around the levels of support have changed, and, of course, the Estyn inspection regime is also changing. At the moment, schools are only inspected once every seven years. We're moving to a system where Estyn will be more regularly in schools. So, they are two systems, but they are different and they look at different things. But our categorisation system is how we look for those ways of identifying support for schools. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: And you've made, with feedback over the last few years, adjustments to the way that the categorisation system works. Are you content with where it is now, or do you see more adjustments being made? Have you got things in front of you that you're getting feedback on saying'Well, we need to tweak this again a little bit'? Kirsty Williams AM: So, that system has evolved over time. So, when it started, it was just a tool around secondary schools. Now, it covers the breadth of schools. Initially, on coming into office, when I first came in, it was purely driven by data, and it was also done in quartiles. So, there was a certain number of schools that had to be in the bottom, which drove practitioners mad. They were like'Ah, every year, there's going to be some of us that have to be in the bottom quartile', because of the way in which it was arranged, which seemed very unfair to them. So, we've changed that. It's not just purely driven on data now; there are other judgments--the professional judgments of our challenge advisers are taken into account. And I would expect that situation to continue to evolve to align itself to our curriculum reform, and our changes in self-evaluation. So, it's not a fixed point. I expect that that system will continue to evolve and change, so that it complements and assists in the reform journey as other parts of the system change. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Thanks for that. I think, for any impartial reader of the way that the trends have been going on this, there is some good news within that, in that, certainly, those schools that might have been identified as have been okay but coasting along, seem to be moving up the categories, although we still do have that--. Well, it's what the system is there to do, it's to identify those schools that do need that additional support. And I like your analogy of a triage system--'You're fit; keep on doing what you're doing and do it well; you need more support, we'll put the support in.'But, can I turn to those schools that are causing significant concern, and how we identify them? The Estyn chief inspector's conclusions at the end of the 2017-18 report that these schools are not being identified early enough--there's a need to do something urgently about these concerns, particularly in secondary schools. Have we addressed that? Are you content that we've addressed that concern? Was he right? Kirsty Williams AM: No, the chief inspector is absolutely right--absolutely right. I've got no beef with that statement at all. In some ways, when a school goes into special measures, in a way, that's a failure of the system, because that should have been identified sooner. So I've got no beef, as I said, with the chief inspector saying that. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: So just to ask, bearing in mind the earlier discussion we were having, how is it that we don't identify those schools? Kirsty Williams AM: That's it--you're quite right. Undoubtedly, what categorisation has done is led to a greater understanding, I think, on behalf of local education authorities'and school improvement services'knowledge about their schools. I think knowledge around schools is greatly enhanced by that process. But we are not there yet in terms of necessarily, then, moving those schools more quickly, once they've been identified as needing the highest level of support to see improvement. And secondary schools is a particular, particular challenge. So you will have seen from the last publication of categorisation data that our primary sector continues to improve--more and more and more of our primary schools are in a green rating, which is very satisfying to me. But we have got more of an issue with secondary schools, and we have a particular issue with the same schools being identified in that level of categorisation. So even though we've identified them as needing that extra help, they are not moving at pace away from that system. So there are two things that we are doing at the moment. The first is, we are, again, looking at different sets of data that can give us even earlier warning systems that things are going wrong in a school--and perhaps Steve will explain later. For instance, staff sickness, and carefully monitoring staff sickness, because there is a direct correlation between high levels of staff sickness in a school and what is going on in the school. And Steve can explain some of this work later. But we're piloting a new approach to those schools that are causing concern. Each local authority has been asked to identify two of their high schools that they are particularly worried about. And we have a new multi-agency approach, working with those schools to try and move them more forward. So it's two from each region, a multi-agency panel, working with the school. And that multi-agency panel includes the school itself, the local authority, the regional consortia school improvement staff, Estyn and Welsh Government--as a multi-agency panel to support improvement in that school. So, for instance, what would normally happen, Estyn would come in, Estyn would make a judgment on the school--requiring special measures or urgent improvement--and Estyn would go away. They'd go away for six months, and then they'd come back in six months, and they'd make another judgment,'No, still not good enough', and disappear for six months. We're saying--Estyn and the Welsh Government have agreed that's not the best approach; Estyn need to be part of the solution, rather than just coming and making a judgment. The initial feedback from this trial is very, very positive. Actually, we've had local authorities coming to us and saying,'Can we put more schools in? Rather than just having two of our high schools, can we engage more in this project and this pilot?'It's being evaluated by Cardiff Metropolitan University and Swansea University, so we're having some academic overview to see, actually, does this approach work, can we evidence it--that it actually makes a difference? And it's actually--I'd like to claim all the credit for it, but it's actually not dissimilar to something that's happening in Scotland as well. But we knew that carrying on doing the same old thing clearly wasn't moving these schools, we needed a new approach, and this is what we're doing at the moment. So it's relatively new, but the initial feedback is positive. Steve, I don't know-- Steve Davies: I think your important point is about,'What about the schools that are sliding in that direction?'And it's bringing together what we know from Estyn, but also, critically, local authorities have knowledge of their schools, and so do consortia. We've got to be better at bringing those together. So, the Minister gave the example of staff sickness--not always a trigger, but it's one of those. If you look at movement of pupils out of a school, you can look at complaints, you can look at, actually, emerging increased use of HR resources that a school pulls on a local authority. None of these have been pushed up into the public domain, but they're important antennae. The point the Minister made about Estyn as well is, historically, when they go into special measures, Estyn, at the end of that week, call in, historically, either the region or the local authority, they will feed back to one of them, and then they go away. So, they are staying with it. So, we are brining together the knowledge. But, as the Minister said, we want to keep a very clear distinction between the accountability and the transparency to the public, to parents, with the very detailed collective work of that multi-agency group to actually make that difference over time. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Okay. So, does that--. I'd love to go further, but time is against us. Does that deal with the issue of the schools that have been identified in those categories of requiring significant improvement and requiring special measures? Are those the ones that will be identified now, or is that above and beyond that again? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, those are the ones that are primarily at the forefront of our minds, but this way of sharing data better, to step in earlier, is part of our attempt to address what the chief inspector says about stepping in early--not waiting until a school gets into special measures and a formal judgment from Estyn of that, but actually using that intelligence to get support in there earlier. The three elements that that multi-agency approach look at are: what are the fundamentals that need addressing in this school? What is the capacity of the school itself to be able to address those fundamentals? And, what extra support needs to go into that senior management team and the governing body to get those fundamentals addressed? And actually, what does sustainable improvement look like? Because, again, one of the issues, sometimes, that happens is, a school goes into a category with Estyn, there's a big push and a big,'We must do something'and the school comes out, but actually, that improvement is not sustainable. It's the low-hanging fruit; it's the easy wins that have been achieved, but actually, perhaps some of the fundamental challenges underlying in that school haven't been addressed in that process. So, this is about what will sustainable improvement look like in six months, what's it going to look like in 12 months and what's it going to look like in 18 months. So, actually, a more strategic, longer term approach to real change in a school rather than, perhaps, some of the easy-to-fix items that make a school as if it's doing better, but we really haven't tackled some of the underlying problems that make that school vulnerable to slipping back. Does that make sense? Lynne Neagle AM: I've got a couple of supplementaries on--. Sorry? Kirsty Williams AM: Does that make sense? Lynne Neagle AM: Yes. We've got a couple of supplementaries on this, first from Suzy and then from Sian. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you for that, Chair. Obviously, I'm pleased to hear that this work is being done, but I'm wondering--. What strikes me, in the recent past, at least, particularly as we've got the usual suspects in this category--. I've got to ask myself why it is that councils have been reluctant, perhaps, to step in with these schools earlier, particularly as they've got consortia or middle-tier support as well. Has there been a deficit in that space that has meant that councils don't feel equipped to step in? I just don't really get it why they've been reluctant to step in so far. If they've been nervous about doing it, because they don't feel that they've got the tools to do it, then I think that's pretty important, because as you were saying, we were talking about fundamentals; surely, councils have been able to deal with fundamentals, and more importantly, consortia up until now. Because, obviously, we're asking these players to give us evidence at some point, so perhaps I'd like to challenge them on how come we're here now. Kirsty Williams AM: And rightly so. Suzy Davies AM: I'm not laying this at your door. Kirsty Williams AM: And rightly so. I guess each local authority will have an explanation for each individual school, I suspect. What's crucial to me is that we have to--. I see our job as corralling the collective effort, and I think, for too long in the system, there has been a lack of co-ordination. So, this is about bringing and corralling a collective effort to address this, going forward, in more sustainable way. And I think it does come back to this issue around self-evaluation and a willingness to be open, honest and upfront about some of the challenges that we've got. It's not easy, is it? It's not easy to accept or to acknowledge sometimes when things are-- Suzy Davies AM: That they don't know how to do this. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, that they're going badly, or perhaps they don't know exactly how to make the difference. So this approach, as I said, is a new way of trying to coral that collective effort across the board. But, I don't know if Steve--because you've done other roles in the system, so perhaps you've got a different insight. Steve Davies: I think you're right. The variation across the country, across local authorities--. There are some local authorities that we've worked with and we identify have taken the appropriate action. There are others that we're working with, and yes, at its best, it's done as a joint exercise where they use their regional school improvement service to help in the identification that there is a need for this. They take advice as to what the action is, whether it is, as the Minister said, in the more significant areas, a board, or whether a warning notice comes in terms of standards or finance. So, we're working with them and we're working with the Welsh Local Government Association to share that practice. An example of that work is: we have done a development training session for cabinet members for education, and scrutiny leads for education across Wales, and all 22 local authorities came to that and engaged with that. That was partly about self-improvement, but it was also about where significant issues arise, you have to constructively confront them. And that comes with what the region knows, and increasingly, we're looking to have it consistently across 22 local authorities, so they are collecting all the additional data that we referred to earlier, so they can legitimately hold a mirror up and say,'This is a real concern that we have. We're not punishing you, but we're registering the seriousness, and we want you to address it.'And we're making progress. I believe it's genuinely more consistent now, but I'd be lying if I said that there was consistency across all 22 local authorities. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. I'm conscious of time. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. I've got a supplementary from Sian, then back to Huw. Sian Gwenllian AM: Because you are moving to a more sophisticated approach in terms of identifying problems sooner, and so can offer the support earlier, is it time to think about moving away from the system of categorisation entirely? That is, has the categorisation system reached the end of its usefulness, and is the multi-agency approach, this more sophisticated approach, a better way, ultimately, of being able to assist schools in moving forward? Kirsty Williams AM: I think, Sian, as I said earlier, the categorisation system has evolved over time, and my expectation is that it will continue to evolve, because it has to be consistent with our overall approach to school improvement and raising standards. I expect OECD will have feedback for us on this important part of our system, and we'll wait to see exactly what they say about it, but as I said in answer to Huw Irranca-Davies earlier, I haven't got a closed mind; we've demonstrated over the last four years our willingness to change the system to make it a smarter system, and we will continue to keep that under review, as we move forward. If I could just go back briefly, it doesn't sound like a very exciting thing, does it, when we say we've been doing work with the WLGA, with cabinet members, but also scrutiny, because that's a really important part of the jigsaw as well, is actually local government scrutiny of the performance of your education portfolio holder and the leadership of your council. So this is about trying to up the ante on all sides, so that those issues around'What are you doing in your local authority to use the powers that you have?'You know, sometimes, making sure that everybody in that authority--those in power and those who are there to hold those in power to account--have the necessary skills, knowledge and understanding to do that appropriately. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Huw, briefly. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Yes, briefly. I only have one final question. We've talked a lot about early identification; getting in there and then managing the improvement, this triage approach there, and then getting some grip of it, as well, in doing all of that. But my question now is on what we currently have. I won't touch on the primary schools, but let's just look at secondary schools--11 per cent of secondary schools inspected in the last two academic years judged as unsatisfactory, needing urgent improvement. There will always be secondary schools and primary schools that hit moments of crisis for one reason or another, but 11 per cent to me, and to any layperson, would seem unreasonably high. Are you--? It would be daft to ask you if you're content. What is a level that you would be content with of having schools in red category in Wales? Kirsty Williams AM: You're right. Schools will need different levels of support at different points, and sometimes, it's not because of a crisis. So, for instance, in my region, we do have an increase in the number of schools in the amber category. That's because we've seen in that particular region a number of headteachers retire because they've reached retirement age, and there are new headteachers. Well, that is a moment of risk in the school--when senior leadership changes. Nothing else has changed in that school, but the simple fact that you have a new leader, sometimes in those cases it might be their first headship. That means that that school is going to need a little bit of extra support, so it isn't always just a crisis that needs extra support, there are just general things that happen in the life of a school that could lead to it. But you're absolutely right--we have a particular challenge in the secondary sector where we have not been able to move individual schools forward at pace. And 11 per cent is not acceptable to me, Huw, which is why we have introduced this new pilot to address those schools where, persistently, we have concerns about their ability to move forward. If we'd have carried on doing the same thing, I suspect we would have just carried on getting the same result--hence the need for a new approach to those schools that are causing concern. Steve Davies: Very briefly, the things we talked about earlier was how we measure the performance of schools, particularly at GCSEs, with a narrow focus. As was said earlier, some of these are the same groups--they trip in and then they don't come out. Our belief is, from research, that they concentrate on squeezing the pips to get the grades up in some small areas for a period of time, and you can do that by targeting and immersing them. Estyn can tick the box to say your grades have got better, but we haven't handled the serious underpinning issues--leadership, teaching and learning, and bringing those together. As the Minister said, what does sustainable improvement look like in six, 12,18 months? It isn't just, as important as they are, getting those exam grades up a bit. They're the fundamental--. And if they're all agreed as the indicators at the outset, we're more likely--. So it's multi-agency; it's not a little activity, it's a major strategy. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Hefin David has some questions now on the middle tier. Hefin David AM: I'd like to consider the work of the consortia. In 2016, your election manifesto very clearly said that you wanted to abolish regional consortia--three words in it. Why haven't you done it? Kirsty Williams AM: Because, given that you're such a keen student of my manifesto, you'll also know that-- Hefin David AM: It was only three words. Kirsty Williams AM: The Liberal Democrat manifesto also said that we supported major local government reform and a major reduction in the number of local government units. That hasn't happened. I have to say genuinely, my experience over the last four years has proven to me the value of regional working, and in the absence of significant local government reform, I think it's absolutely vital that we have scale in school improvement services--scale that I don't think can be delivered across 22 individual local authorities. Hefin David AM: Okay. So, if there was local government reform, you would abolish the consortia. Kirsty Williams AM: I think if there was significant local government reform and we could demonstrate that those units had such a scale that they could perform the functions of regional consortia, then I think it would be inevitable that any education Minister would look to see whether there was an opportunity to change structures. But in the absence of that, Hefin, I have been absolutely convinced whilst doing this job that you need larger units to be able to carry out successful school improvement work, and I think it would be reckless to advocate the system going back to school improvement being organised in 22 different ways. Hefin David AM: Okay. Do you think that the work of the four consortia has been consistent and effective? Kirsty Williams AM: The school improvement services? Hefin David AM: The four consortia. Kirsty Williams AM: I think, as with individual local education authorities, there are some regional consortia services that have performed really highly--and that's not me saying that, that's Estyn, but gives us assurance around that--and there are others that need to improve. I think the consortia themselves would admit that they, since their establishment, have found new ways of working. Initially, they were very separate entities that did things their own way. Increasingly, over recent years, we have seen those consortia working together on a national approach, but delivered on a regional basis. So I think they themselves have evolved over time. But we are constantly looking for optimum delivery from those particular organisations, but as I said, I think it would be absolutely reckless to go back to a situation where school improvement services were being delivered individually on 22 different bases. Hefin David AM: Okay. I'm happy to accept that you've changed your opinion there; that's no problem at all. But with regard to the four consortia, and we'll take Education through Regional Working as an example, it does things differently to the other three. Is that a cause for concern, or do you think that's entirely appropriate? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, ERW does things differently, but then so does the Education Achievement Service. EAS is constituted in a different way to the Central South Consortium. What I'm interested in is not necessarily how they are constituted and organised, I'm interested in the effectiveness of that organisation to deliver for children and for teachers. ERW has got particular challenges, and we continue to work with those in ERW to address those, but increasingly, as I said, what we are seeing the regional consortia do is develop a national approach to school improvement services but deliver that on a regional basis so that there is greater consistency in terms of delivery. Hefin David AM: Are you happy that, within the ERW area, local authorities employ their own improvement advisers, rather than doing it in the way that the others do? Kirsty Williams AM: We have discussed this at length with them. My preference would be for school improvement officers to be employed in the centre, and we continue to have those discussions, but what's really important to understand is that the regional consortia are not a beast of the Government; they are a beast of the local authorities that have worked together to create a school improvement service that meets their needs. So we can't impose that solution, and we continue to discuss with ERW what is the optimal way, and they continue to discuss with their constituent local authorities about how that should be organised. Hefin David AM: Are you concerned that Neath Port Talbot have given notice that they want to withdraw from regional working? Kirsty Williams AM: I think it's really disappointing that Neath Port Talbot have published that notice. What's important for me is to understand--not for me, it will be important for Estyn. It will be really important for us to understand how Neath Port Talbot intend to support their schools and their teachers if they were to withdraw from ERW, especially at what is a very, very critical time. The regional consortia have a key role to play in supporting systems with the introduction of the curriculum. I would want to know from Neath Port Talbot how they are going to do that without being part of that organisation. And, of course, there's the added complexity that so much of our money is channelled through to schools via the regional consortia. So, I would want to understand from Neath Port Talbot how they're going to safeguard their schools and make sure that the children who are receiving their education in Neath Port Talbot are not disadvantaged if they were to follow through on that decision. Hefin David AM: Do you feel that it's your role to intervene in that area and instruct Neath Port Talbot and ERW as to how they should resolve this issue? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, as I said, I would be seeking assurances-- Hefin David AM: What does that mean, though,'seeking assurances'? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, Neath Port Talbot would need to demonstrate to me how they're going to address these issues. If they're not part of ERW and their schools and their children are not going to be in receipt of the support from ERW, as I said, especially at this critical time, how are they intending to do that? I haven't seen those plans, but if they were to push forward and follow through on the notice, I would want to see them and I suspect Estyn would want to see them also. Hefin David AM: Okay, just last issue on that: you're just waiting to see what Neath Port Talbot do next, then. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, we have written to Neath Port Talbot to ask them to demonstrate to us, if they were to pull out of ERW, how they're going to meet their functions. I have not heard back from them. Hefin David AM: Steve, did you want to say something? Steve Davies: Obviously--[Inaudible. ]--that point. We wrote to them last Friday, and we are awaiting their response now. Hefin David AM: Okay. So, that's where we are. Okay. There was the document in 2015--'National model for regional working'. Is that the current document? Are there plans to change or update it, or is that exactly where we stand? Kirsty Williams AM: So, that is the current model. Some work was undertaken in 2017 and 2018 to look to update that model and revise that model. Some specific recommendations were put forward about additional services that could be organised on a regional basis; primarily, that is a specialist human resources resource. We know that, because of austerity in some local authorities, HR departments have been really stretched. Education HR is a specialist service, it's not generic. It's often a service that--. I see that as part of a school improvement service. Support for governors also has been stretched within individual local authorities. So, a proposal was put forward to include specialist HR and governor support as part of the regional model. That was rejected by local government. Our local authorities did not want to include that in the regional model. However, I must say, having presented that evidence, some of our local authorities, even though there wasn't a national agreement to put that into the national model, have pooled their resources, and those services are being delivered and supported on a regional basis. So, for instance, the Education Achievement Service now provide specialist HR resource, and EAS and Central South provide governor support. So, although we weren't successful in persuading local government to adopt a new national model, local authorities in those areas saw the value of moving that way. Hefin David AM: So, with that in mind, and perhaps I'll put this to Steve Davies, everything the Minister just said, and also the line in the document--'The implementation of this model will change over time'-- is it time to go back to that document and review it from a procedural point of view? Steve Davies: I don't think it's necessarily timely to go back and have a complete review of it. But, certainly, we are in ongoing discussions with the Welsh Local Government Association, both in terms of work with local authorities, and the type of intervention in schools. So, we keep a constant watch as to which areas that we believe we could develop further. We are not currently intending to do a wholesale review of that. As the Minister touched on earlier, there is some work to get consistency across the current area, particularly, as we just mentioned, in relation to ERW work. So, it's getting a consistent approach at that level, and sharing the practice. I think what is emerging, as the Minister said, is that there are two regions who have already made this shift to pool services. I think the two other regions are seeing and will see the benefits of that, and instead of forcing it through, we'd expect that to evolve. But we're not, at this stage, looking to a wholesale review of the national model. Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin. Hefin David AM: And Professor Dylan Jones's strategic delivery group seems to have had quite a warm welcome in the sector. Is it fair to say that? Kirsty Williams AM: I believe so. I'm very grateful to Dylan for his hard work and his skill in chairing that group, and I think it's been welcomed by all, so that we can get that clarity and consistency about the roles and responsibilities of the individual partners and players in the middle tier. Hefin David AM: And when will the work be completed, and what will the outcomes be? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, the group is currently engaging with Steve and other officials on agreeing a plan, but also, crucially, that plan is there to support the successful implementation of the curriculum, so that we're very clear about the roles and responsibilities in the middle tier in this crucial phase following the publication. We have to move now from the publication into a relentless focus on implementation. The history of devolution is full of fantastic documents, and, shall I say, patchy implementation. The work that has gone into that curriculum is too important for implementation to be left to chance. It's too important. It's too good to be left to chance. So, everything now is a relentless focus on successful implementation. Hefin David AM: Yes, but I'm thinking that the strategic delivery is reviewing the role of the middle tier. So, you know, what do we expect to see from it, notwithstanding the kind of softly, softly approach that you've already talked about? Steve Davies: It was set up, actually, about 18 months ago--just under. It was set up to build collective efficacy, because what people out there are seeing is that there's a confusion of roles, in what the regions are doing, and it was building that collective efficacy so everyone was behind the wheel. So, they've been looking at who is doing what for the last 18 months, and exploring and making some changes themselves. It's not just what they do with Government or what they do with each other; it's just happened that it's timely, because one of the key bits of feedback we believe we will get from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development is we have had co-construction, we'd had collective effort, but we need to do more, particularly within the middle tier. This is not controlled by Government, it is arm's length from Government, and it's not their job to get it ready for the new curriculum--that's a key part of it. This group will have an ongoing role; it's not a task and finish group. It does feed back in to the Minister but there's no formal mechanism by which they have to report. Hefin David AM: Okay, that's very clear. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. I've got supplementaries from Suzy, then Sian. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Briefly, please. Suzy Davies AM: I think this is a really interesting evidence session. What I'm about to say, I say it even though I'm a big localist: it all seems to be heading in one direction of a national service. Is the strategic group even thinking in these terms, obviously building in local accountability? But it'll just make it so much easier in terms of accountability and consistency to monitor what the middle tier does, if it's a national service, like the National Adoption Service. Local delivery, national service--is it heading in that direction? Kirsty Williams AM: That's not the intention of setting the group up. As Steve just said, I receive feedback from Dylan, because I meet Dylan in this particular capacity on a planned basis. He is there to give me advice on the middle tier, and to give me advice on what he thinks Welsh Government needs to do. But I've not had that conversation with him about a national service. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Well, thank you for that. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: What I was going to raise has been answered already, that is that, from what I can see, the work that Professor Dylan Jones is doing has evolved somewhat. I felt that, originally, the idea was to look at the middle tier in terms of any kind of duplication that was happening, and where it was possible to tighten up the people going into schools from different directions. But it appears that it has evolved to be something that's much more than that, and that it is placing a focus on the curriculum and other aspects of the educational system. Is there a risk for them to lose focus in that sense? Kirsty Williams AM: No, not at all. I think they are very, very clear around establishing roles and responsibilities for each of the players and to be very clear about the expectations that each part of the middle tier can have of each other, as to what they can expect from their partners in the middle tier. And absolutely, it is about making sure that there isn't duplication, that people aren't second-guessing each other's work, and there are clear demarcations about who does what in the system, and, as I said, knowing that you can rely on your colleague in the middle tier to do the bit that they are responsible for. So, I don't think there's a question of it losing focus. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We've got a lot of areas to cover so we are going to have to pick up our pace a bit. The next questions are from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Thinking about you as a Minister trying to see what the long-term trends are with regard to raising standards and improving educational attainment, is that difficult, because the performance measures have changed, haven't they? We can't compare like-for-like now, because of the changes that have been made in the way that performance is measured. So, to begin with, is that a challenge, to see whether progress has been made? And secondly, what evidence do you as Minister use to look at the long-term trends? Kirsty Williams AM: The first thing to say, with regard to changes to performance measures--you're right that change to those does make it, in some cases, more difficult to look at trends over a period of time. But those changes are made for really good reasons. If we change a performance measure, it is done to ensure that it is in the best interests of learners. And I think the best interests of learners always trumps the ease of comparison. I understand that, for researchers and for opposition Members, even for Ministers, it would be simpler to have the same set of measures over a period of time. But if we know that those things are driving behaviours that are unhelpful to children, and not in the best interests of children, then we have to change them, even thought that then does create challenges in different areas. With regard to what do we look at, there are a number of ways that we gain data and look at data in the system: everything from the categorisation system we spoke of earlier, and trends in categorisation; we look at Estyn reports; we continue to look at examination results. But we're trying to develop a broader range of data and statistics that give us a whole picture of the education performance, rather than narrowing down on one simple indicator that tells you one thing but doesn't tell you everything. But I don't know, Steve, if there's anything further that you'd like to add. Steve Davies: It's going back to what the Member raised earlier, in terms of the range of things that you look at--things that can make a difference. So, when Estyn review schools, or we're looking to develop national frameworks for things like mental health and well-being, which look to the practice that enables raising standards, it's collecting that information, both at a national level, through the annual review of Estyn, as well as our engagement with regions and local authorities. So, it's looking at the evidence base that goes beyond, but impacts on data. And, inevitably, we will use the Programme for International Student Assessment, and any other external assessments that come through organisations like the OECD. And even where we've changed the performance measures, we still have, at national level, the ongoing data. So, if you looked at level 2 plus, we believe it is important that children get five good GCSEs--for higher education and for employment. So, we've not lost sight of those at a national level--we're not using them as a narrow set of performance measures for individual schools. Kirsty Williams AM: So, if we look at--level 2 plus is a good example. We know that a relentless focus on that single measure, as a way of judging the system, leads to a set of behaviours in schools. It narrows the focus onto a certain part of the cohort, it narrows the curriculum, when we know that children-- Sian Gwenllian AM: I'm not challenging the fact that you've changed the performance measures--I understand that, and having a broader way of looking is better in the long run. I'm just saying, because there's been this change, it makes it more of a challenge--whilst accepting why you've made the changes, but it does present more of a challenge, presumably, because you have to look at more indicators, and take evidence from different places. But I take it that you're confident that the trajectory is going in the right way. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, I think we are making improvements. But you're right: it does make it more challenging. But those changes are being made for the right reasons, as I said, whether that be at level 2 plus. Look at English literature. I understand why perhaps a performance measure around English was introduced, but the effect of that was that significant numbers of children--and, it must be said, usually children who are entitled to free school meals--were suddenly not sitting English literature GCSE. We've changed that performance measure, and guess what? Last year, we saw a significant increase in the number of children that were sitting English literature GCSE. For standards of literacy and oracy, I think studying literature is really, really important, before we even get into the joy of introducing children to the written word and the love of reading. So, we make changes. Yes, it causes challenges, but we're making those changes because we believe that they are in the best interest of children, and that has to trump ease of comparison. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Why have you decided to ask the consortia, Estyn and so on not to report on local data or regional level data? How do we then come to conclusions about what is working if it isn't presented on a local authority and regional basis? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think the thing to say about the communications from Welsh Government, Estyn, and the WLGA is it's not about not communicating the data, it's about challenging people on how that data should be used. So, the data is still available, but it's a challenge to them about how to use that data. So, for instance, when we're presenting data that compares local authority to local authority, you could have a local authority that says,'There we go, I'm above the national average. I don't need to worry about the education in my local authority, because I'm above the average, or I'm better than my neighbour.'That doesn't necessarily mean that everything is right in your local education authority. Perhaps your children should be doing even better than what you're presented with. So, actually, it's not about hiding data; it's about how you use the data appropriately. And sometimes, how we were presenting data in the past was lulling some people into a false sense of security about the performance of their system. So, it's about how you use data, and that's what the communication from Welsh Government and the WLGA and Estyn was about: think very carefully about this data and what it's telling you about your system, and don't be lulled into a false sense of security that you may be doing brilliantly. Or, perhaps, looking at your data, you may think,'Oh, my goodness me, we're not doing very well at all', but, actually, more careful consideration of that might show that your school's impact on those children is really, really a positive one. So, you've got to use that data in the context. So, it's not about less data. If anything, it's about more data and, crucially for me, it's about more intelligent use and interrogation of that data, about truly what it's telling you about your system. Sian Gwenllian AM: But again, the Welsh Government--. You have continued to publish the local and regional level data. So, doesn't that contradict what you've been telling the consortia and everyone else? Kirsty Williams AM: No, not at all. As I said, we're not in the business of trying to hide data--I believe absolutely in full transparency. And in terms of level 2 data, I think I'm not moving away from the point that I think it's really important that more and more children get five really good GCSEs. I think it's important for their life chances. It is about how that data is used, not about hiding data or making that data not available. Steve Davies: Can I, very briefly--? We didn't just send a letter out collectively. We've now carried out training jointly with WLGA and Estyn on how to use that data. So, it's not just looking where your LA is; it's also not looking at whether your school's better than average for the authority. And it is well received, and it should broaden the approach of scrutiny committees to beyond what historically was, if I'm honest, looking at the league table for their authority or looking at the league table of local authorities. It's not that they shouldn't be looking at that, but they need to dig much, much deeper underneath it. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. We're going to go on now to Suzy. I'm going to appeal for brief questions and brief answers so that we can cover the rest of the questions. Suzy Davies AM: I'll shorten these questions, okay. We know why you got rid of the old measures. We've got interim measures now. What are they telling you about the success you've had in trying to avoid the bad behaviour? Short answers. Kirsty Williams AM: It's impossible. [Laughter. ] I think it's inevitable: whatever kind of measures we put in place, people will look to maximise their success in those measures, and I don't think we'll ever come up with a system where those measures are absolutely perfect. What's really important to me is that we're really, really, really challenging schools to look at the performance of all of their children, rather than just at a very, very narrow cohort around those C/D boundaries, which we knew was detrimental, potentially, to more able and talented children and really pushing those Bs to As and those As to A*s, and children for whom actually just getting in to school on a daily basis is an achievement, and the school has done well to provide that. So, our new capped 9 makes sure that there is breadth across a range of subjects, rather than just focusing on a narrower and narrower bunch of subject opportunities for children, and our new third-third-third system enables schools to really look at their performance. So if their capped 9 score is high, what's driving that? Is it because the bottom third of the cohort is doing really well, and the impact on those children is above and beyond what could be expected, but actually, you're not doing very well for your more able and talented; you're not pushing them on? Alternatively, maybe your capped 9 score is because your MAT children are doing incredibly well, but actually, you're not really making the progress for the middle tier of those children. It allows us to have a greater focus on the performance of our FSM children--where they really are within that system. So, it's a much more granular--. And crucially for me, it looks at the impact for every child, because every child has to matter in the system, and what we had before was a narrowing of curriculum choice and a narrowing on a certain cohort of children. Suzy Davies AM: So are the permanent measures likely to be pretty similar to what you've got now? Because the research--I don't know if the research is complete yet. When will you be publishing the new permanent evaluation? Kirsty Williams AM: Sue, you're right: they're interim measures at the moment, and we will need to make sure that the performance measures are aligned to the new curriculum. That, potentially, of course--. Because Wales's review of qualifications potentially has an impact on what those finally will look like, so that work is ongoing at the moment, and unless Steve can tell me off the top of his head when we expect that to be completed by, I will send you a note. But they're interim at the moment, because we need to align them to the new curriculum. Suzy Davies AM: I think we understand that. [Inaudible. ]--date. Steve Davies: No, no. This is not a quick fix. This is a two to three-year research base. The new qualifications for the new curriculum will not start until 2025. They have to be in place for 2022. There's a three-year roll on. I would expect the broad structure of the interim measures to continue over that time. There will be some tweaks for consistency. It's what's wrapped around those interim measures that I touched on earlier: the other evidence that we bring to bear about the effectiveness of a school, but we do want to say to schools that on the whole, broadly speaking, the interim measures will carry on for two, three years. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, and the reason I asked that is right at the beginning of this session, the Minister said to the Chair that this PS100 million that's going into school improvements will be going into things that work. We need some evidence that the interim measures are going to work as well, so when are they going to be evaluated? Steve Davies: Well, we've only just used them for one year. Suzy Davies AM: That's what I'm asking you. Steve Davies: We've signalled that they're only going to be in place for three years. We are carrying out our own review of the impact of those and that's been built in, but I expect the OECD report--because it is an extensive report--to give us feedback on how those things are working now, and some steer, as they did with the last report, as to the direction we would want to go into. Kirsty Williams AM: And what I'm also interested in is those performance management measures around schools. Yes, they're about outcomes for children, but actually are about a broader suite of behaviours within that school, so, yes, qualifications and grades are an important part of a performance measure, but actually, I have other expectations of schools, above and beyond simply qualifications. And so, we would want our permanent set of performance measures to look at a wider set of behaviours within a school, and I think because--. Exams are important--of course they are, qualifications are important--but the way in which those schools achieve those results are also important. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Would you anticipate that including well-being, then? Suzy Davies AM: In a whole-school approach. Kirsty Williams AM: I absolutely--and we need to find a way of how we can truly measure that. Sometimes, children's well-being is influenced by lots of things outside the control of a school. So, I don't want schools to be held accountable for things that they have no control over, because of the circumstances in which a child may be living. But, absolutely: well-being and how the culture of the school addresses well-being is really important to me. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Suzy. Move on to PISA, please. Suzy Davies AM: How useful is PISA for you in helping school improvement? I know that it's not always the thing that you enjoy watching or looking out for. But, genuinely, how useful is it? Kirsty Williams AM: It is one of a range of tools that we need to look at. Sian, quite rightly, talked about consistency. PISA is one thing where there is a level of consistency, so it will continue to be, I think, an important part of how we test how our system is doing. Suzy Davies AM: We know that you are a little bit encouraged, but we are not out of the woods yet. You mentioned this in Plenary when we talked about PISA. How confident are you that we are on track for meeting these targets that were set before your time, or do you think that having those targets is helpful? Is it setting up aspirations that are incapable of being met within a period of time? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, those long-term targets of a score around 500 are part of'Our National Mission', and we have to keep the pressure on to strive. They are testing, but we have to keep the pressure on to strive to reach them. In some cases, I can be quite encouraged. If we look at reading scores for girls, we are almost there, but that just demonstrates what a journey we've got with our boys to address. For me, one of the ways in which we will reach those targets and achieve them is further progress on our more able and talented children. Although we are now performing at an OECD average, I will be the first person to admit that, although we have seen an improvement in the higher level skills of our more able and talented children, we do not perform at an OECD average with regard to those level 6 and level 5 scores. Suzy Davies AM: Even within the UK, really, we are quite far behind. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes. So, I think that's where we really need to push on. That's one of the reasons why we have introduced a more able and talented budget to support that, and our Seren programme, which is delivering fantastic results post-16. That's why we're introducing the principles of Seren earlier into children's careers, bringing it down from year 9 upwards, to be able to drive improvements. So, I think that that's the area that we are particularly keen to work on: making sure that more of our children perform at the OECD average at level 5 and level 6. Clearly, we've got more work to do on reading. We are working with southern Ireland, who have consistently done well with reading scores, to look to see what lessons we can learn to press on with there with reading. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. My final question on this. You recognise it as a priority, particularly for boys. Does that mean that the focus will then drift slightly from maths, where there has been some success; and drift from science, where the encouragement of more people to take GCSE science has reduced the number of high-level passes? Kirsty Williams AM: First, we have to have a system that is capable of doing all of those of things at the same time. We can't accept a system that says,'Well, we can do a bit over here, but that means we have to--.'We have to have a system, Suzy, that can drive improvements at all levels. That's my expectation. Suzy Davies AM: The balloon needs to be bigger not just squeezing it at one end. Kirsty Williams AM: Absolutely, yes. That's my expectation of this system. You have to deliver across all of these. We have seen some progress. As I've said, it's far from perfect, and we've got more work to do, but we have to deliver across all three domains, as we did last time. And I'm not going to make any apologies for changing the performance indicators around science. It was a travesty that there were children who never had the opportunity to sit a science GCSE. We don't have to make assumptions about the nature of many, many, many of those children. We have seen a significant increase in the number of children who are having the opportunity to sit GCSE science and who are passing GCSE science. So, I'm not going to make any apologies about that. One of the reasons that I suspect we have ended up with poor science scores is because of the previous policy around science entries and science qualifications. Again, one of the reasons that we have changed it isn't just solely because we need to do better in PISA, but I think that by changing it, we will see an impact on PISA. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you for that. Lynne Neagle AM: The final set of questions is from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: I just want to discuss an issue that I know is important to you, namely closing the attainment gap between pupils who are eligible for free school meals and those who are not eligible for free school meals. Unfortunately, the problem persists, doesn't it? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes. We are not where we need to be in terms of the performance, not only of our children on free school meals, but the performance of our looked-after children, and the performance of some children from some ethnic minority groups. So, we will continue to look to support those learners in a variety of ways, again looking to amend our practice on the basis of evidence that is given to us from our experts who are there to advise us. There is clearly more that we need to do. There has been some progress in some areas, but it is not where I would want it to be. Sian Gwenllian AM: But, this is despite the fact that there is PS475 million that has been invested in the pupil development grant, for this exact purpose of closing the attainment gap. But, the problem persists, and in some places, it's deteriorating. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think that, as I said, I am not shying away from any assumption or declaration that we need to do better. But, I do think that we need to acknowledge where progress has been made. If we go back to look at what PISA has said about our performance, the PISA results show that pupils in Wales are relatively more able to overcome the disadvantage of their background than is the average in OECD countries. So, our children are doing better in that, and that gives me encouragement. That's not me saying that; that's there. If we look at pupils who are eligible for free school meals, they do score below their better-off counterparts in PISA by some 34 points. The gap in England is 40 points. So, again, that gap is smaller here in Wales. If we look at basic levels of qualifications, back in--. It's difficult to make comparisons because of all the reasons we have talked about, but if we look back to 2006 and we look at the very basic level of qualifications, which is a level 1 qualification, we have seen a jump from 9. 4 per cent of children in 2006 achieving a level 1 qualification to over 18 per cent. So, there is progress. There is evidence that the resources that we are spending are making a difference. But, clearly, we are not where we would want to be. That's why we will continue to focus those resources on those children, where we need it. But, we need to do that earlier. Sticking plasters in years 10 and 11 aren't going to cut it. We need to get this right for those children, the moment that they come into a nursery and the moment that they start their formal education at the age of 5. That's how we are going to make the difference. Providing catch-up, of course, we need to do for those kids; we can't throw those year 10s and year 11s to the wind. We have to support those children. But, we will see real improvement when we get in there earlier. Sian Gwenllian AM: But I'm sure that that is a disappointment to you, because it has been a personal priority for you as well. In terms of minority ethnic learners, while there are some groups within that category who are achieving, there is underachievement happening here as well, isn't there? It's not consistent across the minority ethnic group. Is that something that you will be focusing upon? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, and that's why we have committed to maintaining a ring-fenced grant to local authorities of some PS10 million, to support education of our minority ethnic children. But, again, you are right, you are absolutely right, Sian. We need a much more sophisticated conversation about what is really going on in attainment across minority ethnic groups so that we can best target that resource and have a conversation about what the differences are. You are absolutely correct: there is a real mixed picture. If we look at black Welsh girls entitled to free school meals, they perform almost at the national average for all children--not FSM children; the national average for all children. Black Welsh boys don't, but neither do white Welsh boys. So, there is a really complex picture here, and I really welcome a debate about acknowledging the various levels of performance of BAME children, and where the gaps in performance lie. You are quite right: it is a complex picture in the system. I'm committed to continuing to support educational opportunities, and that's why have ring-fenced the minority ethnic achievement grant. There are some interesting data there. Some children are doing very, very well; others, we need to concentrate on. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian, this will need to be the last question, I'm afraid. Sian Gwenllian AM: Sorry? Lynne Neagle AM: This is going to have to be the last question. Sian Gwenllian AM: The last question. Lynne Neagle AM: Yes. Sian Gwenllian AM: Fine. In terms of looked-after children, which is one of the groups where attainment isn't where we would like it to be, there was some improvement in 2016 at key stage 4, but it has been disappointing. Do we know what's been happening in 2019? Kirsty Williams AM: The 2019 data will be published next month, and there has been significant activity. You are right: in recent years, the data have been poor and not where we would want it to be. That's why we have had a reformed approach to PDG LAC; the employment of PDG LAC co-ordinators across the regions. We've identified new resource in the new financial year to test new approaches, so, for instance, virtual school approaches, where we know, in other systems, that has worked. But, we expect the next set of data around the performance of this particular group of learners in March. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay, and you hope to see progress. Kirsty Williams AM: I don't want to speculate, but I hope so. Sian Gwenllian AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you very much. We have come to the end of our time, so can I thank you, Minister, and your official for attending this morning? We have had a wide-ranging and very detailed discussion that will be very useful for the committee. As usual, you will be sent a transcript following the meeting to check for accuracy, but thank you again, both of you, for your attendance this morning. Diolch yn fawr. Okay. Item 3 is papers to note. Paper to note 1 is a letter from ERW providing additional information following the evidence session on 16 January. Paper to note 2 is a letter from Central South Consortium, similarly providing additional information following the evidence session. Paper to note 3 is a letter from the Noah's Ark Children's Hospital for Wales regarding children's rights in Wales, following up on some additional information there. Paper to note 4 is a letter from Qualifications Wales, providing additional information following the annual report scrutiny session in January. Item 4, then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting? Are Members content? Thank you.

According to Kirsty, there was no contradiction at all. They were not in the business of trying to hide the data because it was absolutely in full transparency. It was about how the data was used rather than about hiding data or making that data not available. They needed to dig much, much deeper underneath the data.

tr-gq-1244

tr-gq-1244_0

Summarize the whole meeting. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Children, Young People and Education Committee. We've received apologies for absence from Janet Finch-Saunders, and also from Dawn Bowden, and I'd like to welcome Huw Irranca-Davies, who is substituting for Dawn Bowden. Can I ask Members if there are any declarations of interest, please? No. Okay. We'll move on, then, to our evidence session for our inquiry on school improvement and raising standards. I'd like to welcome Kirsty Williams AM, Minister for Education, and Steve Davies, director of education. Thank you both for attending and for your detailed paper in advance of the meeting. We've got a lot of ground to cover, so we'll go straight into questions, if that's okay. If I can just start by asking you: to what extent is the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development still involved in the Welsh Government's school improvement journey? Kirsty Williams AM: First of all, can I thank the committee for their invitation this morning, and their interest in this particular area? As you will be aware, on coming into office, the director and I agreed to ask the OECD to do a rapid review of the state of Welsh education at the beginning of this Assembly term. They did that, and the feedback from that work informed the publication and content of the national mission. I was very clear in the national mission that I would invite the OECD back to review our progress against that mission, and that has happened in the tail end of last year, and the OECD will publish their latest report on Welsh education next month now, in March. So, the expectation is that the report will be published on 23 March, and my intention is to make a statement to the Chamber on 24 March. The nature of that review is part of our ongoing development of self-evaluation. So, we talk a lot about self-evaluation in the school system. Actually, the continuing relationship with OECD is about self-evaluation of the entirety of the system and Welsh Government. We don't want to accept our own orthodoxy and just be in a bubble where we are constantly listening to ourselves and those people who might want to agree with us or tell us what we want to hear. So, the OECD is our best attempt of having some external verification of where we are. That's a risk for Ministers and for Government, because we want them to give an honest evaluation of where we are, but that's a really important tool for me, to ensure that we're constantly testing ourselves. The nature of that review is that the OECD were able to talk to whoever they felt it was important to talk to, so that included practitioners on the ground, elements of the middle tier, as well as Welsh Government. And I know, Chair--I hope you'll be pleased to hear this--that the reports of this committee have formed parts of their review, looking at how the Senedd itself has contributed to and has held the Government to account. So, as I said, we expect our report to be published towards the end of March. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you, Minister. Can I ask about the powers under the School Standards and Organisation (Wales) Act 2013, to ask you to tell us about the use of those powers either by Welsh Government or by local authorities, and how effective you feel that legislation has been? Kirsty Williams AM: Okay. Well, as you'll be aware, local authorities have quite extensive powers of intervention in schools if they feel that is necessary. If I'm honest, I think there's a mixed picture, with some local authorities using those powers not on a regular basis, but obviously demonstrating a willingness to use those powers. There are other local authorities who don't seem to have used them. Since that legislation came into being, there have been a number of reasons, because of course a local authority has to give a reason for using those powers of intervention. They usually focus on standards, but sometimes they focus on a breakdown in governance arrangements, perhaps, or a failure or a breakdown in financial management. So, sometimes the budgetary issues trigger an intervention power. And the types of interventions that have been used have included, in some cases, appointing additional governors to governing bodies, or suspending a school's delegated budget so the local authority takes on, then, financial control of that particular school, or sometimes applying to the Welsh Government to entirely replace a governing body and establish an intervention board. So, if I can give you an example of where that's been used and has been successful, in Flintshire. They applied to Welsh Government for two interim executive boards, in Sir Richard Gwyn Catholic High School and in Ysgol Trefonnen. They applied to us. Those governing bodies were dissolved. The IEBs were put in place and both of those schools, which had been in special measures, moved quite rapidly, actually, out of special measures. Perhaps the most recent example of this is one that the Chair will know very well in her own constituency of Torfaen, in Cwmbran High School, where Torfaen has intervened in that case. The Welsh Government has not used those powers to date. My expectation always is that local authorities should be the first port of call, and I would encourage--and we always encourage--local authorities to take a proactive approach to intervention and to use those powers. But it's my belief that it is they who are best placed initially to do that. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you, Minister. Can I ask, then, about the national evaluation and improvement resource and how significant a role that will play in the raising of school standards, and how you feel it's evolved since it was first conceived? Kirsty Williams AM: So, this brings us back to the principle of self-evaluation and something, if we're honest, we've not been very good at. If you look at a number of chief inspectors'reports into the Welsh education system, self-evaluation has always been identified as something that is missing or underdeveloped in our system to date, hence, then, the work to establish not a new approach, but a more robust approach to self-evaluation. We've done that in conjunction, again, with the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. It's really important, throughout the entirety of our reform journey that that's done in co-construction, because we want this resource to be usable in schools. So, it's all very well having a conceptual idea and people outside the classroom working on it, but if it's of no practical use to a school leadership team, then we won't see the impact. So, it's--. We're in phase 2 at the moment, where we're doing--. So, the initial resource has been developed by the OECD, middle tier and practitioners. We're in the testing phase at the moment and having it evaluated itself, with a view to introducing that resource across the system at the start of the new academic year, in September 2020. I truly believe that, if we're to make progress in Welsh education, we have to develop the skills within our system to have robust self-evaluation. This resource gives us continuity of approach right the way across Wales. So, it's not left to an individual school to come up with a system; it's right the way across the system. My hope would be that those principles could then be applied to local education authorities, to regional school improvement services and Welsh Government as part of a whole-system approach to self-evaluation. I don't know if there's anything more you want to add, Steve. Steve Davies: Just to add that the other critical partners are Estyn themselves. Kirsty Williams AM: Oh, yes, sorry. Steve Davies: So, they have played a critical role and, as we know, as the Minister has said in the past, she may introduce policy and practice, but if Estyn are part of it then schools, usually, because they recognise that it will be part of the inspection process--it gives it greater push and support around it. So, they've been key players within it. Kirsty Williams AM: And I think, if I just say as well, that the external perception of what that's about is really important. It's not a test of school readiness for reform, it is a genuine attempt for a school to evaluate their strengths, their weaknesses and where they need to go next. It's not an Estyn checklist. And because of the word'toolkit'--the feedback was that it gave the impression of a checklist,'Just do this and check list'. So, we're actually going to change the name of that resource. So, it'll be called the national evaluation and improvement resource, rather than the toolkit, because, as I said, the feedback was that'toolkit'gave the impression of a checklist exercise, and it's got to be about more than that if it's going to be meaningful. So, it'll be changed to an'improvement resource'. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. Before I bring Suzy in, can I just welcome Sian Gwenllian, who is joining us via video-conference in north Wales? Morning, Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Good morning. Can you hear me? Lynne Neagle AM: We can, yes. We can hear you very nicely, thank you. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Suzy, you've got a supplementary. Suzy Davies AM: Yes. Only a very quick one. It's about the development of the-- Kirsty Williams AM: The resource. Suzy Davies AM: Yes, the resource, thank you--about whether there were any conflicting ideas in the process of development that made it quite difficult to zone in on something that school leadership teams, in particular, could rely on. Were there differences of opinion on what this should look like? Kirsty Williams AM: Not that I'm aware of from the practitioners that I've spoken to who have been part of that. So, for instance, Suzy, you will know the very small school of Gladestry. The head of Gladestry has been involved in this process, and she said that she'd really enjoyed the process of working alongside Estyn and the OECD as a school leader to be able to shape it. But I'm not aware that there's been conflict in that process. Suzy Davies AM: I'm not suggesting that there has been; I'm just interested as to how it had worked, that's all. Steve Davies: Chair, I think, inevitably, when you bring stakeholders together, they're not going to be in total agreement as to how it's going to work, and I think initially one of the challenges was having Estyn there as part of the facilitation group. There are always some concerns that, actually, it's coming from a to inspect, oral, judgmental tick box. So, we had some early day challenges where we had to convince--and, ultimately, Estyn convinced them--that they were there to help and support as opposed to to inspect, and that the model that was developed, as the Minister said, was not going to be a tick box,'You are good at this part of self-evaluation', it was to build the skillsets up. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. So, it's got their full confidence. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, and I think again, also, what--. You know, four years into the job, what I've reflected on as well is there is this sometimes a feeling out there that the Minister says all the right stuff, but you're not actually going to do it, so, when you talk about a new approach to doing things, you're not actually serious about it. So, trying to build that confidence that we are serious about developing a new system around self-improvement, which is different from accountability--sometimes, the practitioners are like,'Oh, yes, we've heard it all before but it never actually happens.'And I think that's been a part of the constant--not pressure, but the responsibility on Welsh Government is in following through. So, we said that we were going to do this in the national mission, and we are going to do it. I'm really proud that there or thereabouts, a few months either way, we've actually kept to the timetable as outlined in the national mission, and that helps build confidence within the sector that we are committed to that programme and we're going to do what we say we're going to do. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: And a final question from me: how effective do you think the investment in school standards has been in this Assembly term, as opposed to the approach taken in the last Assembly term, where there was the protection put in place for core school budgets? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think, first of all, it's important that, whilst this additional resource is specifically targeted at school standards, that is only a part of a much wider education budget, a budget that--you know--is incredibly complex. And so it is really challenging to be able to draw straight lines--you know,'We did this and it's resulted in that'--given that we're looking at the entirety of school funding here. What's been really important is that, if you drill down into what that money has been spent on, 50 per cent of it has been directed towards professional learning in one form or another to support our teaching professionals. And that's been really important to me. I've said it time and time again: an education system cannot exceed the quality of the people who stand in front of our children day in, day out to work with them and teach them. Therefore, that investment in staff and investment in the professional learning of our staff and support for them I think is making a difference already but, importantly, will continue to make a difference. But I think it is really challenging to be able to say,'Well, we spent this bit of money and it definitely led to that', because it's such a complex picture. But that money, the way it's been spent, has been driven by evidence. And, again, what we do know from international best practice, what do we know that works in driving up standards, and then how can we align the money that we've got to supporting that? And, as I said, 50 per cent of that money has gone directly to simply supporting the professional learning of those who work with our children. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you very much. We're going to talk now a bit about schools causing concern with questions from Huw Irranca-Davies. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Thank you, Chair. If I can, just first of all, zoom in on the way in which we actually decide which schools need what support. So, one of the interesting questions for us is how do we use the different systems out there. So, we've got the school categorisation system, which we're familiar with. We've also got Estyn inspection reports, then we've got other intelligence, including local intelligence on the ground. How do you decide from that? How is it decided what schools need support, need challenge? How do we do that? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, you're right: what we have is a variety of ways in which we can identify schools that need support, or need to be challenged on their practice. But it's important not to confuse them either. So, our primary route to doing this is our school categorisation system. Sometimes, and perhaps this is inevitable--. That system is primarily there as a triage system around identifying where our resource should be spent. So, our school improvement service--it's a risk-based approach, so they can evaluate where they need to put their time, effort and resource. Sometimes, it's used by other people for other things, but that is not its primary purpose; its primary purpose there is not one of accountability, it is one of identifying risk and aligning that then to the support that is available. Estyn--now that is part of that accountability system. That is our method of holding schools and their governing bodies to account for their practice and for the work that they do. Both systems, of course, are evolving. So, how we do categorisation has changed over a period of time. The elements that go into making that judgment around the levels of support have changed, and, of course, the Estyn inspection regime is also changing. At the moment, schools are only inspected once every seven years. We're moving to a system where Estyn will be more regularly in schools. So, they are two systems, but they are different and they look at different things. But our categorisation system is how we look for those ways of identifying support for schools. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: And you've made, with feedback over the last few years, adjustments to the way that the categorisation system works. Are you content with where it is now, or do you see more adjustments being made? Have you got things in front of you that you're getting feedback on saying'Well, we need to tweak this again a little bit'? Kirsty Williams AM: So, that system has evolved over time. So, when it started, it was just a tool around secondary schools. Now, it covers the breadth of schools. Initially, on coming into office, when I first came in, it was purely driven by data, and it was also done in quartiles. So, there was a certain number of schools that had to be in the bottom, which drove practitioners mad. They were like'Ah, every year, there's going to be some of us that have to be in the bottom quartile', because of the way in which it was arranged, which seemed very unfair to them. So, we've changed that. It's not just purely driven on data now; there are other judgments--the professional judgments of our challenge advisers are taken into account. And I would expect that situation to continue to evolve to align itself to our curriculum reform, and our changes in self-evaluation. So, it's not a fixed point. I expect that that system will continue to evolve and change, so that it complements and assists in the reform journey as other parts of the system change. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Thanks for that. I think, for any impartial reader of the way that the trends have been going on this, there is some good news within that, in that, certainly, those schools that might have been identified as have been okay but coasting along, seem to be moving up the categories, although we still do have that--. Well, it's what the system is there to do, it's to identify those schools that do need that additional support. And I like your analogy of a triage system--'You're fit; keep on doing what you're doing and do it well; you need more support, we'll put the support in.'But, can I turn to those schools that are causing significant concern, and how we identify them? The Estyn chief inspector's conclusions at the end of the 2017-18 report that these schools are not being identified early enough--there's a need to do something urgently about these concerns, particularly in secondary schools. Have we addressed that? Are you content that we've addressed that concern? Was he right? Kirsty Williams AM: No, the chief inspector is absolutely right--absolutely right. I've got no beef with that statement at all. In some ways, when a school goes into special measures, in a way, that's a failure of the system, because that should have been identified sooner. So I've got no beef, as I said, with the chief inspector saying that. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: So just to ask, bearing in mind the earlier discussion we were having, how is it that we don't identify those schools? Kirsty Williams AM: That's it--you're quite right. Undoubtedly, what categorisation has done is led to a greater understanding, I think, on behalf of local education authorities'and school improvement services'knowledge about their schools. I think knowledge around schools is greatly enhanced by that process. But we are not there yet in terms of necessarily, then, moving those schools more quickly, once they've been identified as needing the highest level of support to see improvement. And secondary schools is a particular, particular challenge. So you will have seen from the last publication of categorisation data that our primary sector continues to improve--more and more and more of our primary schools are in a green rating, which is very satisfying to me. But we have got more of an issue with secondary schools, and we have a particular issue with the same schools being identified in that level of categorisation. So even though we've identified them as needing that extra help, they are not moving at pace away from that system. So there are two things that we are doing at the moment. The first is, we are, again, looking at different sets of data that can give us even earlier warning systems that things are going wrong in a school--and perhaps Steve will explain later. For instance, staff sickness, and carefully monitoring staff sickness, because there is a direct correlation between high levels of staff sickness in a school and what is going on in the school. And Steve can explain some of this work later. But we're piloting a new approach to those schools that are causing concern. Each local authority has been asked to identify two of their high schools that they are particularly worried about. And we have a new multi-agency approach, working with those schools to try and move them more forward. So it's two from each region, a multi-agency panel, working with the school. And that multi-agency panel includes the school itself, the local authority, the regional consortia school improvement staff, Estyn and Welsh Government--as a multi-agency panel to support improvement in that school. So, for instance, what would normally happen, Estyn would come in, Estyn would make a judgment on the school--requiring special measures or urgent improvement--and Estyn would go away. They'd go away for six months, and then they'd come back in six months, and they'd make another judgment,'No, still not good enough', and disappear for six months. We're saying--Estyn and the Welsh Government have agreed that's not the best approach; Estyn need to be part of the solution, rather than just coming and making a judgment. The initial feedback from this trial is very, very positive. Actually, we've had local authorities coming to us and saying,'Can we put more schools in? Rather than just having two of our high schools, can we engage more in this project and this pilot?'It's being evaluated by Cardiff Metropolitan University and Swansea University, so we're having some academic overview to see, actually, does this approach work, can we evidence it--that it actually makes a difference? And it's actually--I'd like to claim all the credit for it, but it's actually not dissimilar to something that's happening in Scotland as well. But we knew that carrying on doing the same old thing clearly wasn't moving these schools, we needed a new approach, and this is what we're doing at the moment. So it's relatively new, but the initial feedback is positive. Steve, I don't know-- Steve Davies: I think your important point is about,'What about the schools that are sliding in that direction?'And it's bringing together what we know from Estyn, but also, critically, local authorities have knowledge of their schools, and so do consortia. We've got to be better at bringing those together. So, the Minister gave the example of staff sickness--not always a trigger, but it's one of those. If you look at movement of pupils out of a school, you can look at complaints, you can look at, actually, emerging increased use of HR resources that a school pulls on a local authority. None of these have been pushed up into the public domain, but they're important antennae. The point the Minister made about Estyn as well is, historically, when they go into special measures, Estyn, at the end of that week, call in, historically, either the region or the local authority, they will feed back to one of them, and then they go away. So, they are staying with it. So, we are brining together the knowledge. But, as the Minister said, we want to keep a very clear distinction between the accountability and the transparency to the public, to parents, with the very detailed collective work of that multi-agency group to actually make that difference over time. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Okay. So, does that--. I'd love to go further, but time is against us. Does that deal with the issue of the schools that have been identified in those categories of requiring significant improvement and requiring special measures? Are those the ones that will be identified now, or is that above and beyond that again? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, those are the ones that are primarily at the forefront of our minds, but this way of sharing data better, to step in earlier, is part of our attempt to address what the chief inspector says about stepping in early--not waiting until a school gets into special measures and a formal judgment from Estyn of that, but actually using that intelligence to get support in there earlier. The three elements that that multi-agency approach look at are: what are the fundamentals that need addressing in this school? What is the capacity of the school itself to be able to address those fundamentals? And, what extra support needs to go into that senior management team and the governing body to get those fundamentals addressed? And actually, what does sustainable improvement look like? Because, again, one of the issues, sometimes, that happens is, a school goes into a category with Estyn, there's a big push and a big,'We must do something'and the school comes out, but actually, that improvement is not sustainable. It's the low-hanging fruit; it's the easy wins that have been achieved, but actually, perhaps some of the fundamental challenges underlying in that school haven't been addressed in that process. So, this is about what will sustainable improvement look like in six months, what's it going to look like in 12 months and what's it going to look like in 18 months. So, actually, a more strategic, longer term approach to real change in a school rather than, perhaps, some of the easy-to-fix items that make a school as if it's doing better, but we really haven't tackled some of the underlying problems that make that school vulnerable to slipping back. Does that make sense? Lynne Neagle AM: I've got a couple of supplementaries on--. Sorry? Kirsty Williams AM: Does that make sense? Lynne Neagle AM: Yes. We've got a couple of supplementaries on this, first from Suzy and then from Sian. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you for that, Chair. Obviously, I'm pleased to hear that this work is being done, but I'm wondering--. What strikes me, in the recent past, at least, particularly as we've got the usual suspects in this category--. I've got to ask myself why it is that councils have been reluctant, perhaps, to step in with these schools earlier, particularly as they've got consortia or middle-tier support as well. Has there been a deficit in that space that has meant that councils don't feel equipped to step in? I just don't really get it why they've been reluctant to step in so far. If they've been nervous about doing it, because they don't feel that they've got the tools to do it, then I think that's pretty important, because as you were saying, we were talking about fundamentals; surely, councils have been able to deal with fundamentals, and more importantly, consortia up until now. Because, obviously, we're asking these players to give us evidence at some point, so perhaps I'd like to challenge them on how come we're here now. Kirsty Williams AM: And rightly so. Suzy Davies AM: I'm not laying this at your door. Kirsty Williams AM: And rightly so. I guess each local authority will have an explanation for each individual school, I suspect. What's crucial to me is that we have to--. I see our job as corralling the collective effort, and I think, for too long in the system, there has been a lack of co-ordination. So, this is about bringing and corralling a collective effort to address this, going forward, in more sustainable way. And I think it does come back to this issue around self-evaluation and a willingness to be open, honest and upfront about some of the challenges that we've got. It's not easy, is it? It's not easy to accept or to acknowledge sometimes when things are-- Suzy Davies AM: That they don't know how to do this. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, that they're going badly, or perhaps they don't know exactly how to make the difference. So this approach, as I said, is a new way of trying to coral that collective effort across the board. But, I don't know if Steve--because you've done other roles in the system, so perhaps you've got a different insight. Steve Davies: I think you're right. The variation across the country, across local authorities--. There are some local authorities that we've worked with and we identify have taken the appropriate action. There are others that we're working with, and yes, at its best, it's done as a joint exercise where they use their regional school improvement service to help in the identification that there is a need for this. They take advice as to what the action is, whether it is, as the Minister said, in the more significant areas, a board, or whether a warning notice comes in terms of standards or finance. So, we're working with them and we're working with the Welsh Local Government Association to share that practice. An example of that work is: we have done a development training session for cabinet members for education, and scrutiny leads for education across Wales, and all 22 local authorities came to that and engaged with that. That was partly about self-improvement, but it was also about where significant issues arise, you have to constructively confront them. And that comes with what the region knows, and increasingly, we're looking to have it consistently across 22 local authorities, so they are collecting all the additional data that we referred to earlier, so they can legitimately hold a mirror up and say,'This is a real concern that we have. We're not punishing you, but we're registering the seriousness, and we want you to address it.'And we're making progress. I believe it's genuinely more consistent now, but I'd be lying if I said that there was consistency across all 22 local authorities. Suzy Davies AM: Thank you. I'm conscious of time. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. I've got a supplementary from Sian, then back to Huw. Sian Gwenllian AM: Because you are moving to a more sophisticated approach in terms of identifying problems sooner, and so can offer the support earlier, is it time to think about moving away from the system of categorisation entirely? That is, has the categorisation system reached the end of its usefulness, and is the multi-agency approach, this more sophisticated approach, a better way, ultimately, of being able to assist schools in moving forward? Kirsty Williams AM: I think, Sian, as I said earlier, the categorisation system has evolved over time, and my expectation is that it will continue to evolve, because it has to be consistent with our overall approach to school improvement and raising standards. I expect OECD will have feedback for us on this important part of our system, and we'll wait to see exactly what they say about it, but as I said in answer to Huw Irranca-Davies earlier, I haven't got a closed mind; we've demonstrated over the last four years our willingness to change the system to make it a smarter system, and we will continue to keep that under review, as we move forward. If I could just go back briefly, it doesn't sound like a very exciting thing, does it, when we say we've been doing work with the WLGA, with cabinet members, but also scrutiny, because that's a really important part of the jigsaw as well, is actually local government scrutiny of the performance of your education portfolio holder and the leadership of your council. So this is about trying to up the ante on all sides, so that those issues around'What are you doing in your local authority to use the powers that you have?'You know, sometimes, making sure that everybody in that authority--those in power and those who are there to hold those in power to account--have the necessary skills, knowledge and understanding to do that appropriately. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Huw, briefly. Huw Irranca-Davies AM: Yes, briefly. I only have one final question. We've talked a lot about early identification; getting in there and then managing the improvement, this triage approach there, and then getting some grip of it, as well, in doing all of that. But my question now is on what we currently have. I won't touch on the primary schools, but let's just look at secondary schools--11 per cent of secondary schools inspected in the last two academic years judged as unsatisfactory, needing urgent improvement. There will always be secondary schools and primary schools that hit moments of crisis for one reason or another, but 11 per cent to me, and to any layperson, would seem unreasonably high. Are you--? It would be daft to ask you if you're content. What is a level that you would be content with of having schools in red category in Wales? Kirsty Williams AM: You're right. Schools will need different levels of support at different points, and sometimes, it's not because of a crisis. So, for instance, in my region, we do have an increase in the number of schools in the amber category. That's because we've seen in that particular region a number of headteachers retire because they've reached retirement age, and there are new headteachers. Well, that is a moment of risk in the school--when senior leadership changes. Nothing else has changed in that school, but the simple fact that you have a new leader, sometimes in those cases it might be their first headship. That means that that school is going to need a little bit of extra support, so it isn't always just a crisis that needs extra support, there are just general things that happen in the life of a school that could lead to it. But you're absolutely right--we have a particular challenge in the secondary sector where we have not been able to move individual schools forward at pace. And 11 per cent is not acceptable to me, Huw, which is why we have introduced this new pilot to address those schools where, persistently, we have concerns about their ability to move forward. If we'd have carried on doing the same thing, I suspect we would have just carried on getting the same result--hence the need for a new approach to those schools that are causing concern. Steve Davies: Very briefly, the things we talked about earlier was how we measure the performance of schools, particularly at GCSEs, with a narrow focus. As was said earlier, some of these are the same groups--they trip in and then they don't come out. Our belief is, from research, that they concentrate on squeezing the pips to get the grades up in some small areas for a period of time, and you can do that by targeting and immersing them. Estyn can tick the box to say your grades have got better, but we haven't handled the serious underpinning issues--leadership, teaching and learning, and bringing those together. As the Minister said, what does sustainable improvement look like in six, 12,18 months? It isn't just, as important as they are, getting those exam grades up a bit. They're the fundamental--. And if they're all agreed as the indicators at the outset, we're more likely--. So it's multi-agency; it's not a little activity, it's a major strategy. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. Hefin David has some questions now on the middle tier. Hefin David AM: I'd like to consider the work of the consortia. In 2016, your election manifesto very clearly said that you wanted to abolish regional consortia--three words in it. Why haven't you done it? Kirsty Williams AM: Because, given that you're such a keen student of my manifesto, you'll also know that-- Hefin David AM: It was only three words. Kirsty Williams AM: The Liberal Democrat manifesto also said that we supported major local government reform and a major reduction in the number of local government units. That hasn't happened. I have to say genuinely, my experience over the last four years has proven to me the value of regional working, and in the absence of significant local government reform, I think it's absolutely vital that we have scale in school improvement services--scale that I don't think can be delivered across 22 individual local authorities. Hefin David AM: Okay. So, if there was local government reform, you would abolish the consortia. Kirsty Williams AM: I think if there was significant local government reform and we could demonstrate that those units had such a scale that they could perform the functions of regional consortia, then I think it would be inevitable that any education Minister would look to see whether there was an opportunity to change structures. But in the absence of that, Hefin, I have been absolutely convinced whilst doing this job that you need larger units to be able to carry out successful school improvement work, and I think it would be reckless to advocate the system going back to school improvement being organised in 22 different ways. Hefin David AM: Okay. Do you think that the work of the four consortia has been consistent and effective? Kirsty Williams AM: The school improvement services? Hefin David AM: The four consortia. Kirsty Williams AM: I think, as with individual local education authorities, there are some regional consortia services that have performed really highly--and that's not me saying that, that's Estyn, but gives us assurance around that--and there are others that need to improve. I think the consortia themselves would admit that they, since their establishment, have found new ways of working. Initially, they were very separate entities that did things their own way. Increasingly, over recent years, we have seen those consortia working together on a national approach, but delivered on a regional basis. So I think they themselves have evolved over time. But we are constantly looking for optimum delivery from those particular organisations, but as I said, I think it would be absolutely reckless to go back to a situation where school improvement services were being delivered individually on 22 different bases. Hefin David AM: Okay. I'm happy to accept that you've changed your opinion there; that's no problem at all. But with regard to the four consortia, and we'll take Education through Regional Working as an example, it does things differently to the other three. Is that a cause for concern, or do you think that's entirely appropriate? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, ERW does things differently, but then so does the Education Achievement Service. EAS is constituted in a different way to the Central South Consortium. What I'm interested in is not necessarily how they are constituted and organised, I'm interested in the effectiveness of that organisation to deliver for children and for teachers. ERW has got particular challenges, and we continue to work with those in ERW to address those, but increasingly, as I said, what we are seeing the regional consortia do is develop a national approach to school improvement services but deliver that on a regional basis so that there is greater consistency in terms of delivery. Hefin David AM: Are you happy that, within the ERW area, local authorities employ their own improvement advisers, rather than doing it in the way that the others do? Kirsty Williams AM: We have discussed this at length with them. My preference would be for school improvement officers to be employed in the centre, and we continue to have those discussions, but what's really important to understand is that the regional consortia are not a beast of the Government; they are a beast of the local authorities that have worked together to create a school improvement service that meets their needs. So we can't impose that solution, and we continue to discuss with ERW what is the optimal way, and they continue to discuss with their constituent local authorities about how that should be organised. Hefin David AM: Are you concerned that Neath Port Talbot have given notice that they want to withdraw from regional working? Kirsty Williams AM: I think it's really disappointing that Neath Port Talbot have published that notice. What's important for me is to understand--not for me, it will be important for Estyn. It will be really important for us to understand how Neath Port Talbot intend to support their schools and their teachers if they were to withdraw from ERW, especially at what is a very, very critical time. The regional consortia have a key role to play in supporting systems with the introduction of the curriculum. I would want to know from Neath Port Talbot how they are going to do that without being part of that organisation. And, of course, there's the added complexity that so much of our money is channelled through to schools via the regional consortia. So, I would want to understand from Neath Port Talbot how they're going to safeguard their schools and make sure that the children who are receiving their education in Neath Port Talbot are not disadvantaged if they were to follow through on that decision. Hefin David AM: Do you feel that it's your role to intervene in that area and instruct Neath Port Talbot and ERW as to how they should resolve this issue? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, as I said, I would be seeking assurances-- Hefin David AM: What does that mean, though,'seeking assurances'? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, Neath Port Talbot would need to demonstrate to me how they're going to address these issues. If they're not part of ERW and their schools and their children are not going to be in receipt of the support from ERW, as I said, especially at this critical time, how are they intending to do that? I haven't seen those plans, but if they were to push forward and follow through on the notice, I would want to see them and I suspect Estyn would want to see them also. Hefin David AM: Okay, just last issue on that: you're just waiting to see what Neath Port Talbot do next, then. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, we have written to Neath Port Talbot to ask them to demonstrate to us, if they were to pull out of ERW, how they're going to meet their functions. I have not heard back from them. Hefin David AM: Steve, did you want to say something? Steve Davies: Obviously--[Inaudible. ]--that point. We wrote to them last Friday, and we are awaiting their response now. Hefin David AM: Okay. So, that's where we are. Okay. There was the document in 2015--'National model for regional working'. Is that the current document? Are there plans to change or update it, or is that exactly where we stand? Kirsty Williams AM: So, that is the current model. Some work was undertaken in 2017 and 2018 to look to update that model and revise that model. Some specific recommendations were put forward about additional services that could be organised on a regional basis; primarily, that is a specialist human resources resource. We know that, because of austerity in some local authorities, HR departments have been really stretched. Education HR is a specialist service, it's not generic. It's often a service that--. I see that as part of a school improvement service. Support for governors also has been stretched within individual local authorities. So, a proposal was put forward to include specialist HR and governor support as part of the regional model. That was rejected by local government. Our local authorities did not want to include that in the regional model. However, I must say, having presented that evidence, some of our local authorities, even though there wasn't a national agreement to put that into the national model, have pooled their resources, and those services are being delivered and supported on a regional basis. So, for instance, the Education Achievement Service now provide specialist HR resource, and EAS and Central South provide governor support. So, although we weren't successful in persuading local government to adopt a new national model, local authorities in those areas saw the value of moving that way. Hefin David AM: So, with that in mind, and perhaps I'll put this to Steve Davies, everything the Minister just said, and also the line in the document--'The implementation of this model will change over time'-- is it time to go back to that document and review it from a procedural point of view? Steve Davies: I don't think it's necessarily timely to go back and have a complete review of it. But, certainly, we are in ongoing discussions with the Welsh Local Government Association, both in terms of work with local authorities, and the type of intervention in schools. So, we keep a constant watch as to which areas that we believe we could develop further. We are not currently intending to do a wholesale review of that. As the Minister touched on earlier, there is some work to get consistency across the current area, particularly, as we just mentioned, in relation to ERW work. So, it's getting a consistent approach at that level, and sharing the practice. I think what is emerging, as the Minister said, is that there are two regions who have already made this shift to pool services. I think the two other regions are seeing and will see the benefits of that, and instead of forcing it through, we'd expect that to evolve. But we're not, at this stage, looking to a wholesale review of the national model. Lynne Neagle AM: Hefin. Hefin David AM: And Professor Dylan Jones's strategic delivery group seems to have had quite a warm welcome in the sector. Is it fair to say that? Kirsty Williams AM: I believe so. I'm very grateful to Dylan for his hard work and his skill in chairing that group, and I think it's been welcomed by all, so that we can get that clarity and consistency about the roles and responsibilities of the individual partners and players in the middle tier. Hefin David AM: And when will the work be completed, and what will the outcomes be? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, the group is currently engaging with Steve and other officials on agreeing a plan, but also, crucially, that plan is there to support the successful implementation of the curriculum, so that we're very clear about the roles and responsibilities in the middle tier in this crucial phase following the publication. We have to move now from the publication into a relentless focus on implementation. The history of devolution is full of fantastic documents, and, shall I say, patchy implementation. The work that has gone into that curriculum is too important for implementation to be left to chance. It's too important. It's too good to be left to chance. So, everything now is a relentless focus on successful implementation. Hefin David AM: Yes, but I'm thinking that the strategic delivery is reviewing the role of the middle tier. So, you know, what do we expect to see from it, notwithstanding the kind of softly, softly approach that you've already talked about? Steve Davies: It was set up, actually, about 18 months ago--just under. It was set up to build collective efficacy, because what people out there are seeing is that there's a confusion of roles, in what the regions are doing, and it was building that collective efficacy so everyone was behind the wheel. So, they've been looking at who is doing what for the last 18 months, and exploring and making some changes themselves. It's not just what they do with Government or what they do with each other; it's just happened that it's timely, because one of the key bits of feedback we believe we will get from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development is we have had co-construction, we'd had collective effort, but we need to do more, particularly within the middle tier. This is not controlled by Government, it is arm's length from Government, and it's not their job to get it ready for the new curriculum--that's a key part of it. This group will have an ongoing role; it's not a task and finish group. It does feed back in to the Minister but there's no formal mechanism by which they have to report. Hefin David AM: Okay, that's very clear. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay. I've got supplementaries from Suzy, then Sian. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Briefly, please. Suzy Davies AM: I think this is a really interesting evidence session. What I'm about to say, I say it even though I'm a big localist: it all seems to be heading in one direction of a national service. Is the strategic group even thinking in these terms, obviously building in local accountability? But it'll just make it so much easier in terms of accountability and consistency to monitor what the middle tier does, if it's a national service, like the National Adoption Service. Local delivery, national service--is it heading in that direction? Kirsty Williams AM: That's not the intention of setting the group up. As Steve just said, I receive feedback from Dylan, because I meet Dylan in this particular capacity on a planned basis. He is there to give me advice on the middle tier, and to give me advice on what he thinks Welsh Government needs to do. But I've not had that conversation with him about a national service. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Well, thank you for that. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: What I was going to raise has been answered already, that is that, from what I can see, the work that Professor Dylan Jones is doing has evolved somewhat. I felt that, originally, the idea was to look at the middle tier in terms of any kind of duplication that was happening, and where it was possible to tighten up the people going into schools from different directions. But it appears that it has evolved to be something that's much more than that, and that it is placing a focus on the curriculum and other aspects of the educational system. Is there a risk for them to lose focus in that sense? Kirsty Williams AM: No, not at all. I think they are very, very clear around establishing roles and responsibilities for each of the players and to be very clear about the expectations that each part of the middle tier can have of each other, as to what they can expect from their partners in the middle tier. And absolutely, it is about making sure that there isn't duplication, that people aren't second-guessing each other's work, and there are clear demarcations about who does what in the system, and, as I said, knowing that you can rely on your colleague in the middle tier to do the bit that they are responsible for. So, I don't think there's a question of it losing focus. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. We've got a lot of areas to cover so we are going to have to pick up our pace a bit. The next questions are from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Thinking about you as a Minister trying to see what the long-term trends are with regard to raising standards and improving educational attainment, is that difficult, because the performance measures have changed, haven't they? We can't compare like-for-like now, because of the changes that have been made in the way that performance is measured. So, to begin with, is that a challenge, to see whether progress has been made? And secondly, what evidence do you as Minister use to look at the long-term trends? Kirsty Williams AM: The first thing to say, with regard to changes to performance measures--you're right that change to those does make it, in some cases, more difficult to look at trends over a period of time. But those changes are made for really good reasons. If we change a performance measure, it is done to ensure that it is in the best interests of learners. And I think the best interests of learners always trumps the ease of comparison. I understand that, for researchers and for opposition Members, even for Ministers, it would be simpler to have the same set of measures over a period of time. But if we know that those things are driving behaviours that are unhelpful to children, and not in the best interests of children, then we have to change them, even thought that then does create challenges in different areas. With regard to what do we look at, there are a number of ways that we gain data and look at data in the system: everything from the categorisation system we spoke of earlier, and trends in categorisation; we look at Estyn reports; we continue to look at examination results. But we're trying to develop a broader range of data and statistics that give us a whole picture of the education performance, rather than narrowing down on one simple indicator that tells you one thing but doesn't tell you everything. But I don't know, Steve, if there's anything further that you'd like to add. Steve Davies: It's going back to what the Member raised earlier, in terms of the range of things that you look at--things that can make a difference. So, when Estyn review schools, or we're looking to develop national frameworks for things like mental health and well-being, which look to the practice that enables raising standards, it's collecting that information, both at a national level, through the annual review of Estyn, as well as our engagement with regions and local authorities. So, it's looking at the evidence base that goes beyond, but impacts on data. And, inevitably, we will use the Programme for International Student Assessment, and any other external assessments that come through organisations like the OECD. And even where we've changed the performance measures, we still have, at national level, the ongoing data. So, if you looked at level 2 plus, we believe it is important that children get five good GCSEs--for higher education and for employment. So, we've not lost sight of those at a national level--we're not using them as a narrow set of performance measures for individual schools. Kirsty Williams AM: So, if we look at--level 2 plus is a good example. We know that a relentless focus on that single measure, as a way of judging the system, leads to a set of behaviours in schools. It narrows the focus onto a certain part of the cohort, it narrows the curriculum, when we know that children-- Sian Gwenllian AM: I'm not challenging the fact that you've changed the performance measures--I understand that, and having a broader way of looking is better in the long run. I'm just saying, because there's been this change, it makes it more of a challenge--whilst accepting why you've made the changes, but it does present more of a challenge, presumably, because you have to look at more indicators, and take evidence from different places. But I take it that you're confident that the trajectory is going in the right way. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, I think we are making improvements. But you're right: it does make it more challenging. But those changes are being made for the right reasons, as I said, whether that be at level 2 plus. Look at English literature. I understand why perhaps a performance measure around English was introduced, but the effect of that was that significant numbers of children--and, it must be said, usually children who are entitled to free school meals--were suddenly not sitting English literature GCSE. We've changed that performance measure, and guess what? Last year, we saw a significant increase in the number of children that were sitting English literature GCSE. For standards of literacy and oracy, I think studying literature is really, really important, before we even get into the joy of introducing children to the written word and the love of reading. So, we make changes. Yes, it causes challenges, but we're making those changes because we believe that they are in the best interest of children, and that has to trump ease of comparison. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian. Sian Gwenllian AM: Why have you decided to ask the consortia, Estyn and so on not to report on local data or regional level data? How do we then come to conclusions about what is working if it isn't presented on a local authority and regional basis? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think the thing to say about the communications from Welsh Government, Estyn, and the WLGA is it's not about not communicating the data, it's about challenging people on how that data should be used. So, the data is still available, but it's a challenge to them about how to use that data. So, for instance, when we're presenting data that compares local authority to local authority, you could have a local authority that says,'There we go, I'm above the national average. I don't need to worry about the education in my local authority, because I'm above the average, or I'm better than my neighbour.'That doesn't necessarily mean that everything is right in your local education authority. Perhaps your children should be doing even better than what you're presented with. So, actually, it's not about hiding data; it's about how you use the data appropriately. And sometimes, how we were presenting data in the past was lulling some people into a false sense of security about the performance of their system. So, it's about how you use data, and that's what the communication from Welsh Government and the WLGA and Estyn was about: think very carefully about this data and what it's telling you about your system, and don't be lulled into a false sense of security that you may be doing brilliantly. Or, perhaps, looking at your data, you may think,'Oh, my goodness me, we're not doing very well at all', but, actually, more careful consideration of that might show that your school's impact on those children is really, really a positive one. So, you've got to use that data in the context. So, it's not about less data. If anything, it's about more data and, crucially for me, it's about more intelligent use and interrogation of that data, about truly what it's telling you about your system. Sian Gwenllian AM: But again, the Welsh Government--. You have continued to publish the local and regional level data. So, doesn't that contradict what you've been telling the consortia and everyone else? Kirsty Williams AM: No, not at all. As I said, we're not in the business of trying to hide data--I believe absolutely in full transparency. And in terms of level 2 data, I think I'm not moving away from the point that I think it's really important that more and more children get five really good GCSEs. I think it's important for their life chances. It is about how that data is used, not about hiding data or making that data not available. Steve Davies: Can I, very briefly--? We didn't just send a letter out collectively. We've now carried out training jointly with WLGA and Estyn on how to use that data. So, it's not just looking where your LA is; it's also not looking at whether your school's better than average for the authority. And it is well received, and it should broaden the approach of scrutiny committees to beyond what historically was, if I'm honest, looking at the league table for their authority or looking at the league table of local authorities. It's not that they shouldn't be looking at that, but they need to dig much, much deeper underneath it. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you. We're going to go on now to Suzy. I'm going to appeal for brief questions and brief answers so that we can cover the rest of the questions. Suzy Davies AM: I'll shorten these questions, okay. We know why you got rid of the old measures. We've got interim measures now. What are they telling you about the success you've had in trying to avoid the bad behaviour? Short answers. Kirsty Williams AM: It's impossible. [Laughter. ] I think it's inevitable: whatever kind of measures we put in place, people will look to maximise their success in those measures, and I don't think we'll ever come up with a system where those measures are absolutely perfect. What's really important to me is that we're really, really, really challenging schools to look at the performance of all of their children, rather than just at a very, very narrow cohort around those C/D boundaries, which we knew was detrimental, potentially, to more able and talented children and really pushing those Bs to As and those As to A*s, and children for whom actually just getting in to school on a daily basis is an achievement, and the school has done well to provide that. So, our new capped 9 makes sure that there is breadth across a range of subjects, rather than just focusing on a narrower and narrower bunch of subject opportunities for children, and our new third-third-third system enables schools to really look at their performance. So if their capped 9 score is high, what's driving that? Is it because the bottom third of the cohort is doing really well, and the impact on those children is above and beyond what could be expected, but actually, you're not doing very well for your more able and talented; you're not pushing them on? Alternatively, maybe your capped 9 score is because your MAT children are doing incredibly well, but actually, you're not really making the progress for the middle tier of those children. It allows us to have a greater focus on the performance of our FSM children--where they really are within that system. So, it's a much more granular--. And crucially for me, it looks at the impact for every child, because every child has to matter in the system, and what we had before was a narrowing of curriculum choice and a narrowing on a certain cohort of children. Suzy Davies AM: So are the permanent measures likely to be pretty similar to what you've got now? Because the research--I don't know if the research is complete yet. When will you be publishing the new permanent evaluation? Kirsty Williams AM: Sue, you're right: they're interim measures at the moment, and we will need to make sure that the performance measures are aligned to the new curriculum. That, potentially, of course--. Because Wales's review of qualifications potentially has an impact on what those finally will look like, so that work is ongoing at the moment, and unless Steve can tell me off the top of his head when we expect that to be completed by, I will send you a note. But they're interim at the moment, because we need to align them to the new curriculum. Suzy Davies AM: I think we understand that. [Inaudible. ]--date. Steve Davies: No, no. This is not a quick fix. This is a two to three-year research base. The new qualifications for the new curriculum will not start until 2025. They have to be in place for 2022. There's a three-year roll on. I would expect the broad structure of the interim measures to continue over that time. There will be some tweaks for consistency. It's what's wrapped around those interim measures that I touched on earlier: the other evidence that we bring to bear about the effectiveness of a school, but we do want to say to schools that on the whole, broadly speaking, the interim measures will carry on for two, three years. Suzy Davies AM: Okay, and the reason I asked that is right at the beginning of this session, the Minister said to the Chair that this PS100 million that's going into school improvements will be going into things that work. We need some evidence that the interim measures are going to work as well, so when are they going to be evaluated? Steve Davies: Well, we've only just used them for one year. Suzy Davies AM: That's what I'm asking you. Steve Davies: We've signalled that they're only going to be in place for three years. We are carrying out our own review of the impact of those and that's been built in, but I expect the OECD report--because it is an extensive report--to give us feedback on how those things are working now, and some steer, as they did with the last report, as to the direction we would want to go into. Kirsty Williams AM: And what I'm also interested in is those performance management measures around schools. Yes, they're about outcomes for children, but actually are about a broader suite of behaviours within that school, so, yes, qualifications and grades are an important part of a performance measure, but actually, I have other expectations of schools, above and beyond simply qualifications. And so, we would want our permanent set of performance measures to look at a wider set of behaviours within a school, and I think because--. Exams are important--of course they are, qualifications are important--but the way in which those schools achieve those results are also important. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Would you anticipate that including well-being, then? Suzy Davies AM: In a whole-school approach. Kirsty Williams AM: I absolutely--and we need to find a way of how we can truly measure that. Sometimes, children's well-being is influenced by lots of things outside the control of a school. So, I don't want schools to be held accountable for things that they have no control over, because of the circumstances in which a child may be living. But, absolutely: well-being and how the culture of the school addresses well-being is really important to me. Lynne Neagle AM: Okay, thank you. Suzy. Move on to PISA, please. Suzy Davies AM: How useful is PISA for you in helping school improvement? I know that it's not always the thing that you enjoy watching or looking out for. But, genuinely, how useful is it? Kirsty Williams AM: It is one of a range of tools that we need to look at. Sian, quite rightly, talked about consistency. PISA is one thing where there is a level of consistency, so it will continue to be, I think, an important part of how we test how our system is doing. Suzy Davies AM: We know that you are a little bit encouraged, but we are not out of the woods yet. You mentioned this in Plenary when we talked about PISA. How confident are you that we are on track for meeting these targets that were set before your time, or do you think that having those targets is helpful? Is it setting up aspirations that are incapable of being met within a period of time? Kirsty Williams AM: Well, those long-term targets of a score around 500 are part of'Our National Mission', and we have to keep the pressure on to strive. They are testing, but we have to keep the pressure on to strive to reach them. In some cases, I can be quite encouraged. If we look at reading scores for girls, we are almost there, but that just demonstrates what a journey we've got with our boys to address. For me, one of the ways in which we will reach those targets and achieve them is further progress on our more able and talented children. Although we are now performing at an OECD average, I will be the first person to admit that, although we have seen an improvement in the higher level skills of our more able and talented children, we do not perform at an OECD average with regard to those level 6 and level 5 scores. Suzy Davies AM: Even within the UK, really, we are quite far behind. Kirsty Williams AM: Yes. So, I think that's where we really need to push on. That's one of the reasons why we have introduced a more able and talented budget to support that, and our Seren programme, which is delivering fantastic results post-16. That's why we're introducing the principles of Seren earlier into children's careers, bringing it down from year 9 upwards, to be able to drive improvements. So, I think that that's the area that we are particularly keen to work on: making sure that more of our children perform at the OECD average at level 5 and level 6. Clearly, we've got more work to do on reading. We are working with southern Ireland, who have consistently done well with reading scores, to look to see what lessons we can learn to press on with there with reading. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. My final question on this. You recognise it as a priority, particularly for boys. Does that mean that the focus will then drift slightly from maths, where there has been some success; and drift from science, where the encouragement of more people to take GCSE science has reduced the number of high-level passes? Kirsty Williams AM: First, we have to have a system that is capable of doing all of those of things at the same time. We can't accept a system that says,'Well, we can do a bit over here, but that means we have to--.'We have to have a system, Suzy, that can drive improvements at all levels. That's my expectation. Suzy Davies AM: The balloon needs to be bigger not just squeezing it at one end. Kirsty Williams AM: Absolutely, yes. That's my expectation of this system. You have to deliver across all of these. We have seen some progress. As I've said, it's far from perfect, and we've got more work to do, but we have to deliver across all three domains, as we did last time. And I'm not going to make any apologies for changing the performance indicators around science. It was a travesty that there were children who never had the opportunity to sit a science GCSE. We don't have to make assumptions about the nature of many, many, many of those children. We have seen a significant increase in the number of children who are having the opportunity to sit GCSE science and who are passing GCSE science. So, I'm not going to make any apologies about that. One of the reasons that I suspect we have ended up with poor science scores is because of the previous policy around science entries and science qualifications. Again, one of the reasons that we have changed it isn't just solely because we need to do better in PISA, but I think that by changing it, we will see an impact on PISA. Suzy Davies AM: Okay. Thank you for that. Lynne Neagle AM: The final set of questions is from Sian Gwenllian. Sian Gwenllian AM: I just want to discuss an issue that I know is important to you, namely closing the attainment gap between pupils who are eligible for free school meals and those who are not eligible for free school meals. Unfortunately, the problem persists, doesn't it? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes. We are not where we need to be in terms of the performance, not only of our children on free school meals, but the performance of our looked-after children, and the performance of some children from some ethnic minority groups. So, we will continue to look to support those learners in a variety of ways, again looking to amend our practice on the basis of evidence that is given to us from our experts who are there to advise us. There is clearly more that we need to do. There has been some progress in some areas, but it is not where I would want it to be. Sian Gwenllian AM: But, this is despite the fact that there is PS475 million that has been invested in the pupil development grant, for this exact purpose of closing the attainment gap. But, the problem persists, and in some places, it's deteriorating. Kirsty Williams AM: Well, I think that, as I said, I am not shying away from any assumption or declaration that we need to do better. But, I do think that we need to acknowledge where progress has been made. If we go back to look at what PISA has said about our performance, the PISA results show that pupils in Wales are relatively more able to overcome the disadvantage of their background than is the average in OECD countries. So, our children are doing better in that, and that gives me encouragement. That's not me saying that; that's there. If we look at pupils who are eligible for free school meals, they do score below their better-off counterparts in PISA by some 34 points. The gap in England is 40 points. So, again, that gap is smaller here in Wales. If we look at basic levels of qualifications, back in--. It's difficult to make comparisons because of all the reasons we have talked about, but if we look back to 2006 and we look at the very basic level of qualifications, which is a level 1 qualification, we have seen a jump from 9. 4 per cent of children in 2006 achieving a level 1 qualification to over 18 per cent. So, there is progress. There is evidence that the resources that we are spending are making a difference. But, clearly, we are not where we would want to be. That's why we will continue to focus those resources on those children, where we need it. But, we need to do that earlier. Sticking plasters in years 10 and 11 aren't going to cut it. We need to get this right for those children, the moment that they come into a nursery and the moment that they start their formal education at the age of 5. That's how we are going to make the difference. Providing catch-up, of course, we need to do for those kids; we can't throw those year 10s and year 11s to the wind. We have to support those children. But, we will see real improvement when we get in there earlier. Sian Gwenllian AM: But I'm sure that that is a disappointment to you, because it has been a personal priority for you as well. In terms of minority ethnic learners, while there are some groups within that category who are achieving, there is underachievement happening here as well, isn't there? It's not consistent across the minority ethnic group. Is that something that you will be focusing upon? Kirsty Williams AM: Yes, and that's why we have committed to maintaining a ring-fenced grant to local authorities of some PS10 million, to support education of our minority ethnic children. But, again, you are right, you are absolutely right, Sian. We need a much more sophisticated conversation about what is really going on in attainment across minority ethnic groups so that we can best target that resource and have a conversation about what the differences are. You are absolutely correct: there is a real mixed picture. If we look at black Welsh girls entitled to free school meals, they perform almost at the national average for all children--not FSM children; the national average for all children. Black Welsh boys don't, but neither do white Welsh boys. So, there is a really complex picture here, and I really welcome a debate about acknowledging the various levels of performance of BAME children, and where the gaps in performance lie. You are quite right: it is a complex picture in the system. I'm committed to continuing to support educational opportunities, and that's why have ring-fenced the minority ethnic achievement grant. There are some interesting data there. Some children are doing very, very well; others, we need to concentrate on. Lynne Neagle AM: Sian, this will need to be the last question, I'm afraid. Sian Gwenllian AM: Sorry? Lynne Neagle AM: This is going to have to be the last question. Sian Gwenllian AM: The last question. Lynne Neagle AM: Yes. Sian Gwenllian AM: Fine. In terms of looked-after children, which is one of the groups where attainment isn't where we would like it to be, there was some improvement in 2016 at key stage 4, but it has been disappointing. Do we know what's been happening in 2019? Kirsty Williams AM: The 2019 data will be published next month, and there has been significant activity. You are right: in recent years, the data have been poor and not where we would want it to be. That's why we have had a reformed approach to PDG LAC; the employment of PDG LAC co-ordinators across the regions. We've identified new resource in the new financial year to test new approaches, so, for instance, virtual school approaches, where we know, in other systems, that has worked. But, we expect the next set of data around the performance of this particular group of learners in March. Sian Gwenllian AM: Okay, and you hope to see progress. Kirsty Williams AM: I don't want to speculate, but I hope so. Sian Gwenllian AM: Thank you. Lynne Neagle AM: Thank you very much. We have come to the end of our time, so can I thank you, Minister, and your official for attending this morning? We have had a wide-ranging and very detailed discussion that will be very useful for the committee. As usual, you will be sent a transcript following the meeting to check for accuracy, but thank you again, both of you, for your attendance this morning. Diolch yn fawr. Okay. Item 3 is papers to note. Paper to note 1 is a letter from ERW providing additional information following the evidence session on 16 January. Paper to note 2 is a letter from Central South Consortium, similarly providing additional information following the evidence session. Paper to note 3 is a letter from the Noah's Ark Children's Hospital for Wales regarding children's rights in Wales, following up on some additional information there. Paper to note 4 is a letter from Qualifications Wales, providing additional information following the annual report scrutiny session in January. Item 4, then. Can I propose, in accordance with Standing Order 17. 42, that the committee resolves to meet in private for the remainder of the meeting? Are Members content? Thank you.

Basically, the Children, Young People and Education Committee's meeting was about the inquiry on school improvement and raising standards. In this meeting, the Minister for Education, Kirsty and Director of Education, Steve answered many specific questions and expressed their opinions about the current situations. Altogether, they had talked about the school categorization system which has been used right now, the curriculum reform, changes and challenges. Also, they spent lots of time discussing regional consortia services that the way it worked and how they could be improved. Although now they failed to persuade the government to adopt the new model, they were optimistic about the future application.

tr-sq-1245

tr-sq-1245_0

Summarize the debates on the governmental issue of allocating the fund and dealing with the systematic racism. The Chair (Hon. Anthony Rota (NipissingTimiskaming, Lib.) ): I call this meeting to order. Welcome to the 23rd meeting of the House of Commons Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic. A reminder to all members that in order to avoid issues with sound, members participating in person should not also be connected to the video conference. For those of you who are joining via video conference, I will remind you that when speaking you should be on the same channel as the language you are speaking, and please use your headsets. As usual, please direct your remarks through the chair. As I understand, there are no ministerial announcements today. We will now proceed to presenting petitions. I remind members that any petition presented during a meeting of this special committee must have already been certified by the clerk of petitions. For members participating in person, I ask that they please come and drop their signed certificates off at the table once the petition is presented. I would ask members to be very brief and concise, and to summarize the exact content of the petition. We will continue. The first person presenting a petition today is Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May (SaanichGulf Islands, GP): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I present two petitions this morning. The residents of SaanichGulf Islands are calling on the government to simplify the process for protection of marine protected areas. It's a multi-layered communication process. The marine protected area first proposed in the 1970s for the southern Strait of Georgia, now called the Salish Sea, has been awaiting designation for so long that it was originally endorsed by Jacques Cousteau. That gives us a sense for why petitioners are calling for a simplified and more rapid process. The second petition is from petitioners who are very concerned about our obligations under the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and our commitments under the Truth and Reconciliation Commission calls to action. They specifically reference the RCMP violation of UNDRIP in its actions on Wet'suwet'en territory and ask the government to commit to actually living the principles embodied in UNDRIP. The Chair: We will now go to Mr. Hardie. Mr. Ken Hardie (FleetwoodPort Kells, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am presenting a petition on behalf of the one in a million Canadians who suffer severe and adverse effects from vaccinations. GuillainBarre syndrome is very debilitating, and this petition seeks the setting up of a no-fault accident or compensation system to help offset the loss of work, the loss of wages and the loss of quality of life that many of these people suffer. I'm pleased to present this petition pursuant to Standing Order 36. The Chair: Mr. Trudel, you have the floor. Mr. Denis Trudel (LongueuilSaint-Hubert, BQ): Mr. Chair, culture is the soul of a people. Over the past 20years or so, culture, especially music, has never been as accessible as it is now. Paradoxically, creators'incomes have never been so low. The advent of digital technology has completely overturned the system for distributing the wealth generated by creators for the benefit of various Web stakeholders, many of whom are billionaires. This petition addresses these problems and proposes realistic solutions. The first is to set a minimum royalty model for streaming platforms for artists. The second is to update the existing private copying system. The third is for Internet and cell phone providers who sell their services as direct access to culture to share their profits with artists. The fourth is that the GAFAMs have to pay taxes on their services. Six thousand people have already signed the first version of this petition, launched last month by musician JordanOfficer and supported by singer BarbaraSecours. As an artist, I am proud to present this petition today because the issues it raises are fundamental to the survival of Quebec culture. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood ParkFort Saskatchewan, CPC): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I have four petitions to present today. I will be as brief as you suggested, although I will observe that if some members are going on longer during petitions than they normally do, it might be because the government has taken away so many of the tools that opposition members normally have for raising important issues in the House. The first petition deals with the issue of euthanasia and long-term care. The petitioners are concerned that instead of focusing on improving medically assisted life, something that we know is a major issue in light of recent revelations, the government has put so much time and legislative energy into efforts to continually further expand euthanasia in Canada and remove vital safeguards. The second petition speaks to the ongoing conversations happening in Canada around systemic discrimination and systemic racism. I think we do need to reflect on systemic discrimination. This petition deals specifically with Bill 21 in Quebec and raises concerns. The reality of the way that bill applies is that people from certain backgrounds who wish to practise their faith are not able to fully participate in Canadian society if they are employed in the public service. This petition asks the government to provide a response on that issue, something it hasn't done in response to past petitions on this. The third petition deals with the issue of firearms. The petitioners want to see the government take a strong response in dealing with illegal guns and gun smuggling. The petition notes that the vast majority of firearms-related crimes in Canada involves illegal guns. At the same time, the petitioners are concerned that the government has the wrong focusthat is, harassing law-abiding firearms ownerswithout putting in place substantial measures to deal with illegal guns. The petitioners want to see the reversal of the order in council from May 1 and strong measures to deal with illegal firearms. The fourth and final petition deals with Bill S-204, a bill that would make it a criminal offence for a Canadian to go abroad and receive an organ from a person who has not consented to giving that organ. It would also create a mechanism by which someone could be deemed inadmissible to Canada if they were involved in organ harvesting and trafficking. The petitioners are supportive of Bill S-204 and of similar bills in previous parliaments and would like to see us pass that bill as soon as possible. The Chair: Presenting petitions, Mr. Lamoureux. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Winnipeg North, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. It is with pleasure that I table another petition by the residents of Winnipeg North. These residents have signed a petition asking the Government of Canada, and in fact all members of Parliament, to put a high priority on assisting our poorest seniors. The increases to the GIS by $200, and $300 to the OAS, have been well received. They just want to highlight how important it is to support our seniors, in particular the poorest of our seniors. The Chair: For members present in the Chamber, a reminder that they are asked to bring their petitions to the table. We'll now proceed to statements by members. We'll go to Ms. Atwin for the first one. Mrs. Jenica Atwin (Fredericton, GP): Thank you, Mr. Chair. June 21 is National Indigenous Peoples Day, a day of acknowledgement and a day of celebration of the beautiful diversity of indigenous peoples across Turtle Island. I wish to recognize the leadership of Chief Shelley Sabattis of the Welamukotuk First Nation in Oromocto, New Brunswick. Each year she and her council, volunteers and staff go above and beyond to show appreciation for their members and to demonstrate pride and culture while promoting well-being. We gather in an event where all are welcome to take part, from traditional hand drum-making with elders to moose meat and tacos. This year we will celebrate a bit differently, but we will still stay connected, virtually and in spirit, to the vast network of indigenous peoples and allies. We need each other now more than ever. May we come together in song and stories and in solidarity. We will remember those who are not among us. I hope all of Canada will join us in observing National Indigenous Peoples Day. Mawiyapasuwok: let us come together. Nit liech. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Beech. Mr. Terry Beech (Burnaby NorthSeymour, Lib.): Mr. Chair, COVID-19 is an unprecedented challenge for all communities across Canada, but as we do our part to flatten the curve, I often think about those who suit up every morning to serve on the front lines of our health care system. My mother is a home care worker and my sister is a nurse. Even before the crisis, they would often share the hardships they faced on a day-to-day basis. It's a tough job at the best of times. In a pandemic, these jobs are life-threatening. I think we can all agree that these workers deserve more than our good wishes. They deserve a raise. That is why we have worked with the provinces to implement pandemic pay. In British Columbia more than 250,000 front-line workers are eligible for this program. That works out to a pay increase of about $4 an hour. It's a small show of our appreciation for their difficult and priceless contribution to our country. Share this message and say thanks to our front-line workers, participate in the 7 p. m. cheer, and order a pizza for your local nurses. It's the least we can do. The Chair: We'll now go on to Mr. Shipley. Mr. Doug Shipley (BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. We've been living in difficult times. Slowly, we are getting back to some resemblance of normalcy, although unfortunately not soon enough for some of our great summer festivals. It will not be normal in BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte this summer without the iconic Boots and Hearts weekend music festival, Kempenfest, Oro World's Fair, the Elmvale Fall Fair, or the Midhurst Autumnfest. Canada Day celebrations have been cancelled, but we can still celebrate the great nation we call home. Because of the lack of Canada Day celebrations, I've created Happy Canada Day lawn signs that are available through my constituency office, free to all residents of BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte. I'm also hosting a drive-through party on Canada Day at the Royal Canadian Legion on St. Vincent Street in Barrie. All are welcome to attend. There will be cupcakes for all. Please drop by the legion between 11 a. m. and 2 p. m. , and we can celebrate Canada Day safely together. Thank you and have a great summer. The Chair: Now we'll go on to Ms. Young. Ms. Kate Young (London West, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Among the countless ordinary Canadians who have stepped up to do extraordinary work during COVID-19, I wish to draw attention to our teachers. Teachers have always had a special place in my heart. My father was a teacher, and my daughter-in-law, Kelly Webb, is one now. I'm certain that my colleagues can all easily remember a teacher in their past who played an important role in helping them achieve their potential. I remember my grade 12 English teacher, Vince Weaver, at Westminster Secondary School in London. He made me realize that I could do so much more than I believed. Across the country, as schools closed, teachers did not stop their work. Some took their classes online. Others found innovative ways to continue engaging with their students. This is not the school year anyone imagined, and what the next one will look like is unclear, but our teachers in London West and across Canada have shown that no matter what, they will be there to help our next generation shine. The Chair: Before proceeding to the next presenter, I just want to remind the honourable members in the chamber that I realize that the six-foot limit makes it harder to whisper to each other, but we're hearing a bit of rumble, so I just want you to try to whisper at your best. Mr. Bergeron, you have the floor. Mr. Stphane Bergeron (Montarville, BQ): Mr. Chair, on July1st, we will be celebrating one of the most important events for the riding of Montarville: the 175thanniversary of the city of Saint-Bruno-de-Montarville. The theme Proud of our traditions will be the focus of this celebration for the people of Montarville. This is a good illustration of the rich history of this municipality nestled in the western foothills of Mont-Saint-Bruno. The seigneury of Montarville was granted in1710 to the illustrious former governor of Trois-Rivires, PierreBoucher. The parish of Saint-Bruno, which took root there and in which a village grew, became a municipal corporation in1845. To this day, it is one of the most prosperous localities, with a strong sense of belonging, a very dynamic community life and jealously preserved natural environments. A whole program had been drawn up for the celebration, but the current health crisis has taken over some of the planned activities, which has in no way diminished the pride and festive spirit of the people of Montarville. On July1st, we will have a good reason to be proud, in spite of everything. Happy 175thanniversary to Saint-Bruno-de-Montarville. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Maloney. Mr. James Maloney (EtobicokeLakeshore, Lib.): Mr. Chair, thank you for allowing me to take a moment to highlight an initiative that I started early on during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Heroes of EtobicokeLakeshore is an opportunity for citizens in my riding to recognize the contributions of those in their community who make life a bit easier. I'm pleased with the number of nominations I received that honour everyone from front-line workers to businesses that are innovating in these difficult times to volunteers who are finding new ways to reach out. I think of Daniel Lauzon who set up Food for Now, a mobile service that helps take care of the homeless. I think of Toni Varone, who helped his business clients by forgiving their rents, or young Lucas, who wanted to thank his teachers. I've been moved and inspired by the countless stories of generosity, strength, resiliency, kindness, incredible character and creativity. I want to thank all the heroes, as well as the people who nominated them. Keep them coming. Stay safe, everyone, and I wish you happy Canada Day early. The Chair: We'll now move on to Ms. Wong. Hon. Alice Wong (Richmond Centre, CPC): Mr. Chair, it gives me great pleasure to thank a local Richmond-based charity, the Social Diversity for Children Foundation, SDC, for its hard work both in raising funds for the purchase of personal protective equipment and in distributing this PPE to long-term care facilities and individual seniors'homes in the lower mainland of B. C. The COVID-19 relief fund is supported by a dozen other non-profits, businesses and community groups. Over the past two months, SDC has been to 32 seniors homes and senior-related organizations. In total, it has delivered masks to 7,000 care workers, staff and seniors. It is amazing to have witnessed how the younger generation have gotten involved in caring for the elderly at this very challenging time. The Chair: We'll now go to Ms. Damoff. Ms. Pam Damoff (Oakville NorthBurlington, Lib.): Mr. Chair, June is ALS Awareness Month, and 79 years after Lou Gehrig died from ALS little has changed. There's still no cure, and those with ALS typically die within five years of diagnosis. On June 21, Canadians will gather virtually to raise funds for ALS Canada in the Walk to End ALS. In Halton, normally we meet each year at Bronte Creek Provincial Park on the May long weekend to raise funds for ALS Canada. This year I will virtually join Tim's Titans, a team formed to honour Tim Robertson, my friend who died in 2016 after living with ALS for 13 years. I have a T-shirt, with a picture of Lou Gehrig, that says, Great Player. . . Lousy Disease and Tim's Titans. . . Great Team! ALS. . . Still a Lousy Disease. Join me on June 21 for the virtual Walk to End ALS to raise funds to support patients and their families and for ALS research. The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Khera. Ms. Kamal Khera (Brampton West, Lib.): Mr. Chair, on Saturday our community stood and marched in solidarity against anti-black racism. The peaceful protests that we're seeing across the country and around the world were not triggered by an isolated incident. They are fuelled by decades of ineffective action against something that is so insidious and deeply entrenched in our history, systems and institutions. For us, that is the racial inequality faced by Canada's indigenous and black communities. Anti-black racism is real. It exists right here in Canada, in our communities, including in Brampton. It exists when racialized students at McCrimmon Middle School are called McCriminals. It exists when a shocking report exposes the Peel District School Board's failure to work fairly with the black community. It exists when D'Andre Campbell, who was fighting mental illness, loses his life at the hands of the police. It is clear that we need reform. We need to dismantle the systems that allow this privilege and oppression to take form, and address the unconscious bias plaguing our institutions. We'll need to be bold, and the time to do that is now. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd (Sturgeon RiverParkland, CPC): Mr. Chair, a few months ago I rose in the House on the eve of our closure due to COVID-19. I told Canadians we must not give in to fear, that we would carry on and get through this crisis stronger than ever. Today, in this city and across Canada, Canadians are enjoying a beer on their favourite patios. Businesses are reopening, jobs are returning and our lives are starting to feel a bit normal again. Canadians pulled together, and because of that we did not see the devastating death toll that many had predicted. Life may be returning to normal, but unfortunately, here in this chamber of democracy, the people's voices continue to be shut down. There is no good reason for Parliament to be suspended today. In the words of my grandfather, it's time for the Liberals to get with the program and bring back the House. The Chair: We will now proceed with Ms. Jones. Ms. Yvonne Jones (Labrador, Lib.): Mr. Chair, from in-person learning to virtual classrooms, COVID-19 has drastically changed the lives of students across the country, especially those in post-secondary education who are worried about covering costs like tuition or rent this coming fall. Our government recognized that students should not have to worry or put their futures on pause during this difficult time. That's why last month the federal government introduced the Canada emergency student benefit. If you're a high school student headed to a post-secondary school, or a current post-secondary student or a recent graduate, you can receive the Canada emergency student benefit every four weeks and have the financial support that you need to save for school. We also doubled Canada student grants and loans, enhanced the student loan program, increased supports for indigenous post-secondary education and introduced the Canada student service grant for those who wish to pursue it. Our government is here to help all students get the support they need to pursue their future goals successfully. I wish them all the very best, and I wish all of you, my colleagues and those across Canada, a very happy National Indigenous Peoples Day, which is coming up on June 21. The Chair: I want to remind the honourable members to keep to their 60 seconds so that we don't go over the time. I'm sure it would be a lot easier for everyone if we stuck to that limit. We will now go to Mr. Aitchison. Mr. Scott Aitchison (Parry SoundMuskoka, CPC): Mr. Chair, I rise today to once again implore the government to do something about the horrible lack of access to and crazy cost of rural Internet service. Right now, too many areas of my riding have no access to rural Internet service at all, and those who can get service are paying through the nose. I've even heard constituents say that during this pandemic, they are having to choose between feeding their kids and educating them. Over the last few weeks, Conservatives have been consulting with rural Canadians, and the results are in. My constituents are tired of fancy political promises. They are frustrated beyond belief by the new challenges created by this pandemic. They are absolutely fed up with having their pleas ignored. All we want is affordable and reliable Internet service. Is that too much to ask of the government? The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. MacGregor. Mr. Alistair MacGregor (CowichanMalahatLangford, NDP): Mr. Chair, these last few months have been incredibly challenging for the residents of CowichanMalahatLangford, who have been forced to deal with the economic and social consequences of COVID-19. The pandemic has laid bare the inadequacies of our social safety net, the weakness in our supply chains and the dependence of our society on essential workers, who often work long hours for low wages, putting themselves and their families at risk. We've also been forced to confront the systemic inequality, poverty and racism that continue to hold so many people back from achieving their full potential. I will not dishonour the sacrifice that so many have made during this time by allowing us to go back to the status quo that got us here in the first place. I will not apologize for demanding that the most vulnerable in our society get the supports and opportunities they need to live with dignity, and I will not relent from pushing my political colleagues to summon the courage necessary to implement policies that lead to environmental, economic and social justice. The Chair: I now give the floor to Mr. Blaney. Hon. Steven Blaney (BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, CPC): Mr. Chair, here is a beautiful story, the story of a woman from Bellechasse, a courageous young mother from Saint-Malachie, Marie-ChristineGoupil. With three children, including the eldest daughter with a disability, and realizing that her daughter with a disability had special clothing needs, she decided to go into business to meet the needs of other parents who, like her, were facing their child's clothing challenges. Last week, she presented her Handy clothing collection on the show Dans l'il du dragon. It was a very emotional moment for the audience and the dragons. They were so touched that they decided to give her the amount she wanted without diluting her shares. The video of her presentation has already been viewed over 1million times on social networks. Marie-ChristineGoupil has discovered a passion for entrepreneurship and has moved and inspired many people with her passionate and courageous attitude. Congratulations, Ms. Goupil, your example makes us proud. The Chair: Mr. Blanchet, you have the floor. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet (BeloeilChambly, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I lend my voice to the Chief of the Assembly of First Nations of Quebec-Labrador, GhislainPicard, whose message is as follows: There have been no fewer than 14reports and conclusions of commissions of inquiry since1967 highlighting major problems in relations between law enforcement agencies and indigenous people. Each time, the conclusions have been overwhelming and highlight a disturbing reality. The justice system has failed indigenous people. Are you going to respond, as you too often do, by moving on to the next one, or are you going to do what we expect you to do, which is to recognize that the justice system discriminates against indigenous people and that we have no less right to security than the rest of the population? In three months, police interventions have claimed more victims among our members than the pandemic. But it is not enough to simply take a knee and denounce racism. It's about standing up and taking action. Those are the words of GhislainPicard. The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Harder. Ms. Rachael Harder (Lethbridge, CPC): Over the last few months, Canada's democracy has been disregarded and an autocracy has been resurrected in its place. By refusing to hold regular parliamentary sittings, Mr. Trudeau is sending a strong message to the Canadian public that he alone is the one who matters. In 2014, he professed that Canadians want their Members of Parliament to be effective voices for their communities in Ottawa, and not merely mouthpieces for an all-too-powerful Prime Minister. As it stands, however, he has shut down Parliament. Effectively, he has stripped us, the opposition, of our privileges and our powers. Sadly, Mr. Trudeau has become the all-too-powerful Prime Minister that he once warned against. A government that does not allow for effective opposition is not functioning in the best interest of Canadians; it is operating in the best interest of itself and, even more so, the interest of the Prime Minister. Canadians deserve to flourish in a democracy, not merely survive under the autocracy that this Prime Minister has created. The Chair: We'll now go on to Ms. Zahid. Mrs. Salma Zahid (Scarborough Centre, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I would like to recognize the work of Agincourt Community Services Association and its tireless executive director, Lee Soda, who have been serving our community during the COVID-19 pandemic. Under more pressure than ever, their staff and volunteers continue to serve a community whose need was great even before the crisis. Their food bank helps over 4,000 people weekly. They have opened outdoor washrooms and hand-washing stations for vulnerable communities and are delivering groceries and other essentials to vulnerable seniors. ACSA is a bridge between those who can help and those who need help, and they are just one example of how our community has come together to meet this challenge. There are restaurants and businesses donating meals to front-line workers, residents answering the call to stock the food bank shelves and neighbours looking in on the vulnerable and isolated. I am so proud of our community's spirit. Scarborough is strong. The Chair: We'll now proceed to the questioning of ministers. Please note that we will suspend the proceedings twice in order to allow employees who provide support for the sitting to replace each other safely. The first question goes to the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Chair, for months Conservatives have been pointing out flaws in Liberal government programs that are preventing Canadians from getting the help they need. The Prime Minister has refused to make these very technical changes to get more help to Canadians who need it. For example, on the wage subsidy, more than two-thirds of the money allocated for that program has lapsed because businesses don't qualify. I have a simple question. Will the Prime Minister change the program to allow companies who have made acquisitions to access the wage subsidy to keep more people working? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Papineau, Lib.): Mr. Chair, from the very beginning we knew that as we rolled out measures, we would need to improve them and tweak them, and that's exactly what we've been doing over the past three months. We needed to make measures happen quickly for Canadians, and we did that. But we continued to improve them, to make additions and amendments so that more people could get the help they needed, including with the proposed legislation last week that expanded the reach of the wage subsidy to more businesses. Unfortunately, the Conservatives didn't even want us to debate that particular piece of legislation. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Actually, Mr. Chair, it was the Liberals who said no to the motion to allow this Parliament to sit to debate that motion, and even in that legislation they refused to allow businesses who have made acquisitions to access the program. Now, when we look at the rent relief program, it is so difficult to apply for it that many landlords are refusing to bother, leaving even more small businesses to fall through the cracks. In fact, of the $3 billion allocated to the rent relief program, only $39 million has been paid out. That's less than 2%. Now, the Prime Minister is still using talking points from April. It's now June and he has refused to fix these programs and has successfully talked out the calendar on the days that the House of Commons could meet to discuss these programs. When will he make these changes to get more help to Canadians who need it? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, throughout this pandemic, we have constantly been updating and expanding our various programs. We recognize, in conversations with the premiers, how important it is to make sure that we're working together, the provinces and the federal government, on issues like rent subsidies where commercial rent is indeed a provincial jurisdiction. Many provinces have moved forward with the eviction bans that are necessary to go along with this, and we'll continue to work with provinces to make sure that we're getting Canadians the help they need. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Mr. Chair, Canadians cannot wait. He has run down the clock on parliamentary sittings and he still refuses to make these changes to get more help to Canadians. Today, we learned that Telus has installed Huawei technology in downtown Ottawa. There are over 80 sites across the national capital region with Huawei technology installed. Some of these sites are very near sensitive government institutions, like government departments, the National Research Council, RCMP headquarters and the Bank of Canada. How long has the Prime Minister known that Huawei technology has been installed in the Ottawa area? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, first off, on the issue of Parliament, it has been meeting four times a week over the past many weeks, and members of the opposition have been able to continue to ask questions on COVID-19 and a broad range of subjects. Moreover, every two weeks the finance department puts forward at the finance committee the full transparent measures that we've taken, so that parliamentarians can study them. We are continuing to work in this crisis. At the same time Mr. Ziad Aboultaif (Edmonton Manning, CPC): Answer the question. The Chair: I'm sorry? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: in regard to Huawei technology there are strict rules for companies to follow and we assume they will all follow those. The Chair: We'll pause for a second and stop the clock. I want to remind the honourable members who are joining us virtually that heckling really does disrupt the whole session. Your face does come up and we do see who it is, so I just want to make sure that you're aware of that. Now we'll go back to Mr. Scheer. We have a minute and 10 seconds left. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister is bragging about accountability and transparency. Will he table an economic update before the House rises? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, throughout this unprecedented pandemic, we have been open and transparent about all of the measures we've put forward. We've updated the finance committee The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer: That's a long way of saying no, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister has pursued a policy of appeasement in pursuit of a personal vanity product at the UN. In the process, he's cozied up to dictators and human rights violators. He's abandoned Israel and committed funding to UNRWA, an organization whose schools have been used as storage facilities for Hamas rockets against Israeli civilians, and whose facilities have served as breeding grounds for racism and anti-Semitism. He has apologized for the Iranian regime when it shot down a plane full of Canadian citizens, and he refuses to list the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist entity. What's the point of having a seat at the table if you have to sell out Canadian principles to get there? The Chair: The Right Honourable Prime Minister. Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, we see that the Conservatives have kept with the Harper approach to international diplomacy. The failed presence of Canada on the world stage was an embarrassment for many Canadians for many years. That's why, when we took office five years ago, we demonstrated the kind of leadership on values that Canadians expected. We will continue to work around the world to defend multilateralism. The Chair: We have a point of order. Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May: This being a committee, we can have a point of order during what would have been question period. I am not sitting that far away from the Prime Minister, and I'm sorry, but Andrew Scheer used to be the Speaker of the House and should show better decorum. The Chair: We have a point of order from Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, on the same point of order, it is disgusting for the leader of the Green Party to use decorum as an excuse to interrupt the Leader of the Opposition in the middle of critical lines of questioning. The leader of the Green Party knows the rules of the House and shouldn't be abusing them to advance a partisan agenda. The Chair: We're getting into debate. I do want to point out that the time had run out. We're now moving on to the next line of questions. On a point of order, Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer: I appreciate the honourable leader of the Green Party, Elizabeth May, for that reminder. When I was Speaker I always appreciated her help and advice about how to improve decorum in here. I just want to say to the member, and to all members, that the reason that I cannot control myself is that the Prime Minister used the word embarrassment in answering a foreign affairs question, and it just made me think of the India trip. The Chair: I believe we're getting into debate and arguments. Mr. Blanchet, you have the floor. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: Mr. Chair, while the Greens and the Conservatives are saying that they'll be waiting outside after the meeting, I will ask a question. The Prime Minister has extended the Canada emergency response benefit, and that's good news, but it's not enough. Last week in the House, the government said it was urgent to fight fraud. For us, it was also urgent to adjust the CERB to the needs of the tourism, arts and agriculture sectors. Farmers are going to be seriously under-resourced. So what happened to the urgency of reforming the CERB? Why is the government refusing to talk to the opposition parties? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, I am very pleased to hear the hon. member finally align himself with the positions of the Liberal Party. Unfortunately, the Bloc is a week late. It should have let us debate these concerns in the House last week. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: It seems to me that the word alignment here is a fantasy. We have unequivocally proposed to extend the debate to reach an agreement, which brings me to my second question. Last week, the issue of assistance to people with disabilities was also a pressing concern, and it's even more so a week later. The Bloc proposed to extend the discussions and split the government's bill in two to help people with disabilities. Why is the government refusing this assistance to people with disabilities, when it could have been debated with the opposition in a civilized and proper way in a Parliament in which it has a minority? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: That was exactly what we wanted, but unanimous consent of the Chamber was required to debate this matter, and the Conservative Party of Canada voted against it. Unfortunately, we are going to have to find a different way to help people with disabilities. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: If the idea is so good and wonderful, why not start over and open the dialogue now? What's stopping the Prime Minister from being a rallying point and inviting us to take to each other and resolve the problem, rather than saying that he is going to pack up his toys and go home? The people with disabilities are the ones who will pay the price. Where was the Prime Minister on October21,2019? He received a minority mandate from Quebeckers and Canadians. Why is he behaving like something between a prime minister with a majority and a monarch by divine right? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: I've heard the Conservative Party and the Bloc Qubcois throw their accusations around. They don't point out that the House of Commons did indeed give its consent to extend the mandate of the Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic until the end of June. Three parties agreed, which was the right thing to do in the context of this minority government. We've been working with the other parties. However, as they did not get the results they wanted, they complained. Unfortunately, they too are part of a minority Parliament and must respect the voice of the majority of parliamentarians, just as we do. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: I might have been tempted, but that's unlikely to happen because the Prime Minister isn't me, he's him. It's therefore up to him to bring people together, open a dialogue and recall Parliament. All we were asking for was the opportunity to talk for an hour or two. However, suddenly he doesn't want to play anymore. It's not working anymore, and there's something a bit strange about that. In addition, the government wants to buy the right to interfere in provincial and Quebec jurisdictions for $14billion. However, Quebec and a number of provinces are refusing to allow it to interfere in their jurisdictions and are asking that this money be paid to them unconditionally. Is the Prime Minister trying to take advantage of the crisis or is he trying to create a constitutional crisis? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, the safety of Canadians is the responsibility of all levels of government. That's why we have proposed a $14billion agreement to ensure that all Canadians across the country experience a safe re-opening of the economy. This is a proposal that we are working on with the provinces because we know that there are needs across the country, including early childhood centres, screening and support for municipalities. The federal government wants to be there to help the provinces. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh (Burnaby South, NDP): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Indigenous leaders have expressed a lack of confidence in the RCMP commissioner's ability to tackle full-scale systemic racism, but the Prime Minister has expressed his confidence in the commissioner. What's that based on? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, over the past two years, Commissioner Lucki has made significant strides forward on an issue where there is still much more to do. We know that systemic racism exists in all of our institutions across this country The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: This is the same RCMP commissioner who just recently said that they couldn't explain what systemic racism was. Now the Prime Minister says that he has confidence, when indigenous leaders express their lack of confidence. Why does the Prime Minister believe that the RCMP commissioner can tackle systemic racism in the RCMP? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, systemic racism is something that touches every corner of our country, every corner of our institutions. It requires people to understand and move forward in coordinated ways with partners. The commissioner is committed to doing that, alongside members of our government. We will do that together and work with indigenous communities and black The Chair: Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, recent events have made it abundantly clear that to tackle the systemic racism at the level of the RCMP, we need a full-scale overhaul of the RCMP. Is the Prime Minister committed to a full-scale overhaul of the RCMP to root out systemic racism? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: As I've said many times, Mr. Chair, I am committed to addressing systemic racism in this country and taking significant, bold actions to reduce the amount of discrimination that indigenous peoples, that racialized Canadians face on a daily basis. We have much work to do, but we will do it together. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, Black Lives Matter has been calling for governments to defund the police. What it's saying is that we need to be better at where we spend our money, investing in communities and not policing. Will the Prime Minister commit to a review of the RCMP budget to allocate resources to community services and not to policing? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, over the past years we have been investing more directly and more money in community organizations, in the black community, and working with indigenous partners on the path to reconciliation. We have been investing in the kinds of community-based programs and solutions that are part of the solution. We know there is much more to do, and we will continue to look at all of our expenditures to make sure we're doing the right things. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, over the past few years, while the Prime Minister has been in office, the RCMP budget has increased by 31%. More money is going towards policing. In recent events we've seen people who needed a health care response to a health care crisis been killed by the RCMP. Does the Prime Minister believe that we need to be investing in a health care response instead of a police response for people who are faced with a crisis? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, the member opposite well knows that it's not an either-or. We need to make sure that our systems across the board, from our police systems to our judicial systems, to our health care systems, to our community systems, are actually addressing the systemic discrimination issues that are embedded within them That is exactly what we are going to continue to do in the coming years. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, with regard to the CERB extension, can the Prime Minister guarantee that everyone who is receiving CERB payments now will continue to do so without any gaps throughout the summer? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, I am happy to highlight that many Canadians who were on the CERB are now returning to work. Many more who are on the CERB now will be returning to work in the coming weeks. We know that as the economy gets back to work, people will want to The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Can the Prime Minister assure people who need it that they will continue to receive the CERB over the summer, yes or no? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: We are very pleased to point out that we are going to extend the Canada emergency response benefit for at least another eight weeks, because a lot of people are going to need it. Even if they want to work, there aren't enough jobs for everyone. So we'll be there for them, as we have been from the beginning. The Chair: We're going to pause and suspend proceedings just for a few moments to allow our support staff to substitute for one another in a healthy and safe way. We'll now proceed with Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod (KamloopsThompsonCariboo, CPC): Mr. Chair, it was really a surprise in the middle of a pandemic to see the Prime Minister at his first campaign stop last week in Ottawa. Certainly the game plan has become very transparent. He has a daily report show and he wants to sideline Parliament, dominate the news cycle and keep everyone in the dark about the state of the economy. According to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, there is no reason that he cannot provide the fiscal update during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the PBO has published a number of reports himself. Why won't the Prime Minister provide a fiscal update so we can all understand the state of our economy, or is that just not part of his campaign playbook? Hon. Mona Fortier (Minister of Middle Class Prosperity and Associate Minister of Finance): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Canada's economy is in a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We've been clear about that. We will continue to be open and transparent about the actions that we are taking to support families, businesses, workers, our health care system and our economy. This includes biweekly reports to Parliament on the full cost and status of our economic measures. Once it is possible to provide a clear economic projection, we will provide an update. We are in this together, and we are prepared to do whatever is necessary to support Canadians. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: Chair, Canada's economy was in trouble prior to the COVID, with some of the worst numbers since 2009. Government revenues in March dropped by 7. 2%, and it's shameful and, quite frankly, it's outrageous that they refuse to provide Parliament and Canadians with an economic update. Households during this challenging time know how much money is coming in and they know how much money is going out. The picture is not pretty, but they know what the picture is. Can the finance minister at least reveal the projected revenue decline in quarters one and two? Hon. Mona Fortier: The Canadian economy is going through a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We've known this for three months. We've continued to be open and transparent about the measures we've put in place for Canadians, workers and businesses. In fact, we have reported biweekly to Parliament on the total cost and status of our plan's measures. As soon as it's possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide a comprehensive update to Canadians The Chair: We go back to Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: Other governments have managed to provide updates for their citizens and carry out their responsibilities, but of course this government has sidelined Parliament with simply a question-but-no-answer period. Let's try something else. The forestry industry was in crisis even before the pandemic, with mills closing down and thousands of jobs lost. Eight weeks ago, Minister Freeland said, I have had many discussions with leaders in our forestry sector and the provinces about what we can do to support the industry today. Meanwhile, we've had support going to the arts and we've had support going to fisheries, just to name a few, but arguably for the industry that was having some of the most numerous challenges, it has been radio silence. That was eight weeks ago today. Can the government at least commit to releasing an updated softwood lumber transition plan before we rise? Hon. Seamus O'Regan (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Chair, we remain committed, of course, to the forestry industry and seeing it through this pandemic and this very uncertain time. The expanding market opportunities program, for instance, has helped Canada's forestry sector diversify, create jobs and open new markets. We've had new construction projects that are active today, using Canadian wood in key markets like Korea, Japan, China and the United States. Tomorrow this House will vote on our government's investment of $20. 97 million for this program. It's part of our budget 2019 commitment to invest $251 million over three years, and I hope the opposition will support us in that. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: It was stated in a major newspaper this morning that this government is like a sexy sports carvroom, vroom, vroombut with a history of breakdowns and major repairs. I think that might describe what has been happening. For forestry, it has been eight weeks and there has been nothing. There is another area that Deputy Prime Minister Freeland did talk about. We were talking about the U. S. softwood lumber duties that are being held in the United States. It's billions of dollars being held with the U. S. treasury. In April, she acknowledged that these duties are a real issue for the softwood lumber industry. What's been done since that time? Hon. David Lametti (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada): Mr. Chair, Canada's forestry industry supports good middle-class jobs in communities across our country. The sector is also an essential link in the medical equipment supply chain, and we thank them for all the work they're doing. We're aware of the immense pressures faced by this sector, especially at this time, and Deputy Prime Minister Freeland and others are taking that seriously and working through this issue. As our government has said repeatedly, we firmly believe that the U. S. duties on Canadian softwood lumber are unfair and unwarranted, and we will pursue all means in order to The Chair: Before continuing, I want to remind honourable members who are at home to make sure that the boom on their headsets is down. It just makes a better pickup. We heard everything, but it was a little distant. That's for everyone's benefit. We're now going to continue with Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell (Louis-Saint-Laurent, CPC): Mr. Chair, before I ask my question, I'd like to pay tribute to the Minister of Justice, particularly to his versatility. Today, he talked about forests. Yesterday, the Minister of Justice talked about Davie and indigenous affairs. Really, this minister is very versatile. My question is directly for the Minister of Finance. I like Mr. Lametti very much, but I'd like Mr. Morneau to answer my question. Yesterday, in a Senate parliamentary committee, the Minister of Finance half-opened the door to an economic update. Based on what he said, it seems that, as we speak, a committee of the Department of Finance is working on an economic update. Could Mr. Morneau tell Canadians when he is going to table this economic update? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, as we know, the Canadian economy is going through a period of extraordinary uncertainty. As soon as it's possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide a full update to Canadians. Right now, we can say that we have supported workers, businesses and Canadians with the emergency measures we have put in place. We will continue to do so, because we need to be sure that Canadians can get through this crisis. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I thought it was too good to be true. The Minister of Finance is opening the door, and the Minister of Small Business is closing it. We don't know when the economic update will take place, yet all across Canada, provinces are doing economic updates. Could Mr. Morneau explain to Canadians why he is unable to give one? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, since the beginning of the crisis, we have implemented the economic action plan to respond to COVID-19, and we've provided immediate assistance to Canadians, businesses and workers. Over 2. 5million jobs were protected by the Canada emergency wage subsidy. In addition, 8. 4million Canadians The Chair: We are returning to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, next Friday, the Quebec minister of finance, EricGirard, will give an economic update. If EricGirard can give one for Quebec, why can't BillMorneau give one for Canada? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, once again, we have been open and transparent from the outset. We have devoted our energy to support Canadians, workers and businesses. We will continue to do so. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I cannot judge the quality of the work done by the provinces, but what I do know is that Quebec, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland have also made efforts to support their residents economically. Those provinces are able to table economic updates. Yesterday, Saskatchewan even tabled a budget. Why is Bill Morneau unable to table an economic update for all Canadians? Hon. Mona Fortier: Let me repeat for my hon. colleague that we are going through extraordinarily uncertain times. We have continued to be open and transparent. We have reported biweekly to Parliament on the total cost and status of the measures in our economic response plan. Once again, as soon as clear economic projections can be provided, we will provide an update The Chair: Mr. Deltell has the floor. Mr. Grard Deltell: The minister talks about the total cost of the government's economic expenditures. So I ask the question: so far, over the past three months, how much has the pandemic cost Canadians? Hon. Mona Fortier: As I said earlier, it is important to note that we have put forward measures, including the wage subsidy, which have helped more than 2. 5million The Chair: Mr. Deltell has the floor. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I have been trying for four minutes to get anything remotely resembling an answer, and I'm getting absolutely nothing. I am not asking questions for myself; I am asking questions for Canadians. Why are the government and the Minister of Finance, Bill Morneau, not able to table an economic update when some provinces are able to? Hon. Mona Fortier: Once again, I would like to remind my hon. colleague that we have provided interest-free loans to businesses. More than 669,000loans have been approved. We have continued to support businesses and Canadians during this time The Chair: Mr. Deltell, you have time for a very brief question. Mr. Grard Deltell: The only thing that distinguishes the provinces that table economic updates and the current government is political will. Why does Bill Morneau not have the political will to tell Canadians the truth? Hon. Mona Fortier: Once again, we have been open and transparent. As soon as it is possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide Canadians with a full update. The Chair: We will now continue with Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya (MarkhamUnionville, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. COVID-19 has sparked and spurred anti-Asian racism. These are not just racist comments online; Asian Canadians have been attacked. What is the government doing to combat anti-Asian racism? Hon. Bardish Chagger (Minister of Diversity and Inclusion and Youth): Mr. Chair, since our government took office in 2015, we have been making investments and working with communities. The difference between our government and the previous government is that we will actually consult with Canadians, including black Canadians, including Asian Canadians, to respond to the challenges, including with an anti-racism secretariat and an anti-racism strategy. It will take all of us. I appreciate the member's question, so that we can also work together. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, one business owner I know in Markham has operated for 20 years. Now she's looking at over $9,000 in rent due on June 24. COVID-19 has crippled her sales and she's going to go out of business. Her landlord has no interest in the Canada emergency commercial rent assistance program. How can the government say this program is working? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, this program was made possible by working with the provinces, and we will continue to encourage landlords and tenants to work together to make sure they have relief for this very difficult time in which they're living. We're continuing to monitor the CECRA program and we will make it possible for businesses to have access to the program. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, the government business rent relief program has been a total disaster. Even the government's own numbers show it is a failure. As of June 8, less than 2% of the $3 billion budgeted has been spent. What is it going to take for the government to admit that the program is a disaster and needs changes? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we know our government has been working closely with the provinces and territories to deliver the Canada emergency commercial rent assistance. Although the tenant-landlord relationship is ultimately the responsibility of the provinces and territories, our government has stepped up to provide support through the tools we have and through CMHC so that small businesses can get the rent relief they need. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, according to the government, there are around 1. 1 million small businesses in Canada. At committee, we were told only around 5,500 of them are receiving COVID-19 rent relief. That number is shameful. When will the Liberal government wake up and make the changes? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we welcome the steps some provinces and territories have taken to further protect commercial tenants. We will continue to monitor this program closely and ensure that Canada's small businesses are supported during this challenging time. We will continue to monitor to see The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, there was no answer. When can the government make these changes? Hon. Mary Ng (Minister of Small Business, Export Promotion and International Trade): Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable colleague that we are doing everything and will continue to do everything to help small businesses in our country. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, on May 27 the CBSA seized 65 small handguns at Pearson airport, the largest firearms seizure on record. It is clear that smuggled handguns are the weapon of choice for criminals. Why is the Prime Minister focusing on an ineffective municipal ban? Hon. Bill Blair (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness): Mr. Chair, I would point out that gun violence in any of our communities is unacceptable, and it's important that governments and communities take steps to prevent guns from getting into the hands of criminals. That's why we do important work at our border to keep guns from being smuggled into our country, but it also necessitates additional work. I don't think you can talk about gun violence without talking about stronger gun control. That's why our government has taken a very strong position and will strengthen gun control to keep Canadians safe. The Chair: Mr. Saroya, you may have a 10-second question, if that's possible, please. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, COVID-19 has not stopped gun violence in the GTA. My constituents are concerned about shootings minutes away from their homes. We know the Liberals'gun ban won't change anything, but a focus on smuggled guns and criminals will. When will they make that change? Hon. Bill Blair: Mr. Chair, stronger gun control laws are an effective tool, and that's been told to us by police leadership and communities across the country. We're also making investments in borders and law enforcement. Most importantly, we're making investments in communities and in kids to keep communities safe. I look forward to the member's strong support of those measures when we bring them forward. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback (Prince Albert, CPC): Mr. Chair, the U. S. and the U. K. began their second round of free trade negotiations yesterday. Does the government intend to have a trade agreement in place before the U. K. tariffs come into effect on January 1? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, the U. K. is a strong partner of Canada, as is the European Union, and we're looking forward to continuing that strong relationship The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Thank you, Mr. Chair. With respect to the negotiations with the U. K. , when will the minister publish her goals and objectives for this agreement? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, we're going to continue to work to ensure that any future agreement is going to be based on the best interests of Canadians, and we will The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Can the minister confirm whether they've entered into negotiations with the U. K. at this point? Hon. Mary Ng: Our government is analyzing the most-favoured-nation tariff regimes schedule the U. K. has put out. I want to assure Canadians The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Mr. Chair, during the CUSMA negotiations, a deal was struck between the Liberal Party and the NDP that the government would notify this House 90 days before it starts any negotiations on any trade agreement. When will the minister notify this House? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that we will absolutely be sharing information. Right now, we are analyzing the most-favoured-nation tariff regimes schedule put out by the U. K. Mr. Randy Hoback: Mr. Chair, any meaningful attempts to reform the WTO needs buy-in from the United States. I think all countries agree on that. Has the minister discussed a WTO reform with the USTR, the United States trade representative? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, the Ottawa Group is a consensus-based group, and any decisions will be taken together. Of course, any meaningful reform must include the U. S. The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Has the U. S. been invited to the Ottawa Group meetings? Hon. Mary Ng: The Ottawa Group is a consensus-based group limited to WTO members who are committed to bringing forward ideas and proposals The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Just as with any other trade agreement, the minister has committed to this House that she will publish the list of goals and responsibilities for the negotiations. When will she publish the list for the Ottawa Group? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I'm thrilled that we had an excellent meeting of the Ottawa Group yesterday where, as a group, we agreed to take concrete action. Mr. Randy Hoback: Will the minister be releasing a list of Canada's objectives we would like to see the new WTO's director-general pursue prior to the upcoming DG election? Hon. Mary Ng: We published an action statement from the Ottawa Group yesterday. I would encourage the member opposite to have a look. I'm certainly happy to send it to him. Mr. Randy Hoback: Going back to economic prosperity, we know that the U. S. has been having talks with other countries around the world. Has Canada yet been invited to this group? Hon. Mary Ng: I'm pleased to continue to pursue the objectives of trade diversification. I would remind the member that we have access to a billion and a half customers through our very robust Mr. Randy Hoback: A billion and a half customers is fine if you have a functioning WTO, but if you don't have a functioning WTO, then a billion and a half customers may not be fully accessible to our suppliers, manufacturers and agriculture producers. Can the minister confirm that she's in discussions with the U. S. in joining this economic prosperity group? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that nothing is more important than standing up and helping create markets for our Canadian businesses and to help our small businesses get more export-ready so that they can grow into the international marketplace. This is work that we've committed to do, and we will keep working on it, particularly The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Yesterday Saskatchewan presented a budget. Not only did they present the budget, but they'll also actually debate the budget and pass the budget in Parliament. There's full accountability. Why won't this government do the same? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons): Mr. Chair, the House is sitting in this hybrid format so that people can participate in the House on the screens. I'm sure my colleague is happy to see that his own colleagues are able to ask questions and participate. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Williamson. Mr. John Williamson (New Brunswick Southwest, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will say that this is no substitute for Parliament, but I appreciate the opportunity. New Brunswick families and businesses are rapidly making adjustments to manage and live with the coronavirus pandemic. Businesses here are opening and services are being offered. Families are preparing for summer and even planning ahead for a new school year in September. We have a lot of work ahead of us. One notable absence is Service Canada. When does the government plan on opening its service counters to assist Canadians again? Hon. Ahmed Hussen (Minister of Families, Children and Social Development): Mr. Chair, our government is committed to ensuring that Canadians continue to have access to the benefits that they rely on through Service Canada. We have redeployed over 3,000 additional staff to ensure that Canadians continue to have access to their benefits. We've established a 1,500-agent call centre to make sure that people can get access to the phone lines to get the help they need. Mr. John Williamson: Service Canada is about more than providing COVID-19 information and benefits. Provincial governments are working hard to adjust to Canada's new normal by opening up businesses and front-line government services. When will we see Service Canada play its role and open its service counters in our communities? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Mr. Chair, we're currently working with our world-class public health experts to determine how best to reopen the Service Canada network for the public. Make no mistake: Our Service Canada employees have gone above and beyond to ensure that Canadians continue to have access to the services that they rely on and the benefits that they need. Mr. John Williamson: Please don't hide behind health experts when the Prime Minister is appearing in the middle of large protests, yet is afraid to bring back the Parliament of Canada to do its business. In fact, the New Brunswick legislature is open for regular business. Bills are being studied, opposition input is being heard and MLAs are voting on legislation, not rubber-stamping government bills. By comparison, our Parliament is stuck in pretending it cannot function like other law-making assemblies. Canadians are in the dark about our country's finances. When will the government table an economic update so taxpayers understand what was spent, what is owed by our kids and grandchildren, and what the government's fiscal footing looks like? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, nobody's hiding. Nobody's doing anything like that. The only reason my colleague is able to ask a question and I'm able to answer his question is that he's right there on the screen. We have this hybrid format that cares for MPs across the country, not only the ones sitting in the House. Mr. John Williamson: This is no substitute for Parliament. I will ask my question again. When will the government table an economic update so that taxpayers understand what was spent, what is owed by our kids and grandchildren, and what the government's fiscal footing looks like in today's environment? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, I thank my honourable colleague for his question. Canada's economy is still in a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We have been open and transparent about the measures we have been providing to support families, businesses and workers. Even our health care The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Williamson. Mr. John Williamson: Except you have not. The Auditor General is underfunded. We have no idea about the total of government spending. Again I will ask when the government will table an economic update so that we can have an understanding of what the government's fiscal footing looks like. Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we have included biweekly reports to Parliament on the full cost and status of our economic response plan measures since the beginning. I have said, and I will continue to say, that when it is possible to provide a clear economic projection, we will provide an update. Mr. John Williamson: What is the full cost to date of the government's COVID-19 relief measures, as the minister just claimed the government has provided to Parliament? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we have provided support for workers, and 2. 5 million Canadians have been helped through the Canadian wage subsidy. We have provided businesses with some loans, and 669,000 businesses have applied for these loans. Even for the CERB, we have over eight million Canadians who have applied. The Chair: We will now continue with Mr. Bergeron. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: Mr. Chair, as the leader of the Bloc Qubcois mentioned a few moments ago, the government promised $14billion to Quebec and the provinces, but in targeted transfers. That is very little compared to the considerable expenses incurred to deal with the current crisis. But Quebec and the provinces don't just want this money to be transferred unconditionally, they also want a real discussion on a permanent increase in health care transfers. PremierLegault was rightly concerned about the feds'interference into provincial jurisdictions. The federal government, which does not manage any hospitals or long-term care centres, must stop playing armchair quarterback and transfer the money to the only governments with jurisdiction over health, that is, Quebec and the provinces. Will it do so without delay and without nitpicking? The Honourable Patty Hajdu (Minister of Health): Mr. Chair, we know that the Government of Quebec is working hard to ensure the safety of Quebeckers and we are here to support them. As part of this co-operation, we have developed health and safety recommendations for workplaces, we have purchased medical equipment for workers and we have supported the province in developing its reopening program. We are continuing this important partnership to ensure the safety of Quebeckers and all Canadians. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: The co-operation is so effective that the money is staying in the federal government's coffers. In fact, when the federal government wants to impose conditions, it always takes longer. We see it with housing, for which Quebec has not received a dime of the $1. 4billion it is owed. We have also seen it with infrastructure funds, particularly for public transit, water systems and water treatment. The health crisis is now. The needs are now. The much needed reopening of our economy is now. Will the government finally transfer the money without messing around or quibbling? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I am pleased to confirm to my colleague that there is no messing around, no quibbling, nothing of the kind. There is co-operation between two levels of government. It is natural to have discussions with all the provinces and with Quebec. I myself am taking part in some discussions and several of my colleagues are taking part in others. There is a clear willingness on the part of the federal government to co-operate with Quebec and all the provinces. That is what we are doing and that is perhaps what the Bloc Qubcois does not like. It likes bickering, but for the time being, there is none. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: We don't want to bicker, we want the money to be paid out. It is not complicated, for heaven's sake! We do not want a blank cheque. Right now, the money remains in the federal government's coffers. There is $1. 4billion that should be paid to Quebec for social housing and is sitting in the federal government's coffers. We are waiting for money for water treatment and water systems, but it is sitting in the federal government's coffers. It's almost July. We are wasting precious months for construction. What is the government waiting for to pay out the money so that we can get our economy rolling? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: The federal government is a very active partner. We are discussing and working with Quebec on infrastructure projects. We are continuing our discussions and negotiations on the housing agreement. Nothing is at a standstill. We are discussing and co-operating for the well-being of all Quebeckers. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: MadamChair, things are definitely at a standstill, because the money is owed and has not been paid out. Months are going by while construction is not taking place. We need to reopen the economy. We need more flexibility in the gas tax program and Quebec's contribution to allow municipalities to undertake work on city halls, community centres and fire stations. We need the federal government to contribute to funding public transit operations, which have become a real financial drain because of the drop in ridership. What is the federal government waiting for to provide real help instead of just talking? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: When it comes to just talking, the Bloc Qubcois has a lot of experience, I admit. We, in the government, are working and co-operating. We are not waiting with our arms folded, we are discussing a series of issues with Quebec. We do more than discuss, we work and we co-operate. We are working on projects, not only in infrastructure, but in a number of other areas. Just think of the co-operation of our armed forces in the CHSLDs, for example. We are here for Quebeckers. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Your time has run out, Mr. Bergeron. We'll go now to Ms. Khalid, from MississaugaErin Mills. Ms. Iqra Khalid (MississaugaErin Mills, Lib.): Madam Chair, I'll be splitting my time with the member for GlengarryPrescottRussell. During a consultation with the business community in Mississauga, the concerns of businesses, big and small, included the need for stable, affordable and safe child care. With the lack of such child care spaces, an economic recovery plan post-COVID cannot be effective until and unless we make sure that people are able to get back to work. I've heard from parents across Mississauga that they're being forced to stay home because of inadequate child care and that they have to choose between putting food on the table and keeping family safe. More and more employers are realizing that good employees are unable to contribute to their business growth because of this challenge. Now more than ever, we need to find long-term sustainable solutions for Canadians who face challenges with regard to child care. I ask our Minister of Families, Children and Social Development this: What is our strategy to tackle this ever-growing need for a national child care plan? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I thank the honourable member for her question and for her important advocacy and work on this important issue. We understand that child care is important to our economic recovery and our social infrastructure. We know the pressure that COVID-19 has placed on families, especially parents. That is why we're committed to continuing to work with provinces and territories to renew our agreements on early learning and child care, and to provide, at the earliest opportunity, $400 million in support. In addition to that, the Prime Minister has already indicated that child care will be part of the $14-billion pledge to provinces and territories to assist them with respect to COVID-19 recovery efforts. Over the next decade, we will continue to invest $7. 5 billion, and together we have achieved the goal of over 40,000 affordable child care spaces. We are also committed to continuing to create over 250,000 before-school and after-school child care spaces for kids under the age of 10. We will continue to work with our partners in the provinces and territories to ensure that Canadians can continue to have access to safe, quality and affordable child care. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for GlengarryPrescottRussell has the floor. Mr. Francis Drouin (GlengarryPrescottRussell, Lib.): MadamChair, small businesses play a fundamental role in the Canadian economy. In an article in LaPresse, the Minister of Economic Development warned us that the economic crisis caused by severe lockdown measures could have more serious consequences in small municipalities than in large cities. Based on discussions with the chambers of commerce in my riding, it is clear that federal government assistance will be essential for the reopening of the economy, specifically for the rural economy. In fact, I would like to acknowledge the work of the Prescott-Russell community development corporation, under the leadership of John Candie. After announcing almost $57million to help SMEs adopt e-commerce, how does the minister plan to help SMEs and the business community in our rural areas? Hon. Mlanie Joly (Minister of Economic Development and Official Languages): MadamChair, I also thank my colleague from GlengarryPrescottRussell for his important question. Yes, our regions are important and the entrepreneurs in those regions are creative and daring. They take risks, but they are currently facing huge challenges. So we are here for them. We understand their anxiety and we want to help them. That is why we have decided to invest heavily in rural economic development. It is also why we have doubled the budget of CFDCs and Community Futures organizations across the country. In southern Ontario we have reinvested over $260million in the regional economic development agency FedDev. In the great riding of GlengarryPrescottRussell, which I am particularly fond of and where there is a very good member of Parliament, there is an additional $1million for entrepreneurs in the region. We have been, we are and we will be at your side. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for GlengarryPrescottRussell has 36seconds left. No? Then we'll go to the honourable member for ElmwoodTranscona. Mr. Daniel Blaikie (ElmwoodTranscona, NDP): Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with the member for Victoria. Madam Chair, Krystal is a community worker in Winnipeg. She has been working from home since late March, taking care of her child, who is out of school, and caring for her father, who is living with her and vulnerable to COVID-19. Her employer called her up recently and asked her to physically return to work or to take a leave. As a parent and a care provider to a vulnerable person, she's not comfortable with physically returning to work. Service Canada won't give Krystal a straight answer as to whether going on leave and collecting CERB would count as refusing a reasonable job offer. With Bill C-17 looming in the background, Krystal is worried about jail time and fines if she does right by her child and her father by applying for CERB. Can Krystal reasonably refuse to go back to work and collect CERB, or will she be considered a fraudster? That's my question for the minister that is specific to Krystal's case. As well, what is the minister doing to provide clear direction to Canadians and to Service Canada agents so that people can get a clear answer before making their decision about returning to work? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I want to thank the honourable member for his important question. We recognize that Canadian workers will face various different situations, including those who are ineligible for the Canada emergency support benefit. We'll continue to work with workers to make sure they're able to be supported throughout this pandemic. The fact of the matter is that every province has workplace health and safety regulations that must be supported. We understand that workers have the right not to work in unsafe situations. We also understand that many Canadians do want to go back to work; and in fact many have. We will make sure that we support Canadians throughout this recovery process. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member has 47 seconds left, and that includes the answer. Mr. Daniel Blaikie: Madam Chair, that answer is really not good enough, because the problem here is that Krystal needs to know whether she can continue receiving CERB or not. That's a federal government decision, and she needs to know whether the federal government is going to accuse her of fraud and put her in jail or assess fines against her if she refuses to go back to work because she wants to take care of her child and her father. What is the minister's answer to that? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister has 20 seconds to respond. Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that if a Canadian has to take care of a loved one due to circumstances surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, they are indeed eligible to receive the CERB and remain receiving that benefit. Ms. Laurel Collins (Victoria, NDP): As we deal with the global pandemic, we cannot lose sight of the ongoing climate emergency. Canada has missed every single climate target it set, and we need to break the cycle of empty promises. Canadians want their government to be accountable, and environmental groups such as Ecojustice, CAN-Rac, Environmental Defence and West Coast Environmental Law, as well as the government's own climate institute, are all calling for legally binding climate targets. When will the government put its climate targets into law with legally binding milestones so we never miss another target again? Hon. Navdeep Bains (MississaugaMalton, Lib.): Madam Chair, I thank my honourable colleague for her question. I totally agree with her when it comes to the environment. It is a priority not only for us as a government, but it should be a priority for all Canadians. That is why we have put measures in place to put a price on pollution through carbon pricing. That is why we have a comprehensive plan that also includes significant investments in clean technology, which will help reduce our carbon footprint. I am confident that these measures will enable us to not only meet but exceed our 2030 target and also allow us to achieve our net-zero 2050 target. Ms. Laurel Collins: That didn't answer my question. I asked when. Empty promises won't get us any closer to meeting our climate targets. Can the minister tell us when his government will introduce climate accountability laws? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I think the fundamental issue here is having a plan when it comes to the environment. I'm confident that the measures that we have takenputting a price on pollution, investing in clean technology, and other key measures to reduce our carbon footprint, including the investment in infrastructureunderpin a plan The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to the honourable member for Victoria. Ms. Laurel Collins: This government is not meeting its targets, but it is meeting with oil and gas lobbyists. The pandemic has made us reflect on our priorities. Are we going to choose a just recovery with good, sustainable jobs for Canadian workers, or are we going to keep subsidizing oil and gas companies to the tune of billions, subsidies that we know are ending up in the pockets of CEOs and shareholders? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will have a brief answer from the minister. Hon. Navdeep Bains: Again, Madam Chair, this is the fundamental difference between us and the NDP. We fundamentally believe that the entire economy needs to work together, including the energy sector, to enable us to achieve those 2030 and 2050 targets. We are going to work together to support our workers, including in the energy sector, to reduce our carbon footprint. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Now we will go to the honourable member for SaskatoonGrasswood, Mr. Waugh. Mr. Kevin Waugh (SaskatoonGrasswood, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. When I was last here in May, I was on my way back to Saskatoon from Toronto, and there was actually someone on my flight who tested positive for COVID-19. I was never informed of it by the airline. I found out two weeks later. The report was in the news media. Why hasn't the government put rules in place requiring airlines to reach out to individuals like me who may have been exposed to COVID on their flights? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, it's hard to speculate on what happened from such a vague description of his experience, but I will say that we have every confidence in local public health, which is doing the hard and heavy lifting of contact tracing and working very closely with all kinds of different sectors, including airline sectors, to make sure that close contacts of people who have tested positive for COVID-19 are found, are traced and are isolated. I assume that the member took appropriate precautions on the flight and I hope that he continues to do so. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, it was reported that the individual on my plane who had COVID was actually connecting in Toronto from an international flight. The Prime Minister announced last week that they would begin mandating temperature checks for those bound for Canada in July. Will international travellers be tested when they land in Canada, or will they be relying on the tests that take place in other countries? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, this is a very important question, because the protection and safety of all Canadiansin particular, Canadian travellersis a high priority for our government. We've been working very closely with the airlines. At the current time, we are putting temperature screening in place. That will initially be done primarily by the airlines that are in the best position to do it at this point in time. We are also now going to be including CATSA, the people who do the security screening, so that when people enter the airport, they will also be screened. We believe that is going to be the most effective measure to keep all travellers safe. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, last week five of the largest professional sports leagues in North America put out a statement of support for my private member's bill, the safe and regulated sports betting act. Given the struggles that clubs and leagues are facing due to COVID-19, including having no fans at all in the stands for the foreseeable future, the legalization of sports betting would be a welcome opportunity not only to engage fans but to generate much-needed revenue. Will the government commit now to supporting the sports and gaming industries by supporting my private member's bill, Bill C-218? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, I've had the opportunity on many occasions to speak to members of Parliament and also to mayors and councillors and people living in border communities where there are casinos. They've raised this issue a number of times. We've listened very carefully to the concerns that have been expressed by them. I would like to advise the member that I look forward to the opportunity for a careful examination of his bill. We are at all times concerned about maintaining the integrity of the gaming industry within our community. That's the best way to protect Canadians. At the same time, we will examine his bill with all of the necessary attention to make sure it's given full consideration. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, it's the first time in history that we've had the five professional leagues in this country joining together for this bill. Newspapers rely, as we all know, on advertising for a significant portion of their revenue. This includes the usual flyers as well as in-paper ads. I've heard major concerns from a number of newspapers in this country about competition they're receiving today from Canada Post, which is offering massive free postage services. In fact, I have one of their ads here, which says that the first 6,000 pieces of postage are 100% free. If the government is genuine about wanting to ensure that newspapers and journals can succeed in this country, why are you allowing Canada Post to use its monopoly power to actually threaten local newspapers in this country? Hon. Steven Guilbeault (Minister of Canadian Heritage): Thank you, Madame Chair, and I thank the member opposite for his question. As you well know, a healthy news and media sector in Canada is a priority for our government, which is why we have put in place a number of measures before COVID-19 and during COVID-19, and we will continue to be there for them after this crisis has gone by. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Before we go on, we will be taking a break to do a bit of a changeover. I also want to remind members to address their questions and comments to the chair. We will go now to the honourable member for BruceGreyOwen Sound, Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff (BruceGreyOwen Sound, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Mr. Blair stated yesterday here in the House that the AR-15 has been used in mass killings in Canada on many occasions. Mr. Blair, please provide just one specific instance in which an AR-15 was used in a mass killing in Canada. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I remind the member to address questions and comments to the chair. The honourable minister may respond. Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I think this is an excellent opportunity to point out to the member opposite how important it is to actually listen to what was said. If you go back and review that tape, and I would invite you to do so, you'll see that I said the AR-15 and other weapons like themreferring of course to military-style assault weaponshave been used in mass killings, and I actually cited a number of examples. Madam Chair, I think it would be very useful if the member's questions were based on facts. Mr. Alex Ruff: I can remind Mr. Blair that I actually have watched the video a couple of times, and he specifically states that the AR-15 was used in mass killings in Canada, yet he has yet to provide one. My additional question is to Mr. Blair. Out of the recently banned firearms on May 1, how many have been or are still currently in use by the Canadian Armed Forces? Hon. Bill Blair: That's an excellent question, Madam Chair, because it's very important to provide Canadians with clarity. We have prohibited these firearms for non-law enforcement and non-military use. The military uses weapons that were actually designed for soldiers to use in combat to shoot other soldiers. That's the appropriate use of such weapons, Madam Chair. They're not things to be played with in civilian society. Mr. Alex Ruff: As a soldier for 25 years, I'll remind Mr. Blair that none of the currently prohibited firearms would be used in the Canadian Armed Forces. I asked him a question on whether any of them is being or ever has been used in the Canadian Armed Forces. Are any of the recently banned firearms still in use, or have they ever been in use, in any military in the world? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, I think it's important to also recognize that the basic origin, the provenance of the weapons that we have prohibited, was in their original design. They were designed for military use for various military forces around the world. As I've said previously, they were designed for soldiers to use in combat to kill other soldiers. They're very efficient in their design for killing people. They have no purpose in Canadian society. Mr. Alex Ruff: As someone who has used many military-style firearms and who is actually involved in helping define what we purchase in the military, I would use none of the ones that are currently prohibited. I have a question, Chair, for Minister MacAulay. Can he please confirm whether Veterans Affairs has a plan to address the claims backlog, yes or no? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (Minister of Veterans Affairs): Madam Chair, I appreciate my honourable colleague's question, and yes, we've indicated that it's a major priority. That's why I'm so pleased that the supplementary estimates contained just under $90 million to address hiring more staff, improving the process and making sure that we attack the backlog in an appropriate manner. Mr. Alex Ruff: Madame Chair, does that plan exist in written form? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Well, Madam Chair, I can assure you that it's in the supplementary estimates, and of course, this money is The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We'll go back to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff: The question is about the plan, not how much money has been allocated. I am asking for the written plan on how to address the backlog. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Madam Chair, I can tell my honourable colleague that the money is in the supplementary estimates, and with the money we're able to attack this problem in an appropriate manner, and that's what is important for our veterans. Mr. Alex Ruff: The deputy minister committed on March 10 that a written plan would be provided to the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs within a month and made public. Did the deputy minister or the department provide the minister that plan within a month? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Madame Chair, I'm sure my honourable colleague wants an appropriate plan and he would be fully aware this just under $90 million would make a big difference in the plan to attack the backlog. We The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We'll go back to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff: Thank you, Chair. Therefore, my question is, if the deputy minister in the department provided him with an appropriate plan or a written plan, why is he questioning how appropriate that plan is? I have complete confidence in the deputy minister's ability to produce a written plan. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister may give a brief answer, please. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I can assure my honourable colleague that with the appropriate funding, we will address the backlog in Veterans Affairs. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Parry SoundMuskoka, Mr. Aitchison. Mr. Scott Aitchison: Thank you, Madam Chair. My question is about summer camps again. Three weeks ago, I asked this government if the finance minister would meet with the beleaguered summer camp sector. Summer camps, which are a social and economic mainstay in Parry SoundMuskoka and all of northern Ontario, have been crippled by the global pandemic. It's costing millions of jobs, and some camps are actually in danger of folding. Aside from a brief follow-up conversation over the phone with the junior minister, there has still been no action from this government. When will the Minister of Finance meet with summer camps to find a solution? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I recognize the honourable member's important question and his focus on summer camps. We recognize the importance of looking at that and paying attention to the needs of that community. We will continue to engage with them, as we have, to ensure and find ways in which we can get their feedback and find ways in which we can support them. That work is ongoing, and I assure the honourable member that our focus is on the kids and on ensuring that they have access to summer camps for this year. Mr. Scott Aitchison: I don't know why you need to find ways to get feedback. The summer camps association has given lots of feedback and my office has given lots of feedback, so I don't see what's confusing about this. However, I've become accustomed to not really getting answers to questions, so I will go to the next one. The Ontario government's regional reopening plan permits cruise boats to resume on Georgian Bay, yet the federal government is refusing to allow these vessels to operate until July 1. Therefore, small businesses such as the Island Queen cruiser in Parry Sound, which has only a very few precious weeks to operate in the first place, is losing yet another two weeks because of federal inaction. This not only hurts the cruise boat industry but also hurts tourism and small businesses all through our area. Will the Minister of Transport take a regional approach himself by lifting the federal ban on Georgian Bay, just like the Province of Ontario has done? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister may reply. Is there a response? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, there is. I apologize for the confusion. Let me respond, if I may, on behalf of the Minister of Transport. There have been a number of very important discussions with the provinces, in particular with the Province of Ontario, around provisions regarding pleasure craft. There are certain restrictions that will come to an end on June 30. We're working very closely with our provincial counterparts to address this issue, but we want to ensure that it will be done safely. Mr. Scott Aitchison: Madam Chair, I actually gave the minister a heads-up that I would be asking that question. He sent me an email today saying he was not going to be able to be in the House, and it's great of him to do that. He said that whoever was going to fill in for him would have an answer, but again, that was not really an answer. The next issue I would like to bring this government's attention to is the deplorable state of rural Internet service in Parry SoundMuskoka. Quite simply, there are too many gaps in service, and what is available is generally way too expensive. We have families trying to work and teach their kids from home on unreliable and outrageously expensive Internet service, and we have too many small businesses that either cannot access or afford reliable Internet services. Today Greg Rickford, the Ontario energy minister, and Laurie Scott, Ontario Minister of Infrastructure, announced $2. 3 million for seven northern Ontario broadband projects. Minister, will when your government get serious and become a reliable partner for the Government of Ontario and the private sector to deliver this crucial modern-day infrastructure to rural Canadians? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I remind the member that he needs to address the questions and comments to the chair. The honourable minister may reply. Hon. Maryam Monsef (Minister for Women and Gender Equality and Rural Economic Development): Madam Chair, in the best of times, life without access to high-speed Internet is hard. During a pandemic, the challenges are that much more pronounced. Our government's unprecedented investments are already connecting a million more Canadian households to this essential service, but until we achieve universal access our work is not done. We will work with our partners, including provinces across the country, to connect every Canadian household to high-quality Internet access that is affordable and reliable. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member has 30 seconds. Mr. Scott Aitchison: I think I can squeeze something in here, then. I'm wondering, then, Madam Chair, since the Province of Ontario has used the Northern Ontario Heritage Corporation Fund to make this announcement, what about using FedNor to make the same kind of announcement, and partner with the province? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister has a brief answer. Hon. Mlanie Joly: Obviously we believe in the importance of northern Ontario; that's why we nearly doubled the budget of FedNor. We will continue to invest in businesses and people all around Parry Sound, Muskoka and northern Ontario. If my colleague has specific projects in mind, please come and see me and let's have a conversation. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for Montmagny-L'Islet-KamouraskaRivire-du-Loup, Mr. Gnreux, has the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux (MontmagnyL'IsletKamouraskaRivire-du-Loup, CPC): Thank you, MadamChair. I will continue along the same lines as my colleague. During this pandemic, we are realizing the extent to which reliable high-speed Internet service is needed for Canada's economy. There are still places where telework is not possible today because of the lack of adequate coverage. However, since2015, the government has committed to addressing the situation through three new programs. Benot Pilotto, who is the mayor of Saint-Onsime-d'Ixworth, in my riding, wrote to me a few days ago. That is why I am asking you what concrete results the government plans to achieve for our rural areas by the end of the year. Hon. Maryam Monsef: At the best of times, life without high-speed Internet access is difficult. During a pandemic, the difficulties are even greater. Our government's unprecedented investments are already connecting an additional one million Canadian households to this essential service. However, until we achieve universal access, our job is not done. We are working The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Gnreux, you have the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, I am simply asking the minister to tell me when the mayor of Saint-Onsime-d'Ixworth will be able to tell his residents when the Internet will be available in his municipality. It is not complicated. What does the government plan to do so that rural municipalities across Canada can have access to the Internet as soon as possible? What is its plan? Hon. Maryam Monsef: We are working with partners across the country to ensure that every Canadian household is connected to a high-quality, accessible and affordable high-speed Internet service. Madam Chair, I assure my colleagues that we share the same goal, and we will work with all our partners across the country to ensure every Canadian household has access The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Gnreux, you have the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, I am still not getting a specific answer. According to the government's plan, when will rural Canadian businesses and households be connected? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I would ask the honourable minister to provide a brief answer. Hon. Maryam Monsef: Madam Chair, those plans are under way, and we will have more to share in the coming days. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: It seems that the Minister of Rural Economic Development plans to announce a new plan this week. Can she tell us how this program will differ from the Connect to Innovate program, which is already in place? Can the minister tell us whether her program will solve the problem of the 25square kilometre hexagonal zones, which unfortunately make many projects ineligible for the CRTC's broadband fund? Hon. Maryam Monsef: Madam Chair, I'm pleased to share with my colleague that the model he's referring to, the hexagon model, is no more. Our maps are much more precise now to ensure that we do not leave Canadians behind. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, this year, the Canada summer jobs program is a real fiasco. I think all my colleagues will agree with me. On May13,100jobs were announced in my riding; on May20,16jobs were announced; on May27,13jobs were announced; on June3,12jobs were announced; and on June10, only one job was announced. As we speak, an amount of $100,000 is still to be confirmed in my riding. Can we have an announcement, once and for all? Let's stop the piecemeal announcements and finally confirm the remaining jobs today so that our organizations can have young people before the summer starts on the weekend. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable minister. Hon. Ahmed Hussen: MadamChair, I thank the honourable member for his question. We recognize the important role that the Canada summer jobs program is playing in supporting employers and young workers in communities right across the country. Our government is working very hard to help employers adapt to the realities of the COVID-19 pandemic, and at the same time is supporting young Canadians as they begin to look for summer employment. We've introduced flexibilities into the program to ensure that more young workers have opportunities to get employed. The honourable member also has to understand that we're in the COVID-19 pandemic, and as such it will take some time for businesses to equip themselves to hire students. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for NanaimoLadysmith, Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly (NanaimoLadysmith, GP): Thank you, Madam Chair. In the first five months of this year, 554 B. C. residents died from opioid overdoses. They were teachers, construction workers, business owners, family members, neighbours and friends. Addiction is a health and social issue, but criminalization creates stigma, so people hide their drug use and die alone. Access to a safe supply of drugs and safe injection sites saves lives and puts addicts in daily contact with people who can help them. Will this government end the war on drugs by decriminalizing them, providing a safe supply and reallocating resources from policing addicts to providing treatment for them? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, I think it's really important we make sure that when we speak about people who use substances, we remove stigmatizing language like the word addict. We can stand together, as this government has, with people who use substances and their families to ensure a range of options for people who are struggling with addiction, who are using substances in a way that is harming their health and their communities. As you know, we have restored harm reduction to the Canadian drugs and substances strategy. We've made it easier for people to access safe supplies of substances. We've increased access to treatment and the variety of treatment through federal transfers to provinces and territories. Madam Chair, we're working with communities to make sure there are more community-based approaches to treating The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, the Geneva Convention considers both tear gas and pepper spray to be chemical weapons and prohibits their use in war, yet our police forces use these weapons on Canadian civilians. These weapons are indiscriminate and can affect peaceful protestors and innocent bystanders. Will the government prohibit the use of these weapons and require police to use de-escalation techniques to keep legal protests peaceful? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, the right to peaceful protest in this country is a constitutionally protected right. We want to ensure it's always respected. At the same time, Madam Chair, we recognize that the use of even less than lethal force can have significant impacts on people's safety. This is a highly regulated substance in Canada. It's prohibited for non-police use, and for the police it is and should be highly regulated. The RCMP have advised me they have not used tear gas in nine years. We'll continue to monitor it to ensure that peaceful protest is always respected. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, in 2012 the RCMP spent $14 million on 18 armoured personnel carriers. One's parked at the Nanaimo detachment. I can't imagine why we have weapons of war like this for policing civilians. Will the government rein in the RCMP budget and end wasteful spending on militarizing our civilian police forces? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, it's a very important tradition that our Canadian police are not militarized. At the same time, we've seen a number of tragedies when police have responded to situations in which people were armed with weapons designed for soldiers to kill soldiers, and they've been used to kill police officers. The militarization of our society, so strongly promoted by some, is the direct consequence of the militarization of the police. As we remove these weapons from our society and prohibit them, we'll make it safer for everyone and we can then move away from such a model of policing. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, the government spent $4. 5 billion to buy an old, leaky pipeline. Since 1961, there have been 82 reported spills from the Trans Mountain pipeline. Over 1. 5 million litres of crude oil has spilled into the surrounding environment. This weekend, the Trans Mountain pipeline leaked again, dumping 190,000 litres of oil. How much is this spill going to cost Canadian taxpayers to clean up? How much contingency funding has been budgeted to repair the environmental destruction from spills? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I want to thank the honourable colleague for his question. He full well knows that the acquisition that we made with regard to the TMX initiative is a reflection of the fact that we want this initiative to move forward in a sustainable manner and in a manner that protects the environment. I'll continue to work with my colleagues to endeavour to make sure that we have the appropriate processes in place to protect the environment and at the same time create good-quality, middle-class jobs for Canadians. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for RosemontLa PetitePatrie, Mr. Boulerice, has the floor. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice (RosemontLa Petite-Patrie, NDP): Thank you, MadamChair. The Black Lives Matter movement is right to discuss systemic racism in our societies. In Montreal, the city and the police department have recognized this, and measures will be put in place. The Liberal government, once again, is all talk and no walk. Although it spends $10million a day, we see no attempt to reform or change the RCMP. If the Prime Minister really wants to act, why is he delaying the action plan in response to the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls? Hon. Bill Blair: Let me assure this House and the member opposite that we're not dragging our feet. This is an important issue. Indigenous people, black Canadians and other racialized people are far too often experiencing systemic racism and disparate outcomes through the criminal justice system. It's incumbent upon all of us who work within the criminal justice system to take the steps and actions necessary to produce more equitable outcomes. All police services, including the RCMP, must be committed to ensuring that the people they're sworn to serve and protect are always treated with dignity and respect. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: MadamChair, why are the Liberals taking indigenous children to court to challenge the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal ruling in their favour? Hon. Marc Miller (Minister of Indigenous Services): Madam Chair, as the honourable member knows full well, a number of cases are pending, and we are currently negotiating with the parties. We are making progress, and I would be delighted to tell the member and the House about it in response to a later question. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: We've been asking questions about it for months, and as I see it, we should keep doing so. The Prime Minister's new pipeline, which taxpayers were forced to buy with their hard-earned money, has leaked. Some 190,000litres of oil spilled, and we can't even make the company pay for it because the Liberals bought the pipeline. Trans-Mountain, KeystoneXL and the resumption of gas exploration and development off the coast of Newfoundland and Labradorare these the projects the Liberals had in mind for their green recovery? Hon. Navdeep Bains: I'd like to thank the honourable member for his question. Our priority was to protect the health and safety of Canadians throughout the pandemic, especially when it comes to the environment. That's why environmental and climate change laws aimed at protecting the environment, human health and conservation will remain in force. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: Across Quebec, the cultural community is going through a harrowing time. Unions, associations, artists and creators have all taken part in public demonstrations recently to condemn the lack of a specific plan for the living arts, performing arts and festival sector. What is the government waiting for? Hon. Steven Guilbeault: I'd like to thank the member for his question. However, I strongly disagree with him. We haven't waited to develop a plan for the arts and culture sector. We listened to the community and we tailored our supports, as they were announced. We have an emergency plan for the arts and culture sector. We were asked to adapt the CERB to take royalties into account, and we did. We were asked to extend the CERB, and we did. We are fully aware that the recovery will take longer in the arts and culture sector. We have been there, we are there and we will be there for the arts and culture sector. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: Well, that wasn't at all what the artists and creators who were out demonstrating in the streets a few days ago thought. They were protesting on the weekend. The CERB extension announced by the government only brings us to September, but the cultural community is expecting the worst in the fall. What is the government's long-term plan to support creators and their entire teams? Hon. Steven Guilbeault: I'm not so sure those who were protesting last week had issues with our government, but we'd certainly be happy to speak with them. As for a long-term plan, we are currently consulting arts and culture stakeholders to contemplate together how the government can help the sector in response to the ongoing crisis. We are working on finding solutions, but until we have long-term solutions, we have seen to it that our artists and organizations have access to funding until September. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for BeauportLimoilou, Mrs. Vignola, has the floor. Mrs. Julie Vignola (BeauportLimoilou, BQ): Madam Chair, I will be sharing my time with the member for Montcalm. According to the latest news, Seaspan Shipyards will be spending an additional $1. 5billion to build two ships. Why? Because the ships were ordered in 2011 and still haven't been delivered. Davie built the Asterix without going over budget because it delivered the ship on time. Davie is currently the top shipyard, representing 50% of Canada's shipbuilding capacity. Why isn't Davie being awarded its fair share of contracts? Hon. Anita Anand (Minister of Public Services and Procurement): I'd like to thank the member for her question. Davie is certainly a strong and trusted partner that works very hard to help our government get results for Canadians. Building a new class of ships is highly complex, and it's not unusual for cost estimates to change throughout the procurement project. It's important to make sure additional funding is available for the joint support ships project to ensure the navy's vessels are delivered. Mrs. Julie Vignola: We are talking about $1. 5billion, here. In the beginning, eight years ago, the project was supposed to cost $2. 6billion. There can't be much missing when the cost overrun is double the initial estimate. Why haven't the ships been delivered yet? Why is Davie still not seen as a trusted partner? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Minister, please keep your answer brief. Hon. Anita Anand: Once again, I would point out that building a new class of ships is highly complex, and it's not unusual for the cost estimate to change for a procurement project as large as this one. I know that Davie works very hard, and we also believe it is an outstanding partner. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): It is now over to the honourable member for Montcalm, Mr. Thriault. Mr. Luc Thriault (Montcalm, BQ): Madam Chair, in Quebec, 12,000people have begun their training to work in residential and long-term care centres. They will be ready for duty in mid-September. In the meantime, we need the support of the army, which is helping us save lives. The dedication of the members of the armed forces is paramount, and I want to extend my heartfelt thanks. The government extended their mission until June26, which is only 10days away. What does the army have to do right now that is more important than helping our caregivers save lives? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, I'm glad my fellow member recognizes the fundamental role the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces have played and continue to play in residential and long-term care centres and many other areas in support of our seniors. We are in talks with the Quebec government. The discussions around providing continued assistance to Quebec are quite positive and productive. That assistance can take many forms, including the Red Cross. We will be there for our seniors, Madam Chair. Mr. Luc Thriault: We are short 12,000people, so if the Red Cross wants to help us, all the better. We'll take all the help we can get. Barely 800members of the military are still in Quebec. I repeat my question: What does the army have to do 10days from now that is more important if it's not to help caregivers save lives? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, all the members of the military are still in Quebec. They have done absolutely incredible work and are continuing to do so. The people at the Canadian Red Cross are well-trained paid workers who can perform the same work in partnership with the members of the armed forces, who can stay in Quebec as well. Right now, we are working with the Quebec government and discussing how we can keep the measure in place until September15. Mr. Luc Thriault: Madam Chair, our nurses and orderlies are exhausted. They're at the end of their ropes. Now is the time to thank them, not the time to turn our backs on them. It's not the time for dilly-dallying or discussions. It's the time to tell them that we will be there to help them until the end. I will repeat my question. What does the army have to do that is more important than helping caregivers save the lives of those who built Quebec? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The Leader of the Government in the House of Commons is asked to keep his answer brief. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, the Government of Canada is there and will continue to be there to help the people who built Quebec. The Government of Canada will work with the Quebec government to make that happen. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for Red DeerMountain View, Mr. Dreeshen. Mr. Earl Dreeshen (Red DeerMountain View, CPC): Thank you so much. Madam Chair, on May 14 I asked the Minister of Agriculture when the Liberal government would put aside its usual campaign rhetoric and recognize the very detrimental impact the carbon tax is having on farmers across this country. Minister Bibeau proudly noted that according to their data, the average cost of the carbon tax per farm across Canada is $210 to $819. We know that these numbers are completely unfounded and are not based on any factual evidence. The fact is that the Liberal government's own Parliamentary Budget Officer has estimated that at $25 per tonne, the cost for an 855-acre crop farm in Alberta is well over $6,000. The office came up with that using the government's statistics from the 2016 agricultural census. Madam Chair, the evidence is right in front of the minister. When will this Liberal government come clean with Canadians and recognize the disastrous impact the carbon tax is having on Canada's critical agriculture and agri-food sector? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food): Madam Chair, our pollution pricing policy is designed to grow a clean economy. To support this sector, we have put in place the following measures. Emissions from livestock and crop production are not priced. Farm fuels and fuels from cardlock facilities are exempt, and there is a partial rebate for propane and natural gas used in commercial greenhouses. Our government has been very open and transparent about our pollution pricing plan. We will do a review of our pollution pricing system in 2020, focused on competitiveness issues in trade-exposed industries such as agriculture. It is also important to remember that this is about tackling climate change and that 100% of the revenues stay in the province. We will continue to support our farmers and food processors as they provide an essential service across Canada. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Madam Chair, Minister Bibeau keeps talking about wanting to protect Canadians'environment. Well, the truth is that Canada's farmers, ranchers and processors have for years demonstrated their ability to deliver meaningful reductions in emissions and to safeguard the environment through the adoption of new technologies, education and innovative management practices, but the government ignores these efforts. Will the minister at the very least admit to Canadians that Canadian farmers are unable to pass on the cost of the carbon tax to consumers and instead have to absorb those extra costs out of their own pockets? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Madam Chair, allow me to explain again our government's position on pollution pricing. The price and method were developed so we could build an increasingly clean economy. We put a number of measures in place to help the agriculture sector. Emissions from animal and plant production aren't taxed. Farm fuels and fuels delivered to off-farm points-of-sale are also Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you, Madam Chair. I do have another question. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I am watching the time, Mr. Dreeshan. You have a couple more seconds. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you. Madam Chair, Minister Bibeau has repeatedly asked stakeholders to send her data about the impacts of the carbon tax on farmers, so this is exactly what they have been doing. The Atlantic Grains Council, the Grain Farmers of Ontario, Producteurs de grains du Qubec and the Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association issued a joint statement at the beginning of this year in which they estimated that the cumulative indirect inflation of carbon tax on farm costs will be $14. 50 an acre this year, with that cost escalating by more than double by 2022 to almost $30 an acre. These are huge numbers. Why does the Liberal government continue to ignore the facts presented to it and continue to misrepresent the truth to Canadians? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Madame Chair, I can assure you that we have paid close attention to all the information that has been provided to us and that our calculation was also based on this information provided by provinces and different stakeholders. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Our government has been very open and transparent about our pollution pricing plan. The department used data from stakeholders and provinces Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you very much, Madam Chair Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: as well as the 2019 agricultural tax data to estimate the average cost of pollution pricing associated with grain drying at up to 0. 4% of overall operating costs. It is important to remember that we have put in place many special provisions Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Madam Chair Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: like exempting farm fuel and providing other financial supports for farmers. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Dreeshen, I am watching the time, and the minister is allowed to answer for the same amount of time that you used to ask the question. Therefore, I would hope that we would allow her to finish. She has finished, and unfortunately the time is up. The committee now stands adjourned until tomorrow at noon.

When it comes to the governmental issues, some of the members, for example, Justin Trudeau and Jagmeet Singh had a heated debate over the way of the distribution of the fund. The root of their debate was the problem of systematic racism in the RCMP, and many other institutions at home. Therefore, a revolution might be needed in those institutions. In terms of the revolution, Jagmeet Singh pointed out that the governmental fund should be allocated to medical care instead of RCMP, for that during the outbreak of COVID-19, emergent needs had shown in the medical field.

tr-sq-1246

tr-sq-1246_0

What did JustinTrudeau elaborate on the governmental fund when discussing the issue of allocating the fund and dealing with systematic racism? The Chair (Hon. Anthony Rota (NipissingTimiskaming, Lib.) ): I call this meeting to order. Welcome to the 23rd meeting of the House of Commons Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic. A reminder to all members that in order to avoid issues with sound, members participating in person should not also be connected to the video conference. For those of you who are joining via video conference, I will remind you that when speaking you should be on the same channel as the language you are speaking, and please use your headsets. As usual, please direct your remarks through the chair. As I understand, there are no ministerial announcements today. We will now proceed to presenting petitions. I remind members that any petition presented during a meeting of this special committee must have already been certified by the clerk of petitions. For members participating in person, I ask that they please come and drop their signed certificates off at the table once the petition is presented. I would ask members to be very brief and concise, and to summarize the exact content of the petition. We will continue. The first person presenting a petition today is Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May (SaanichGulf Islands, GP): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I present two petitions this morning. The residents of SaanichGulf Islands are calling on the government to simplify the process for protection of marine protected areas. It's a multi-layered communication process. The marine protected area first proposed in the 1970s for the southern Strait of Georgia, now called the Salish Sea, has been awaiting designation for so long that it was originally endorsed by Jacques Cousteau. That gives us a sense for why petitioners are calling for a simplified and more rapid process. The second petition is from petitioners who are very concerned about our obligations under the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and our commitments under the Truth and Reconciliation Commission calls to action. They specifically reference the RCMP violation of UNDRIP in its actions on Wet'suwet'en territory and ask the government to commit to actually living the principles embodied in UNDRIP. The Chair: We will now go to Mr. Hardie. Mr. Ken Hardie (FleetwoodPort Kells, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am presenting a petition on behalf of the one in a million Canadians who suffer severe and adverse effects from vaccinations. GuillainBarre syndrome is very debilitating, and this petition seeks the setting up of a no-fault accident or compensation system to help offset the loss of work, the loss of wages and the loss of quality of life that many of these people suffer. I'm pleased to present this petition pursuant to Standing Order 36. The Chair: Mr. Trudel, you have the floor. Mr. Denis Trudel (LongueuilSaint-Hubert, BQ): Mr. Chair, culture is the soul of a people. Over the past 20years or so, culture, especially music, has never been as accessible as it is now. Paradoxically, creators'incomes have never been so low. The advent of digital technology has completely overturned the system for distributing the wealth generated by creators for the benefit of various Web stakeholders, many of whom are billionaires. This petition addresses these problems and proposes realistic solutions. The first is to set a minimum royalty model for streaming platforms for artists. The second is to update the existing private copying system. The third is for Internet and cell phone providers who sell their services as direct access to culture to share their profits with artists. The fourth is that the GAFAMs have to pay taxes on their services. Six thousand people have already signed the first version of this petition, launched last month by musician JordanOfficer and supported by singer BarbaraSecours. As an artist, I am proud to present this petition today because the issues it raises are fundamental to the survival of Quebec culture. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood ParkFort Saskatchewan, CPC): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I have four petitions to present today. I will be as brief as you suggested, although I will observe that if some members are going on longer during petitions than they normally do, it might be because the government has taken away so many of the tools that opposition members normally have for raising important issues in the House. The first petition deals with the issue of euthanasia and long-term care. The petitioners are concerned that instead of focusing on improving medically assisted life, something that we know is a major issue in light of recent revelations, the government has put so much time and legislative energy into efforts to continually further expand euthanasia in Canada and remove vital safeguards. The second petition speaks to the ongoing conversations happening in Canada around systemic discrimination and systemic racism. I think we do need to reflect on systemic discrimination. This petition deals specifically with Bill 21 in Quebec and raises concerns. The reality of the way that bill applies is that people from certain backgrounds who wish to practise their faith are not able to fully participate in Canadian society if they are employed in the public service. This petition asks the government to provide a response on that issue, something it hasn't done in response to past petitions on this. The third petition deals with the issue of firearms. The petitioners want to see the government take a strong response in dealing with illegal guns and gun smuggling. The petition notes that the vast majority of firearms-related crimes in Canada involves illegal guns. At the same time, the petitioners are concerned that the government has the wrong focusthat is, harassing law-abiding firearms ownerswithout putting in place substantial measures to deal with illegal guns. The petitioners want to see the reversal of the order in council from May 1 and strong measures to deal with illegal firearms. The fourth and final petition deals with Bill S-204, a bill that would make it a criminal offence for a Canadian to go abroad and receive an organ from a person who has not consented to giving that organ. It would also create a mechanism by which someone could be deemed inadmissible to Canada if they were involved in organ harvesting and trafficking. The petitioners are supportive of Bill S-204 and of similar bills in previous parliaments and would like to see us pass that bill as soon as possible. The Chair: Presenting petitions, Mr. Lamoureux. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Winnipeg North, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. It is with pleasure that I table another petition by the residents of Winnipeg North. These residents have signed a petition asking the Government of Canada, and in fact all members of Parliament, to put a high priority on assisting our poorest seniors. The increases to the GIS by $200, and $300 to the OAS, have been well received. They just want to highlight how important it is to support our seniors, in particular the poorest of our seniors. The Chair: For members present in the Chamber, a reminder that they are asked to bring their petitions to the table. We'll now proceed to statements by members. We'll go to Ms. Atwin for the first one. Mrs. Jenica Atwin (Fredericton, GP): Thank you, Mr. Chair. June 21 is National Indigenous Peoples Day, a day of acknowledgement and a day of celebration of the beautiful diversity of indigenous peoples across Turtle Island. I wish to recognize the leadership of Chief Shelley Sabattis of the Welamukotuk First Nation in Oromocto, New Brunswick. Each year she and her council, volunteers and staff go above and beyond to show appreciation for their members and to demonstrate pride and culture while promoting well-being. We gather in an event where all are welcome to take part, from traditional hand drum-making with elders to moose meat and tacos. This year we will celebrate a bit differently, but we will still stay connected, virtually and in spirit, to the vast network of indigenous peoples and allies. We need each other now more than ever. May we come together in song and stories and in solidarity. We will remember those who are not among us. I hope all of Canada will join us in observing National Indigenous Peoples Day. Mawiyapasuwok: let us come together. Nit liech. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Beech. Mr. Terry Beech (Burnaby NorthSeymour, Lib.): Mr. Chair, COVID-19 is an unprecedented challenge for all communities across Canada, but as we do our part to flatten the curve, I often think about those who suit up every morning to serve on the front lines of our health care system. My mother is a home care worker and my sister is a nurse. Even before the crisis, they would often share the hardships they faced on a day-to-day basis. It's a tough job at the best of times. In a pandemic, these jobs are life-threatening. I think we can all agree that these workers deserve more than our good wishes. They deserve a raise. That is why we have worked with the provinces to implement pandemic pay. In British Columbia more than 250,000 front-line workers are eligible for this program. That works out to a pay increase of about $4 an hour. It's a small show of our appreciation for their difficult and priceless contribution to our country. Share this message and say thanks to our front-line workers, participate in the 7 p. m. cheer, and order a pizza for your local nurses. It's the least we can do. The Chair: We'll now go on to Mr. Shipley. Mr. Doug Shipley (BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. We've been living in difficult times. Slowly, we are getting back to some resemblance of normalcy, although unfortunately not soon enough for some of our great summer festivals. It will not be normal in BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte this summer without the iconic Boots and Hearts weekend music festival, Kempenfest, Oro World's Fair, the Elmvale Fall Fair, or the Midhurst Autumnfest. Canada Day celebrations have been cancelled, but we can still celebrate the great nation we call home. Because of the lack of Canada Day celebrations, I've created Happy Canada Day lawn signs that are available through my constituency office, free to all residents of BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte. I'm also hosting a drive-through party on Canada Day at the Royal Canadian Legion on St. Vincent Street in Barrie. All are welcome to attend. There will be cupcakes for all. Please drop by the legion between 11 a. m. and 2 p. m. , and we can celebrate Canada Day safely together. Thank you and have a great summer. The Chair: Now we'll go on to Ms. Young. Ms. Kate Young (London West, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Among the countless ordinary Canadians who have stepped up to do extraordinary work during COVID-19, I wish to draw attention to our teachers. Teachers have always had a special place in my heart. My father was a teacher, and my daughter-in-law, Kelly Webb, is one now. I'm certain that my colleagues can all easily remember a teacher in their past who played an important role in helping them achieve their potential. I remember my grade 12 English teacher, Vince Weaver, at Westminster Secondary School in London. He made me realize that I could do so much more than I believed. Across the country, as schools closed, teachers did not stop their work. Some took their classes online. Others found innovative ways to continue engaging with their students. This is not the school year anyone imagined, and what the next one will look like is unclear, but our teachers in London West and across Canada have shown that no matter what, they will be there to help our next generation shine. The Chair: Before proceeding to the next presenter, I just want to remind the honourable members in the chamber that I realize that the six-foot limit makes it harder to whisper to each other, but we're hearing a bit of rumble, so I just want you to try to whisper at your best. Mr. Bergeron, you have the floor. Mr. Stphane Bergeron (Montarville, BQ): Mr. Chair, on July1st, we will be celebrating one of the most important events for the riding of Montarville: the 175thanniversary of the city of Saint-Bruno-de-Montarville. The theme Proud of our traditions will be the focus of this celebration for the people of Montarville. This is a good illustration of the rich history of this municipality nestled in the western foothills of Mont-Saint-Bruno. The seigneury of Montarville was granted in1710 to the illustrious former governor of Trois-Rivires, PierreBoucher. The parish of Saint-Bruno, which took root there and in which a village grew, became a municipal corporation in1845. To this day, it is one of the most prosperous localities, with a strong sense of belonging, a very dynamic community life and jealously preserved natural environments. A whole program had been drawn up for the celebration, but the current health crisis has taken over some of the planned activities, which has in no way diminished the pride and festive spirit of the people of Montarville. On July1st, we will have a good reason to be proud, in spite of everything. Happy 175thanniversary to Saint-Bruno-de-Montarville. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Maloney. Mr. James Maloney (EtobicokeLakeshore, Lib.): Mr. Chair, thank you for allowing me to take a moment to highlight an initiative that I started early on during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Heroes of EtobicokeLakeshore is an opportunity for citizens in my riding to recognize the contributions of those in their community who make life a bit easier. I'm pleased with the number of nominations I received that honour everyone from front-line workers to businesses that are innovating in these difficult times to volunteers who are finding new ways to reach out. I think of Daniel Lauzon who set up Food for Now, a mobile service that helps take care of the homeless. I think of Toni Varone, who helped his business clients by forgiving their rents, or young Lucas, who wanted to thank his teachers. I've been moved and inspired by the countless stories of generosity, strength, resiliency, kindness, incredible character and creativity. I want to thank all the heroes, as well as the people who nominated them. Keep them coming. Stay safe, everyone, and I wish you happy Canada Day early. The Chair: We'll now move on to Ms. Wong. Hon. Alice Wong (Richmond Centre, CPC): Mr. Chair, it gives me great pleasure to thank a local Richmond-based charity, the Social Diversity for Children Foundation, SDC, for its hard work both in raising funds for the purchase of personal protective equipment and in distributing this PPE to long-term care facilities and individual seniors'homes in the lower mainland of B. C. The COVID-19 relief fund is supported by a dozen other non-profits, businesses and community groups. Over the past two months, SDC has been to 32 seniors homes and senior-related organizations. In total, it has delivered masks to 7,000 care workers, staff and seniors. It is amazing to have witnessed how the younger generation have gotten involved in caring for the elderly at this very challenging time. The Chair: We'll now go to Ms. Damoff. Ms. Pam Damoff (Oakville NorthBurlington, Lib.): Mr. Chair, June is ALS Awareness Month, and 79 years after Lou Gehrig died from ALS little has changed. There's still no cure, and those with ALS typically die within five years of diagnosis. On June 21, Canadians will gather virtually to raise funds for ALS Canada in the Walk to End ALS. In Halton, normally we meet each year at Bronte Creek Provincial Park on the May long weekend to raise funds for ALS Canada. This year I will virtually join Tim's Titans, a team formed to honour Tim Robertson, my friend who died in 2016 after living with ALS for 13 years. I have a T-shirt, with a picture of Lou Gehrig, that says, Great Player. . . Lousy Disease and Tim's Titans. . . Great Team! ALS. . . Still a Lousy Disease. Join me on June 21 for the virtual Walk to End ALS to raise funds to support patients and their families and for ALS research. The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Khera. Ms. Kamal Khera (Brampton West, Lib.): Mr. Chair, on Saturday our community stood and marched in solidarity against anti-black racism. The peaceful protests that we're seeing across the country and around the world were not triggered by an isolated incident. They are fuelled by decades of ineffective action against something that is so insidious and deeply entrenched in our history, systems and institutions. For us, that is the racial inequality faced by Canada's indigenous and black communities. Anti-black racism is real. It exists right here in Canada, in our communities, including in Brampton. It exists when racialized students at McCrimmon Middle School are called McCriminals. It exists when a shocking report exposes the Peel District School Board's failure to work fairly with the black community. It exists when D'Andre Campbell, who was fighting mental illness, loses his life at the hands of the police. It is clear that we need reform. We need to dismantle the systems that allow this privilege and oppression to take form, and address the unconscious bias plaguing our institutions. We'll need to be bold, and the time to do that is now. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd (Sturgeon RiverParkland, CPC): Mr. Chair, a few months ago I rose in the House on the eve of our closure due to COVID-19. I told Canadians we must not give in to fear, that we would carry on and get through this crisis stronger than ever. Today, in this city and across Canada, Canadians are enjoying a beer on their favourite patios. Businesses are reopening, jobs are returning and our lives are starting to feel a bit normal again. Canadians pulled together, and because of that we did not see the devastating death toll that many had predicted. Life may be returning to normal, but unfortunately, here in this chamber of democracy, the people's voices continue to be shut down. There is no good reason for Parliament to be suspended today. In the words of my grandfather, it's time for the Liberals to get with the program and bring back the House. The Chair: We will now proceed with Ms. Jones. Ms. Yvonne Jones (Labrador, Lib.): Mr. Chair, from in-person learning to virtual classrooms, COVID-19 has drastically changed the lives of students across the country, especially those in post-secondary education who are worried about covering costs like tuition or rent this coming fall. Our government recognized that students should not have to worry or put their futures on pause during this difficult time. That's why last month the federal government introduced the Canada emergency student benefit. If you're a high school student headed to a post-secondary school, or a current post-secondary student or a recent graduate, you can receive the Canada emergency student benefit every four weeks and have the financial support that you need to save for school. We also doubled Canada student grants and loans, enhanced the student loan program, increased supports for indigenous post-secondary education and introduced the Canada student service grant for those who wish to pursue it. Our government is here to help all students get the support they need to pursue their future goals successfully. I wish them all the very best, and I wish all of you, my colleagues and those across Canada, a very happy National Indigenous Peoples Day, which is coming up on June 21. The Chair: I want to remind the honourable members to keep to their 60 seconds so that we don't go over the time. I'm sure it would be a lot easier for everyone if we stuck to that limit. We will now go to Mr. Aitchison. Mr. Scott Aitchison (Parry SoundMuskoka, CPC): Mr. Chair, I rise today to once again implore the government to do something about the horrible lack of access to and crazy cost of rural Internet service. Right now, too many areas of my riding have no access to rural Internet service at all, and those who can get service are paying through the nose. I've even heard constituents say that during this pandemic, they are having to choose between feeding their kids and educating them. Over the last few weeks, Conservatives have been consulting with rural Canadians, and the results are in. My constituents are tired of fancy political promises. They are frustrated beyond belief by the new challenges created by this pandemic. They are absolutely fed up with having their pleas ignored. All we want is affordable and reliable Internet service. Is that too much to ask of the government? The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. MacGregor. Mr. Alistair MacGregor (CowichanMalahatLangford, NDP): Mr. Chair, these last few months have been incredibly challenging for the residents of CowichanMalahatLangford, who have been forced to deal with the economic and social consequences of COVID-19. The pandemic has laid bare the inadequacies of our social safety net, the weakness in our supply chains and the dependence of our society on essential workers, who often work long hours for low wages, putting themselves and their families at risk. We've also been forced to confront the systemic inequality, poverty and racism that continue to hold so many people back from achieving their full potential. I will not dishonour the sacrifice that so many have made during this time by allowing us to go back to the status quo that got us here in the first place. I will not apologize for demanding that the most vulnerable in our society get the supports and opportunities they need to live with dignity, and I will not relent from pushing my political colleagues to summon the courage necessary to implement policies that lead to environmental, economic and social justice. The Chair: I now give the floor to Mr. Blaney. Hon. Steven Blaney (BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, CPC): Mr. Chair, here is a beautiful story, the story of a woman from Bellechasse, a courageous young mother from Saint-Malachie, Marie-ChristineGoupil. With three children, including the eldest daughter with a disability, and realizing that her daughter with a disability had special clothing needs, she decided to go into business to meet the needs of other parents who, like her, were facing their child's clothing challenges. Last week, she presented her Handy clothing collection on the show Dans l'il du dragon. It was a very emotional moment for the audience and the dragons. They were so touched that they decided to give her the amount she wanted without diluting her shares. The video of her presentation has already been viewed over 1million times on social networks. Marie-ChristineGoupil has discovered a passion for entrepreneurship and has moved and inspired many people with her passionate and courageous attitude. Congratulations, Ms. Goupil, your example makes us proud. The Chair: Mr. Blanchet, you have the floor. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet (BeloeilChambly, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I lend my voice to the Chief of the Assembly of First Nations of Quebec-Labrador, GhislainPicard, whose message is as follows: There have been no fewer than 14reports and conclusions of commissions of inquiry since1967 highlighting major problems in relations between law enforcement agencies and indigenous people. Each time, the conclusions have been overwhelming and highlight a disturbing reality. The justice system has failed indigenous people. Are you going to respond, as you too often do, by moving on to the next one, or are you going to do what we expect you to do, which is to recognize that the justice system discriminates against indigenous people and that we have no less right to security than the rest of the population? In three months, police interventions have claimed more victims among our members than the pandemic. But it is not enough to simply take a knee and denounce racism. It's about standing up and taking action. Those are the words of GhislainPicard. The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Harder. Ms. Rachael Harder (Lethbridge, CPC): Over the last few months, Canada's democracy has been disregarded and an autocracy has been resurrected in its place. By refusing to hold regular parliamentary sittings, Mr. Trudeau is sending a strong message to the Canadian public that he alone is the one who matters. In 2014, he professed that Canadians want their Members of Parliament to be effective voices for their communities in Ottawa, and not merely mouthpieces for an all-too-powerful Prime Minister. As it stands, however, he has shut down Parliament. Effectively, he has stripped us, the opposition, of our privileges and our powers. Sadly, Mr. Trudeau has become the all-too-powerful Prime Minister that he once warned against. A government that does not allow for effective opposition is not functioning in the best interest of Canadians; it is operating in the best interest of itself and, even more so, the interest of the Prime Minister. Canadians deserve to flourish in a democracy, not merely survive under the autocracy that this Prime Minister has created. The Chair: We'll now go on to Ms. Zahid. Mrs. Salma Zahid (Scarborough Centre, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I would like to recognize the work of Agincourt Community Services Association and its tireless executive director, Lee Soda, who have been serving our community during the COVID-19 pandemic. Under more pressure than ever, their staff and volunteers continue to serve a community whose need was great even before the crisis. Their food bank helps over 4,000 people weekly. They have opened outdoor washrooms and hand-washing stations for vulnerable communities and are delivering groceries and other essentials to vulnerable seniors. ACSA is a bridge between those who can help and those who need help, and they are just one example of how our community has come together to meet this challenge. There are restaurants and businesses donating meals to front-line workers, residents answering the call to stock the food bank shelves and neighbours looking in on the vulnerable and isolated. I am so proud of our community's spirit. Scarborough is strong. The Chair: We'll now proceed to the questioning of ministers. Please note that we will suspend the proceedings twice in order to allow employees who provide support for the sitting to replace each other safely. The first question goes to the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Chair, for months Conservatives have been pointing out flaws in Liberal government programs that are preventing Canadians from getting the help they need. The Prime Minister has refused to make these very technical changes to get more help to Canadians who need it. For example, on the wage subsidy, more than two-thirds of the money allocated for that program has lapsed because businesses don't qualify. I have a simple question. Will the Prime Minister change the program to allow companies who have made acquisitions to access the wage subsidy to keep more people working? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Papineau, Lib.): Mr. Chair, from the very beginning we knew that as we rolled out measures, we would need to improve them and tweak them, and that's exactly what we've been doing over the past three months. We needed to make measures happen quickly for Canadians, and we did that. But we continued to improve them, to make additions and amendments so that more people could get the help they needed, including with the proposed legislation last week that expanded the reach of the wage subsidy to more businesses. Unfortunately, the Conservatives didn't even want us to debate that particular piece of legislation. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Actually, Mr. Chair, it was the Liberals who said no to the motion to allow this Parliament to sit to debate that motion, and even in that legislation they refused to allow businesses who have made acquisitions to access the program. Now, when we look at the rent relief program, it is so difficult to apply for it that many landlords are refusing to bother, leaving even more small businesses to fall through the cracks. In fact, of the $3 billion allocated to the rent relief program, only $39 million has been paid out. That's less than 2%. Now, the Prime Minister is still using talking points from April. It's now June and he has refused to fix these programs and has successfully talked out the calendar on the days that the House of Commons could meet to discuss these programs. When will he make these changes to get more help to Canadians who need it? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, throughout this pandemic, we have constantly been updating and expanding our various programs. We recognize, in conversations with the premiers, how important it is to make sure that we're working together, the provinces and the federal government, on issues like rent subsidies where commercial rent is indeed a provincial jurisdiction. Many provinces have moved forward with the eviction bans that are necessary to go along with this, and we'll continue to work with provinces to make sure that we're getting Canadians the help they need. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Mr. Chair, Canadians cannot wait. He has run down the clock on parliamentary sittings and he still refuses to make these changes to get more help to Canadians. Today, we learned that Telus has installed Huawei technology in downtown Ottawa. There are over 80 sites across the national capital region with Huawei technology installed. Some of these sites are very near sensitive government institutions, like government departments, the National Research Council, RCMP headquarters and the Bank of Canada. How long has the Prime Minister known that Huawei technology has been installed in the Ottawa area? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, first off, on the issue of Parliament, it has been meeting four times a week over the past many weeks, and members of the opposition have been able to continue to ask questions on COVID-19 and a broad range of subjects. Moreover, every two weeks the finance department puts forward at the finance committee the full transparent measures that we've taken, so that parliamentarians can study them. We are continuing to work in this crisis. At the same time Mr. Ziad Aboultaif (Edmonton Manning, CPC): Answer the question. The Chair: I'm sorry? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: in regard to Huawei technology there are strict rules for companies to follow and we assume they will all follow those. The Chair: We'll pause for a second and stop the clock. I want to remind the honourable members who are joining us virtually that heckling really does disrupt the whole session. Your face does come up and we do see who it is, so I just want to make sure that you're aware of that. Now we'll go back to Mr. Scheer. We have a minute and 10 seconds left. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister is bragging about accountability and transparency. Will he table an economic update before the House rises? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, throughout this unprecedented pandemic, we have been open and transparent about all of the measures we've put forward. We've updated the finance committee The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer: That's a long way of saying no, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister has pursued a policy of appeasement in pursuit of a personal vanity product at the UN. In the process, he's cozied up to dictators and human rights violators. He's abandoned Israel and committed funding to UNRWA, an organization whose schools have been used as storage facilities for Hamas rockets against Israeli civilians, and whose facilities have served as breeding grounds for racism and anti-Semitism. He has apologized for the Iranian regime when it shot down a plane full of Canadian citizens, and he refuses to list the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist entity. What's the point of having a seat at the table if you have to sell out Canadian principles to get there? The Chair: The Right Honourable Prime Minister. Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, we see that the Conservatives have kept with the Harper approach to international diplomacy. The failed presence of Canada on the world stage was an embarrassment for many Canadians for many years. That's why, when we took office five years ago, we demonstrated the kind of leadership on values that Canadians expected. We will continue to work around the world to defend multilateralism. The Chair: We have a point of order. Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May: This being a committee, we can have a point of order during what would have been question period. I am not sitting that far away from the Prime Minister, and I'm sorry, but Andrew Scheer used to be the Speaker of the House and should show better decorum. The Chair: We have a point of order from Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, on the same point of order, it is disgusting for the leader of the Green Party to use decorum as an excuse to interrupt the Leader of the Opposition in the middle of critical lines of questioning. The leader of the Green Party knows the rules of the House and shouldn't be abusing them to advance a partisan agenda. The Chair: We're getting into debate. I do want to point out that the time had run out. We're now moving on to the next line of questions. On a point of order, Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer: I appreciate the honourable leader of the Green Party, Elizabeth May, for that reminder. When I was Speaker I always appreciated her help and advice about how to improve decorum in here. I just want to say to the member, and to all members, that the reason that I cannot control myself is that the Prime Minister used the word embarrassment in answering a foreign affairs question, and it just made me think of the India trip. The Chair: I believe we're getting into debate and arguments. Mr. Blanchet, you have the floor. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: Mr. Chair, while the Greens and the Conservatives are saying that they'll be waiting outside after the meeting, I will ask a question. The Prime Minister has extended the Canada emergency response benefit, and that's good news, but it's not enough. Last week in the House, the government said it was urgent to fight fraud. For us, it was also urgent to adjust the CERB to the needs of the tourism, arts and agriculture sectors. Farmers are going to be seriously under-resourced. So what happened to the urgency of reforming the CERB? Why is the government refusing to talk to the opposition parties? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, I am very pleased to hear the hon. member finally align himself with the positions of the Liberal Party. Unfortunately, the Bloc is a week late. It should have let us debate these concerns in the House last week. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: It seems to me that the word alignment here is a fantasy. We have unequivocally proposed to extend the debate to reach an agreement, which brings me to my second question. Last week, the issue of assistance to people with disabilities was also a pressing concern, and it's even more so a week later. The Bloc proposed to extend the discussions and split the government's bill in two to help people with disabilities. Why is the government refusing this assistance to people with disabilities, when it could have been debated with the opposition in a civilized and proper way in a Parliament in which it has a minority? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: That was exactly what we wanted, but unanimous consent of the Chamber was required to debate this matter, and the Conservative Party of Canada voted against it. Unfortunately, we are going to have to find a different way to help people with disabilities. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: If the idea is so good and wonderful, why not start over and open the dialogue now? What's stopping the Prime Minister from being a rallying point and inviting us to take to each other and resolve the problem, rather than saying that he is going to pack up his toys and go home? The people with disabilities are the ones who will pay the price. Where was the Prime Minister on October21,2019? He received a minority mandate from Quebeckers and Canadians. Why is he behaving like something between a prime minister with a majority and a monarch by divine right? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: I've heard the Conservative Party and the Bloc Qubcois throw their accusations around. They don't point out that the House of Commons did indeed give its consent to extend the mandate of the Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic until the end of June. Three parties agreed, which was the right thing to do in the context of this minority government. We've been working with the other parties. However, as they did not get the results they wanted, they complained. Unfortunately, they too are part of a minority Parliament and must respect the voice of the majority of parliamentarians, just as we do. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: I might have been tempted, but that's unlikely to happen because the Prime Minister isn't me, he's him. It's therefore up to him to bring people together, open a dialogue and recall Parliament. All we were asking for was the opportunity to talk for an hour or two. However, suddenly he doesn't want to play anymore. It's not working anymore, and there's something a bit strange about that. In addition, the government wants to buy the right to interfere in provincial and Quebec jurisdictions for $14billion. However, Quebec and a number of provinces are refusing to allow it to interfere in their jurisdictions and are asking that this money be paid to them unconditionally. Is the Prime Minister trying to take advantage of the crisis or is he trying to create a constitutional crisis? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, the safety of Canadians is the responsibility of all levels of government. That's why we have proposed a $14billion agreement to ensure that all Canadians across the country experience a safe re-opening of the economy. This is a proposal that we are working on with the provinces because we know that there are needs across the country, including early childhood centres, screening and support for municipalities. The federal government wants to be there to help the provinces. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh (Burnaby South, NDP): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Indigenous leaders have expressed a lack of confidence in the RCMP commissioner's ability to tackle full-scale systemic racism, but the Prime Minister has expressed his confidence in the commissioner. What's that based on? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, over the past two years, Commissioner Lucki has made significant strides forward on an issue where there is still much more to do. We know that systemic racism exists in all of our institutions across this country The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: This is the same RCMP commissioner who just recently said that they couldn't explain what systemic racism was. Now the Prime Minister says that he has confidence, when indigenous leaders express their lack of confidence. Why does the Prime Minister believe that the RCMP commissioner can tackle systemic racism in the RCMP? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, systemic racism is something that touches every corner of our country, every corner of our institutions. It requires people to understand and move forward in coordinated ways with partners. The commissioner is committed to doing that, alongside members of our government. We will do that together and work with indigenous communities and black The Chair: Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, recent events have made it abundantly clear that to tackle the systemic racism at the level of the RCMP, we need a full-scale overhaul of the RCMP. Is the Prime Minister committed to a full-scale overhaul of the RCMP to root out systemic racism? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: As I've said many times, Mr. Chair, I am committed to addressing systemic racism in this country and taking significant, bold actions to reduce the amount of discrimination that indigenous peoples, that racialized Canadians face on a daily basis. We have much work to do, but we will do it together. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, Black Lives Matter has been calling for governments to defund the police. What it's saying is that we need to be better at where we spend our money, investing in communities and not policing. Will the Prime Minister commit to a review of the RCMP budget to allocate resources to community services and not to policing? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, over the past years we have been investing more directly and more money in community organizations, in the black community, and working with indigenous partners on the path to reconciliation. We have been investing in the kinds of community-based programs and solutions that are part of the solution. We know there is much more to do, and we will continue to look at all of our expenditures to make sure we're doing the right things. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, over the past few years, while the Prime Minister has been in office, the RCMP budget has increased by 31%. More money is going towards policing. In recent events we've seen people who needed a health care response to a health care crisis been killed by the RCMP. Does the Prime Minister believe that we need to be investing in a health care response instead of a police response for people who are faced with a crisis? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, the member opposite well knows that it's not an either-or. We need to make sure that our systems across the board, from our police systems to our judicial systems, to our health care systems, to our community systems, are actually addressing the systemic discrimination issues that are embedded within them That is exactly what we are going to continue to do in the coming years. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, with regard to the CERB extension, can the Prime Minister guarantee that everyone who is receiving CERB payments now will continue to do so without any gaps throughout the summer? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, I am happy to highlight that many Canadians who were on the CERB are now returning to work. Many more who are on the CERB now will be returning to work in the coming weeks. We know that as the economy gets back to work, people will want to The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Can the Prime Minister assure people who need it that they will continue to receive the CERB over the summer, yes or no? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: We are very pleased to point out that we are going to extend the Canada emergency response benefit for at least another eight weeks, because a lot of people are going to need it. Even if they want to work, there aren't enough jobs for everyone. So we'll be there for them, as we have been from the beginning. The Chair: We're going to pause and suspend proceedings just for a few moments to allow our support staff to substitute for one another in a healthy and safe way. We'll now proceed with Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod (KamloopsThompsonCariboo, CPC): Mr. Chair, it was really a surprise in the middle of a pandemic to see the Prime Minister at his first campaign stop last week in Ottawa. Certainly the game plan has become very transparent. He has a daily report show and he wants to sideline Parliament, dominate the news cycle and keep everyone in the dark about the state of the economy. According to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, there is no reason that he cannot provide the fiscal update during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the PBO has published a number of reports himself. Why won't the Prime Minister provide a fiscal update so we can all understand the state of our economy, or is that just not part of his campaign playbook? Hon. Mona Fortier (Minister of Middle Class Prosperity and Associate Minister of Finance): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Canada's economy is in a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We've been clear about that. We will continue to be open and transparent about the actions that we are taking to support families, businesses, workers, our health care system and our economy. This includes biweekly reports to Parliament on the full cost and status of our economic measures. Once it is possible to provide a clear economic projection, we will provide an update. We are in this together, and we are prepared to do whatever is necessary to support Canadians. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: Chair, Canada's economy was in trouble prior to the COVID, with some of the worst numbers since 2009. Government revenues in March dropped by 7. 2%, and it's shameful and, quite frankly, it's outrageous that they refuse to provide Parliament and Canadians with an economic update. Households during this challenging time know how much money is coming in and they know how much money is going out. The picture is not pretty, but they know what the picture is. Can the finance minister at least reveal the projected revenue decline in quarters one and two? Hon. Mona Fortier: The Canadian economy is going through a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We've known this for three months. We've continued to be open and transparent about the measures we've put in place for Canadians, workers and businesses. In fact, we have reported biweekly to Parliament on the total cost and status of our plan's measures. As soon as it's possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide a comprehensive update to Canadians The Chair: We go back to Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: Other governments have managed to provide updates for their citizens and carry out their responsibilities, but of course this government has sidelined Parliament with simply a question-but-no-answer period. Let's try something else. The forestry industry was in crisis even before the pandemic, with mills closing down and thousands of jobs lost. Eight weeks ago, Minister Freeland said, I have had many discussions with leaders in our forestry sector and the provinces about what we can do to support the industry today. Meanwhile, we've had support going to the arts and we've had support going to fisheries, just to name a few, but arguably for the industry that was having some of the most numerous challenges, it has been radio silence. That was eight weeks ago today. Can the government at least commit to releasing an updated softwood lumber transition plan before we rise? Hon. Seamus O'Regan (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Chair, we remain committed, of course, to the forestry industry and seeing it through this pandemic and this very uncertain time. The expanding market opportunities program, for instance, has helped Canada's forestry sector diversify, create jobs and open new markets. We've had new construction projects that are active today, using Canadian wood in key markets like Korea, Japan, China and the United States. Tomorrow this House will vote on our government's investment of $20. 97 million for this program. It's part of our budget 2019 commitment to invest $251 million over three years, and I hope the opposition will support us in that. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: It was stated in a major newspaper this morning that this government is like a sexy sports carvroom, vroom, vroombut with a history of breakdowns and major repairs. I think that might describe what has been happening. For forestry, it has been eight weeks and there has been nothing. There is another area that Deputy Prime Minister Freeland did talk about. We were talking about the U. S. softwood lumber duties that are being held in the United States. It's billions of dollars being held with the U. S. treasury. In April, she acknowledged that these duties are a real issue for the softwood lumber industry. What's been done since that time? Hon. David Lametti (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada): Mr. Chair, Canada's forestry industry supports good middle-class jobs in communities across our country. The sector is also an essential link in the medical equipment supply chain, and we thank them for all the work they're doing. We're aware of the immense pressures faced by this sector, especially at this time, and Deputy Prime Minister Freeland and others are taking that seriously and working through this issue. As our government has said repeatedly, we firmly believe that the U. S. duties on Canadian softwood lumber are unfair and unwarranted, and we will pursue all means in order to The Chair: Before continuing, I want to remind honourable members who are at home to make sure that the boom on their headsets is down. It just makes a better pickup. We heard everything, but it was a little distant. That's for everyone's benefit. We're now going to continue with Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell (Louis-Saint-Laurent, CPC): Mr. Chair, before I ask my question, I'd like to pay tribute to the Minister of Justice, particularly to his versatility. Today, he talked about forests. Yesterday, the Minister of Justice talked about Davie and indigenous affairs. Really, this minister is very versatile. My question is directly for the Minister of Finance. I like Mr. Lametti very much, but I'd like Mr. Morneau to answer my question. Yesterday, in a Senate parliamentary committee, the Minister of Finance half-opened the door to an economic update. Based on what he said, it seems that, as we speak, a committee of the Department of Finance is working on an economic update. Could Mr. Morneau tell Canadians when he is going to table this economic update? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, as we know, the Canadian economy is going through a period of extraordinary uncertainty. As soon as it's possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide a full update to Canadians. Right now, we can say that we have supported workers, businesses and Canadians with the emergency measures we have put in place. We will continue to do so, because we need to be sure that Canadians can get through this crisis. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I thought it was too good to be true. The Minister of Finance is opening the door, and the Minister of Small Business is closing it. We don't know when the economic update will take place, yet all across Canada, provinces are doing economic updates. Could Mr. Morneau explain to Canadians why he is unable to give one? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, since the beginning of the crisis, we have implemented the economic action plan to respond to COVID-19, and we've provided immediate assistance to Canadians, businesses and workers. Over 2. 5million jobs were protected by the Canada emergency wage subsidy. In addition, 8. 4million Canadians The Chair: We are returning to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, next Friday, the Quebec minister of finance, EricGirard, will give an economic update. If EricGirard can give one for Quebec, why can't BillMorneau give one for Canada? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, once again, we have been open and transparent from the outset. We have devoted our energy to support Canadians, workers and businesses. We will continue to do so. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I cannot judge the quality of the work done by the provinces, but what I do know is that Quebec, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland have also made efforts to support their residents economically. Those provinces are able to table economic updates. Yesterday, Saskatchewan even tabled a budget. Why is Bill Morneau unable to table an economic update for all Canadians? Hon. Mona Fortier: Let me repeat for my hon. colleague that we are going through extraordinarily uncertain times. We have continued to be open and transparent. We have reported biweekly to Parliament on the total cost and status of the measures in our economic response plan. Once again, as soon as clear economic projections can be provided, we will provide an update The Chair: Mr. Deltell has the floor. Mr. Grard Deltell: The minister talks about the total cost of the government's economic expenditures. So I ask the question: so far, over the past three months, how much has the pandemic cost Canadians? Hon. Mona Fortier: As I said earlier, it is important to note that we have put forward measures, including the wage subsidy, which have helped more than 2. 5million The Chair: Mr. Deltell has the floor. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I have been trying for four minutes to get anything remotely resembling an answer, and I'm getting absolutely nothing. I am not asking questions for myself; I am asking questions for Canadians. Why are the government and the Minister of Finance, Bill Morneau, not able to table an economic update when some provinces are able to? Hon. Mona Fortier: Once again, I would like to remind my hon. colleague that we have provided interest-free loans to businesses. More than 669,000loans have been approved. We have continued to support businesses and Canadians during this time The Chair: Mr. Deltell, you have time for a very brief question. Mr. Grard Deltell: The only thing that distinguishes the provinces that table economic updates and the current government is political will. Why does Bill Morneau not have the political will to tell Canadians the truth? Hon. Mona Fortier: Once again, we have been open and transparent. As soon as it is possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide Canadians with a full update. The Chair: We will now continue with Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya (MarkhamUnionville, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. COVID-19 has sparked and spurred anti-Asian racism. These are not just racist comments online; Asian Canadians have been attacked. What is the government doing to combat anti-Asian racism? Hon. Bardish Chagger (Minister of Diversity and Inclusion and Youth): Mr. Chair, since our government took office in 2015, we have been making investments and working with communities. The difference between our government and the previous government is that we will actually consult with Canadians, including black Canadians, including Asian Canadians, to respond to the challenges, including with an anti-racism secretariat and an anti-racism strategy. It will take all of us. I appreciate the member's question, so that we can also work together. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, one business owner I know in Markham has operated for 20 years. Now she's looking at over $9,000 in rent due on June 24. COVID-19 has crippled her sales and she's going to go out of business. Her landlord has no interest in the Canada emergency commercial rent assistance program. How can the government say this program is working? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, this program was made possible by working with the provinces, and we will continue to encourage landlords and tenants to work together to make sure they have relief for this very difficult time in which they're living. We're continuing to monitor the CECRA program and we will make it possible for businesses to have access to the program. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, the government business rent relief program has been a total disaster. Even the government's own numbers show it is a failure. As of June 8, less than 2% of the $3 billion budgeted has been spent. What is it going to take for the government to admit that the program is a disaster and needs changes? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we know our government has been working closely with the provinces and territories to deliver the Canada emergency commercial rent assistance. Although the tenant-landlord relationship is ultimately the responsibility of the provinces and territories, our government has stepped up to provide support through the tools we have and through CMHC so that small businesses can get the rent relief they need. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, according to the government, there are around 1. 1 million small businesses in Canada. At committee, we were told only around 5,500 of them are receiving COVID-19 rent relief. That number is shameful. When will the Liberal government wake up and make the changes? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we welcome the steps some provinces and territories have taken to further protect commercial tenants. We will continue to monitor this program closely and ensure that Canada's small businesses are supported during this challenging time. We will continue to monitor to see The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, there was no answer. When can the government make these changes? Hon. Mary Ng (Minister of Small Business, Export Promotion and International Trade): Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable colleague that we are doing everything and will continue to do everything to help small businesses in our country. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, on May 27 the CBSA seized 65 small handguns at Pearson airport, the largest firearms seizure on record. It is clear that smuggled handguns are the weapon of choice for criminals. Why is the Prime Minister focusing on an ineffective municipal ban? Hon. Bill Blair (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness): Mr. Chair, I would point out that gun violence in any of our communities is unacceptable, and it's important that governments and communities take steps to prevent guns from getting into the hands of criminals. That's why we do important work at our border to keep guns from being smuggled into our country, but it also necessitates additional work. I don't think you can talk about gun violence without talking about stronger gun control. That's why our government has taken a very strong position and will strengthen gun control to keep Canadians safe. The Chair: Mr. Saroya, you may have a 10-second question, if that's possible, please. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, COVID-19 has not stopped gun violence in the GTA. My constituents are concerned about shootings minutes away from their homes. We know the Liberals'gun ban won't change anything, but a focus on smuggled guns and criminals will. When will they make that change? Hon. Bill Blair: Mr. Chair, stronger gun control laws are an effective tool, and that's been told to us by police leadership and communities across the country. We're also making investments in borders and law enforcement. Most importantly, we're making investments in communities and in kids to keep communities safe. I look forward to the member's strong support of those measures when we bring them forward. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback (Prince Albert, CPC): Mr. Chair, the U. S. and the U. K. began their second round of free trade negotiations yesterday. Does the government intend to have a trade agreement in place before the U. K. tariffs come into effect on January 1? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, the U. K. is a strong partner of Canada, as is the European Union, and we're looking forward to continuing that strong relationship The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Thank you, Mr. Chair. With respect to the negotiations with the U. K. , when will the minister publish her goals and objectives for this agreement? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, we're going to continue to work to ensure that any future agreement is going to be based on the best interests of Canadians, and we will The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Can the minister confirm whether they've entered into negotiations with the U. K. at this point? Hon. Mary Ng: Our government is analyzing the most-favoured-nation tariff regimes schedule the U. K. has put out. I want to assure Canadians The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Mr. Chair, during the CUSMA negotiations, a deal was struck between the Liberal Party and the NDP that the government would notify this House 90 days before it starts any negotiations on any trade agreement. When will the minister notify this House? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that we will absolutely be sharing information. Right now, we are analyzing the most-favoured-nation tariff regimes schedule put out by the U. K. Mr. Randy Hoback: Mr. Chair, any meaningful attempts to reform the WTO needs buy-in from the United States. I think all countries agree on that. Has the minister discussed a WTO reform with the USTR, the United States trade representative? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, the Ottawa Group is a consensus-based group, and any decisions will be taken together. Of course, any meaningful reform must include the U. S. The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Has the U. S. been invited to the Ottawa Group meetings? Hon. Mary Ng: The Ottawa Group is a consensus-based group limited to WTO members who are committed to bringing forward ideas and proposals The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Just as with any other trade agreement, the minister has committed to this House that she will publish the list of goals and responsibilities for the negotiations. When will she publish the list for the Ottawa Group? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I'm thrilled that we had an excellent meeting of the Ottawa Group yesterday where, as a group, we agreed to take concrete action. Mr. Randy Hoback: Will the minister be releasing a list of Canada's objectives we would like to see the new WTO's director-general pursue prior to the upcoming DG election? Hon. Mary Ng: We published an action statement from the Ottawa Group yesterday. I would encourage the member opposite to have a look. I'm certainly happy to send it to him. Mr. Randy Hoback: Going back to economic prosperity, we know that the U. S. has been having talks with other countries around the world. Has Canada yet been invited to this group? Hon. Mary Ng: I'm pleased to continue to pursue the objectives of trade diversification. I would remind the member that we have access to a billion and a half customers through our very robust Mr. Randy Hoback: A billion and a half customers is fine if you have a functioning WTO, but if you don't have a functioning WTO, then a billion and a half customers may not be fully accessible to our suppliers, manufacturers and agriculture producers. Can the minister confirm that she's in discussions with the U. S. in joining this economic prosperity group? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that nothing is more important than standing up and helping create markets for our Canadian businesses and to help our small businesses get more export-ready so that they can grow into the international marketplace. This is work that we've committed to do, and we will keep working on it, particularly The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Yesterday Saskatchewan presented a budget. Not only did they present the budget, but they'll also actually debate the budget and pass the budget in Parliament. There's full accountability. Why won't this government do the same? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons): Mr. Chair, the House is sitting in this hybrid format so that people can participate in the House on the screens. I'm sure my colleague is happy to see that his own colleagues are able to ask questions and participate. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Williamson. Mr. John Williamson (New Brunswick Southwest, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will say that this is no substitute for Parliament, but I appreciate the opportunity. New Brunswick families and businesses are rapidly making adjustments to manage and live with the coronavirus pandemic. Businesses here are opening and services are being offered. Families are preparing for summer and even planning ahead for a new school year in September. We have a lot of work ahead of us. One notable absence is Service Canada. When does the government plan on opening its service counters to assist Canadians again? Hon. Ahmed Hussen (Minister of Families, Children and Social Development): Mr. Chair, our government is committed to ensuring that Canadians continue to have access to the benefits that they rely on through Service Canada. We have redeployed over 3,000 additional staff to ensure that Canadians continue to have access to their benefits. We've established a 1,500-agent call centre to make sure that people can get access to the phone lines to get the help they need. Mr. John Williamson: Service Canada is about more than providing COVID-19 information and benefits. Provincial governments are working hard to adjust to Canada's new normal by opening up businesses and front-line government services. When will we see Service Canada play its role and open its service counters in our communities? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Mr. Chair, we're currently working with our world-class public health experts to determine how best to reopen the Service Canada network for the public. Make no mistake: Our Service Canada employees have gone above and beyond to ensure that Canadians continue to have access to the services that they rely on and the benefits that they need. Mr. John Williamson: Please don't hide behind health experts when the Prime Minister is appearing in the middle of large protests, yet is afraid to bring back the Parliament of Canada to do its business. In fact, the New Brunswick legislature is open for regular business. Bills are being studied, opposition input is being heard and MLAs are voting on legislation, not rubber-stamping government bills. By comparison, our Parliament is stuck in pretending it cannot function like other law-making assemblies. Canadians are in the dark about our country's finances. When will the government table an economic update so taxpayers understand what was spent, what is owed by our kids and grandchildren, and what the government's fiscal footing looks like? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, nobody's hiding. Nobody's doing anything like that. The only reason my colleague is able to ask a question and I'm able to answer his question is that he's right there on the screen. We have this hybrid format that cares for MPs across the country, not only the ones sitting in the House. Mr. John Williamson: This is no substitute for Parliament. I will ask my question again. When will the government table an economic update so that taxpayers understand what was spent, what is owed by our kids and grandchildren, and what the government's fiscal footing looks like in today's environment? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, I thank my honourable colleague for his question. Canada's economy is still in a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We have been open and transparent about the measures we have been providing to support families, businesses and workers. Even our health care The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Williamson. Mr. John Williamson: Except you have not. The Auditor General is underfunded. We have no idea about the total of government spending. Again I will ask when the government will table an economic update so that we can have an understanding of what the government's fiscal footing looks like. Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we have included biweekly reports to Parliament on the full cost and status of our economic response plan measures since the beginning. I have said, and I will continue to say, that when it is possible to provide a clear economic projection, we will provide an update. Mr. John Williamson: What is the full cost to date of the government's COVID-19 relief measures, as the minister just claimed the government has provided to Parliament? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we have provided support for workers, and 2. 5 million Canadians have been helped through the Canadian wage subsidy. We have provided businesses with some loans, and 669,000 businesses have applied for these loans. Even for the CERB, we have over eight million Canadians who have applied. The Chair: We will now continue with Mr. Bergeron. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: Mr. Chair, as the leader of the Bloc Qubcois mentioned a few moments ago, the government promised $14billion to Quebec and the provinces, but in targeted transfers. That is very little compared to the considerable expenses incurred to deal with the current crisis. But Quebec and the provinces don't just want this money to be transferred unconditionally, they also want a real discussion on a permanent increase in health care transfers. PremierLegault was rightly concerned about the feds'interference into provincial jurisdictions. The federal government, which does not manage any hospitals or long-term care centres, must stop playing armchair quarterback and transfer the money to the only governments with jurisdiction over health, that is, Quebec and the provinces. Will it do so without delay and without nitpicking? The Honourable Patty Hajdu (Minister of Health): Mr. Chair, we know that the Government of Quebec is working hard to ensure the safety of Quebeckers and we are here to support them. As part of this co-operation, we have developed health and safety recommendations for workplaces, we have purchased medical equipment for workers and we have supported the province in developing its reopening program. We are continuing this important partnership to ensure the safety of Quebeckers and all Canadians. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: The co-operation is so effective that the money is staying in the federal government's coffers. In fact, when the federal government wants to impose conditions, it always takes longer. We see it with housing, for which Quebec has not received a dime of the $1. 4billion it is owed. We have also seen it with infrastructure funds, particularly for public transit, water systems and water treatment. The health crisis is now. The needs are now. The much needed reopening of our economy is now. Will the government finally transfer the money without messing around or quibbling? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I am pleased to confirm to my colleague that there is no messing around, no quibbling, nothing of the kind. There is co-operation between two levels of government. It is natural to have discussions with all the provinces and with Quebec. I myself am taking part in some discussions and several of my colleagues are taking part in others. There is a clear willingness on the part of the federal government to co-operate with Quebec and all the provinces. That is what we are doing and that is perhaps what the Bloc Qubcois does not like. It likes bickering, but for the time being, there is none. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: We don't want to bicker, we want the money to be paid out. It is not complicated, for heaven's sake! We do not want a blank cheque. Right now, the money remains in the federal government's coffers. There is $1. 4billion that should be paid to Quebec for social housing and is sitting in the federal government's coffers. We are waiting for money for water treatment and water systems, but it is sitting in the federal government's coffers. It's almost July. We are wasting precious months for construction. What is the government waiting for to pay out the money so that we can get our economy rolling? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: The federal government is a very active partner. We are discussing and working with Quebec on infrastructure projects. We are continuing our discussions and negotiations on the housing agreement. Nothing is at a standstill. We are discussing and co-operating for the well-being of all Quebeckers. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: MadamChair, things are definitely at a standstill, because the money is owed and has not been paid out. Months are going by while construction is not taking place. We need to reopen the economy. We need more flexibility in the gas tax program and Quebec's contribution to allow municipalities to undertake work on city halls, community centres and fire stations. We need the federal government to contribute to funding public transit operations, which have become a real financial drain because of the drop in ridership. What is the federal government waiting for to provide real help instead of just talking? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: When it comes to just talking, the Bloc Qubcois has a lot of experience, I admit. We, in the government, are working and co-operating. We are not waiting with our arms folded, we are discussing a series of issues with Quebec. We do more than discuss, we work and we co-operate. We are working on projects, not only in infrastructure, but in a number of other areas. Just think of the co-operation of our armed forces in the CHSLDs, for example. We are here for Quebeckers. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Your time has run out, Mr. Bergeron. We'll go now to Ms. Khalid, from MississaugaErin Mills. Ms. Iqra Khalid (MississaugaErin Mills, Lib.): Madam Chair, I'll be splitting my time with the member for GlengarryPrescottRussell. During a consultation with the business community in Mississauga, the concerns of businesses, big and small, included the need for stable, affordable and safe child care. With the lack of such child care spaces, an economic recovery plan post-COVID cannot be effective until and unless we make sure that people are able to get back to work. I've heard from parents across Mississauga that they're being forced to stay home because of inadequate child care and that they have to choose between putting food on the table and keeping family safe. More and more employers are realizing that good employees are unable to contribute to their business growth because of this challenge. Now more than ever, we need to find long-term sustainable solutions for Canadians who face challenges with regard to child care. I ask our Minister of Families, Children and Social Development this: What is our strategy to tackle this ever-growing need for a national child care plan? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I thank the honourable member for her question and for her important advocacy and work on this important issue. We understand that child care is important to our economic recovery and our social infrastructure. We know the pressure that COVID-19 has placed on families, especially parents. That is why we're committed to continuing to work with provinces and territories to renew our agreements on early learning and child care, and to provide, at the earliest opportunity, $400 million in support. In addition to that, the Prime Minister has already indicated that child care will be part of the $14-billion pledge to provinces and territories to assist them with respect to COVID-19 recovery efforts. Over the next decade, we will continue to invest $7. 5 billion, and together we have achieved the goal of over 40,000 affordable child care spaces. We are also committed to continuing to create over 250,000 before-school and after-school child care spaces for kids under the age of 10. We will continue to work with our partners in the provinces and territories to ensure that Canadians can continue to have access to safe, quality and affordable child care. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for GlengarryPrescottRussell has the floor. Mr. Francis Drouin (GlengarryPrescottRussell, Lib.): MadamChair, small businesses play a fundamental role in the Canadian economy. In an article in LaPresse, the Minister of Economic Development warned us that the economic crisis caused by severe lockdown measures could have more serious consequences in small municipalities than in large cities. Based on discussions with the chambers of commerce in my riding, it is clear that federal government assistance will be essential for the reopening of the economy, specifically for the rural economy. In fact, I would like to acknowledge the work of the Prescott-Russell community development corporation, under the leadership of John Candie. After announcing almost $57million to help SMEs adopt e-commerce, how does the minister plan to help SMEs and the business community in our rural areas? Hon. Mlanie Joly (Minister of Economic Development and Official Languages): MadamChair, I also thank my colleague from GlengarryPrescottRussell for his important question. Yes, our regions are important and the entrepreneurs in those regions are creative and daring. They take risks, but they are currently facing huge challenges. So we are here for them. We understand their anxiety and we want to help them. That is why we have decided to invest heavily in rural economic development. It is also why we have doubled the budget of CFDCs and Community Futures organizations across the country. In southern Ontario we have reinvested over $260million in the regional economic development agency FedDev. In the great riding of GlengarryPrescottRussell, which I am particularly fond of and where there is a very good member of Parliament, there is an additional $1million for entrepreneurs in the region. We have been, we are and we will be at your side. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for GlengarryPrescottRussell has 36seconds left. No? Then we'll go to the honourable member for ElmwoodTranscona. Mr. Daniel Blaikie (ElmwoodTranscona, NDP): Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with the member for Victoria. Madam Chair, Krystal is a community worker in Winnipeg. She has been working from home since late March, taking care of her child, who is out of school, and caring for her father, who is living with her and vulnerable to COVID-19. Her employer called her up recently and asked her to physically return to work or to take a leave. As a parent and a care provider to a vulnerable person, she's not comfortable with physically returning to work. Service Canada won't give Krystal a straight answer as to whether going on leave and collecting CERB would count as refusing a reasonable job offer. With Bill C-17 looming in the background, Krystal is worried about jail time and fines if she does right by her child and her father by applying for CERB. Can Krystal reasonably refuse to go back to work and collect CERB, or will she be considered a fraudster? That's my question for the minister that is specific to Krystal's case. As well, what is the minister doing to provide clear direction to Canadians and to Service Canada agents so that people can get a clear answer before making their decision about returning to work? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I want to thank the honourable member for his important question. We recognize that Canadian workers will face various different situations, including those who are ineligible for the Canada emergency support benefit. We'll continue to work with workers to make sure they're able to be supported throughout this pandemic. The fact of the matter is that every province has workplace health and safety regulations that must be supported. We understand that workers have the right not to work in unsafe situations. We also understand that many Canadians do want to go back to work; and in fact many have. We will make sure that we support Canadians throughout this recovery process. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member has 47 seconds left, and that includes the answer. Mr. Daniel Blaikie: Madam Chair, that answer is really not good enough, because the problem here is that Krystal needs to know whether she can continue receiving CERB or not. That's a federal government decision, and she needs to know whether the federal government is going to accuse her of fraud and put her in jail or assess fines against her if she refuses to go back to work because she wants to take care of her child and her father. What is the minister's answer to that? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister has 20 seconds to respond. Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that if a Canadian has to take care of a loved one due to circumstances surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, they are indeed eligible to receive the CERB and remain receiving that benefit. Ms. Laurel Collins (Victoria, NDP): As we deal with the global pandemic, we cannot lose sight of the ongoing climate emergency. Canada has missed every single climate target it set, and we need to break the cycle of empty promises. Canadians want their government to be accountable, and environmental groups such as Ecojustice, CAN-Rac, Environmental Defence and West Coast Environmental Law, as well as the government's own climate institute, are all calling for legally binding climate targets. When will the government put its climate targets into law with legally binding milestones so we never miss another target again? Hon. Navdeep Bains (MississaugaMalton, Lib.): Madam Chair, I thank my honourable colleague for her question. I totally agree with her when it comes to the environment. It is a priority not only for us as a government, but it should be a priority for all Canadians. That is why we have put measures in place to put a price on pollution through carbon pricing. That is why we have a comprehensive plan that also includes significant investments in clean technology, which will help reduce our carbon footprint. I am confident that these measures will enable us to not only meet but exceed our 2030 target and also allow us to achieve our net-zero 2050 target. Ms. Laurel Collins: That didn't answer my question. I asked when. Empty promises won't get us any closer to meeting our climate targets. Can the minister tell us when his government will introduce climate accountability laws? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I think the fundamental issue here is having a plan when it comes to the environment. I'm confident that the measures that we have takenputting a price on pollution, investing in clean technology, and other key measures to reduce our carbon footprint, including the investment in infrastructureunderpin a plan The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to the honourable member for Victoria. Ms. Laurel Collins: This government is not meeting its targets, but it is meeting with oil and gas lobbyists. The pandemic has made us reflect on our priorities. Are we going to choose a just recovery with good, sustainable jobs for Canadian workers, or are we going to keep subsidizing oil and gas companies to the tune of billions, subsidies that we know are ending up in the pockets of CEOs and shareholders? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will have a brief answer from the minister. Hon. Navdeep Bains: Again, Madam Chair, this is the fundamental difference between us and the NDP. We fundamentally believe that the entire economy needs to work together, including the energy sector, to enable us to achieve those 2030 and 2050 targets. We are going to work together to support our workers, including in the energy sector, to reduce our carbon footprint. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Now we will go to the honourable member for SaskatoonGrasswood, Mr. Waugh. Mr. Kevin Waugh (SaskatoonGrasswood, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. When I was last here in May, I was on my way back to Saskatoon from Toronto, and there was actually someone on my flight who tested positive for COVID-19. I was never informed of it by the airline. I found out two weeks later. The report was in the news media. Why hasn't the government put rules in place requiring airlines to reach out to individuals like me who may have been exposed to COVID on their flights? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, it's hard to speculate on what happened from such a vague description of his experience, but I will say that we have every confidence in local public health, which is doing the hard and heavy lifting of contact tracing and working very closely with all kinds of different sectors, including airline sectors, to make sure that close contacts of people who have tested positive for COVID-19 are found, are traced and are isolated. I assume that the member took appropriate precautions on the flight and I hope that he continues to do so. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, it was reported that the individual on my plane who had COVID was actually connecting in Toronto from an international flight. The Prime Minister announced last week that they would begin mandating temperature checks for those bound for Canada in July. Will international travellers be tested when they land in Canada, or will they be relying on the tests that take place in other countries? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, this is a very important question, because the protection and safety of all Canadiansin particular, Canadian travellersis a high priority for our government. We've been working very closely with the airlines. At the current time, we are putting temperature screening in place. That will initially be done primarily by the airlines that are in the best position to do it at this point in time. We are also now going to be including CATSA, the people who do the security screening, so that when people enter the airport, they will also be screened. We believe that is going to be the most effective measure to keep all travellers safe. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, last week five of the largest professional sports leagues in North America put out a statement of support for my private member's bill, the safe and regulated sports betting act. Given the struggles that clubs and leagues are facing due to COVID-19, including having no fans at all in the stands for the foreseeable future, the legalization of sports betting would be a welcome opportunity not only to engage fans but to generate much-needed revenue. Will the government commit now to supporting the sports and gaming industries by supporting my private member's bill, Bill C-218? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, I've had the opportunity on many occasions to speak to members of Parliament and also to mayors and councillors and people living in border communities where there are casinos. They've raised this issue a number of times. We've listened very carefully to the concerns that have been expressed by them. I would like to advise the member that I look forward to the opportunity for a careful examination of his bill. We are at all times concerned about maintaining the integrity of the gaming industry within our community. That's the best way to protect Canadians. At the same time, we will examine his bill with all of the necessary attention to make sure it's given full consideration. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, it's the first time in history that we've had the five professional leagues in this country joining together for this bill. Newspapers rely, as we all know, on advertising for a significant portion of their revenue. This includes the usual flyers as well as in-paper ads. I've heard major concerns from a number of newspapers in this country about competition they're receiving today from Canada Post, which is offering massive free postage services. In fact, I have one of their ads here, which says that the first 6,000 pieces of postage are 100% free. If the government is genuine about wanting to ensure that newspapers and journals can succeed in this country, why are you allowing Canada Post to use its monopoly power to actually threaten local newspapers in this country? Hon. Steven Guilbeault (Minister of Canadian Heritage): Thank you, Madame Chair, and I thank the member opposite for his question. As you well know, a healthy news and media sector in Canada is a priority for our government, which is why we have put in place a number of measures before COVID-19 and during COVID-19, and we will continue to be there for them after this crisis has gone by. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Before we go on, we will be taking a break to do a bit of a changeover. I also want to remind members to address their questions and comments to the chair. We will go now to the honourable member for BruceGreyOwen Sound, Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff (BruceGreyOwen Sound, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Mr. Blair stated yesterday here in the House that the AR-15 has been used in mass killings in Canada on many occasions. Mr. Blair, please provide just one specific instance in which an AR-15 was used in a mass killing in Canada. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I remind the member to address questions and comments to the chair. The honourable minister may respond. Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I think this is an excellent opportunity to point out to the member opposite how important it is to actually listen to what was said. If you go back and review that tape, and I would invite you to do so, you'll see that I said the AR-15 and other weapons like themreferring of course to military-style assault weaponshave been used in mass killings, and I actually cited a number of examples. Madam Chair, I think it would be very useful if the member's questions were based on facts. Mr. Alex Ruff: I can remind Mr. Blair that I actually have watched the video a couple of times, and he specifically states that the AR-15 was used in mass killings in Canada, yet he has yet to provide one. My additional question is to Mr. Blair. Out of the recently banned firearms on May 1, how many have been or are still currently in use by the Canadian Armed Forces? Hon. Bill Blair: That's an excellent question, Madam Chair, because it's very important to provide Canadians with clarity. We have prohibited these firearms for non-law enforcement and non-military use. The military uses weapons that were actually designed for soldiers to use in combat to shoot other soldiers. That's the appropriate use of such weapons, Madam Chair. They're not things to be played with in civilian society. Mr. Alex Ruff: As a soldier for 25 years, I'll remind Mr. Blair that none of the currently prohibited firearms would be used in the Canadian Armed Forces. I asked him a question on whether any of them is being or ever has been used in the Canadian Armed Forces. Are any of the recently banned firearms still in use, or have they ever been in use, in any military in the world? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, I think it's important to also recognize that the basic origin, the provenance of the weapons that we have prohibited, was in their original design. They were designed for military use for various military forces around the world. As I've said previously, they were designed for soldiers to use in combat to kill other soldiers. They're very efficient in their design for killing people. They have no purpose in Canadian society. Mr. Alex Ruff: As someone who has used many military-style firearms and who is actually involved in helping define what we purchase in the military, I would use none of the ones that are currently prohibited. I have a question, Chair, for Minister MacAulay. Can he please confirm whether Veterans Affairs has a plan to address the claims backlog, yes or no? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (Minister of Veterans Affairs): Madam Chair, I appreciate my honourable colleague's question, and yes, we've indicated that it's a major priority. That's why I'm so pleased that the supplementary estimates contained just under $90 million to address hiring more staff, improving the process and making sure that we attack the backlog in an appropriate manner. Mr. Alex Ruff: Madame Chair, does that plan exist in written form? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Well, Madam Chair, I can assure you that it's in the supplementary estimates, and of course, this money is The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We'll go back to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff: The question is about the plan, not how much money has been allocated. I am asking for the written plan on how to address the backlog. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Madam Chair, I can tell my honourable colleague that the money is in the supplementary estimates, and with the money we're able to attack this problem in an appropriate manner, and that's what is important for our veterans. Mr. Alex Ruff: The deputy minister committed on March 10 that a written plan would be provided to the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs within a month and made public. Did the deputy minister or the department provide the minister that plan within a month? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Madame Chair, I'm sure my honourable colleague wants an appropriate plan and he would be fully aware this just under $90 million would make a big difference in the plan to attack the backlog. We The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We'll go back to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff: Thank you, Chair. Therefore, my question is, if the deputy minister in the department provided him with an appropriate plan or a written plan, why is he questioning how appropriate that plan is? I have complete confidence in the deputy minister's ability to produce a written plan. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister may give a brief answer, please. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I can assure my honourable colleague that with the appropriate funding, we will address the backlog in Veterans Affairs. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Parry SoundMuskoka, Mr. Aitchison. Mr. Scott Aitchison: Thank you, Madam Chair. My question is about summer camps again. Three weeks ago, I asked this government if the finance minister would meet with the beleaguered summer camp sector. Summer camps, which are a social and economic mainstay in Parry SoundMuskoka and all of northern Ontario, have been crippled by the global pandemic. It's costing millions of jobs, and some camps are actually in danger of folding. Aside from a brief follow-up conversation over the phone with the junior minister, there has still been no action from this government. When will the Minister of Finance meet with summer camps to find a solution? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I recognize the honourable member's important question and his focus on summer camps. We recognize the importance of looking at that and paying attention to the needs of that community. We will continue to engage with them, as we have, to ensure and find ways in which we can get their feedback and find ways in which we can support them. That work is ongoing, and I assure the honourable member that our focus is on the kids and on ensuring that they have access to summer camps for this year. Mr. Scott Aitchison: I don't know why you need to find ways to get feedback. The summer camps association has given lots of feedback and my office has given lots of feedback, so I don't see what's confusing about this. However, I've become accustomed to not really getting answers to questions, so I will go to the next one. The Ontario government's regional reopening plan permits cruise boats to resume on Georgian Bay, yet the federal government is refusing to allow these vessels to operate until July 1. Therefore, small businesses such as the Island Queen cruiser in Parry Sound, which has only a very few precious weeks to operate in the first place, is losing yet another two weeks because of federal inaction. This not only hurts the cruise boat industry but also hurts tourism and small businesses all through our area. Will the Minister of Transport take a regional approach himself by lifting the federal ban on Georgian Bay, just like the Province of Ontario has done? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister may reply. Is there a response? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, there is. I apologize for the confusion. Let me respond, if I may, on behalf of the Minister of Transport. There have been a number of very important discussions with the provinces, in particular with the Province of Ontario, around provisions regarding pleasure craft. There are certain restrictions that will come to an end on June 30. We're working very closely with our provincial counterparts to address this issue, but we want to ensure that it will be done safely. Mr. Scott Aitchison: Madam Chair, I actually gave the minister a heads-up that I would be asking that question. He sent me an email today saying he was not going to be able to be in the House, and it's great of him to do that. He said that whoever was going to fill in for him would have an answer, but again, that was not really an answer. The next issue I would like to bring this government's attention to is the deplorable state of rural Internet service in Parry SoundMuskoka. Quite simply, there are too many gaps in service, and what is available is generally way too expensive. We have families trying to work and teach their kids from home on unreliable and outrageously expensive Internet service, and we have too many small businesses that either cannot access or afford reliable Internet services. Today Greg Rickford, the Ontario energy minister, and Laurie Scott, Ontario Minister of Infrastructure, announced $2. 3 million for seven northern Ontario broadband projects. Minister, will when your government get serious and become a reliable partner for the Government of Ontario and the private sector to deliver this crucial modern-day infrastructure to rural Canadians? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I remind the member that he needs to address the questions and comments to the chair. The honourable minister may reply. Hon. Maryam Monsef (Minister for Women and Gender Equality and Rural Economic Development): Madam Chair, in the best of times, life without access to high-speed Internet is hard. During a pandemic, the challenges are that much more pronounced. Our government's unprecedented investments are already connecting a million more Canadian households to this essential service, but until we achieve universal access our work is not done. We will work with our partners, including provinces across the country, to connect every Canadian household to high-quality Internet access that is affordable and reliable. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member has 30 seconds. Mr. Scott Aitchison: I think I can squeeze something in here, then. I'm wondering, then, Madam Chair, since the Province of Ontario has used the Northern Ontario Heritage Corporation Fund to make this announcement, what about using FedNor to make the same kind of announcement, and partner with the province? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister has a brief answer. Hon. Mlanie Joly: Obviously we believe in the importance of northern Ontario; that's why we nearly doubled the budget of FedNor. We will continue to invest in businesses and people all around Parry Sound, Muskoka and northern Ontario. If my colleague has specific projects in mind, please come and see me and let's have a conversation. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for Montmagny-L'Islet-KamouraskaRivire-du-Loup, Mr. Gnreux, has the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux (MontmagnyL'IsletKamouraskaRivire-du-Loup, CPC): Thank you, MadamChair. I will continue along the same lines as my colleague. During this pandemic, we are realizing the extent to which reliable high-speed Internet service is needed for Canada's economy. There are still places where telework is not possible today because of the lack of adequate coverage. However, since2015, the government has committed to addressing the situation through three new programs. Benot Pilotto, who is the mayor of Saint-Onsime-d'Ixworth, in my riding, wrote to me a few days ago. That is why I am asking you what concrete results the government plans to achieve for our rural areas by the end of the year. Hon. Maryam Monsef: At the best of times, life without high-speed Internet access is difficult. During a pandemic, the difficulties are even greater. Our government's unprecedented investments are already connecting an additional one million Canadian households to this essential service. However, until we achieve universal access, our job is not done. We are working The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Gnreux, you have the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, I am simply asking the minister to tell me when the mayor of Saint-Onsime-d'Ixworth will be able to tell his residents when the Internet will be available in his municipality. It is not complicated. What does the government plan to do so that rural municipalities across Canada can have access to the Internet as soon as possible? What is its plan? Hon. Maryam Monsef: We are working with partners across the country to ensure that every Canadian household is connected to a high-quality, accessible and affordable high-speed Internet service. Madam Chair, I assure my colleagues that we share the same goal, and we will work with all our partners across the country to ensure every Canadian household has access The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Gnreux, you have the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, I am still not getting a specific answer. According to the government's plan, when will rural Canadian businesses and households be connected? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I would ask the honourable minister to provide a brief answer. Hon. Maryam Monsef: Madam Chair, those plans are under way, and we will have more to share in the coming days. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: It seems that the Minister of Rural Economic Development plans to announce a new plan this week. Can she tell us how this program will differ from the Connect to Innovate program, which is already in place? Can the minister tell us whether her program will solve the problem of the 25square kilometre hexagonal zones, which unfortunately make many projects ineligible for the CRTC's broadband fund? Hon. Maryam Monsef: Madam Chair, I'm pleased to share with my colleague that the model he's referring to, the hexagon model, is no more. Our maps are much more precise now to ensure that we do not leave Canadians behind. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, this year, the Canada summer jobs program is a real fiasco. I think all my colleagues will agree with me. On May13,100jobs were announced in my riding; on May20,16jobs were announced; on May27,13jobs were announced; on June3,12jobs were announced; and on June10, only one job was announced. As we speak, an amount of $100,000 is still to be confirmed in my riding. Can we have an announcement, once and for all? Let's stop the piecemeal announcements and finally confirm the remaining jobs today so that our organizations can have young people before the summer starts on the weekend. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable minister. Hon. Ahmed Hussen: MadamChair, I thank the honourable member for his question. We recognize the important role that the Canada summer jobs program is playing in supporting employers and young workers in communities right across the country. Our government is working very hard to help employers adapt to the realities of the COVID-19 pandemic, and at the same time is supporting young Canadians as they begin to look for summer employment. We've introduced flexibilities into the program to ensure that more young workers have opportunities to get employed. The honourable member also has to understand that we're in the COVID-19 pandemic, and as such it will take some time for businesses to equip themselves to hire students. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for NanaimoLadysmith, Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly (NanaimoLadysmith, GP): Thank you, Madam Chair. In the first five months of this year, 554 B. C. residents died from opioid overdoses. They were teachers, construction workers, business owners, family members, neighbours and friends. Addiction is a health and social issue, but criminalization creates stigma, so people hide their drug use and die alone. Access to a safe supply of drugs and safe injection sites saves lives and puts addicts in daily contact with people who can help them. Will this government end the war on drugs by decriminalizing them, providing a safe supply and reallocating resources from policing addicts to providing treatment for them? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, I think it's really important we make sure that when we speak about people who use substances, we remove stigmatizing language like the word addict. We can stand together, as this government has, with people who use substances and their families to ensure a range of options for people who are struggling with addiction, who are using substances in a way that is harming their health and their communities. As you know, we have restored harm reduction to the Canadian drugs and substances strategy. We've made it easier for people to access safe supplies of substances. We've increased access to treatment and the variety of treatment through federal transfers to provinces and territories. Madam Chair, we're working with communities to make sure there are more community-based approaches to treating The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, the Geneva Convention considers both tear gas and pepper spray to be chemical weapons and prohibits their use in war, yet our police forces use these weapons on Canadian civilians. These weapons are indiscriminate and can affect peaceful protestors and innocent bystanders. Will the government prohibit the use of these weapons and require police to use de-escalation techniques to keep legal protests peaceful? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, the right to peaceful protest in this country is a constitutionally protected right. We want to ensure it's always respected. At the same time, Madam Chair, we recognize that the use of even less than lethal force can have significant impacts on people's safety. This is a highly regulated substance in Canada. It's prohibited for non-police use, and for the police it is and should be highly regulated. The RCMP have advised me they have not used tear gas in nine years. We'll continue to monitor it to ensure that peaceful protest is always respected. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, in 2012 the RCMP spent $14 million on 18 armoured personnel carriers. One's parked at the Nanaimo detachment. I can't imagine why we have weapons of war like this for policing civilians. Will the government rein in the RCMP budget and end wasteful spending on militarizing our civilian police forces? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, it's a very important tradition that our Canadian police are not militarized. At the same time, we've seen a number of tragedies when police have responded to situations in which people were armed with weapons designed for soldiers to kill soldiers, and they've been used to kill police officers. The militarization of our society, so strongly promoted by some, is the direct consequence of the militarization of the police. As we remove these weapons from our society and prohibit them, we'll make it safer for everyone and we can then move away from such a model of policing. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, the government spent $4. 5 billion to buy an old, leaky pipeline. Since 1961, there have been 82 reported spills from the Trans Mountain pipeline. Over 1. 5 million litres of crude oil has spilled into the surrounding environment. This weekend, the Trans Mountain pipeline leaked again, dumping 190,000 litres of oil. How much is this spill going to cost Canadian taxpayers to clean up? How much contingency funding has been budgeted to repair the environmental destruction from spills? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I want to thank the honourable colleague for his question. He full well knows that the acquisition that we made with regard to the TMX initiative is a reflection of the fact that we want this initiative to move forward in a sustainable manner and in a manner that protects the environment. I'll continue to work with my colleagues to endeavour to make sure that we have the appropriate processes in place to protect the environment and at the same time create good-quality, middle-class jobs for Canadians. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for RosemontLa PetitePatrie, Mr. Boulerice, has the floor. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice (RosemontLa Petite-Patrie, NDP): Thank you, MadamChair. The Black Lives Matter movement is right to discuss systemic racism in our societies. In Montreal, the city and the police department have recognized this, and measures will be put in place. The Liberal government, once again, is all talk and no walk. Although it spends $10million a day, we see no attempt to reform or change the RCMP. If the Prime Minister really wants to act, why is he delaying the action plan in response to the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls? Hon. Bill Blair: Let me assure this House and the member opposite that we're not dragging our feet. This is an important issue. Indigenous people, black Canadians and other racialized people are far too often experiencing systemic racism and disparate outcomes through the criminal justice system. It's incumbent upon all of us who work within the criminal justice system to take the steps and actions necessary to produce more equitable outcomes. All police services, including the RCMP, must be committed to ensuring that the people they're sworn to serve and protect are always treated with dignity and respect. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: MadamChair, why are the Liberals taking indigenous children to court to challenge the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal ruling in their favour? Hon. Marc Miller (Minister of Indigenous Services): Madam Chair, as the honourable member knows full well, a number of cases are pending, and we are currently negotiating with the parties. We are making progress, and I would be delighted to tell the member and the House about it in response to a later question. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: We've been asking questions about it for months, and as I see it, we should keep doing so. The Prime Minister's new pipeline, which taxpayers were forced to buy with their hard-earned money, has leaked. Some 190,000litres of oil spilled, and we can't even make the company pay for it because the Liberals bought the pipeline. Trans-Mountain, KeystoneXL and the resumption of gas exploration and development off the coast of Newfoundland and Labradorare these the projects the Liberals had in mind for their green recovery? Hon. Navdeep Bains: I'd like to thank the honourable member for his question. Our priority was to protect the health and safety of Canadians throughout the pandemic, especially when it comes to the environment. That's why environmental and climate change laws aimed at protecting the environment, human health and conservation will remain in force. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: Across Quebec, the cultural community is going through a harrowing time. Unions, associations, artists and creators have all taken part in public demonstrations recently to condemn the lack of a specific plan for the living arts, performing arts and festival sector. What is the government waiting for? Hon. Steven Guilbeault: I'd like to thank the member for his question. However, I strongly disagree with him. We haven't waited to develop a plan for the arts and culture sector. We listened to the community and we tailored our supports, as they were announced. We have an emergency plan for the arts and culture sector. We were asked to adapt the CERB to take royalties into account, and we did. We were asked to extend the CERB, and we did. We are fully aware that the recovery will take longer in the arts and culture sector. We have been there, we are there and we will be there for the arts and culture sector. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: Well, that wasn't at all what the artists and creators who were out demonstrating in the streets a few days ago thought. They were protesting on the weekend. The CERB extension announced by the government only brings us to September, but the cultural community is expecting the worst in the fall. What is the government's long-term plan to support creators and their entire teams? Hon. Steven Guilbeault: I'm not so sure those who were protesting last week had issues with our government, but we'd certainly be happy to speak with them. As for a long-term plan, we are currently consulting arts and culture stakeholders to contemplate together how the government can help the sector in response to the ongoing crisis. We are working on finding solutions, but until we have long-term solutions, we have seen to it that our artists and organizations have access to funding until September. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for BeauportLimoilou, Mrs. Vignola, has the floor. Mrs. Julie Vignola (BeauportLimoilou, BQ): Madam Chair, I will be sharing my time with the member for Montcalm. According to the latest news, Seaspan Shipyards will be spending an additional $1. 5billion to build two ships. Why? Because the ships were ordered in 2011 and still haven't been delivered. Davie built the Asterix without going over budget because it delivered the ship on time. Davie is currently the top shipyard, representing 50% of Canada's shipbuilding capacity. Why isn't Davie being awarded its fair share of contracts? Hon. Anita Anand (Minister of Public Services and Procurement): I'd like to thank the member for her question. Davie is certainly a strong and trusted partner that works very hard to help our government get results for Canadians. Building a new class of ships is highly complex, and it's not unusual for cost estimates to change throughout the procurement project. It's important to make sure additional funding is available for the joint support ships project to ensure the navy's vessels are delivered. Mrs. Julie Vignola: We are talking about $1. 5billion, here. In the beginning, eight years ago, the project was supposed to cost $2. 6billion. There can't be much missing when the cost overrun is double the initial estimate. Why haven't the ships been delivered yet? Why is Davie still not seen as a trusted partner? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Minister, please keep your answer brief. Hon. Anita Anand: Once again, I would point out that building a new class of ships is highly complex, and it's not unusual for the cost estimate to change for a procurement project as large as this one. I know that Davie works very hard, and we also believe it is an outstanding partner. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): It is now over to the honourable member for Montcalm, Mr. Thriault. Mr. Luc Thriault (Montcalm, BQ): Madam Chair, in Quebec, 12,000people have begun their training to work in residential and long-term care centres. They will be ready for duty in mid-September. In the meantime, we need the support of the army, which is helping us save lives. The dedication of the members of the armed forces is paramount, and I want to extend my heartfelt thanks. The government extended their mission until June26, which is only 10days away. What does the army have to do right now that is more important than helping our caregivers save lives? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, I'm glad my fellow member recognizes the fundamental role the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces have played and continue to play in residential and long-term care centres and many other areas in support of our seniors. We are in talks with the Quebec government. The discussions around providing continued assistance to Quebec are quite positive and productive. That assistance can take many forms, including the Red Cross. We will be there for our seniors, Madam Chair. Mr. Luc Thriault: We are short 12,000people, so if the Red Cross wants to help us, all the better. We'll take all the help we can get. Barely 800members of the military are still in Quebec. I repeat my question: What does the army have to do 10days from now that is more important if it's not to help caregivers save lives? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, all the members of the military are still in Quebec. They have done absolutely incredible work and are continuing to do so. The people at the Canadian Red Cross are well-trained paid workers who can perform the same work in partnership with the members of the armed forces, who can stay in Quebec as well. Right now, we are working with the Quebec government and discussing how we can keep the measure in place until September15. Mr. Luc Thriault: Madam Chair, our nurses and orderlies are exhausted. They're at the end of their ropes. Now is the time to thank them, not the time to turn our backs on them. It's not the time for dilly-dallying or discussions. It's the time to tell them that we will be there to help them until the end. I will repeat my question. What does the army have to do that is more important than helping caregivers save the lives of those who built Quebec? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The Leader of the Government in the House of Commons is asked to keep his answer brief. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, the Government of Canada is there and will continue to be there to help the people who built Quebec. The Government of Canada will work with the Quebec government to make that happen. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for Red DeerMountain View, Mr. Dreeshen. Mr. Earl Dreeshen (Red DeerMountain View, CPC): Thank you so much. Madam Chair, on May 14 I asked the Minister of Agriculture when the Liberal government would put aside its usual campaign rhetoric and recognize the very detrimental impact the carbon tax is having on farmers across this country. Minister Bibeau proudly noted that according to their data, the average cost of the carbon tax per farm across Canada is $210 to $819. We know that these numbers are completely unfounded and are not based on any factual evidence. The fact is that the Liberal government's own Parliamentary Budget Officer has estimated that at $25 per tonne, the cost for an 855-acre crop farm in Alberta is well over $6,000. The office came up with that using the government's statistics from the 2016 agricultural census. Madam Chair, the evidence is right in front of the minister. When will this Liberal government come clean with Canadians and recognize the disastrous impact the carbon tax is having on Canada's critical agriculture and agri-food sector? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food): Madam Chair, our pollution pricing policy is designed to grow a clean economy. To support this sector, we have put in place the following measures. Emissions from livestock and crop production are not priced. Farm fuels and fuels from cardlock facilities are exempt, and there is a partial rebate for propane and natural gas used in commercial greenhouses. Our government has been very open and transparent about our pollution pricing plan. We will do a review of our pollution pricing system in 2020, focused on competitiveness issues in trade-exposed industries such as agriculture. It is also important to remember that this is about tackling climate change and that 100% of the revenues stay in the province. We will continue to support our farmers and food processors as they provide an essential service across Canada. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Madam Chair, Minister Bibeau keeps talking about wanting to protect Canadians'environment. Well, the truth is that Canada's farmers, ranchers and processors have for years demonstrated their ability to deliver meaningful reductions in emissions and to safeguard the environment through the adoption of new technologies, education and innovative management practices, but the government ignores these efforts. Will the minister at the very least admit to Canadians that Canadian farmers are unable to pass on the cost of the carbon tax to consumers and instead have to absorb those extra costs out of their own pockets? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Madam Chair, allow me to explain again our government's position on pollution pricing. The price and method were developed so we could build an increasingly clean economy. We put a number of measures in place to help the agriculture sector. Emissions from animal and plant production aren't taxed. Farm fuels and fuels delivered to off-farm points-of-sale are also Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you, Madam Chair. I do have another question. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I am watching the time, Mr. Dreeshan. You have a couple more seconds. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you. Madam Chair, Minister Bibeau has repeatedly asked stakeholders to send her data about the impacts of the carbon tax on farmers, so this is exactly what they have been doing. The Atlantic Grains Council, the Grain Farmers of Ontario, Producteurs de grains du Qubec and the Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association issued a joint statement at the beginning of this year in which they estimated that the cumulative indirect inflation of carbon tax on farm costs will be $14. 50 an acre this year, with that cost escalating by more than double by 2022 to almost $30 an acre. These are huge numbers. Why does the Liberal government continue to ignore the facts presented to it and continue to misrepresent the truth to Canadians? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Madame Chair, I can assure you that we have paid close attention to all the information that has been provided to us and that our calculation was also based on this information provided by provinces and different stakeholders. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Our government has been very open and transparent about our pollution pricing plan. The department used data from stakeholders and provinces Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you very much, Madam Chair Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: as well as the 2019 agricultural tax data to estimate the average cost of pollution pricing associated with grain drying at up to 0. 4% of overall operating costs. It is important to remember that we have put in place many special provisions Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Madam Chair Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: like exempting farm fuel and providing other financial supports for farmers. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Dreeshen, I am watching the time, and the minister is allowed to answer for the same amount of time that you used to ask the question. Therefore, I would hope that we would allow her to finish. She has finished, and unfortunately the time is up. The committee now stands adjourned until tomorrow at noon.

When talking about the issue of allocating the governmental fund, Yves-Fran questioned why their prime minister at present was acting like something between a prime minister with a majority and a monarch by divine right, he further pointed out that the government was meant to use the $14 million fund to interfere with the political affair of Quebec. But according to Justin Trudeau, the $14 million fund would actually be used to guarantee their people's safety during the pandemic outbreak.

tr-sq-1247

tr-sq-1247_0

What did JustinTrudeau think of the revolution in those national institutions when talking about the governmental issue of allocating the fund and dealing with systematic racism? The Chair (Hon. Anthony Rota (NipissingTimiskaming, Lib.) ): I call this meeting to order. Welcome to the 23rd meeting of the House of Commons Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic. A reminder to all members that in order to avoid issues with sound, members participating in person should not also be connected to the video conference. For those of you who are joining via video conference, I will remind you that when speaking you should be on the same channel as the language you are speaking, and please use your headsets. As usual, please direct your remarks through the chair. As I understand, there are no ministerial announcements today. We will now proceed to presenting petitions. I remind members that any petition presented during a meeting of this special committee must have already been certified by the clerk of petitions. For members participating in person, I ask that they please come and drop their signed certificates off at the table once the petition is presented. I would ask members to be very brief and concise, and to summarize the exact content of the petition. We will continue. The first person presenting a petition today is Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May (SaanichGulf Islands, GP): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I present two petitions this morning. The residents of SaanichGulf Islands are calling on the government to simplify the process for protection of marine protected areas. It's a multi-layered communication process. The marine protected area first proposed in the 1970s for the southern Strait of Georgia, now called the Salish Sea, has been awaiting designation for so long that it was originally endorsed by Jacques Cousteau. That gives us a sense for why petitioners are calling for a simplified and more rapid process. The second petition is from petitioners who are very concerned about our obligations under the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and our commitments under the Truth and Reconciliation Commission calls to action. They specifically reference the RCMP violation of UNDRIP in its actions on Wet'suwet'en territory and ask the government to commit to actually living the principles embodied in UNDRIP. The Chair: We will now go to Mr. Hardie. Mr. Ken Hardie (FleetwoodPort Kells, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am presenting a petition on behalf of the one in a million Canadians who suffer severe and adverse effects from vaccinations. GuillainBarre syndrome is very debilitating, and this petition seeks the setting up of a no-fault accident or compensation system to help offset the loss of work, the loss of wages and the loss of quality of life that many of these people suffer. I'm pleased to present this petition pursuant to Standing Order 36. The Chair: Mr. Trudel, you have the floor. Mr. Denis Trudel (LongueuilSaint-Hubert, BQ): Mr. Chair, culture is the soul of a people. Over the past 20years or so, culture, especially music, has never been as accessible as it is now. Paradoxically, creators'incomes have never been so low. The advent of digital technology has completely overturned the system for distributing the wealth generated by creators for the benefit of various Web stakeholders, many of whom are billionaires. This petition addresses these problems and proposes realistic solutions. The first is to set a minimum royalty model for streaming platforms for artists. The second is to update the existing private copying system. The third is for Internet and cell phone providers who sell their services as direct access to culture to share their profits with artists. The fourth is that the GAFAMs have to pay taxes on their services. Six thousand people have already signed the first version of this petition, launched last month by musician JordanOfficer and supported by singer BarbaraSecours. As an artist, I am proud to present this petition today because the issues it raises are fundamental to the survival of Quebec culture. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood ParkFort Saskatchewan, CPC): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I have four petitions to present today. I will be as brief as you suggested, although I will observe that if some members are going on longer during petitions than they normally do, it might be because the government has taken away so many of the tools that opposition members normally have for raising important issues in the House. The first petition deals with the issue of euthanasia and long-term care. The petitioners are concerned that instead of focusing on improving medically assisted life, something that we know is a major issue in light of recent revelations, the government has put so much time and legislative energy into efforts to continually further expand euthanasia in Canada and remove vital safeguards. The second petition speaks to the ongoing conversations happening in Canada around systemic discrimination and systemic racism. I think we do need to reflect on systemic discrimination. This petition deals specifically with Bill 21 in Quebec and raises concerns. The reality of the way that bill applies is that people from certain backgrounds who wish to practise their faith are not able to fully participate in Canadian society if they are employed in the public service. This petition asks the government to provide a response on that issue, something it hasn't done in response to past petitions on this. The third petition deals with the issue of firearms. The petitioners want to see the government take a strong response in dealing with illegal guns and gun smuggling. The petition notes that the vast majority of firearms-related crimes in Canada involves illegal guns. At the same time, the petitioners are concerned that the government has the wrong focusthat is, harassing law-abiding firearms ownerswithout putting in place substantial measures to deal with illegal guns. The petitioners want to see the reversal of the order in council from May 1 and strong measures to deal with illegal firearms. The fourth and final petition deals with Bill S-204, a bill that would make it a criminal offence for a Canadian to go abroad and receive an organ from a person who has not consented to giving that organ. It would also create a mechanism by which someone could be deemed inadmissible to Canada if they were involved in organ harvesting and trafficking. The petitioners are supportive of Bill S-204 and of similar bills in previous parliaments and would like to see us pass that bill as soon as possible. The Chair: Presenting petitions, Mr. Lamoureux. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Winnipeg North, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. It is with pleasure that I table another petition by the residents of Winnipeg North. These residents have signed a petition asking the Government of Canada, and in fact all members of Parliament, to put a high priority on assisting our poorest seniors. The increases to the GIS by $200, and $300 to the OAS, have been well received. They just want to highlight how important it is to support our seniors, in particular the poorest of our seniors. The Chair: For members present in the Chamber, a reminder that they are asked to bring their petitions to the table. We'll now proceed to statements by members. We'll go to Ms. Atwin for the first one. Mrs. Jenica Atwin (Fredericton, GP): Thank you, Mr. Chair. June 21 is National Indigenous Peoples Day, a day of acknowledgement and a day of celebration of the beautiful diversity of indigenous peoples across Turtle Island. I wish to recognize the leadership of Chief Shelley Sabattis of the Welamukotuk First Nation in Oromocto, New Brunswick. Each year she and her council, volunteers and staff go above and beyond to show appreciation for their members and to demonstrate pride and culture while promoting well-being. We gather in an event where all are welcome to take part, from traditional hand drum-making with elders to moose meat and tacos. This year we will celebrate a bit differently, but we will still stay connected, virtually and in spirit, to the vast network of indigenous peoples and allies. We need each other now more than ever. May we come together in song and stories and in solidarity. We will remember those who are not among us. I hope all of Canada will join us in observing National Indigenous Peoples Day. Mawiyapasuwok: let us come together. Nit liech. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Beech. Mr. Terry Beech (Burnaby NorthSeymour, Lib.): Mr. Chair, COVID-19 is an unprecedented challenge for all communities across Canada, but as we do our part to flatten the curve, I often think about those who suit up every morning to serve on the front lines of our health care system. My mother is a home care worker and my sister is a nurse. Even before the crisis, they would often share the hardships they faced on a day-to-day basis. It's a tough job at the best of times. In a pandemic, these jobs are life-threatening. I think we can all agree that these workers deserve more than our good wishes. They deserve a raise. That is why we have worked with the provinces to implement pandemic pay. In British Columbia more than 250,000 front-line workers are eligible for this program. That works out to a pay increase of about $4 an hour. It's a small show of our appreciation for their difficult and priceless contribution to our country. Share this message and say thanks to our front-line workers, participate in the 7 p. m. cheer, and order a pizza for your local nurses. It's the least we can do. The Chair: We'll now go on to Mr. Shipley. Mr. Doug Shipley (BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. We've been living in difficult times. Slowly, we are getting back to some resemblance of normalcy, although unfortunately not soon enough for some of our great summer festivals. It will not be normal in BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte this summer without the iconic Boots and Hearts weekend music festival, Kempenfest, Oro World's Fair, the Elmvale Fall Fair, or the Midhurst Autumnfest. Canada Day celebrations have been cancelled, but we can still celebrate the great nation we call home. Because of the lack of Canada Day celebrations, I've created Happy Canada Day lawn signs that are available through my constituency office, free to all residents of BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte. I'm also hosting a drive-through party on Canada Day at the Royal Canadian Legion on St. Vincent Street in Barrie. All are welcome to attend. There will be cupcakes for all. Please drop by the legion between 11 a. m. and 2 p. m. , and we can celebrate Canada Day safely together. Thank you and have a great summer. The Chair: Now we'll go on to Ms. Young. Ms. Kate Young (London West, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Among the countless ordinary Canadians who have stepped up to do extraordinary work during COVID-19, I wish to draw attention to our teachers. Teachers have always had a special place in my heart. My father was a teacher, and my daughter-in-law, Kelly Webb, is one now. I'm certain that my colleagues can all easily remember a teacher in their past who played an important role in helping them achieve their potential. I remember my grade 12 English teacher, Vince Weaver, at Westminster Secondary School in London. He made me realize that I could do so much more than I believed. Across the country, as schools closed, teachers did not stop their work. Some took their classes online. Others found innovative ways to continue engaging with their students. This is not the school year anyone imagined, and what the next one will look like is unclear, but our teachers in London West and across Canada have shown that no matter what, they will be there to help our next generation shine. The Chair: Before proceeding to the next presenter, I just want to remind the honourable members in the chamber that I realize that the six-foot limit makes it harder to whisper to each other, but we're hearing a bit of rumble, so I just want you to try to whisper at your best. Mr. Bergeron, you have the floor. Mr. Stphane Bergeron (Montarville, BQ): Mr. Chair, on July1st, we will be celebrating one of the most important events for the riding of Montarville: the 175thanniversary of the city of Saint-Bruno-de-Montarville. The theme Proud of our traditions will be the focus of this celebration for the people of Montarville. This is a good illustration of the rich history of this municipality nestled in the western foothills of Mont-Saint-Bruno. The seigneury of Montarville was granted in1710 to the illustrious former governor of Trois-Rivires, PierreBoucher. The parish of Saint-Bruno, which took root there and in which a village grew, became a municipal corporation in1845. To this day, it is one of the most prosperous localities, with a strong sense of belonging, a very dynamic community life and jealously preserved natural environments. A whole program had been drawn up for the celebration, but the current health crisis has taken over some of the planned activities, which has in no way diminished the pride and festive spirit of the people of Montarville. On July1st, we will have a good reason to be proud, in spite of everything. Happy 175thanniversary to Saint-Bruno-de-Montarville. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Maloney. Mr. James Maloney (EtobicokeLakeshore, Lib.): Mr. Chair, thank you for allowing me to take a moment to highlight an initiative that I started early on during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Heroes of EtobicokeLakeshore is an opportunity for citizens in my riding to recognize the contributions of those in their community who make life a bit easier. I'm pleased with the number of nominations I received that honour everyone from front-line workers to businesses that are innovating in these difficult times to volunteers who are finding new ways to reach out. I think of Daniel Lauzon who set up Food for Now, a mobile service that helps take care of the homeless. I think of Toni Varone, who helped his business clients by forgiving their rents, or young Lucas, who wanted to thank his teachers. I've been moved and inspired by the countless stories of generosity, strength, resiliency, kindness, incredible character and creativity. I want to thank all the heroes, as well as the people who nominated them. Keep them coming. Stay safe, everyone, and I wish you happy Canada Day early. The Chair: We'll now move on to Ms. Wong. Hon. Alice Wong (Richmond Centre, CPC): Mr. Chair, it gives me great pleasure to thank a local Richmond-based charity, the Social Diversity for Children Foundation, SDC, for its hard work both in raising funds for the purchase of personal protective equipment and in distributing this PPE to long-term care facilities and individual seniors'homes in the lower mainland of B. C. The COVID-19 relief fund is supported by a dozen other non-profits, businesses and community groups. Over the past two months, SDC has been to 32 seniors homes and senior-related organizations. In total, it has delivered masks to 7,000 care workers, staff and seniors. It is amazing to have witnessed how the younger generation have gotten involved in caring for the elderly at this very challenging time. The Chair: We'll now go to Ms. Damoff. Ms. Pam Damoff (Oakville NorthBurlington, Lib.): Mr. Chair, June is ALS Awareness Month, and 79 years after Lou Gehrig died from ALS little has changed. There's still no cure, and those with ALS typically die within five years of diagnosis. On June 21, Canadians will gather virtually to raise funds for ALS Canada in the Walk to End ALS. In Halton, normally we meet each year at Bronte Creek Provincial Park on the May long weekend to raise funds for ALS Canada. This year I will virtually join Tim's Titans, a team formed to honour Tim Robertson, my friend who died in 2016 after living with ALS for 13 years. I have a T-shirt, with a picture of Lou Gehrig, that says, Great Player. . . Lousy Disease and Tim's Titans. . . Great Team! ALS. . . Still a Lousy Disease. Join me on June 21 for the virtual Walk to End ALS to raise funds to support patients and their families and for ALS research. The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Khera. Ms. Kamal Khera (Brampton West, Lib.): Mr. Chair, on Saturday our community stood and marched in solidarity against anti-black racism. The peaceful protests that we're seeing across the country and around the world were not triggered by an isolated incident. They are fuelled by decades of ineffective action against something that is so insidious and deeply entrenched in our history, systems and institutions. For us, that is the racial inequality faced by Canada's indigenous and black communities. Anti-black racism is real. It exists right here in Canada, in our communities, including in Brampton. It exists when racialized students at McCrimmon Middle School are called McCriminals. It exists when a shocking report exposes the Peel District School Board's failure to work fairly with the black community. It exists when D'Andre Campbell, who was fighting mental illness, loses his life at the hands of the police. It is clear that we need reform. We need to dismantle the systems that allow this privilege and oppression to take form, and address the unconscious bias plaguing our institutions. We'll need to be bold, and the time to do that is now. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd (Sturgeon RiverParkland, CPC): Mr. Chair, a few months ago I rose in the House on the eve of our closure due to COVID-19. I told Canadians we must not give in to fear, that we would carry on and get through this crisis stronger than ever. Today, in this city and across Canada, Canadians are enjoying a beer on their favourite patios. Businesses are reopening, jobs are returning and our lives are starting to feel a bit normal again. Canadians pulled together, and because of that we did not see the devastating death toll that many had predicted. Life may be returning to normal, but unfortunately, here in this chamber of democracy, the people's voices continue to be shut down. There is no good reason for Parliament to be suspended today. In the words of my grandfather, it's time for the Liberals to get with the program and bring back the House. The Chair: We will now proceed with Ms. Jones. Ms. Yvonne Jones (Labrador, Lib.): Mr. Chair, from in-person learning to virtual classrooms, COVID-19 has drastically changed the lives of students across the country, especially those in post-secondary education who are worried about covering costs like tuition or rent this coming fall. Our government recognized that students should not have to worry or put their futures on pause during this difficult time. That's why last month the federal government introduced the Canada emergency student benefit. If you're a high school student headed to a post-secondary school, or a current post-secondary student or a recent graduate, you can receive the Canada emergency student benefit every four weeks and have the financial support that you need to save for school. We also doubled Canada student grants and loans, enhanced the student loan program, increased supports for indigenous post-secondary education and introduced the Canada student service grant for those who wish to pursue it. Our government is here to help all students get the support they need to pursue their future goals successfully. I wish them all the very best, and I wish all of you, my colleagues and those across Canada, a very happy National Indigenous Peoples Day, which is coming up on June 21. The Chair: I want to remind the honourable members to keep to their 60 seconds so that we don't go over the time. I'm sure it would be a lot easier for everyone if we stuck to that limit. We will now go to Mr. Aitchison. Mr. Scott Aitchison (Parry SoundMuskoka, CPC): Mr. Chair, I rise today to once again implore the government to do something about the horrible lack of access to and crazy cost of rural Internet service. Right now, too many areas of my riding have no access to rural Internet service at all, and those who can get service are paying through the nose. I've even heard constituents say that during this pandemic, they are having to choose between feeding their kids and educating them. Over the last few weeks, Conservatives have been consulting with rural Canadians, and the results are in. My constituents are tired of fancy political promises. They are frustrated beyond belief by the new challenges created by this pandemic. They are absolutely fed up with having their pleas ignored. All we want is affordable and reliable Internet service. Is that too much to ask of the government? The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. MacGregor. Mr. Alistair MacGregor (CowichanMalahatLangford, NDP): Mr. Chair, these last few months have been incredibly challenging for the residents of CowichanMalahatLangford, who have been forced to deal with the economic and social consequences of COVID-19. The pandemic has laid bare the inadequacies of our social safety net, the weakness in our supply chains and the dependence of our society on essential workers, who often work long hours for low wages, putting themselves and their families at risk. We've also been forced to confront the systemic inequality, poverty and racism that continue to hold so many people back from achieving their full potential. I will not dishonour the sacrifice that so many have made during this time by allowing us to go back to the status quo that got us here in the first place. I will not apologize for demanding that the most vulnerable in our society get the supports and opportunities they need to live with dignity, and I will not relent from pushing my political colleagues to summon the courage necessary to implement policies that lead to environmental, economic and social justice. The Chair: I now give the floor to Mr. Blaney. Hon. Steven Blaney (BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, CPC): Mr. Chair, here is a beautiful story, the story of a woman from Bellechasse, a courageous young mother from Saint-Malachie, Marie-ChristineGoupil. With three children, including the eldest daughter with a disability, and realizing that her daughter with a disability had special clothing needs, she decided to go into business to meet the needs of other parents who, like her, were facing their child's clothing challenges. Last week, she presented her Handy clothing collection on the show Dans l'il du dragon. It was a very emotional moment for the audience and the dragons. They were so touched that they decided to give her the amount she wanted without diluting her shares. The video of her presentation has already been viewed over 1million times on social networks. Marie-ChristineGoupil has discovered a passion for entrepreneurship and has moved and inspired many people with her passionate and courageous attitude. Congratulations, Ms. Goupil, your example makes us proud. The Chair: Mr. Blanchet, you have the floor. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet (BeloeilChambly, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I lend my voice to the Chief of the Assembly of First Nations of Quebec-Labrador, GhislainPicard, whose message is as follows: There have been no fewer than 14reports and conclusions of commissions of inquiry since1967 highlighting major problems in relations between law enforcement agencies and indigenous people. Each time, the conclusions have been overwhelming and highlight a disturbing reality. The justice system has failed indigenous people. Are you going to respond, as you too often do, by moving on to the next one, or are you going to do what we expect you to do, which is to recognize that the justice system discriminates against indigenous people and that we have no less right to security than the rest of the population? In three months, police interventions have claimed more victims among our members than the pandemic. But it is not enough to simply take a knee and denounce racism. It's about standing up and taking action. Those are the words of GhislainPicard. The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Harder. Ms. Rachael Harder (Lethbridge, CPC): Over the last few months, Canada's democracy has been disregarded and an autocracy has been resurrected in its place. By refusing to hold regular parliamentary sittings, Mr. Trudeau is sending a strong message to the Canadian public that he alone is the one who matters. In 2014, he professed that Canadians want their Members of Parliament to be effective voices for their communities in Ottawa, and not merely mouthpieces for an all-too-powerful Prime Minister. As it stands, however, he has shut down Parliament. Effectively, he has stripped us, the opposition, of our privileges and our powers. Sadly, Mr. Trudeau has become the all-too-powerful Prime Minister that he once warned against. A government that does not allow for effective opposition is not functioning in the best interest of Canadians; it is operating in the best interest of itself and, even more so, the interest of the Prime Minister. Canadians deserve to flourish in a democracy, not merely survive under the autocracy that this Prime Minister has created. The Chair: We'll now go on to Ms. Zahid. Mrs. Salma Zahid (Scarborough Centre, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I would like to recognize the work of Agincourt Community Services Association and its tireless executive director, Lee Soda, who have been serving our community during the COVID-19 pandemic. Under more pressure than ever, their staff and volunteers continue to serve a community whose need was great even before the crisis. Their food bank helps over 4,000 people weekly. They have opened outdoor washrooms and hand-washing stations for vulnerable communities and are delivering groceries and other essentials to vulnerable seniors. ACSA is a bridge between those who can help and those who need help, and they are just one example of how our community has come together to meet this challenge. There are restaurants and businesses donating meals to front-line workers, residents answering the call to stock the food bank shelves and neighbours looking in on the vulnerable and isolated. I am so proud of our community's spirit. Scarborough is strong. The Chair: We'll now proceed to the questioning of ministers. Please note that we will suspend the proceedings twice in order to allow employees who provide support for the sitting to replace each other safely. The first question goes to the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Chair, for months Conservatives have been pointing out flaws in Liberal government programs that are preventing Canadians from getting the help they need. The Prime Minister has refused to make these very technical changes to get more help to Canadians who need it. For example, on the wage subsidy, more than two-thirds of the money allocated for that program has lapsed because businesses don't qualify. I have a simple question. Will the Prime Minister change the program to allow companies who have made acquisitions to access the wage subsidy to keep more people working? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Papineau, Lib.): Mr. Chair, from the very beginning we knew that as we rolled out measures, we would need to improve them and tweak them, and that's exactly what we've been doing over the past three months. We needed to make measures happen quickly for Canadians, and we did that. But we continued to improve them, to make additions and amendments so that more people could get the help they needed, including with the proposed legislation last week that expanded the reach of the wage subsidy to more businesses. Unfortunately, the Conservatives didn't even want us to debate that particular piece of legislation. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Actually, Mr. Chair, it was the Liberals who said no to the motion to allow this Parliament to sit to debate that motion, and even in that legislation they refused to allow businesses who have made acquisitions to access the program. Now, when we look at the rent relief program, it is so difficult to apply for it that many landlords are refusing to bother, leaving even more small businesses to fall through the cracks. In fact, of the $3 billion allocated to the rent relief program, only $39 million has been paid out. That's less than 2%. Now, the Prime Minister is still using talking points from April. It's now June and he has refused to fix these programs and has successfully talked out the calendar on the days that the House of Commons could meet to discuss these programs. When will he make these changes to get more help to Canadians who need it? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, throughout this pandemic, we have constantly been updating and expanding our various programs. We recognize, in conversations with the premiers, how important it is to make sure that we're working together, the provinces and the federal government, on issues like rent subsidies where commercial rent is indeed a provincial jurisdiction. Many provinces have moved forward with the eviction bans that are necessary to go along with this, and we'll continue to work with provinces to make sure that we're getting Canadians the help they need. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Mr. Chair, Canadians cannot wait. He has run down the clock on parliamentary sittings and he still refuses to make these changes to get more help to Canadians. Today, we learned that Telus has installed Huawei technology in downtown Ottawa. There are over 80 sites across the national capital region with Huawei technology installed. Some of these sites are very near sensitive government institutions, like government departments, the National Research Council, RCMP headquarters and the Bank of Canada. How long has the Prime Minister known that Huawei technology has been installed in the Ottawa area? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, first off, on the issue of Parliament, it has been meeting four times a week over the past many weeks, and members of the opposition have been able to continue to ask questions on COVID-19 and a broad range of subjects. Moreover, every two weeks the finance department puts forward at the finance committee the full transparent measures that we've taken, so that parliamentarians can study them. We are continuing to work in this crisis. At the same time Mr. Ziad Aboultaif (Edmonton Manning, CPC): Answer the question. The Chair: I'm sorry? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: in regard to Huawei technology there are strict rules for companies to follow and we assume they will all follow those. The Chair: We'll pause for a second and stop the clock. I want to remind the honourable members who are joining us virtually that heckling really does disrupt the whole session. Your face does come up and we do see who it is, so I just want to make sure that you're aware of that. Now we'll go back to Mr. Scheer. We have a minute and 10 seconds left. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister is bragging about accountability and transparency. Will he table an economic update before the House rises? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, throughout this unprecedented pandemic, we have been open and transparent about all of the measures we've put forward. We've updated the finance committee The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer: That's a long way of saying no, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister has pursued a policy of appeasement in pursuit of a personal vanity product at the UN. In the process, he's cozied up to dictators and human rights violators. He's abandoned Israel and committed funding to UNRWA, an organization whose schools have been used as storage facilities for Hamas rockets against Israeli civilians, and whose facilities have served as breeding grounds for racism and anti-Semitism. He has apologized for the Iranian regime when it shot down a plane full of Canadian citizens, and he refuses to list the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist entity. What's the point of having a seat at the table if you have to sell out Canadian principles to get there? The Chair: The Right Honourable Prime Minister. Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, we see that the Conservatives have kept with the Harper approach to international diplomacy. The failed presence of Canada on the world stage was an embarrassment for many Canadians for many years. That's why, when we took office five years ago, we demonstrated the kind of leadership on values that Canadians expected. We will continue to work around the world to defend multilateralism. The Chair: We have a point of order. Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May: This being a committee, we can have a point of order during what would have been question period. I am not sitting that far away from the Prime Minister, and I'm sorry, but Andrew Scheer used to be the Speaker of the House and should show better decorum. The Chair: We have a point of order from Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, on the same point of order, it is disgusting for the leader of the Green Party to use decorum as an excuse to interrupt the Leader of the Opposition in the middle of critical lines of questioning. The leader of the Green Party knows the rules of the House and shouldn't be abusing them to advance a partisan agenda. The Chair: We're getting into debate. I do want to point out that the time had run out. We're now moving on to the next line of questions. On a point of order, Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer: I appreciate the honourable leader of the Green Party, Elizabeth May, for that reminder. When I was Speaker I always appreciated her help and advice about how to improve decorum in here. I just want to say to the member, and to all members, that the reason that I cannot control myself is that the Prime Minister used the word embarrassment in answering a foreign affairs question, and it just made me think of the India trip. The Chair: I believe we're getting into debate and arguments. Mr. Blanchet, you have the floor. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: Mr. Chair, while the Greens and the Conservatives are saying that they'll be waiting outside after the meeting, I will ask a question. The Prime Minister has extended the Canada emergency response benefit, and that's good news, but it's not enough. Last week in the House, the government said it was urgent to fight fraud. For us, it was also urgent to adjust the CERB to the needs of the tourism, arts and agriculture sectors. Farmers are going to be seriously under-resourced. So what happened to the urgency of reforming the CERB? Why is the government refusing to talk to the opposition parties? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, I am very pleased to hear the hon. member finally align himself with the positions of the Liberal Party. Unfortunately, the Bloc is a week late. It should have let us debate these concerns in the House last week. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: It seems to me that the word alignment here is a fantasy. We have unequivocally proposed to extend the debate to reach an agreement, which brings me to my second question. Last week, the issue of assistance to people with disabilities was also a pressing concern, and it's even more so a week later. The Bloc proposed to extend the discussions and split the government's bill in two to help people with disabilities. Why is the government refusing this assistance to people with disabilities, when it could have been debated with the opposition in a civilized and proper way in a Parliament in which it has a minority? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: That was exactly what we wanted, but unanimous consent of the Chamber was required to debate this matter, and the Conservative Party of Canada voted against it. Unfortunately, we are going to have to find a different way to help people with disabilities. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: If the idea is so good and wonderful, why not start over and open the dialogue now? What's stopping the Prime Minister from being a rallying point and inviting us to take to each other and resolve the problem, rather than saying that he is going to pack up his toys and go home? The people with disabilities are the ones who will pay the price. Where was the Prime Minister on October21,2019? He received a minority mandate from Quebeckers and Canadians. Why is he behaving like something between a prime minister with a majority and a monarch by divine right? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: I've heard the Conservative Party and the Bloc Qubcois throw their accusations around. They don't point out that the House of Commons did indeed give its consent to extend the mandate of the Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic until the end of June. Three parties agreed, which was the right thing to do in the context of this minority government. We've been working with the other parties. However, as they did not get the results they wanted, they complained. Unfortunately, they too are part of a minority Parliament and must respect the voice of the majority of parliamentarians, just as we do. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: I might have been tempted, but that's unlikely to happen because the Prime Minister isn't me, he's him. It's therefore up to him to bring people together, open a dialogue and recall Parliament. All we were asking for was the opportunity to talk for an hour or two. However, suddenly he doesn't want to play anymore. It's not working anymore, and there's something a bit strange about that. In addition, the government wants to buy the right to interfere in provincial and Quebec jurisdictions for $14billion. However, Quebec and a number of provinces are refusing to allow it to interfere in their jurisdictions and are asking that this money be paid to them unconditionally. Is the Prime Minister trying to take advantage of the crisis or is he trying to create a constitutional crisis? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, the safety of Canadians is the responsibility of all levels of government. That's why we have proposed a $14billion agreement to ensure that all Canadians across the country experience a safe re-opening of the economy. This is a proposal that we are working on with the provinces because we know that there are needs across the country, including early childhood centres, screening and support for municipalities. The federal government wants to be there to help the provinces. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh (Burnaby South, NDP): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Indigenous leaders have expressed a lack of confidence in the RCMP commissioner's ability to tackle full-scale systemic racism, but the Prime Minister has expressed his confidence in the commissioner. What's that based on? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, over the past two years, Commissioner Lucki has made significant strides forward on an issue where there is still much more to do. We know that systemic racism exists in all of our institutions across this country The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: This is the same RCMP commissioner who just recently said that they couldn't explain what systemic racism was. Now the Prime Minister says that he has confidence, when indigenous leaders express their lack of confidence. Why does the Prime Minister believe that the RCMP commissioner can tackle systemic racism in the RCMP? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, systemic racism is something that touches every corner of our country, every corner of our institutions. It requires people to understand and move forward in coordinated ways with partners. The commissioner is committed to doing that, alongside members of our government. We will do that together and work with indigenous communities and black The Chair: Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, recent events have made it abundantly clear that to tackle the systemic racism at the level of the RCMP, we need a full-scale overhaul of the RCMP. Is the Prime Minister committed to a full-scale overhaul of the RCMP to root out systemic racism? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: As I've said many times, Mr. Chair, I am committed to addressing systemic racism in this country and taking significant, bold actions to reduce the amount of discrimination that indigenous peoples, that racialized Canadians face on a daily basis. We have much work to do, but we will do it together. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, Black Lives Matter has been calling for governments to defund the police. What it's saying is that we need to be better at where we spend our money, investing in communities and not policing. Will the Prime Minister commit to a review of the RCMP budget to allocate resources to community services and not to policing? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, over the past years we have been investing more directly and more money in community organizations, in the black community, and working with indigenous partners on the path to reconciliation. We have been investing in the kinds of community-based programs and solutions that are part of the solution. We know there is much more to do, and we will continue to look at all of our expenditures to make sure we're doing the right things. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, over the past few years, while the Prime Minister has been in office, the RCMP budget has increased by 31%. More money is going towards policing. In recent events we've seen people who needed a health care response to a health care crisis been killed by the RCMP. Does the Prime Minister believe that we need to be investing in a health care response instead of a police response for people who are faced with a crisis? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, the member opposite well knows that it's not an either-or. We need to make sure that our systems across the board, from our police systems to our judicial systems, to our health care systems, to our community systems, are actually addressing the systemic discrimination issues that are embedded within them That is exactly what we are going to continue to do in the coming years. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, with regard to the CERB extension, can the Prime Minister guarantee that everyone who is receiving CERB payments now will continue to do so without any gaps throughout the summer? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, I am happy to highlight that many Canadians who were on the CERB are now returning to work. Many more who are on the CERB now will be returning to work in the coming weeks. We know that as the economy gets back to work, people will want to The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Can the Prime Minister assure people who need it that they will continue to receive the CERB over the summer, yes or no? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: We are very pleased to point out that we are going to extend the Canada emergency response benefit for at least another eight weeks, because a lot of people are going to need it. Even if they want to work, there aren't enough jobs for everyone. So we'll be there for them, as we have been from the beginning. The Chair: We're going to pause and suspend proceedings just for a few moments to allow our support staff to substitute for one another in a healthy and safe way. We'll now proceed with Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod (KamloopsThompsonCariboo, CPC): Mr. Chair, it was really a surprise in the middle of a pandemic to see the Prime Minister at his first campaign stop last week in Ottawa. Certainly the game plan has become very transparent. He has a daily report show and he wants to sideline Parliament, dominate the news cycle and keep everyone in the dark about the state of the economy. According to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, there is no reason that he cannot provide the fiscal update during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the PBO has published a number of reports himself. Why won't the Prime Minister provide a fiscal update so we can all understand the state of our economy, or is that just not part of his campaign playbook? Hon. Mona Fortier (Minister of Middle Class Prosperity and Associate Minister of Finance): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Canada's economy is in a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We've been clear about that. We will continue to be open and transparent about the actions that we are taking to support families, businesses, workers, our health care system and our economy. This includes biweekly reports to Parliament on the full cost and status of our economic measures. Once it is possible to provide a clear economic projection, we will provide an update. We are in this together, and we are prepared to do whatever is necessary to support Canadians. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: Chair, Canada's economy was in trouble prior to the COVID, with some of the worst numbers since 2009. Government revenues in March dropped by 7. 2%, and it's shameful and, quite frankly, it's outrageous that they refuse to provide Parliament and Canadians with an economic update. Households during this challenging time know how much money is coming in and they know how much money is going out. The picture is not pretty, but they know what the picture is. Can the finance minister at least reveal the projected revenue decline in quarters one and two? Hon. Mona Fortier: The Canadian economy is going through a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We've known this for three months. We've continued to be open and transparent about the measures we've put in place for Canadians, workers and businesses. In fact, we have reported biweekly to Parliament on the total cost and status of our plan's measures. As soon as it's possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide a comprehensive update to Canadians The Chair: We go back to Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: Other governments have managed to provide updates for their citizens and carry out their responsibilities, but of course this government has sidelined Parliament with simply a question-but-no-answer period. Let's try something else. The forestry industry was in crisis even before the pandemic, with mills closing down and thousands of jobs lost. Eight weeks ago, Minister Freeland said, I have had many discussions with leaders in our forestry sector and the provinces about what we can do to support the industry today. Meanwhile, we've had support going to the arts and we've had support going to fisheries, just to name a few, but arguably for the industry that was having some of the most numerous challenges, it has been radio silence. That was eight weeks ago today. Can the government at least commit to releasing an updated softwood lumber transition plan before we rise? Hon. Seamus O'Regan (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Chair, we remain committed, of course, to the forestry industry and seeing it through this pandemic and this very uncertain time. The expanding market opportunities program, for instance, has helped Canada's forestry sector diversify, create jobs and open new markets. We've had new construction projects that are active today, using Canadian wood in key markets like Korea, Japan, China and the United States. Tomorrow this House will vote on our government's investment of $20. 97 million for this program. It's part of our budget 2019 commitment to invest $251 million over three years, and I hope the opposition will support us in that. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: It was stated in a major newspaper this morning that this government is like a sexy sports carvroom, vroom, vroombut with a history of breakdowns and major repairs. I think that might describe what has been happening. For forestry, it has been eight weeks and there has been nothing. There is another area that Deputy Prime Minister Freeland did talk about. We were talking about the U. S. softwood lumber duties that are being held in the United States. It's billions of dollars being held with the U. S. treasury. In April, she acknowledged that these duties are a real issue for the softwood lumber industry. What's been done since that time? Hon. David Lametti (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada): Mr. Chair, Canada's forestry industry supports good middle-class jobs in communities across our country. The sector is also an essential link in the medical equipment supply chain, and we thank them for all the work they're doing. We're aware of the immense pressures faced by this sector, especially at this time, and Deputy Prime Minister Freeland and others are taking that seriously and working through this issue. As our government has said repeatedly, we firmly believe that the U. S. duties on Canadian softwood lumber are unfair and unwarranted, and we will pursue all means in order to The Chair: Before continuing, I want to remind honourable members who are at home to make sure that the boom on their headsets is down. It just makes a better pickup. We heard everything, but it was a little distant. That's for everyone's benefit. We're now going to continue with Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell (Louis-Saint-Laurent, CPC): Mr. Chair, before I ask my question, I'd like to pay tribute to the Minister of Justice, particularly to his versatility. Today, he talked about forests. Yesterday, the Minister of Justice talked about Davie and indigenous affairs. Really, this minister is very versatile. My question is directly for the Minister of Finance. I like Mr. Lametti very much, but I'd like Mr. Morneau to answer my question. Yesterday, in a Senate parliamentary committee, the Minister of Finance half-opened the door to an economic update. Based on what he said, it seems that, as we speak, a committee of the Department of Finance is working on an economic update. Could Mr. Morneau tell Canadians when he is going to table this economic update? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, as we know, the Canadian economy is going through a period of extraordinary uncertainty. As soon as it's possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide a full update to Canadians. Right now, we can say that we have supported workers, businesses and Canadians with the emergency measures we have put in place. We will continue to do so, because we need to be sure that Canadians can get through this crisis. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I thought it was too good to be true. The Minister of Finance is opening the door, and the Minister of Small Business is closing it. We don't know when the economic update will take place, yet all across Canada, provinces are doing economic updates. Could Mr. Morneau explain to Canadians why he is unable to give one? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, since the beginning of the crisis, we have implemented the economic action plan to respond to COVID-19, and we've provided immediate assistance to Canadians, businesses and workers. Over 2. 5million jobs were protected by the Canada emergency wage subsidy. In addition, 8. 4million Canadians The Chair: We are returning to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, next Friday, the Quebec minister of finance, EricGirard, will give an economic update. If EricGirard can give one for Quebec, why can't BillMorneau give one for Canada? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, once again, we have been open and transparent from the outset. We have devoted our energy to support Canadians, workers and businesses. We will continue to do so. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I cannot judge the quality of the work done by the provinces, but what I do know is that Quebec, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland have also made efforts to support their residents economically. Those provinces are able to table economic updates. Yesterday, Saskatchewan even tabled a budget. Why is Bill Morneau unable to table an economic update for all Canadians? Hon. Mona Fortier: Let me repeat for my hon. colleague that we are going through extraordinarily uncertain times. We have continued to be open and transparent. We have reported biweekly to Parliament on the total cost and status of the measures in our economic response plan. Once again, as soon as clear economic projections can be provided, we will provide an update The Chair: Mr. Deltell has the floor. Mr. Grard Deltell: The minister talks about the total cost of the government's economic expenditures. So I ask the question: so far, over the past three months, how much has the pandemic cost Canadians? Hon. Mona Fortier: As I said earlier, it is important to note that we have put forward measures, including the wage subsidy, which have helped more than 2. 5million The Chair: Mr. Deltell has the floor. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I have been trying for four minutes to get anything remotely resembling an answer, and I'm getting absolutely nothing. I am not asking questions for myself; I am asking questions for Canadians. Why are the government and the Minister of Finance, Bill Morneau, not able to table an economic update when some provinces are able to? Hon. Mona Fortier: Once again, I would like to remind my hon. colleague that we have provided interest-free loans to businesses. More than 669,000loans have been approved. We have continued to support businesses and Canadians during this time The Chair: Mr. Deltell, you have time for a very brief question. Mr. Grard Deltell: The only thing that distinguishes the provinces that table economic updates and the current government is political will. Why does Bill Morneau not have the political will to tell Canadians the truth? Hon. Mona Fortier: Once again, we have been open and transparent. As soon as it is possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide Canadians with a full update. The Chair: We will now continue with Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya (MarkhamUnionville, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. COVID-19 has sparked and spurred anti-Asian racism. These are not just racist comments online; Asian Canadians have been attacked. What is the government doing to combat anti-Asian racism? Hon. Bardish Chagger (Minister of Diversity and Inclusion and Youth): Mr. Chair, since our government took office in 2015, we have been making investments and working with communities. The difference between our government and the previous government is that we will actually consult with Canadians, including black Canadians, including Asian Canadians, to respond to the challenges, including with an anti-racism secretariat and an anti-racism strategy. It will take all of us. I appreciate the member's question, so that we can also work together. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, one business owner I know in Markham has operated for 20 years. Now she's looking at over $9,000 in rent due on June 24. COVID-19 has crippled her sales and she's going to go out of business. Her landlord has no interest in the Canada emergency commercial rent assistance program. How can the government say this program is working? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, this program was made possible by working with the provinces, and we will continue to encourage landlords and tenants to work together to make sure they have relief for this very difficult time in which they're living. We're continuing to monitor the CECRA program and we will make it possible for businesses to have access to the program. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, the government business rent relief program has been a total disaster. Even the government's own numbers show it is a failure. As of June 8, less than 2% of the $3 billion budgeted has been spent. What is it going to take for the government to admit that the program is a disaster and needs changes? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we know our government has been working closely with the provinces and territories to deliver the Canada emergency commercial rent assistance. Although the tenant-landlord relationship is ultimately the responsibility of the provinces and territories, our government has stepped up to provide support through the tools we have and through CMHC so that small businesses can get the rent relief they need. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, according to the government, there are around 1. 1 million small businesses in Canada. At committee, we were told only around 5,500 of them are receiving COVID-19 rent relief. That number is shameful. When will the Liberal government wake up and make the changes? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we welcome the steps some provinces and territories have taken to further protect commercial tenants. We will continue to monitor this program closely and ensure that Canada's small businesses are supported during this challenging time. We will continue to monitor to see The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, there was no answer. When can the government make these changes? Hon. Mary Ng (Minister of Small Business, Export Promotion and International Trade): Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable colleague that we are doing everything and will continue to do everything to help small businesses in our country. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, on May 27 the CBSA seized 65 small handguns at Pearson airport, the largest firearms seizure on record. It is clear that smuggled handguns are the weapon of choice for criminals. Why is the Prime Minister focusing on an ineffective municipal ban? Hon. Bill Blair (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness): Mr. Chair, I would point out that gun violence in any of our communities is unacceptable, and it's important that governments and communities take steps to prevent guns from getting into the hands of criminals. That's why we do important work at our border to keep guns from being smuggled into our country, but it also necessitates additional work. I don't think you can talk about gun violence without talking about stronger gun control. That's why our government has taken a very strong position and will strengthen gun control to keep Canadians safe. The Chair: Mr. Saroya, you may have a 10-second question, if that's possible, please. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, COVID-19 has not stopped gun violence in the GTA. My constituents are concerned about shootings minutes away from their homes. We know the Liberals'gun ban won't change anything, but a focus on smuggled guns and criminals will. When will they make that change? Hon. Bill Blair: Mr. Chair, stronger gun control laws are an effective tool, and that's been told to us by police leadership and communities across the country. We're also making investments in borders and law enforcement. Most importantly, we're making investments in communities and in kids to keep communities safe. I look forward to the member's strong support of those measures when we bring them forward. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback (Prince Albert, CPC): Mr. Chair, the U. S. and the U. K. began their second round of free trade negotiations yesterday. Does the government intend to have a trade agreement in place before the U. K. tariffs come into effect on January 1? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, the U. K. is a strong partner of Canada, as is the European Union, and we're looking forward to continuing that strong relationship The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Thank you, Mr. Chair. With respect to the negotiations with the U. K. , when will the minister publish her goals and objectives for this agreement? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, we're going to continue to work to ensure that any future agreement is going to be based on the best interests of Canadians, and we will The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Can the minister confirm whether they've entered into negotiations with the U. K. at this point? Hon. Mary Ng: Our government is analyzing the most-favoured-nation tariff regimes schedule the U. K. has put out. I want to assure Canadians The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Mr. Chair, during the CUSMA negotiations, a deal was struck between the Liberal Party and the NDP that the government would notify this House 90 days before it starts any negotiations on any trade agreement. When will the minister notify this House? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that we will absolutely be sharing information. Right now, we are analyzing the most-favoured-nation tariff regimes schedule put out by the U. K. Mr. Randy Hoback: Mr. Chair, any meaningful attempts to reform the WTO needs buy-in from the United States. I think all countries agree on that. Has the minister discussed a WTO reform with the USTR, the United States trade representative? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, the Ottawa Group is a consensus-based group, and any decisions will be taken together. Of course, any meaningful reform must include the U. S. The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Has the U. S. been invited to the Ottawa Group meetings? Hon. Mary Ng: The Ottawa Group is a consensus-based group limited to WTO members who are committed to bringing forward ideas and proposals The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Just as with any other trade agreement, the minister has committed to this House that she will publish the list of goals and responsibilities for the negotiations. When will she publish the list for the Ottawa Group? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I'm thrilled that we had an excellent meeting of the Ottawa Group yesterday where, as a group, we agreed to take concrete action. Mr. Randy Hoback: Will the minister be releasing a list of Canada's objectives we would like to see the new WTO's director-general pursue prior to the upcoming DG election? Hon. Mary Ng: We published an action statement from the Ottawa Group yesterday. I would encourage the member opposite to have a look. I'm certainly happy to send it to him. Mr. Randy Hoback: Going back to economic prosperity, we know that the U. S. has been having talks with other countries around the world. Has Canada yet been invited to this group? Hon. Mary Ng: I'm pleased to continue to pursue the objectives of trade diversification. I would remind the member that we have access to a billion and a half customers through our very robust Mr. Randy Hoback: A billion and a half customers is fine if you have a functioning WTO, but if you don't have a functioning WTO, then a billion and a half customers may not be fully accessible to our suppliers, manufacturers and agriculture producers. Can the minister confirm that she's in discussions with the U. S. in joining this economic prosperity group? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that nothing is more important than standing up and helping create markets for our Canadian businesses and to help our small businesses get more export-ready so that they can grow into the international marketplace. This is work that we've committed to do, and we will keep working on it, particularly The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Yesterday Saskatchewan presented a budget. Not only did they present the budget, but they'll also actually debate the budget and pass the budget in Parliament. There's full accountability. Why won't this government do the same? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons): Mr. Chair, the House is sitting in this hybrid format so that people can participate in the House on the screens. I'm sure my colleague is happy to see that his own colleagues are able to ask questions and participate. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Williamson. Mr. John Williamson (New Brunswick Southwest, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will say that this is no substitute for Parliament, but I appreciate the opportunity. New Brunswick families and businesses are rapidly making adjustments to manage and live with the coronavirus pandemic. Businesses here are opening and services are being offered. Families are preparing for summer and even planning ahead for a new school year in September. We have a lot of work ahead of us. One notable absence is Service Canada. When does the government plan on opening its service counters to assist Canadians again? Hon. Ahmed Hussen (Minister of Families, Children and Social Development): Mr. Chair, our government is committed to ensuring that Canadians continue to have access to the benefits that they rely on through Service Canada. We have redeployed over 3,000 additional staff to ensure that Canadians continue to have access to their benefits. We've established a 1,500-agent call centre to make sure that people can get access to the phone lines to get the help they need. Mr. John Williamson: Service Canada is about more than providing COVID-19 information and benefits. Provincial governments are working hard to adjust to Canada's new normal by opening up businesses and front-line government services. When will we see Service Canada play its role and open its service counters in our communities? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Mr. Chair, we're currently working with our world-class public health experts to determine how best to reopen the Service Canada network for the public. Make no mistake: Our Service Canada employees have gone above and beyond to ensure that Canadians continue to have access to the services that they rely on and the benefits that they need. Mr. John Williamson: Please don't hide behind health experts when the Prime Minister is appearing in the middle of large protests, yet is afraid to bring back the Parliament of Canada to do its business. In fact, the New Brunswick legislature is open for regular business. Bills are being studied, opposition input is being heard and MLAs are voting on legislation, not rubber-stamping government bills. By comparison, our Parliament is stuck in pretending it cannot function like other law-making assemblies. Canadians are in the dark about our country's finances. When will the government table an economic update so taxpayers understand what was spent, what is owed by our kids and grandchildren, and what the government's fiscal footing looks like? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, nobody's hiding. Nobody's doing anything like that. The only reason my colleague is able to ask a question and I'm able to answer his question is that he's right there on the screen. We have this hybrid format that cares for MPs across the country, not only the ones sitting in the House. Mr. John Williamson: This is no substitute for Parliament. I will ask my question again. When will the government table an economic update so that taxpayers understand what was spent, what is owed by our kids and grandchildren, and what the government's fiscal footing looks like in today's environment? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, I thank my honourable colleague for his question. Canada's economy is still in a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We have been open and transparent about the measures we have been providing to support families, businesses and workers. Even our health care The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Williamson. Mr. John Williamson: Except you have not. The Auditor General is underfunded. We have no idea about the total of government spending. Again I will ask when the government will table an economic update so that we can have an understanding of what the government's fiscal footing looks like. Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we have included biweekly reports to Parliament on the full cost and status of our economic response plan measures since the beginning. I have said, and I will continue to say, that when it is possible to provide a clear economic projection, we will provide an update. Mr. John Williamson: What is the full cost to date of the government's COVID-19 relief measures, as the minister just claimed the government has provided to Parliament? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we have provided support for workers, and 2. 5 million Canadians have been helped through the Canadian wage subsidy. We have provided businesses with some loans, and 669,000 businesses have applied for these loans. Even for the CERB, we have over eight million Canadians who have applied. The Chair: We will now continue with Mr. Bergeron. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: Mr. Chair, as the leader of the Bloc Qubcois mentioned a few moments ago, the government promised $14billion to Quebec and the provinces, but in targeted transfers. That is very little compared to the considerable expenses incurred to deal with the current crisis. But Quebec and the provinces don't just want this money to be transferred unconditionally, they also want a real discussion on a permanent increase in health care transfers. PremierLegault was rightly concerned about the feds'interference into provincial jurisdictions. The federal government, which does not manage any hospitals or long-term care centres, must stop playing armchair quarterback and transfer the money to the only governments with jurisdiction over health, that is, Quebec and the provinces. Will it do so without delay and without nitpicking? The Honourable Patty Hajdu (Minister of Health): Mr. Chair, we know that the Government of Quebec is working hard to ensure the safety of Quebeckers and we are here to support them. As part of this co-operation, we have developed health and safety recommendations for workplaces, we have purchased medical equipment for workers and we have supported the province in developing its reopening program. We are continuing this important partnership to ensure the safety of Quebeckers and all Canadians. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: The co-operation is so effective that the money is staying in the federal government's coffers. In fact, when the federal government wants to impose conditions, it always takes longer. We see it with housing, for which Quebec has not received a dime of the $1. 4billion it is owed. We have also seen it with infrastructure funds, particularly for public transit, water systems and water treatment. The health crisis is now. The needs are now. The much needed reopening of our economy is now. Will the government finally transfer the money without messing around or quibbling? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I am pleased to confirm to my colleague that there is no messing around, no quibbling, nothing of the kind. There is co-operation between two levels of government. It is natural to have discussions with all the provinces and with Quebec. I myself am taking part in some discussions and several of my colleagues are taking part in others. There is a clear willingness on the part of the federal government to co-operate with Quebec and all the provinces. That is what we are doing and that is perhaps what the Bloc Qubcois does not like. It likes bickering, but for the time being, there is none. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: We don't want to bicker, we want the money to be paid out. It is not complicated, for heaven's sake! We do not want a blank cheque. Right now, the money remains in the federal government's coffers. There is $1. 4billion that should be paid to Quebec for social housing and is sitting in the federal government's coffers. We are waiting for money for water treatment and water systems, but it is sitting in the federal government's coffers. It's almost July. We are wasting precious months for construction. What is the government waiting for to pay out the money so that we can get our economy rolling? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: The federal government is a very active partner. We are discussing and working with Quebec on infrastructure projects. We are continuing our discussions and negotiations on the housing agreement. Nothing is at a standstill. We are discussing and co-operating for the well-being of all Quebeckers. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: MadamChair, things are definitely at a standstill, because the money is owed and has not been paid out. Months are going by while construction is not taking place. We need to reopen the economy. We need more flexibility in the gas tax program and Quebec's contribution to allow municipalities to undertake work on city halls, community centres and fire stations. We need the federal government to contribute to funding public transit operations, which have become a real financial drain because of the drop in ridership. What is the federal government waiting for to provide real help instead of just talking? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: When it comes to just talking, the Bloc Qubcois has a lot of experience, I admit. We, in the government, are working and co-operating. We are not waiting with our arms folded, we are discussing a series of issues with Quebec. We do more than discuss, we work and we co-operate. We are working on projects, not only in infrastructure, but in a number of other areas. Just think of the co-operation of our armed forces in the CHSLDs, for example. We are here for Quebeckers. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Your time has run out, Mr. Bergeron. We'll go now to Ms. Khalid, from MississaugaErin Mills. Ms. Iqra Khalid (MississaugaErin Mills, Lib.): Madam Chair, I'll be splitting my time with the member for GlengarryPrescottRussell. During a consultation with the business community in Mississauga, the concerns of businesses, big and small, included the need for stable, affordable and safe child care. With the lack of such child care spaces, an economic recovery plan post-COVID cannot be effective until and unless we make sure that people are able to get back to work. I've heard from parents across Mississauga that they're being forced to stay home because of inadequate child care and that they have to choose between putting food on the table and keeping family safe. More and more employers are realizing that good employees are unable to contribute to their business growth because of this challenge. Now more than ever, we need to find long-term sustainable solutions for Canadians who face challenges with regard to child care. I ask our Minister of Families, Children and Social Development this: What is our strategy to tackle this ever-growing need for a national child care plan? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I thank the honourable member for her question and for her important advocacy and work on this important issue. We understand that child care is important to our economic recovery and our social infrastructure. We know the pressure that COVID-19 has placed on families, especially parents. That is why we're committed to continuing to work with provinces and territories to renew our agreements on early learning and child care, and to provide, at the earliest opportunity, $400 million in support. In addition to that, the Prime Minister has already indicated that child care will be part of the $14-billion pledge to provinces and territories to assist them with respect to COVID-19 recovery efforts. Over the next decade, we will continue to invest $7. 5 billion, and together we have achieved the goal of over 40,000 affordable child care spaces. We are also committed to continuing to create over 250,000 before-school and after-school child care spaces for kids under the age of 10. We will continue to work with our partners in the provinces and territories to ensure that Canadians can continue to have access to safe, quality and affordable child care. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for GlengarryPrescottRussell has the floor. Mr. Francis Drouin (GlengarryPrescottRussell, Lib.): MadamChair, small businesses play a fundamental role in the Canadian economy. In an article in LaPresse, the Minister of Economic Development warned us that the economic crisis caused by severe lockdown measures could have more serious consequences in small municipalities than in large cities. Based on discussions with the chambers of commerce in my riding, it is clear that federal government assistance will be essential for the reopening of the economy, specifically for the rural economy. In fact, I would like to acknowledge the work of the Prescott-Russell community development corporation, under the leadership of John Candie. After announcing almost $57million to help SMEs adopt e-commerce, how does the minister plan to help SMEs and the business community in our rural areas? Hon. Mlanie Joly (Minister of Economic Development and Official Languages): MadamChair, I also thank my colleague from GlengarryPrescottRussell for his important question. Yes, our regions are important and the entrepreneurs in those regions are creative and daring. They take risks, but they are currently facing huge challenges. So we are here for them. We understand their anxiety and we want to help them. That is why we have decided to invest heavily in rural economic development. It is also why we have doubled the budget of CFDCs and Community Futures organizations across the country. In southern Ontario we have reinvested over $260million in the regional economic development agency FedDev. In the great riding of GlengarryPrescottRussell, which I am particularly fond of and where there is a very good member of Parliament, there is an additional $1million for entrepreneurs in the region. We have been, we are and we will be at your side. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for GlengarryPrescottRussell has 36seconds left. No? Then we'll go to the honourable member for ElmwoodTranscona. Mr. Daniel Blaikie (ElmwoodTranscona, NDP): Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with the member for Victoria. Madam Chair, Krystal is a community worker in Winnipeg. She has been working from home since late March, taking care of her child, who is out of school, and caring for her father, who is living with her and vulnerable to COVID-19. Her employer called her up recently and asked her to physically return to work or to take a leave. As a parent and a care provider to a vulnerable person, she's not comfortable with physically returning to work. Service Canada won't give Krystal a straight answer as to whether going on leave and collecting CERB would count as refusing a reasonable job offer. With Bill C-17 looming in the background, Krystal is worried about jail time and fines if she does right by her child and her father by applying for CERB. Can Krystal reasonably refuse to go back to work and collect CERB, or will she be considered a fraudster? That's my question for the minister that is specific to Krystal's case. As well, what is the minister doing to provide clear direction to Canadians and to Service Canada agents so that people can get a clear answer before making their decision about returning to work? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I want to thank the honourable member for his important question. We recognize that Canadian workers will face various different situations, including those who are ineligible for the Canada emergency support benefit. We'll continue to work with workers to make sure they're able to be supported throughout this pandemic. The fact of the matter is that every province has workplace health and safety regulations that must be supported. We understand that workers have the right not to work in unsafe situations. We also understand that many Canadians do want to go back to work; and in fact many have. We will make sure that we support Canadians throughout this recovery process. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member has 47 seconds left, and that includes the answer. Mr. Daniel Blaikie: Madam Chair, that answer is really not good enough, because the problem here is that Krystal needs to know whether she can continue receiving CERB or not. That's a federal government decision, and she needs to know whether the federal government is going to accuse her of fraud and put her in jail or assess fines against her if she refuses to go back to work because she wants to take care of her child and her father. What is the minister's answer to that? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister has 20 seconds to respond. Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that if a Canadian has to take care of a loved one due to circumstances surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, they are indeed eligible to receive the CERB and remain receiving that benefit. Ms. Laurel Collins (Victoria, NDP): As we deal with the global pandemic, we cannot lose sight of the ongoing climate emergency. Canada has missed every single climate target it set, and we need to break the cycle of empty promises. Canadians want their government to be accountable, and environmental groups such as Ecojustice, CAN-Rac, Environmental Defence and West Coast Environmental Law, as well as the government's own climate institute, are all calling for legally binding climate targets. When will the government put its climate targets into law with legally binding milestones so we never miss another target again? Hon. Navdeep Bains (MississaugaMalton, Lib.): Madam Chair, I thank my honourable colleague for her question. I totally agree with her when it comes to the environment. It is a priority not only for us as a government, but it should be a priority for all Canadians. That is why we have put measures in place to put a price on pollution through carbon pricing. That is why we have a comprehensive plan that also includes significant investments in clean technology, which will help reduce our carbon footprint. I am confident that these measures will enable us to not only meet but exceed our 2030 target and also allow us to achieve our net-zero 2050 target. Ms. Laurel Collins: That didn't answer my question. I asked when. Empty promises won't get us any closer to meeting our climate targets. Can the minister tell us when his government will introduce climate accountability laws? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I think the fundamental issue here is having a plan when it comes to the environment. I'm confident that the measures that we have takenputting a price on pollution, investing in clean technology, and other key measures to reduce our carbon footprint, including the investment in infrastructureunderpin a plan The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to the honourable member for Victoria. Ms. Laurel Collins: This government is not meeting its targets, but it is meeting with oil and gas lobbyists. The pandemic has made us reflect on our priorities. Are we going to choose a just recovery with good, sustainable jobs for Canadian workers, or are we going to keep subsidizing oil and gas companies to the tune of billions, subsidies that we know are ending up in the pockets of CEOs and shareholders? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will have a brief answer from the minister. Hon. Navdeep Bains: Again, Madam Chair, this is the fundamental difference between us and the NDP. We fundamentally believe that the entire economy needs to work together, including the energy sector, to enable us to achieve those 2030 and 2050 targets. We are going to work together to support our workers, including in the energy sector, to reduce our carbon footprint. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Now we will go to the honourable member for SaskatoonGrasswood, Mr. Waugh. Mr. Kevin Waugh (SaskatoonGrasswood, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. When I was last here in May, I was on my way back to Saskatoon from Toronto, and there was actually someone on my flight who tested positive for COVID-19. I was never informed of it by the airline. I found out two weeks later. The report was in the news media. Why hasn't the government put rules in place requiring airlines to reach out to individuals like me who may have been exposed to COVID on their flights? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, it's hard to speculate on what happened from such a vague description of his experience, but I will say that we have every confidence in local public health, which is doing the hard and heavy lifting of contact tracing and working very closely with all kinds of different sectors, including airline sectors, to make sure that close contacts of people who have tested positive for COVID-19 are found, are traced and are isolated. I assume that the member took appropriate precautions on the flight and I hope that he continues to do so. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, it was reported that the individual on my plane who had COVID was actually connecting in Toronto from an international flight. The Prime Minister announced last week that they would begin mandating temperature checks for those bound for Canada in July. Will international travellers be tested when they land in Canada, or will they be relying on the tests that take place in other countries? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, this is a very important question, because the protection and safety of all Canadiansin particular, Canadian travellersis a high priority for our government. We've been working very closely with the airlines. At the current time, we are putting temperature screening in place. That will initially be done primarily by the airlines that are in the best position to do it at this point in time. We are also now going to be including CATSA, the people who do the security screening, so that when people enter the airport, they will also be screened. We believe that is going to be the most effective measure to keep all travellers safe. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, last week five of the largest professional sports leagues in North America put out a statement of support for my private member's bill, the safe and regulated sports betting act. Given the struggles that clubs and leagues are facing due to COVID-19, including having no fans at all in the stands for the foreseeable future, the legalization of sports betting would be a welcome opportunity not only to engage fans but to generate much-needed revenue. Will the government commit now to supporting the sports and gaming industries by supporting my private member's bill, Bill C-218? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, I've had the opportunity on many occasions to speak to members of Parliament and also to mayors and councillors and people living in border communities where there are casinos. They've raised this issue a number of times. We've listened very carefully to the concerns that have been expressed by them. I would like to advise the member that I look forward to the opportunity for a careful examination of his bill. We are at all times concerned about maintaining the integrity of the gaming industry within our community. That's the best way to protect Canadians. At the same time, we will examine his bill with all of the necessary attention to make sure it's given full consideration. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, it's the first time in history that we've had the five professional leagues in this country joining together for this bill. Newspapers rely, as we all know, on advertising for a significant portion of their revenue. This includes the usual flyers as well as in-paper ads. I've heard major concerns from a number of newspapers in this country about competition they're receiving today from Canada Post, which is offering massive free postage services. In fact, I have one of their ads here, which says that the first 6,000 pieces of postage are 100% free. If the government is genuine about wanting to ensure that newspapers and journals can succeed in this country, why are you allowing Canada Post to use its monopoly power to actually threaten local newspapers in this country? Hon. Steven Guilbeault (Minister of Canadian Heritage): Thank you, Madame Chair, and I thank the member opposite for his question. As you well know, a healthy news and media sector in Canada is a priority for our government, which is why we have put in place a number of measures before COVID-19 and during COVID-19, and we will continue to be there for them after this crisis has gone by. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Before we go on, we will be taking a break to do a bit of a changeover. I also want to remind members to address their questions and comments to the chair. We will go now to the honourable member for BruceGreyOwen Sound, Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff (BruceGreyOwen Sound, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Mr. Blair stated yesterday here in the House that the AR-15 has been used in mass killings in Canada on many occasions. Mr. Blair, please provide just one specific instance in which an AR-15 was used in a mass killing in Canada. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I remind the member to address questions and comments to the chair. The honourable minister may respond. Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I think this is an excellent opportunity to point out to the member opposite how important it is to actually listen to what was said. If you go back and review that tape, and I would invite you to do so, you'll see that I said the AR-15 and other weapons like themreferring of course to military-style assault weaponshave been used in mass killings, and I actually cited a number of examples. Madam Chair, I think it would be very useful if the member's questions were based on facts. Mr. Alex Ruff: I can remind Mr. Blair that I actually have watched the video a couple of times, and he specifically states that the AR-15 was used in mass killings in Canada, yet he has yet to provide one. My additional question is to Mr. Blair. Out of the recently banned firearms on May 1, how many have been or are still currently in use by the Canadian Armed Forces? Hon. Bill Blair: That's an excellent question, Madam Chair, because it's very important to provide Canadians with clarity. We have prohibited these firearms for non-law enforcement and non-military use. The military uses weapons that were actually designed for soldiers to use in combat to shoot other soldiers. That's the appropriate use of such weapons, Madam Chair. They're not things to be played with in civilian society. Mr. Alex Ruff: As a soldier for 25 years, I'll remind Mr. Blair that none of the currently prohibited firearms would be used in the Canadian Armed Forces. I asked him a question on whether any of them is being or ever has been used in the Canadian Armed Forces. Are any of the recently banned firearms still in use, or have they ever been in use, in any military in the world? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, I think it's important to also recognize that the basic origin, the provenance of the weapons that we have prohibited, was in their original design. They were designed for military use for various military forces around the world. As I've said previously, they were designed for soldiers to use in combat to kill other soldiers. They're very efficient in their design for killing people. They have no purpose in Canadian society. Mr. Alex Ruff: As someone who has used many military-style firearms and who is actually involved in helping define what we purchase in the military, I would use none of the ones that are currently prohibited. I have a question, Chair, for Minister MacAulay. Can he please confirm whether Veterans Affairs has a plan to address the claims backlog, yes or no? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (Minister of Veterans Affairs): Madam Chair, I appreciate my honourable colleague's question, and yes, we've indicated that it's a major priority. That's why I'm so pleased that the supplementary estimates contained just under $90 million to address hiring more staff, improving the process and making sure that we attack the backlog in an appropriate manner. Mr. Alex Ruff: Madame Chair, does that plan exist in written form? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Well, Madam Chair, I can assure you that it's in the supplementary estimates, and of course, this money is The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We'll go back to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff: The question is about the plan, not how much money has been allocated. I am asking for the written plan on how to address the backlog. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Madam Chair, I can tell my honourable colleague that the money is in the supplementary estimates, and with the money we're able to attack this problem in an appropriate manner, and that's what is important for our veterans. Mr. Alex Ruff: The deputy minister committed on March 10 that a written plan would be provided to the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs within a month and made public. Did the deputy minister or the department provide the minister that plan within a month? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Madame Chair, I'm sure my honourable colleague wants an appropriate plan and he would be fully aware this just under $90 million would make a big difference in the plan to attack the backlog. We The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We'll go back to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff: Thank you, Chair. Therefore, my question is, if the deputy minister in the department provided him with an appropriate plan or a written plan, why is he questioning how appropriate that plan is? I have complete confidence in the deputy minister's ability to produce a written plan. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister may give a brief answer, please. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I can assure my honourable colleague that with the appropriate funding, we will address the backlog in Veterans Affairs. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Parry SoundMuskoka, Mr. Aitchison. Mr. Scott Aitchison: Thank you, Madam Chair. My question is about summer camps again. Three weeks ago, I asked this government if the finance minister would meet with the beleaguered summer camp sector. Summer camps, which are a social and economic mainstay in Parry SoundMuskoka and all of northern Ontario, have been crippled by the global pandemic. It's costing millions of jobs, and some camps are actually in danger of folding. Aside from a brief follow-up conversation over the phone with the junior minister, there has still been no action from this government. When will the Minister of Finance meet with summer camps to find a solution? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I recognize the honourable member's important question and his focus on summer camps. We recognize the importance of looking at that and paying attention to the needs of that community. We will continue to engage with them, as we have, to ensure and find ways in which we can get their feedback and find ways in which we can support them. That work is ongoing, and I assure the honourable member that our focus is on the kids and on ensuring that they have access to summer camps for this year. Mr. Scott Aitchison: I don't know why you need to find ways to get feedback. The summer camps association has given lots of feedback and my office has given lots of feedback, so I don't see what's confusing about this. However, I've become accustomed to not really getting answers to questions, so I will go to the next one. The Ontario government's regional reopening plan permits cruise boats to resume on Georgian Bay, yet the federal government is refusing to allow these vessels to operate until July 1. Therefore, small businesses such as the Island Queen cruiser in Parry Sound, which has only a very few precious weeks to operate in the first place, is losing yet another two weeks because of federal inaction. This not only hurts the cruise boat industry but also hurts tourism and small businesses all through our area. Will the Minister of Transport take a regional approach himself by lifting the federal ban on Georgian Bay, just like the Province of Ontario has done? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister may reply. Is there a response? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, there is. I apologize for the confusion. Let me respond, if I may, on behalf of the Minister of Transport. There have been a number of very important discussions with the provinces, in particular with the Province of Ontario, around provisions regarding pleasure craft. There are certain restrictions that will come to an end on June 30. We're working very closely with our provincial counterparts to address this issue, but we want to ensure that it will be done safely. Mr. Scott Aitchison: Madam Chair, I actually gave the minister a heads-up that I would be asking that question. He sent me an email today saying he was not going to be able to be in the House, and it's great of him to do that. He said that whoever was going to fill in for him would have an answer, but again, that was not really an answer. The next issue I would like to bring this government's attention to is the deplorable state of rural Internet service in Parry SoundMuskoka. Quite simply, there are too many gaps in service, and what is available is generally way too expensive. We have families trying to work and teach their kids from home on unreliable and outrageously expensive Internet service, and we have too many small businesses that either cannot access or afford reliable Internet services. Today Greg Rickford, the Ontario energy minister, and Laurie Scott, Ontario Minister of Infrastructure, announced $2. 3 million for seven northern Ontario broadband projects. Minister, will when your government get serious and become a reliable partner for the Government of Ontario and the private sector to deliver this crucial modern-day infrastructure to rural Canadians? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I remind the member that he needs to address the questions and comments to the chair. The honourable minister may reply. Hon. Maryam Monsef (Minister for Women and Gender Equality and Rural Economic Development): Madam Chair, in the best of times, life without access to high-speed Internet is hard. During a pandemic, the challenges are that much more pronounced. Our government's unprecedented investments are already connecting a million more Canadian households to this essential service, but until we achieve universal access our work is not done. We will work with our partners, including provinces across the country, to connect every Canadian household to high-quality Internet access that is affordable and reliable. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member has 30 seconds. Mr. Scott Aitchison: I think I can squeeze something in here, then. I'm wondering, then, Madam Chair, since the Province of Ontario has used the Northern Ontario Heritage Corporation Fund to make this announcement, what about using FedNor to make the same kind of announcement, and partner with the province? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister has a brief answer. Hon. Mlanie Joly: Obviously we believe in the importance of northern Ontario; that's why we nearly doubled the budget of FedNor. We will continue to invest in businesses and people all around Parry Sound, Muskoka and northern Ontario. If my colleague has specific projects in mind, please come and see me and let's have a conversation. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for Montmagny-L'Islet-KamouraskaRivire-du-Loup, Mr. Gnreux, has the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux (MontmagnyL'IsletKamouraskaRivire-du-Loup, CPC): Thank you, MadamChair. I will continue along the same lines as my colleague. During this pandemic, we are realizing the extent to which reliable high-speed Internet service is needed for Canada's economy. There are still places where telework is not possible today because of the lack of adequate coverage. However, since2015, the government has committed to addressing the situation through three new programs. Benot Pilotto, who is the mayor of Saint-Onsime-d'Ixworth, in my riding, wrote to me a few days ago. That is why I am asking you what concrete results the government plans to achieve for our rural areas by the end of the year. Hon. Maryam Monsef: At the best of times, life without high-speed Internet access is difficult. During a pandemic, the difficulties are even greater. Our government's unprecedented investments are already connecting an additional one million Canadian households to this essential service. However, until we achieve universal access, our job is not done. We are working The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Gnreux, you have the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, I am simply asking the minister to tell me when the mayor of Saint-Onsime-d'Ixworth will be able to tell his residents when the Internet will be available in his municipality. It is not complicated. What does the government plan to do so that rural municipalities across Canada can have access to the Internet as soon as possible? What is its plan? Hon. Maryam Monsef: We are working with partners across the country to ensure that every Canadian household is connected to a high-quality, accessible and affordable high-speed Internet service. Madam Chair, I assure my colleagues that we share the same goal, and we will work with all our partners across the country to ensure every Canadian household has access The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Gnreux, you have the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, I am still not getting a specific answer. According to the government's plan, when will rural Canadian businesses and households be connected? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I would ask the honourable minister to provide a brief answer. Hon. Maryam Monsef: Madam Chair, those plans are under way, and we will have more to share in the coming days. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: It seems that the Minister of Rural Economic Development plans to announce a new plan this week. Can she tell us how this program will differ from the Connect to Innovate program, which is already in place? Can the minister tell us whether her program will solve the problem of the 25square kilometre hexagonal zones, which unfortunately make many projects ineligible for the CRTC's broadband fund? Hon. Maryam Monsef: Madam Chair, I'm pleased to share with my colleague that the model he's referring to, the hexagon model, is no more. Our maps are much more precise now to ensure that we do not leave Canadians behind. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, this year, the Canada summer jobs program is a real fiasco. I think all my colleagues will agree with me. On May13,100jobs were announced in my riding; on May20,16jobs were announced; on May27,13jobs were announced; on June3,12jobs were announced; and on June10, only one job was announced. As we speak, an amount of $100,000 is still to be confirmed in my riding. Can we have an announcement, once and for all? Let's stop the piecemeal announcements and finally confirm the remaining jobs today so that our organizations can have young people before the summer starts on the weekend. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable minister. Hon. Ahmed Hussen: MadamChair, I thank the honourable member for his question. We recognize the important role that the Canada summer jobs program is playing in supporting employers and young workers in communities right across the country. Our government is working very hard to help employers adapt to the realities of the COVID-19 pandemic, and at the same time is supporting young Canadians as they begin to look for summer employment. We've introduced flexibilities into the program to ensure that more young workers have opportunities to get employed. The honourable member also has to understand that we're in the COVID-19 pandemic, and as such it will take some time for businesses to equip themselves to hire students. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for NanaimoLadysmith, Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly (NanaimoLadysmith, GP): Thank you, Madam Chair. In the first five months of this year, 554 B. C. residents died from opioid overdoses. They were teachers, construction workers, business owners, family members, neighbours and friends. Addiction is a health and social issue, but criminalization creates stigma, so people hide their drug use and die alone. Access to a safe supply of drugs and safe injection sites saves lives and puts addicts in daily contact with people who can help them. Will this government end the war on drugs by decriminalizing them, providing a safe supply and reallocating resources from policing addicts to providing treatment for them? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, I think it's really important we make sure that when we speak about people who use substances, we remove stigmatizing language like the word addict. We can stand together, as this government has, with people who use substances and their families to ensure a range of options for people who are struggling with addiction, who are using substances in a way that is harming their health and their communities. As you know, we have restored harm reduction to the Canadian drugs and substances strategy. We've made it easier for people to access safe supplies of substances. We've increased access to treatment and the variety of treatment through federal transfers to provinces and territories. Madam Chair, we're working with communities to make sure there are more community-based approaches to treating The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, the Geneva Convention considers both tear gas and pepper spray to be chemical weapons and prohibits their use in war, yet our police forces use these weapons on Canadian civilians. These weapons are indiscriminate and can affect peaceful protestors and innocent bystanders. Will the government prohibit the use of these weapons and require police to use de-escalation techniques to keep legal protests peaceful? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, the right to peaceful protest in this country is a constitutionally protected right. We want to ensure it's always respected. At the same time, Madam Chair, we recognize that the use of even less than lethal force can have significant impacts on people's safety. This is a highly regulated substance in Canada. It's prohibited for non-police use, and for the police it is and should be highly regulated. The RCMP have advised me they have not used tear gas in nine years. We'll continue to monitor it to ensure that peaceful protest is always respected. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, in 2012 the RCMP spent $14 million on 18 armoured personnel carriers. One's parked at the Nanaimo detachment. I can't imagine why we have weapons of war like this for policing civilians. Will the government rein in the RCMP budget and end wasteful spending on militarizing our civilian police forces? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, it's a very important tradition that our Canadian police are not militarized. At the same time, we've seen a number of tragedies when police have responded to situations in which people were armed with weapons designed for soldiers to kill soldiers, and they've been used to kill police officers. The militarization of our society, so strongly promoted by some, is the direct consequence of the militarization of the police. As we remove these weapons from our society and prohibit them, we'll make it safer for everyone and we can then move away from such a model of policing. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, the government spent $4. 5 billion to buy an old, leaky pipeline. Since 1961, there have been 82 reported spills from the Trans Mountain pipeline. Over 1. 5 million litres of crude oil has spilled into the surrounding environment. This weekend, the Trans Mountain pipeline leaked again, dumping 190,000 litres of oil. How much is this spill going to cost Canadian taxpayers to clean up? How much contingency funding has been budgeted to repair the environmental destruction from spills? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I want to thank the honourable colleague for his question. He full well knows that the acquisition that we made with regard to the TMX initiative is a reflection of the fact that we want this initiative to move forward in a sustainable manner and in a manner that protects the environment. I'll continue to work with my colleagues to endeavour to make sure that we have the appropriate processes in place to protect the environment and at the same time create good-quality, middle-class jobs for Canadians. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for RosemontLa PetitePatrie, Mr. Boulerice, has the floor. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice (RosemontLa Petite-Patrie, NDP): Thank you, MadamChair. The Black Lives Matter movement is right to discuss systemic racism in our societies. In Montreal, the city and the police department have recognized this, and measures will be put in place. The Liberal government, once again, is all talk and no walk. Although it spends $10million a day, we see no attempt to reform or change the RCMP. If the Prime Minister really wants to act, why is he delaying the action plan in response to the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls? Hon. Bill Blair: Let me assure this House and the member opposite that we're not dragging our feet. This is an important issue. Indigenous people, black Canadians and other racialized people are far too often experiencing systemic racism and disparate outcomes through the criminal justice system. It's incumbent upon all of us who work within the criminal justice system to take the steps and actions necessary to produce more equitable outcomes. All police services, including the RCMP, must be committed to ensuring that the people they're sworn to serve and protect are always treated with dignity and respect. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: MadamChair, why are the Liberals taking indigenous children to court to challenge the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal ruling in their favour? Hon. Marc Miller (Minister of Indigenous Services): Madam Chair, as the honourable member knows full well, a number of cases are pending, and we are currently negotiating with the parties. We are making progress, and I would be delighted to tell the member and the House about it in response to a later question. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: We've been asking questions about it for months, and as I see it, we should keep doing so. The Prime Minister's new pipeline, which taxpayers were forced to buy with their hard-earned money, has leaked. Some 190,000litres of oil spilled, and we can't even make the company pay for it because the Liberals bought the pipeline. Trans-Mountain, KeystoneXL and the resumption of gas exploration and development off the coast of Newfoundland and Labradorare these the projects the Liberals had in mind for their green recovery? Hon. Navdeep Bains: I'd like to thank the honourable member for his question. Our priority was to protect the health and safety of Canadians throughout the pandemic, especially when it comes to the environment. That's why environmental and climate change laws aimed at protecting the environment, human health and conservation will remain in force. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: Across Quebec, the cultural community is going through a harrowing time. Unions, associations, artists and creators have all taken part in public demonstrations recently to condemn the lack of a specific plan for the living arts, performing arts and festival sector. What is the government waiting for? Hon. Steven Guilbeault: I'd like to thank the member for his question. However, I strongly disagree with him. We haven't waited to develop a plan for the arts and culture sector. We listened to the community and we tailored our supports, as they were announced. We have an emergency plan for the arts and culture sector. We were asked to adapt the CERB to take royalties into account, and we did. We were asked to extend the CERB, and we did. We are fully aware that the recovery will take longer in the arts and culture sector. We have been there, we are there and we will be there for the arts and culture sector. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: Well, that wasn't at all what the artists and creators who were out demonstrating in the streets a few days ago thought. They were protesting on the weekend. The CERB extension announced by the government only brings us to September, but the cultural community is expecting the worst in the fall. What is the government's long-term plan to support creators and their entire teams? Hon. Steven Guilbeault: I'm not so sure those who were protesting last week had issues with our government, but we'd certainly be happy to speak with them. As for a long-term plan, we are currently consulting arts and culture stakeholders to contemplate together how the government can help the sector in response to the ongoing crisis. We are working on finding solutions, but until we have long-term solutions, we have seen to it that our artists and organizations have access to funding until September. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for BeauportLimoilou, Mrs. Vignola, has the floor. Mrs. Julie Vignola (BeauportLimoilou, BQ): Madam Chair, I will be sharing my time with the member for Montcalm. According to the latest news, Seaspan Shipyards will be spending an additional $1. 5billion to build two ships. Why? Because the ships were ordered in 2011 and still haven't been delivered. Davie built the Asterix without going over budget because it delivered the ship on time. Davie is currently the top shipyard, representing 50% of Canada's shipbuilding capacity. Why isn't Davie being awarded its fair share of contracts? Hon. Anita Anand (Minister of Public Services and Procurement): I'd like to thank the member for her question. Davie is certainly a strong and trusted partner that works very hard to help our government get results for Canadians. Building a new class of ships is highly complex, and it's not unusual for cost estimates to change throughout the procurement project. It's important to make sure additional funding is available for the joint support ships project to ensure the navy's vessels are delivered. Mrs. Julie Vignola: We are talking about $1. 5billion, here. In the beginning, eight years ago, the project was supposed to cost $2. 6billion. There can't be much missing when the cost overrun is double the initial estimate. Why haven't the ships been delivered yet? Why is Davie still not seen as a trusted partner? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Minister, please keep your answer brief. Hon. Anita Anand: Once again, I would point out that building a new class of ships is highly complex, and it's not unusual for the cost estimate to change for a procurement project as large as this one. I know that Davie works very hard, and we also believe it is an outstanding partner. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): It is now over to the honourable member for Montcalm, Mr. Thriault. Mr. Luc Thriault (Montcalm, BQ): Madam Chair, in Quebec, 12,000people have begun their training to work in residential and long-term care centres. They will be ready for duty in mid-September. In the meantime, we need the support of the army, which is helping us save lives. The dedication of the members of the armed forces is paramount, and I want to extend my heartfelt thanks. The government extended their mission until June26, which is only 10days away. What does the army have to do right now that is more important than helping our caregivers save lives? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, I'm glad my fellow member recognizes the fundamental role the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces have played and continue to play in residential and long-term care centres and many other areas in support of our seniors. We are in talks with the Quebec government. The discussions around providing continued assistance to Quebec are quite positive and productive. That assistance can take many forms, including the Red Cross. We will be there for our seniors, Madam Chair. Mr. Luc Thriault: We are short 12,000people, so if the Red Cross wants to help us, all the better. We'll take all the help we can get. Barely 800members of the military are still in Quebec. I repeat my question: What does the army have to do 10days from now that is more important if it's not to help caregivers save lives? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, all the members of the military are still in Quebec. They have done absolutely incredible work and are continuing to do so. The people at the Canadian Red Cross are well-trained paid workers who can perform the same work in partnership with the members of the armed forces, who can stay in Quebec as well. Right now, we are working with the Quebec government and discussing how we can keep the measure in place until September15. Mr. Luc Thriault: Madam Chair, our nurses and orderlies are exhausted. They're at the end of their ropes. Now is the time to thank them, not the time to turn our backs on them. It's not the time for dilly-dallying or discussions. It's the time to tell them that we will be there to help them until the end. I will repeat my question. What does the army have to do that is more important than helping caregivers save the lives of those who built Quebec? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The Leader of the Government in the House of Commons is asked to keep his answer brief. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, the Government of Canada is there and will continue to be there to help the people who built Quebec. The Government of Canada will work with the Quebec government to make that happen. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for Red DeerMountain View, Mr. Dreeshen. Mr. Earl Dreeshen (Red DeerMountain View, CPC): Thank you so much. Madam Chair, on May 14 I asked the Minister of Agriculture when the Liberal government would put aside its usual campaign rhetoric and recognize the very detrimental impact the carbon tax is having on farmers across this country. Minister Bibeau proudly noted that according to their data, the average cost of the carbon tax per farm across Canada is $210 to $819. We know that these numbers are completely unfounded and are not based on any factual evidence. The fact is that the Liberal government's own Parliamentary Budget Officer has estimated that at $25 per tonne, the cost for an 855-acre crop farm in Alberta is well over $6,000. The office came up with that using the government's statistics from the 2016 agricultural census. Madam Chair, the evidence is right in front of the minister. When will this Liberal government come clean with Canadians and recognize the disastrous impact the carbon tax is having on Canada's critical agriculture and agri-food sector? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food): Madam Chair, our pollution pricing policy is designed to grow a clean economy. To support this sector, we have put in place the following measures. Emissions from livestock and crop production are not priced. Farm fuels and fuels from cardlock facilities are exempt, and there is a partial rebate for propane and natural gas used in commercial greenhouses. Our government has been very open and transparent about our pollution pricing plan. We will do a review of our pollution pricing system in 2020, focused on competitiveness issues in trade-exposed industries such as agriculture. It is also important to remember that this is about tackling climate change and that 100% of the revenues stay in the province. We will continue to support our farmers and food processors as they provide an essential service across Canada. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Madam Chair, Minister Bibeau keeps talking about wanting to protect Canadians'environment. Well, the truth is that Canada's farmers, ranchers and processors have for years demonstrated their ability to deliver meaningful reductions in emissions and to safeguard the environment through the adoption of new technologies, education and innovative management practices, but the government ignores these efforts. Will the minister at the very least admit to Canadians that Canadian farmers are unable to pass on the cost of the carbon tax to consumers and instead have to absorb those extra costs out of their own pockets? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Madam Chair, allow me to explain again our government's position on pollution pricing. The price and method were developed so we could build an increasingly clean economy. We put a number of measures in place to help the agriculture sector. Emissions from animal and plant production aren't taxed. Farm fuels and fuels delivered to off-farm points-of-sale are also Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you, Madam Chair. I do have another question. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I am watching the time, Mr. Dreeshan. You have a couple more seconds. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you. Madam Chair, Minister Bibeau has repeatedly asked stakeholders to send her data about the impacts of the carbon tax on farmers, so this is exactly what they have been doing. The Atlantic Grains Council, the Grain Farmers of Ontario, Producteurs de grains du Qubec and the Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association issued a joint statement at the beginning of this year in which they estimated that the cumulative indirect inflation of carbon tax on farm costs will be $14. 50 an acre this year, with that cost escalating by more than double by 2022 to almost $30 an acre. These are huge numbers. Why does the Liberal government continue to ignore the facts presented to it and continue to misrepresent the truth to Canadians? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Madame Chair, I can assure you that we have paid close attention to all the information that has been provided to us and that our calculation was also based on this information provided by provinces and different stakeholders. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Our government has been very open and transparent about our pollution pricing plan. The department used data from stakeholders and provinces Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you very much, Madam Chair Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: as well as the 2019 agricultural tax data to estimate the average cost of pollution pricing associated with grain drying at up to 0. 4% of overall operating costs. It is important to remember that we have put in place many special provisions Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Madam Chair Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: like exempting farm fuel and providing other financial supports for farmers. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Dreeshen, I am watching the time, and the minister is allowed to answer for the same amount of time that you used to ask the question. Therefore, I would hope that we would allow her to finish. She has finished, and unfortunately the time is up. The committee now stands adjourned until tomorrow at noon.

When discussing the governmental issue of dealing with systematic racism, Justin Trudeau mentioned that actually there had been serious systematic racism in most national institutions for the past two years, so he called for a revolution in those organizations to welcome equal cooperation with the black colleagues and indigenous communities. One of those institutions, RCMP, had another problem of the inappropriate fund allocation. According to Justin Trudeau, during the outbreak of the pandemic, the fund should be paid to the medical system but not the policing work.

tr-sq-1248

tr-sq-1248_0

What did the group talk about the uncertainty of Canadian economy and what the government should do during the special period? The Chair (Hon. Anthony Rota (NipissingTimiskaming, Lib.) ): I call this meeting to order. Welcome to the 23rd meeting of the House of Commons Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic. A reminder to all members that in order to avoid issues with sound, members participating in person should not also be connected to the video conference. For those of you who are joining via video conference, I will remind you that when speaking you should be on the same channel as the language you are speaking, and please use your headsets. As usual, please direct your remarks through the chair. As I understand, there are no ministerial announcements today. We will now proceed to presenting petitions. I remind members that any petition presented during a meeting of this special committee must have already been certified by the clerk of petitions. For members participating in person, I ask that they please come and drop their signed certificates off at the table once the petition is presented. I would ask members to be very brief and concise, and to summarize the exact content of the petition. We will continue. The first person presenting a petition today is Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May (SaanichGulf Islands, GP): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I present two petitions this morning. The residents of SaanichGulf Islands are calling on the government to simplify the process for protection of marine protected areas. It's a multi-layered communication process. The marine protected area first proposed in the 1970s for the southern Strait of Georgia, now called the Salish Sea, has been awaiting designation for so long that it was originally endorsed by Jacques Cousteau. That gives us a sense for why petitioners are calling for a simplified and more rapid process. The second petition is from petitioners who are very concerned about our obligations under the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and our commitments under the Truth and Reconciliation Commission calls to action. They specifically reference the RCMP violation of UNDRIP in its actions on Wet'suwet'en territory and ask the government to commit to actually living the principles embodied in UNDRIP. The Chair: We will now go to Mr. Hardie. Mr. Ken Hardie (FleetwoodPort Kells, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am presenting a petition on behalf of the one in a million Canadians who suffer severe and adverse effects from vaccinations. GuillainBarre syndrome is very debilitating, and this petition seeks the setting up of a no-fault accident or compensation system to help offset the loss of work, the loss of wages and the loss of quality of life that many of these people suffer. I'm pleased to present this petition pursuant to Standing Order 36. The Chair: Mr. Trudel, you have the floor. Mr. Denis Trudel (LongueuilSaint-Hubert, BQ): Mr. Chair, culture is the soul of a people. Over the past 20years or so, culture, especially music, has never been as accessible as it is now. Paradoxically, creators'incomes have never been so low. The advent of digital technology has completely overturned the system for distributing the wealth generated by creators for the benefit of various Web stakeholders, many of whom are billionaires. This petition addresses these problems and proposes realistic solutions. The first is to set a minimum royalty model for streaming platforms for artists. The second is to update the existing private copying system. The third is for Internet and cell phone providers who sell their services as direct access to culture to share their profits with artists. The fourth is that the GAFAMs have to pay taxes on their services. Six thousand people have already signed the first version of this petition, launched last month by musician JordanOfficer and supported by singer BarbaraSecours. As an artist, I am proud to present this petition today because the issues it raises are fundamental to the survival of Quebec culture. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood ParkFort Saskatchewan, CPC): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I have four petitions to present today. I will be as brief as you suggested, although I will observe that if some members are going on longer during petitions than they normally do, it might be because the government has taken away so many of the tools that opposition members normally have for raising important issues in the House. The first petition deals with the issue of euthanasia and long-term care. The petitioners are concerned that instead of focusing on improving medically assisted life, something that we know is a major issue in light of recent revelations, the government has put so much time and legislative energy into efforts to continually further expand euthanasia in Canada and remove vital safeguards. The second petition speaks to the ongoing conversations happening in Canada around systemic discrimination and systemic racism. I think we do need to reflect on systemic discrimination. This petition deals specifically with Bill 21 in Quebec and raises concerns. The reality of the way that bill applies is that people from certain backgrounds who wish to practise their faith are not able to fully participate in Canadian society if they are employed in the public service. This petition asks the government to provide a response on that issue, something it hasn't done in response to past petitions on this. The third petition deals with the issue of firearms. The petitioners want to see the government take a strong response in dealing with illegal guns and gun smuggling. The petition notes that the vast majority of firearms-related crimes in Canada involves illegal guns. At the same time, the petitioners are concerned that the government has the wrong focusthat is, harassing law-abiding firearms ownerswithout putting in place substantial measures to deal with illegal guns. The petitioners want to see the reversal of the order in council from May 1 and strong measures to deal with illegal firearms. The fourth and final petition deals with Bill S-204, a bill that would make it a criminal offence for a Canadian to go abroad and receive an organ from a person who has not consented to giving that organ. It would also create a mechanism by which someone could be deemed inadmissible to Canada if they were involved in organ harvesting and trafficking. The petitioners are supportive of Bill S-204 and of similar bills in previous parliaments and would like to see us pass that bill as soon as possible. The Chair: Presenting petitions, Mr. Lamoureux. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Winnipeg North, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. It is with pleasure that I table another petition by the residents of Winnipeg North. These residents have signed a petition asking the Government of Canada, and in fact all members of Parliament, to put a high priority on assisting our poorest seniors. The increases to the GIS by $200, and $300 to the OAS, have been well received. They just want to highlight how important it is to support our seniors, in particular the poorest of our seniors. The Chair: For members present in the Chamber, a reminder that they are asked to bring their petitions to the table. We'll now proceed to statements by members. We'll go to Ms. Atwin for the first one. Mrs. Jenica Atwin (Fredericton, GP): Thank you, Mr. Chair. June 21 is National Indigenous Peoples Day, a day of acknowledgement and a day of celebration of the beautiful diversity of indigenous peoples across Turtle Island. I wish to recognize the leadership of Chief Shelley Sabattis of the Welamukotuk First Nation in Oromocto, New Brunswick. Each year she and her council, volunteers and staff go above and beyond to show appreciation for their members and to demonstrate pride and culture while promoting well-being. We gather in an event where all are welcome to take part, from traditional hand drum-making with elders to moose meat and tacos. This year we will celebrate a bit differently, but we will still stay connected, virtually and in spirit, to the vast network of indigenous peoples and allies. We need each other now more than ever. May we come together in song and stories and in solidarity. We will remember those who are not among us. I hope all of Canada will join us in observing National Indigenous Peoples Day. Mawiyapasuwok: let us come together. Nit liech. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Beech. Mr. Terry Beech (Burnaby NorthSeymour, Lib.): Mr. Chair, COVID-19 is an unprecedented challenge for all communities across Canada, but as we do our part to flatten the curve, I often think about those who suit up every morning to serve on the front lines of our health care system. My mother is a home care worker and my sister is a nurse. Even before the crisis, they would often share the hardships they faced on a day-to-day basis. It's a tough job at the best of times. In a pandemic, these jobs are life-threatening. I think we can all agree that these workers deserve more than our good wishes. They deserve a raise. That is why we have worked with the provinces to implement pandemic pay. In British Columbia more than 250,000 front-line workers are eligible for this program. That works out to a pay increase of about $4 an hour. It's a small show of our appreciation for their difficult and priceless contribution to our country. Share this message and say thanks to our front-line workers, participate in the 7 p. m. cheer, and order a pizza for your local nurses. It's the least we can do. The Chair: We'll now go on to Mr. Shipley. Mr. Doug Shipley (BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. We've been living in difficult times. Slowly, we are getting back to some resemblance of normalcy, although unfortunately not soon enough for some of our great summer festivals. It will not be normal in BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte this summer without the iconic Boots and Hearts weekend music festival, Kempenfest, Oro World's Fair, the Elmvale Fall Fair, or the Midhurst Autumnfest. Canada Day celebrations have been cancelled, but we can still celebrate the great nation we call home. Because of the lack of Canada Day celebrations, I've created Happy Canada Day lawn signs that are available through my constituency office, free to all residents of BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte. I'm also hosting a drive-through party on Canada Day at the Royal Canadian Legion on St. Vincent Street in Barrie. All are welcome to attend. There will be cupcakes for all. Please drop by the legion between 11 a. m. and 2 p. m. , and we can celebrate Canada Day safely together. Thank you and have a great summer. The Chair: Now we'll go on to Ms. Young. Ms. Kate Young (London West, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Among the countless ordinary Canadians who have stepped up to do extraordinary work during COVID-19, I wish to draw attention to our teachers. Teachers have always had a special place in my heart. My father was a teacher, and my daughter-in-law, Kelly Webb, is one now. I'm certain that my colleagues can all easily remember a teacher in their past who played an important role in helping them achieve their potential. I remember my grade 12 English teacher, Vince Weaver, at Westminster Secondary School in London. He made me realize that I could do so much more than I believed. Across the country, as schools closed, teachers did not stop their work. Some took their classes online. Others found innovative ways to continue engaging with their students. This is not the school year anyone imagined, and what the next one will look like is unclear, but our teachers in London West and across Canada have shown that no matter what, they will be there to help our next generation shine. The Chair: Before proceeding to the next presenter, I just want to remind the honourable members in the chamber that I realize that the six-foot limit makes it harder to whisper to each other, but we're hearing a bit of rumble, so I just want you to try to whisper at your best. Mr. Bergeron, you have the floor. Mr. Stphane Bergeron (Montarville, BQ): Mr. Chair, on July1st, we will be celebrating one of the most important events for the riding of Montarville: the 175thanniversary of the city of Saint-Bruno-de-Montarville. The theme Proud of our traditions will be the focus of this celebration for the people of Montarville. This is a good illustration of the rich history of this municipality nestled in the western foothills of Mont-Saint-Bruno. The seigneury of Montarville was granted in1710 to the illustrious former governor of Trois-Rivires, PierreBoucher. The parish of Saint-Bruno, which took root there and in which a village grew, became a municipal corporation in1845. To this day, it is one of the most prosperous localities, with a strong sense of belonging, a very dynamic community life and jealously preserved natural environments. A whole program had been drawn up for the celebration, but the current health crisis has taken over some of the planned activities, which has in no way diminished the pride and festive spirit of the people of Montarville. On July1st, we will have a good reason to be proud, in spite of everything. Happy 175thanniversary to Saint-Bruno-de-Montarville. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Maloney. Mr. James Maloney (EtobicokeLakeshore, Lib.): Mr. Chair, thank you for allowing me to take a moment to highlight an initiative that I started early on during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Heroes of EtobicokeLakeshore is an opportunity for citizens in my riding to recognize the contributions of those in their community who make life a bit easier. I'm pleased with the number of nominations I received that honour everyone from front-line workers to businesses that are innovating in these difficult times to volunteers who are finding new ways to reach out. I think of Daniel Lauzon who set up Food for Now, a mobile service that helps take care of the homeless. I think of Toni Varone, who helped his business clients by forgiving their rents, or young Lucas, who wanted to thank his teachers. I've been moved and inspired by the countless stories of generosity, strength, resiliency, kindness, incredible character and creativity. I want to thank all the heroes, as well as the people who nominated them. Keep them coming. Stay safe, everyone, and I wish you happy Canada Day early. The Chair: We'll now move on to Ms. Wong. Hon. Alice Wong (Richmond Centre, CPC): Mr. Chair, it gives me great pleasure to thank a local Richmond-based charity, the Social Diversity for Children Foundation, SDC, for its hard work both in raising funds for the purchase of personal protective equipment and in distributing this PPE to long-term care facilities and individual seniors'homes in the lower mainland of B. C. The COVID-19 relief fund is supported by a dozen other non-profits, businesses and community groups. Over the past two months, SDC has been to 32 seniors homes and senior-related organizations. In total, it has delivered masks to 7,000 care workers, staff and seniors. It is amazing to have witnessed how the younger generation have gotten involved in caring for the elderly at this very challenging time. The Chair: We'll now go to Ms. Damoff. Ms. Pam Damoff (Oakville NorthBurlington, Lib.): Mr. Chair, June is ALS Awareness Month, and 79 years after Lou Gehrig died from ALS little has changed. There's still no cure, and those with ALS typically die within five years of diagnosis. On June 21, Canadians will gather virtually to raise funds for ALS Canada in the Walk to End ALS. In Halton, normally we meet each year at Bronte Creek Provincial Park on the May long weekend to raise funds for ALS Canada. This year I will virtually join Tim's Titans, a team formed to honour Tim Robertson, my friend who died in 2016 after living with ALS for 13 years. I have a T-shirt, with a picture of Lou Gehrig, that says, Great Player. . . Lousy Disease and Tim's Titans. . . Great Team! ALS. . . Still a Lousy Disease. Join me on June 21 for the virtual Walk to End ALS to raise funds to support patients and their families and for ALS research. The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Khera. Ms. Kamal Khera (Brampton West, Lib.): Mr. Chair, on Saturday our community stood and marched in solidarity against anti-black racism. The peaceful protests that we're seeing across the country and around the world were not triggered by an isolated incident. They are fuelled by decades of ineffective action against something that is so insidious and deeply entrenched in our history, systems and institutions. For us, that is the racial inequality faced by Canada's indigenous and black communities. Anti-black racism is real. It exists right here in Canada, in our communities, including in Brampton. It exists when racialized students at McCrimmon Middle School are called McCriminals. It exists when a shocking report exposes the Peel District School Board's failure to work fairly with the black community. It exists when D'Andre Campbell, who was fighting mental illness, loses his life at the hands of the police. It is clear that we need reform. We need to dismantle the systems that allow this privilege and oppression to take form, and address the unconscious bias plaguing our institutions. We'll need to be bold, and the time to do that is now. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd (Sturgeon RiverParkland, CPC): Mr. Chair, a few months ago I rose in the House on the eve of our closure due to COVID-19. I told Canadians we must not give in to fear, that we would carry on and get through this crisis stronger than ever. Today, in this city and across Canada, Canadians are enjoying a beer on their favourite patios. Businesses are reopening, jobs are returning and our lives are starting to feel a bit normal again. Canadians pulled together, and because of that we did not see the devastating death toll that many had predicted. Life may be returning to normal, but unfortunately, here in this chamber of democracy, the people's voices continue to be shut down. There is no good reason for Parliament to be suspended today. In the words of my grandfather, it's time for the Liberals to get with the program and bring back the House. The Chair: We will now proceed with Ms. Jones. Ms. Yvonne Jones (Labrador, Lib.): Mr. Chair, from in-person learning to virtual classrooms, COVID-19 has drastically changed the lives of students across the country, especially those in post-secondary education who are worried about covering costs like tuition or rent this coming fall. Our government recognized that students should not have to worry or put their futures on pause during this difficult time. That's why last month the federal government introduced the Canada emergency student benefit. If you're a high school student headed to a post-secondary school, or a current post-secondary student or a recent graduate, you can receive the Canada emergency student benefit every four weeks and have the financial support that you need to save for school. We also doubled Canada student grants and loans, enhanced the student loan program, increased supports for indigenous post-secondary education and introduced the Canada student service grant for those who wish to pursue it. Our government is here to help all students get the support they need to pursue their future goals successfully. I wish them all the very best, and I wish all of you, my colleagues and those across Canada, a very happy National Indigenous Peoples Day, which is coming up on June 21. The Chair: I want to remind the honourable members to keep to their 60 seconds so that we don't go over the time. I'm sure it would be a lot easier for everyone if we stuck to that limit. We will now go to Mr. Aitchison. Mr. Scott Aitchison (Parry SoundMuskoka, CPC): Mr. Chair, I rise today to once again implore the government to do something about the horrible lack of access to and crazy cost of rural Internet service. Right now, too many areas of my riding have no access to rural Internet service at all, and those who can get service are paying through the nose. I've even heard constituents say that during this pandemic, they are having to choose between feeding their kids and educating them. Over the last few weeks, Conservatives have been consulting with rural Canadians, and the results are in. My constituents are tired of fancy political promises. They are frustrated beyond belief by the new challenges created by this pandemic. They are absolutely fed up with having their pleas ignored. All we want is affordable and reliable Internet service. Is that too much to ask of the government? The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. MacGregor. Mr. Alistair MacGregor (CowichanMalahatLangford, NDP): Mr. Chair, these last few months have been incredibly challenging for the residents of CowichanMalahatLangford, who have been forced to deal with the economic and social consequences of COVID-19. The pandemic has laid bare the inadequacies of our social safety net, the weakness in our supply chains and the dependence of our society on essential workers, who often work long hours for low wages, putting themselves and their families at risk. We've also been forced to confront the systemic inequality, poverty and racism that continue to hold so many people back from achieving their full potential. I will not dishonour the sacrifice that so many have made during this time by allowing us to go back to the status quo that got us here in the first place. I will not apologize for demanding that the most vulnerable in our society get the supports and opportunities they need to live with dignity, and I will not relent from pushing my political colleagues to summon the courage necessary to implement policies that lead to environmental, economic and social justice. The Chair: I now give the floor to Mr. Blaney. Hon. Steven Blaney (BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, CPC): Mr. Chair, here is a beautiful story, the story of a woman from Bellechasse, a courageous young mother from Saint-Malachie, Marie-ChristineGoupil. With three children, including the eldest daughter with a disability, and realizing that her daughter with a disability had special clothing needs, she decided to go into business to meet the needs of other parents who, like her, were facing their child's clothing challenges. Last week, she presented her Handy clothing collection on the show Dans l'il du dragon. It was a very emotional moment for the audience and the dragons. They were so touched that they decided to give her the amount she wanted without diluting her shares. The video of her presentation has already been viewed over 1million times on social networks. Marie-ChristineGoupil has discovered a passion for entrepreneurship and has moved and inspired many people with her passionate and courageous attitude. Congratulations, Ms. Goupil, your example makes us proud. The Chair: Mr. Blanchet, you have the floor. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet (BeloeilChambly, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I lend my voice to the Chief of the Assembly of First Nations of Quebec-Labrador, GhislainPicard, whose message is as follows: There have been no fewer than 14reports and conclusions of commissions of inquiry since1967 highlighting major problems in relations between law enforcement agencies and indigenous people. Each time, the conclusions have been overwhelming and highlight a disturbing reality. The justice system has failed indigenous people. Are you going to respond, as you too often do, by moving on to the next one, or are you going to do what we expect you to do, which is to recognize that the justice system discriminates against indigenous people and that we have no less right to security than the rest of the population? In three months, police interventions have claimed more victims among our members than the pandemic. But it is not enough to simply take a knee and denounce racism. It's about standing up and taking action. Those are the words of GhislainPicard. The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Harder. Ms. Rachael Harder (Lethbridge, CPC): Over the last few months, Canada's democracy has been disregarded and an autocracy has been resurrected in its place. By refusing to hold regular parliamentary sittings, Mr. Trudeau is sending a strong message to the Canadian public that he alone is the one who matters. In 2014, he professed that Canadians want their Members of Parliament to be effective voices for their communities in Ottawa, and not merely mouthpieces for an all-too-powerful Prime Minister. As it stands, however, he has shut down Parliament. Effectively, he has stripped us, the opposition, of our privileges and our powers. Sadly, Mr. Trudeau has become the all-too-powerful Prime Minister that he once warned against. A government that does not allow for effective opposition is not functioning in the best interest of Canadians; it is operating in the best interest of itself and, even more so, the interest of the Prime Minister. Canadians deserve to flourish in a democracy, not merely survive under the autocracy that this Prime Minister has created. The Chair: We'll now go on to Ms. Zahid. Mrs. Salma Zahid (Scarborough Centre, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I would like to recognize the work of Agincourt Community Services Association and its tireless executive director, Lee Soda, who have been serving our community during the COVID-19 pandemic. Under more pressure than ever, their staff and volunteers continue to serve a community whose need was great even before the crisis. Their food bank helps over 4,000 people weekly. They have opened outdoor washrooms and hand-washing stations for vulnerable communities and are delivering groceries and other essentials to vulnerable seniors. ACSA is a bridge between those who can help and those who need help, and they are just one example of how our community has come together to meet this challenge. There are restaurants and businesses donating meals to front-line workers, residents answering the call to stock the food bank shelves and neighbours looking in on the vulnerable and isolated. I am so proud of our community's spirit. Scarborough is strong. The Chair: We'll now proceed to the questioning of ministers. Please note that we will suspend the proceedings twice in order to allow employees who provide support for the sitting to replace each other safely. The first question goes to the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Chair, for months Conservatives have been pointing out flaws in Liberal government programs that are preventing Canadians from getting the help they need. The Prime Minister has refused to make these very technical changes to get more help to Canadians who need it. For example, on the wage subsidy, more than two-thirds of the money allocated for that program has lapsed because businesses don't qualify. I have a simple question. Will the Prime Minister change the program to allow companies who have made acquisitions to access the wage subsidy to keep more people working? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Papineau, Lib.): Mr. Chair, from the very beginning we knew that as we rolled out measures, we would need to improve them and tweak them, and that's exactly what we've been doing over the past three months. We needed to make measures happen quickly for Canadians, and we did that. But we continued to improve them, to make additions and amendments so that more people could get the help they needed, including with the proposed legislation last week that expanded the reach of the wage subsidy to more businesses. Unfortunately, the Conservatives didn't even want us to debate that particular piece of legislation. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Actually, Mr. Chair, it was the Liberals who said no to the motion to allow this Parliament to sit to debate that motion, and even in that legislation they refused to allow businesses who have made acquisitions to access the program. Now, when we look at the rent relief program, it is so difficult to apply for it that many landlords are refusing to bother, leaving even more small businesses to fall through the cracks. In fact, of the $3 billion allocated to the rent relief program, only $39 million has been paid out. That's less than 2%. Now, the Prime Minister is still using talking points from April. It's now June and he has refused to fix these programs and has successfully talked out the calendar on the days that the House of Commons could meet to discuss these programs. When will he make these changes to get more help to Canadians who need it? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, throughout this pandemic, we have constantly been updating and expanding our various programs. We recognize, in conversations with the premiers, how important it is to make sure that we're working together, the provinces and the federal government, on issues like rent subsidies where commercial rent is indeed a provincial jurisdiction. Many provinces have moved forward with the eviction bans that are necessary to go along with this, and we'll continue to work with provinces to make sure that we're getting Canadians the help they need. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Mr. Chair, Canadians cannot wait. He has run down the clock on parliamentary sittings and he still refuses to make these changes to get more help to Canadians. Today, we learned that Telus has installed Huawei technology in downtown Ottawa. There are over 80 sites across the national capital region with Huawei technology installed. Some of these sites are very near sensitive government institutions, like government departments, the National Research Council, RCMP headquarters and the Bank of Canada. How long has the Prime Minister known that Huawei technology has been installed in the Ottawa area? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, first off, on the issue of Parliament, it has been meeting four times a week over the past many weeks, and members of the opposition have been able to continue to ask questions on COVID-19 and a broad range of subjects. Moreover, every two weeks the finance department puts forward at the finance committee the full transparent measures that we've taken, so that parliamentarians can study them. We are continuing to work in this crisis. At the same time Mr. Ziad Aboultaif (Edmonton Manning, CPC): Answer the question. The Chair: I'm sorry? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: in regard to Huawei technology there are strict rules for companies to follow and we assume they will all follow those. The Chair: We'll pause for a second and stop the clock. I want to remind the honourable members who are joining us virtually that heckling really does disrupt the whole session. Your face does come up and we do see who it is, so I just want to make sure that you're aware of that. Now we'll go back to Mr. Scheer. We have a minute and 10 seconds left. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister is bragging about accountability and transparency. Will he table an economic update before the House rises? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, throughout this unprecedented pandemic, we have been open and transparent about all of the measures we've put forward. We've updated the finance committee The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer: That's a long way of saying no, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister has pursued a policy of appeasement in pursuit of a personal vanity product at the UN. In the process, he's cozied up to dictators and human rights violators. He's abandoned Israel and committed funding to UNRWA, an organization whose schools have been used as storage facilities for Hamas rockets against Israeli civilians, and whose facilities have served as breeding grounds for racism and anti-Semitism. He has apologized for the Iranian regime when it shot down a plane full of Canadian citizens, and he refuses to list the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist entity. What's the point of having a seat at the table if you have to sell out Canadian principles to get there? The Chair: The Right Honourable Prime Minister. Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, we see that the Conservatives have kept with the Harper approach to international diplomacy. The failed presence of Canada on the world stage was an embarrassment for many Canadians for many years. That's why, when we took office five years ago, we demonstrated the kind of leadership on values that Canadians expected. We will continue to work around the world to defend multilateralism. The Chair: We have a point of order. Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May: This being a committee, we can have a point of order during what would have been question period. I am not sitting that far away from the Prime Minister, and I'm sorry, but Andrew Scheer used to be the Speaker of the House and should show better decorum. The Chair: We have a point of order from Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, on the same point of order, it is disgusting for the leader of the Green Party to use decorum as an excuse to interrupt the Leader of the Opposition in the middle of critical lines of questioning. The leader of the Green Party knows the rules of the House and shouldn't be abusing them to advance a partisan agenda. The Chair: We're getting into debate. I do want to point out that the time had run out. We're now moving on to the next line of questions. On a point of order, Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer: I appreciate the honourable leader of the Green Party, Elizabeth May, for that reminder. When I was Speaker I always appreciated her help and advice about how to improve decorum in here. I just want to say to the member, and to all members, that the reason that I cannot control myself is that the Prime Minister used the word embarrassment in answering a foreign affairs question, and it just made me think of the India trip. The Chair: I believe we're getting into debate and arguments. Mr. Blanchet, you have the floor. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: Mr. Chair, while the Greens and the Conservatives are saying that they'll be waiting outside after the meeting, I will ask a question. The Prime Minister has extended the Canada emergency response benefit, and that's good news, but it's not enough. Last week in the House, the government said it was urgent to fight fraud. For us, it was also urgent to adjust the CERB to the needs of the tourism, arts and agriculture sectors. Farmers are going to be seriously under-resourced. So what happened to the urgency of reforming the CERB? Why is the government refusing to talk to the opposition parties? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, I am very pleased to hear the hon. member finally align himself with the positions of the Liberal Party. Unfortunately, the Bloc is a week late. It should have let us debate these concerns in the House last week. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: It seems to me that the word alignment here is a fantasy. We have unequivocally proposed to extend the debate to reach an agreement, which brings me to my second question. Last week, the issue of assistance to people with disabilities was also a pressing concern, and it's even more so a week later. The Bloc proposed to extend the discussions and split the government's bill in two to help people with disabilities. Why is the government refusing this assistance to people with disabilities, when it could have been debated with the opposition in a civilized and proper way in a Parliament in which it has a minority? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: That was exactly what we wanted, but unanimous consent of the Chamber was required to debate this matter, and the Conservative Party of Canada voted against it. Unfortunately, we are going to have to find a different way to help people with disabilities. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: If the idea is so good and wonderful, why not start over and open the dialogue now? What's stopping the Prime Minister from being a rallying point and inviting us to take to each other and resolve the problem, rather than saying that he is going to pack up his toys and go home? The people with disabilities are the ones who will pay the price. Where was the Prime Minister on October21,2019? He received a minority mandate from Quebeckers and Canadians. Why is he behaving like something between a prime minister with a majority and a monarch by divine right? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: I've heard the Conservative Party and the Bloc Qubcois throw their accusations around. They don't point out that the House of Commons did indeed give its consent to extend the mandate of the Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic until the end of June. Three parties agreed, which was the right thing to do in the context of this minority government. We've been working with the other parties. However, as they did not get the results they wanted, they complained. Unfortunately, they too are part of a minority Parliament and must respect the voice of the majority of parliamentarians, just as we do. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: I might have been tempted, but that's unlikely to happen because the Prime Minister isn't me, he's him. It's therefore up to him to bring people together, open a dialogue and recall Parliament. All we were asking for was the opportunity to talk for an hour or two. However, suddenly he doesn't want to play anymore. It's not working anymore, and there's something a bit strange about that. In addition, the government wants to buy the right to interfere in provincial and Quebec jurisdictions for $14billion. However, Quebec and a number of provinces are refusing to allow it to interfere in their jurisdictions and are asking that this money be paid to them unconditionally. Is the Prime Minister trying to take advantage of the crisis or is he trying to create a constitutional crisis? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, the safety of Canadians is the responsibility of all levels of government. That's why we have proposed a $14billion agreement to ensure that all Canadians across the country experience a safe re-opening of the economy. This is a proposal that we are working on with the provinces because we know that there are needs across the country, including early childhood centres, screening and support for municipalities. The federal government wants to be there to help the provinces. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh (Burnaby South, NDP): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Indigenous leaders have expressed a lack of confidence in the RCMP commissioner's ability to tackle full-scale systemic racism, but the Prime Minister has expressed his confidence in the commissioner. What's that based on? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, over the past two years, Commissioner Lucki has made significant strides forward on an issue where there is still much more to do. We know that systemic racism exists in all of our institutions across this country The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: This is the same RCMP commissioner who just recently said that they couldn't explain what systemic racism was. Now the Prime Minister says that he has confidence, when indigenous leaders express their lack of confidence. Why does the Prime Minister believe that the RCMP commissioner can tackle systemic racism in the RCMP? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, systemic racism is something that touches every corner of our country, every corner of our institutions. It requires people to understand and move forward in coordinated ways with partners. The commissioner is committed to doing that, alongside members of our government. We will do that together and work with indigenous communities and black The Chair: Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, recent events have made it abundantly clear that to tackle the systemic racism at the level of the RCMP, we need a full-scale overhaul of the RCMP. Is the Prime Minister committed to a full-scale overhaul of the RCMP to root out systemic racism? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: As I've said many times, Mr. Chair, I am committed to addressing systemic racism in this country and taking significant, bold actions to reduce the amount of discrimination that indigenous peoples, that racialized Canadians face on a daily basis. We have much work to do, but we will do it together. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, Black Lives Matter has been calling for governments to defund the police. What it's saying is that we need to be better at where we spend our money, investing in communities and not policing. Will the Prime Minister commit to a review of the RCMP budget to allocate resources to community services and not to policing? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, over the past years we have been investing more directly and more money in community organizations, in the black community, and working with indigenous partners on the path to reconciliation. We have been investing in the kinds of community-based programs and solutions that are part of the solution. We know there is much more to do, and we will continue to look at all of our expenditures to make sure we're doing the right things. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, over the past few years, while the Prime Minister has been in office, the RCMP budget has increased by 31%. More money is going towards policing. In recent events we've seen people who needed a health care response to a health care crisis been killed by the RCMP. Does the Prime Minister believe that we need to be investing in a health care response instead of a police response for people who are faced with a crisis? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, the member opposite well knows that it's not an either-or. We need to make sure that our systems across the board, from our police systems to our judicial systems, to our health care systems, to our community systems, are actually addressing the systemic discrimination issues that are embedded within them That is exactly what we are going to continue to do in the coming years. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, with regard to the CERB extension, can the Prime Minister guarantee that everyone who is receiving CERB payments now will continue to do so without any gaps throughout the summer? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, I am happy to highlight that many Canadians who were on the CERB are now returning to work. Many more who are on the CERB now will be returning to work in the coming weeks. We know that as the economy gets back to work, people will want to The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Can the Prime Minister assure people who need it that they will continue to receive the CERB over the summer, yes or no? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: We are very pleased to point out that we are going to extend the Canada emergency response benefit for at least another eight weeks, because a lot of people are going to need it. Even if they want to work, there aren't enough jobs for everyone. So we'll be there for them, as we have been from the beginning. The Chair: We're going to pause and suspend proceedings just for a few moments to allow our support staff to substitute for one another in a healthy and safe way. We'll now proceed with Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod (KamloopsThompsonCariboo, CPC): Mr. Chair, it was really a surprise in the middle of a pandemic to see the Prime Minister at his first campaign stop last week in Ottawa. Certainly the game plan has become very transparent. He has a daily report show and he wants to sideline Parliament, dominate the news cycle and keep everyone in the dark about the state of the economy. According to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, there is no reason that he cannot provide the fiscal update during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the PBO has published a number of reports himself. Why won't the Prime Minister provide a fiscal update so we can all understand the state of our economy, or is that just not part of his campaign playbook? Hon. Mona Fortier (Minister of Middle Class Prosperity and Associate Minister of Finance): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Canada's economy is in a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We've been clear about that. We will continue to be open and transparent about the actions that we are taking to support families, businesses, workers, our health care system and our economy. This includes biweekly reports to Parliament on the full cost and status of our economic measures. Once it is possible to provide a clear economic projection, we will provide an update. We are in this together, and we are prepared to do whatever is necessary to support Canadians. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: Chair, Canada's economy was in trouble prior to the COVID, with some of the worst numbers since 2009. Government revenues in March dropped by 7. 2%, and it's shameful and, quite frankly, it's outrageous that they refuse to provide Parliament and Canadians with an economic update. Households during this challenging time know how much money is coming in and they know how much money is going out. The picture is not pretty, but they know what the picture is. Can the finance minister at least reveal the projected revenue decline in quarters one and two? Hon. Mona Fortier: The Canadian economy is going through a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We've known this for three months. We've continued to be open and transparent about the measures we've put in place for Canadians, workers and businesses. In fact, we have reported biweekly to Parliament on the total cost and status of our plan's measures. As soon as it's possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide a comprehensive update to Canadians The Chair: We go back to Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: Other governments have managed to provide updates for their citizens and carry out their responsibilities, but of course this government has sidelined Parliament with simply a question-but-no-answer period. Let's try something else. The forestry industry was in crisis even before the pandemic, with mills closing down and thousands of jobs lost. Eight weeks ago, Minister Freeland said, I have had many discussions with leaders in our forestry sector and the provinces about what we can do to support the industry today. Meanwhile, we've had support going to the arts and we've had support going to fisheries, just to name a few, but arguably for the industry that was having some of the most numerous challenges, it has been radio silence. That was eight weeks ago today. Can the government at least commit to releasing an updated softwood lumber transition plan before we rise? Hon. Seamus O'Regan (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Chair, we remain committed, of course, to the forestry industry and seeing it through this pandemic and this very uncertain time. The expanding market opportunities program, for instance, has helped Canada's forestry sector diversify, create jobs and open new markets. We've had new construction projects that are active today, using Canadian wood in key markets like Korea, Japan, China and the United States. Tomorrow this House will vote on our government's investment of $20. 97 million for this program. It's part of our budget 2019 commitment to invest $251 million over three years, and I hope the opposition will support us in that. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: It was stated in a major newspaper this morning that this government is like a sexy sports carvroom, vroom, vroombut with a history of breakdowns and major repairs. I think that might describe what has been happening. For forestry, it has been eight weeks and there has been nothing. There is another area that Deputy Prime Minister Freeland did talk about. We were talking about the U. S. softwood lumber duties that are being held in the United States. It's billions of dollars being held with the U. S. treasury. In April, she acknowledged that these duties are a real issue for the softwood lumber industry. What's been done since that time? Hon. David Lametti (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada): Mr. Chair, Canada's forestry industry supports good middle-class jobs in communities across our country. The sector is also an essential link in the medical equipment supply chain, and we thank them for all the work they're doing. We're aware of the immense pressures faced by this sector, especially at this time, and Deputy Prime Minister Freeland and others are taking that seriously and working through this issue. As our government has said repeatedly, we firmly believe that the U. S. duties on Canadian softwood lumber are unfair and unwarranted, and we will pursue all means in order to The Chair: Before continuing, I want to remind honourable members who are at home to make sure that the boom on their headsets is down. It just makes a better pickup. We heard everything, but it was a little distant. That's for everyone's benefit. We're now going to continue with Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell (Louis-Saint-Laurent, CPC): Mr. Chair, before I ask my question, I'd like to pay tribute to the Minister of Justice, particularly to his versatility. Today, he talked about forests. Yesterday, the Minister of Justice talked about Davie and indigenous affairs. Really, this minister is very versatile. My question is directly for the Minister of Finance. I like Mr. Lametti very much, but I'd like Mr. Morneau to answer my question. Yesterday, in a Senate parliamentary committee, the Minister of Finance half-opened the door to an economic update. Based on what he said, it seems that, as we speak, a committee of the Department of Finance is working on an economic update. Could Mr. Morneau tell Canadians when he is going to table this economic update? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, as we know, the Canadian economy is going through a period of extraordinary uncertainty. As soon as it's possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide a full update to Canadians. Right now, we can say that we have supported workers, businesses and Canadians with the emergency measures we have put in place. We will continue to do so, because we need to be sure that Canadians can get through this crisis. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I thought it was too good to be true. The Minister of Finance is opening the door, and the Minister of Small Business is closing it. We don't know when the economic update will take place, yet all across Canada, provinces are doing economic updates. Could Mr. Morneau explain to Canadians why he is unable to give one? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, since the beginning of the crisis, we have implemented the economic action plan to respond to COVID-19, and we've provided immediate assistance to Canadians, businesses and workers. Over 2. 5million jobs were protected by the Canada emergency wage subsidy. In addition, 8. 4million Canadians The Chair: We are returning to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, next Friday, the Quebec minister of finance, EricGirard, will give an economic update. If EricGirard can give one for Quebec, why can't BillMorneau give one for Canada? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, once again, we have been open and transparent from the outset. We have devoted our energy to support Canadians, workers and businesses. We will continue to do so. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I cannot judge the quality of the work done by the provinces, but what I do know is that Quebec, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland have also made efforts to support their residents economically. Those provinces are able to table economic updates. Yesterday, Saskatchewan even tabled a budget. Why is Bill Morneau unable to table an economic update for all Canadians? Hon. Mona Fortier: Let me repeat for my hon. colleague that we are going through extraordinarily uncertain times. We have continued to be open and transparent. We have reported biweekly to Parliament on the total cost and status of the measures in our economic response plan. Once again, as soon as clear economic projections can be provided, we will provide an update The Chair: Mr. Deltell has the floor. Mr. Grard Deltell: The minister talks about the total cost of the government's economic expenditures. So I ask the question: so far, over the past three months, how much has the pandemic cost Canadians? Hon. Mona Fortier: As I said earlier, it is important to note that we have put forward measures, including the wage subsidy, which have helped more than 2. 5million The Chair: Mr. Deltell has the floor. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I have been trying for four minutes to get anything remotely resembling an answer, and I'm getting absolutely nothing. I am not asking questions for myself; I am asking questions for Canadians. Why are the government and the Minister of Finance, Bill Morneau, not able to table an economic update when some provinces are able to? Hon. Mona Fortier: Once again, I would like to remind my hon. colleague that we have provided interest-free loans to businesses. More than 669,000loans have been approved. We have continued to support businesses and Canadians during this time The Chair: Mr. Deltell, you have time for a very brief question. Mr. Grard Deltell: The only thing that distinguishes the provinces that table economic updates and the current government is political will. Why does Bill Morneau not have the political will to tell Canadians the truth? Hon. Mona Fortier: Once again, we have been open and transparent. As soon as it is possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide Canadians with a full update. The Chair: We will now continue with Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya (MarkhamUnionville, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. COVID-19 has sparked and spurred anti-Asian racism. These are not just racist comments online; Asian Canadians have been attacked. What is the government doing to combat anti-Asian racism? Hon. Bardish Chagger (Minister of Diversity and Inclusion and Youth): Mr. Chair, since our government took office in 2015, we have been making investments and working with communities. The difference between our government and the previous government is that we will actually consult with Canadians, including black Canadians, including Asian Canadians, to respond to the challenges, including with an anti-racism secretariat and an anti-racism strategy. It will take all of us. I appreciate the member's question, so that we can also work together. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, one business owner I know in Markham has operated for 20 years. Now she's looking at over $9,000 in rent due on June 24. COVID-19 has crippled her sales and she's going to go out of business. Her landlord has no interest in the Canada emergency commercial rent assistance program. How can the government say this program is working? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, this program was made possible by working with the provinces, and we will continue to encourage landlords and tenants to work together to make sure they have relief for this very difficult time in which they're living. We're continuing to monitor the CECRA program and we will make it possible for businesses to have access to the program. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, the government business rent relief program has been a total disaster. Even the government's own numbers show it is a failure. As of June 8, less than 2% of the $3 billion budgeted has been spent. What is it going to take for the government to admit that the program is a disaster and needs changes? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we know our government has been working closely with the provinces and territories to deliver the Canada emergency commercial rent assistance. Although the tenant-landlord relationship is ultimately the responsibility of the provinces and territories, our government has stepped up to provide support through the tools we have and through CMHC so that small businesses can get the rent relief they need. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, according to the government, there are around 1. 1 million small businesses in Canada. At committee, we were told only around 5,500 of them are receiving COVID-19 rent relief. That number is shameful. When will the Liberal government wake up and make the changes? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we welcome the steps some provinces and territories have taken to further protect commercial tenants. We will continue to monitor this program closely and ensure that Canada's small businesses are supported during this challenging time. We will continue to monitor to see The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, there was no answer. When can the government make these changes? Hon. Mary Ng (Minister of Small Business, Export Promotion and International Trade): Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable colleague that we are doing everything and will continue to do everything to help small businesses in our country. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, on May 27 the CBSA seized 65 small handguns at Pearson airport, the largest firearms seizure on record. It is clear that smuggled handguns are the weapon of choice for criminals. Why is the Prime Minister focusing on an ineffective municipal ban? Hon. Bill Blair (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness): Mr. Chair, I would point out that gun violence in any of our communities is unacceptable, and it's important that governments and communities take steps to prevent guns from getting into the hands of criminals. That's why we do important work at our border to keep guns from being smuggled into our country, but it also necessitates additional work. I don't think you can talk about gun violence without talking about stronger gun control. That's why our government has taken a very strong position and will strengthen gun control to keep Canadians safe. The Chair: Mr. Saroya, you may have a 10-second question, if that's possible, please. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, COVID-19 has not stopped gun violence in the GTA. My constituents are concerned about shootings minutes away from their homes. We know the Liberals'gun ban won't change anything, but a focus on smuggled guns and criminals will. When will they make that change? Hon. Bill Blair: Mr. Chair, stronger gun control laws are an effective tool, and that's been told to us by police leadership and communities across the country. We're also making investments in borders and law enforcement. Most importantly, we're making investments in communities and in kids to keep communities safe. I look forward to the member's strong support of those measures when we bring them forward. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback (Prince Albert, CPC): Mr. Chair, the U. S. and the U. K. began their second round of free trade negotiations yesterday. Does the government intend to have a trade agreement in place before the U. K. tariffs come into effect on January 1? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, the U. K. is a strong partner of Canada, as is the European Union, and we're looking forward to continuing that strong relationship The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Thank you, Mr. Chair. With respect to the negotiations with the U. K. , when will the minister publish her goals and objectives for this agreement? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, we're going to continue to work to ensure that any future agreement is going to be based on the best interests of Canadians, and we will The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Can the minister confirm whether they've entered into negotiations with the U. K. at this point? Hon. Mary Ng: Our government is analyzing the most-favoured-nation tariff regimes schedule the U. K. has put out. I want to assure Canadians The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Mr. Chair, during the CUSMA negotiations, a deal was struck between the Liberal Party and the NDP that the government would notify this House 90 days before it starts any negotiations on any trade agreement. When will the minister notify this House? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that we will absolutely be sharing information. Right now, we are analyzing the most-favoured-nation tariff regimes schedule put out by the U. K. Mr. Randy Hoback: Mr. Chair, any meaningful attempts to reform the WTO needs buy-in from the United States. I think all countries agree on that. Has the minister discussed a WTO reform with the USTR, the United States trade representative? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, the Ottawa Group is a consensus-based group, and any decisions will be taken together. Of course, any meaningful reform must include the U. S. The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Has the U. S. been invited to the Ottawa Group meetings? Hon. Mary Ng: The Ottawa Group is a consensus-based group limited to WTO members who are committed to bringing forward ideas and proposals The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Just as with any other trade agreement, the minister has committed to this House that she will publish the list of goals and responsibilities for the negotiations. When will she publish the list for the Ottawa Group? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I'm thrilled that we had an excellent meeting of the Ottawa Group yesterday where, as a group, we agreed to take concrete action. Mr. Randy Hoback: Will the minister be releasing a list of Canada's objectives we would like to see the new WTO's director-general pursue prior to the upcoming DG election? Hon. Mary Ng: We published an action statement from the Ottawa Group yesterday. I would encourage the member opposite to have a look. I'm certainly happy to send it to him. Mr. Randy Hoback: Going back to economic prosperity, we know that the U. S. has been having talks with other countries around the world. Has Canada yet been invited to this group? Hon. Mary Ng: I'm pleased to continue to pursue the objectives of trade diversification. I would remind the member that we have access to a billion and a half customers through our very robust Mr. Randy Hoback: A billion and a half customers is fine if you have a functioning WTO, but if you don't have a functioning WTO, then a billion and a half customers may not be fully accessible to our suppliers, manufacturers and agriculture producers. Can the minister confirm that she's in discussions with the U. S. in joining this economic prosperity group? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that nothing is more important than standing up and helping create markets for our Canadian businesses and to help our small businesses get more export-ready so that they can grow into the international marketplace. This is work that we've committed to do, and we will keep working on it, particularly The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Yesterday Saskatchewan presented a budget. Not only did they present the budget, but they'll also actually debate the budget and pass the budget in Parliament. There's full accountability. Why won't this government do the same? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons): Mr. Chair, the House is sitting in this hybrid format so that people can participate in the House on the screens. I'm sure my colleague is happy to see that his own colleagues are able to ask questions and participate. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Williamson. Mr. John Williamson (New Brunswick Southwest, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will say that this is no substitute for Parliament, but I appreciate the opportunity. New Brunswick families and businesses are rapidly making adjustments to manage and live with the coronavirus pandemic. Businesses here are opening and services are being offered. Families are preparing for summer and even planning ahead for a new school year in September. We have a lot of work ahead of us. One notable absence is Service Canada. When does the government plan on opening its service counters to assist Canadians again? Hon. Ahmed Hussen (Minister of Families, Children and Social Development): Mr. Chair, our government is committed to ensuring that Canadians continue to have access to the benefits that they rely on through Service Canada. We have redeployed over 3,000 additional staff to ensure that Canadians continue to have access to their benefits. We've established a 1,500-agent call centre to make sure that people can get access to the phone lines to get the help they need. Mr. John Williamson: Service Canada is about more than providing COVID-19 information and benefits. Provincial governments are working hard to adjust to Canada's new normal by opening up businesses and front-line government services. When will we see Service Canada play its role and open its service counters in our communities? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Mr. Chair, we're currently working with our world-class public health experts to determine how best to reopen the Service Canada network for the public. Make no mistake: Our Service Canada employees have gone above and beyond to ensure that Canadians continue to have access to the services that they rely on and the benefits that they need. Mr. John Williamson: Please don't hide behind health experts when the Prime Minister is appearing in the middle of large protests, yet is afraid to bring back the Parliament of Canada to do its business. In fact, the New Brunswick legislature is open for regular business. Bills are being studied, opposition input is being heard and MLAs are voting on legislation, not rubber-stamping government bills. By comparison, our Parliament is stuck in pretending it cannot function like other law-making assemblies. Canadians are in the dark about our country's finances. When will the government table an economic update so taxpayers understand what was spent, what is owed by our kids and grandchildren, and what the government's fiscal footing looks like? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, nobody's hiding. Nobody's doing anything like that. The only reason my colleague is able to ask a question and I'm able to answer his question is that he's right there on the screen. We have this hybrid format that cares for MPs across the country, not only the ones sitting in the House. Mr. John Williamson: This is no substitute for Parliament. I will ask my question again. When will the government table an economic update so that taxpayers understand what was spent, what is owed by our kids and grandchildren, and what the government's fiscal footing looks like in today's environment? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, I thank my honourable colleague for his question. Canada's economy is still in a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We have been open and transparent about the measures we have been providing to support families, businesses and workers. Even our health care The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Williamson. Mr. John Williamson: Except you have not. The Auditor General is underfunded. We have no idea about the total of government spending. Again I will ask when the government will table an economic update so that we can have an understanding of what the government's fiscal footing looks like. Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we have included biweekly reports to Parliament on the full cost and status of our economic response plan measures since the beginning. I have said, and I will continue to say, that when it is possible to provide a clear economic projection, we will provide an update. Mr. John Williamson: What is the full cost to date of the government's COVID-19 relief measures, as the minister just claimed the government has provided to Parliament? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we have provided support for workers, and 2. 5 million Canadians have been helped through the Canadian wage subsidy. We have provided businesses with some loans, and 669,000 businesses have applied for these loans. Even for the CERB, we have over eight million Canadians who have applied. The Chair: We will now continue with Mr. Bergeron. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: Mr. Chair, as the leader of the Bloc Qubcois mentioned a few moments ago, the government promised $14billion to Quebec and the provinces, but in targeted transfers. That is very little compared to the considerable expenses incurred to deal with the current crisis. But Quebec and the provinces don't just want this money to be transferred unconditionally, they also want a real discussion on a permanent increase in health care transfers. PremierLegault was rightly concerned about the feds'interference into provincial jurisdictions. The federal government, which does not manage any hospitals or long-term care centres, must stop playing armchair quarterback and transfer the money to the only governments with jurisdiction over health, that is, Quebec and the provinces. Will it do so without delay and without nitpicking? The Honourable Patty Hajdu (Minister of Health): Mr. Chair, we know that the Government of Quebec is working hard to ensure the safety of Quebeckers and we are here to support them. As part of this co-operation, we have developed health and safety recommendations for workplaces, we have purchased medical equipment for workers and we have supported the province in developing its reopening program. We are continuing this important partnership to ensure the safety of Quebeckers and all Canadians. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: The co-operation is so effective that the money is staying in the federal government's coffers. In fact, when the federal government wants to impose conditions, it always takes longer. We see it with housing, for which Quebec has not received a dime of the $1. 4billion it is owed. We have also seen it with infrastructure funds, particularly for public transit, water systems and water treatment. The health crisis is now. The needs are now. The much needed reopening of our economy is now. Will the government finally transfer the money without messing around or quibbling? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I am pleased to confirm to my colleague that there is no messing around, no quibbling, nothing of the kind. There is co-operation between two levels of government. It is natural to have discussions with all the provinces and with Quebec. I myself am taking part in some discussions and several of my colleagues are taking part in others. There is a clear willingness on the part of the federal government to co-operate with Quebec and all the provinces. That is what we are doing and that is perhaps what the Bloc Qubcois does not like. It likes bickering, but for the time being, there is none. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: We don't want to bicker, we want the money to be paid out. It is not complicated, for heaven's sake! We do not want a blank cheque. Right now, the money remains in the federal government's coffers. There is $1. 4billion that should be paid to Quebec for social housing and is sitting in the federal government's coffers. We are waiting for money for water treatment and water systems, but it is sitting in the federal government's coffers. It's almost July. We are wasting precious months for construction. What is the government waiting for to pay out the money so that we can get our economy rolling? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: The federal government is a very active partner. We are discussing and working with Quebec on infrastructure projects. We are continuing our discussions and negotiations on the housing agreement. Nothing is at a standstill. We are discussing and co-operating for the well-being of all Quebeckers. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: MadamChair, things are definitely at a standstill, because the money is owed and has not been paid out. Months are going by while construction is not taking place. We need to reopen the economy. We need more flexibility in the gas tax program and Quebec's contribution to allow municipalities to undertake work on city halls, community centres and fire stations. We need the federal government to contribute to funding public transit operations, which have become a real financial drain because of the drop in ridership. What is the federal government waiting for to provide real help instead of just talking? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: When it comes to just talking, the Bloc Qubcois has a lot of experience, I admit. We, in the government, are working and co-operating. We are not waiting with our arms folded, we are discussing a series of issues with Quebec. We do more than discuss, we work and we co-operate. We are working on projects, not only in infrastructure, but in a number of other areas. Just think of the co-operation of our armed forces in the CHSLDs, for example. We are here for Quebeckers. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Your time has run out, Mr. Bergeron. We'll go now to Ms. Khalid, from MississaugaErin Mills. Ms. Iqra Khalid (MississaugaErin Mills, Lib.): Madam Chair, I'll be splitting my time with the member for GlengarryPrescottRussell. During a consultation with the business community in Mississauga, the concerns of businesses, big and small, included the need for stable, affordable and safe child care. With the lack of such child care spaces, an economic recovery plan post-COVID cannot be effective until and unless we make sure that people are able to get back to work. I've heard from parents across Mississauga that they're being forced to stay home because of inadequate child care and that they have to choose between putting food on the table and keeping family safe. More and more employers are realizing that good employees are unable to contribute to their business growth because of this challenge. Now more than ever, we need to find long-term sustainable solutions for Canadians who face challenges with regard to child care. I ask our Minister of Families, Children and Social Development this: What is our strategy to tackle this ever-growing need for a national child care plan? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I thank the honourable member for her question and for her important advocacy and work on this important issue. We understand that child care is important to our economic recovery and our social infrastructure. We know the pressure that COVID-19 has placed on families, especially parents. That is why we're committed to continuing to work with provinces and territories to renew our agreements on early learning and child care, and to provide, at the earliest opportunity, $400 million in support. In addition to that, the Prime Minister has already indicated that child care will be part of the $14-billion pledge to provinces and territories to assist them with respect to COVID-19 recovery efforts. Over the next decade, we will continue to invest $7. 5 billion, and together we have achieved the goal of over 40,000 affordable child care spaces. We are also committed to continuing to create over 250,000 before-school and after-school child care spaces for kids under the age of 10. We will continue to work with our partners in the provinces and territories to ensure that Canadians can continue to have access to safe, quality and affordable child care. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for GlengarryPrescottRussell has the floor. Mr. Francis Drouin (GlengarryPrescottRussell, Lib.): MadamChair, small businesses play a fundamental role in the Canadian economy. In an article in LaPresse, the Minister of Economic Development warned us that the economic crisis caused by severe lockdown measures could have more serious consequences in small municipalities than in large cities. Based on discussions with the chambers of commerce in my riding, it is clear that federal government assistance will be essential for the reopening of the economy, specifically for the rural economy. In fact, I would like to acknowledge the work of the Prescott-Russell community development corporation, under the leadership of John Candie. After announcing almost $57million to help SMEs adopt e-commerce, how does the minister plan to help SMEs and the business community in our rural areas? Hon. Mlanie Joly (Minister of Economic Development and Official Languages): MadamChair, I also thank my colleague from GlengarryPrescottRussell for his important question. Yes, our regions are important and the entrepreneurs in those regions are creative and daring. They take risks, but they are currently facing huge challenges. So we are here for them. We understand their anxiety and we want to help them. That is why we have decided to invest heavily in rural economic development. It is also why we have doubled the budget of CFDCs and Community Futures organizations across the country. In southern Ontario we have reinvested over $260million in the regional economic development agency FedDev. In the great riding of GlengarryPrescottRussell, which I am particularly fond of and where there is a very good member of Parliament, there is an additional $1million for entrepreneurs in the region. We have been, we are and we will be at your side. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for GlengarryPrescottRussell has 36seconds left. No? Then we'll go to the honourable member for ElmwoodTranscona. Mr. Daniel Blaikie (ElmwoodTranscona, NDP): Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with the member for Victoria. Madam Chair, Krystal is a community worker in Winnipeg. She has been working from home since late March, taking care of her child, who is out of school, and caring for her father, who is living with her and vulnerable to COVID-19. Her employer called her up recently and asked her to physically return to work or to take a leave. As a parent and a care provider to a vulnerable person, she's not comfortable with physically returning to work. Service Canada won't give Krystal a straight answer as to whether going on leave and collecting CERB would count as refusing a reasonable job offer. With Bill C-17 looming in the background, Krystal is worried about jail time and fines if she does right by her child and her father by applying for CERB. Can Krystal reasonably refuse to go back to work and collect CERB, or will she be considered a fraudster? That's my question for the minister that is specific to Krystal's case. As well, what is the minister doing to provide clear direction to Canadians and to Service Canada agents so that people can get a clear answer before making their decision about returning to work? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I want to thank the honourable member for his important question. We recognize that Canadian workers will face various different situations, including those who are ineligible for the Canada emergency support benefit. We'll continue to work with workers to make sure they're able to be supported throughout this pandemic. The fact of the matter is that every province has workplace health and safety regulations that must be supported. We understand that workers have the right not to work in unsafe situations. We also understand that many Canadians do want to go back to work; and in fact many have. We will make sure that we support Canadians throughout this recovery process. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member has 47 seconds left, and that includes the answer. Mr. Daniel Blaikie: Madam Chair, that answer is really not good enough, because the problem here is that Krystal needs to know whether she can continue receiving CERB or not. That's a federal government decision, and she needs to know whether the federal government is going to accuse her of fraud and put her in jail or assess fines against her if she refuses to go back to work because she wants to take care of her child and her father. What is the minister's answer to that? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister has 20 seconds to respond. Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that if a Canadian has to take care of a loved one due to circumstances surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, they are indeed eligible to receive the CERB and remain receiving that benefit. Ms. Laurel Collins (Victoria, NDP): As we deal with the global pandemic, we cannot lose sight of the ongoing climate emergency. Canada has missed every single climate target it set, and we need to break the cycle of empty promises. Canadians want their government to be accountable, and environmental groups such as Ecojustice, CAN-Rac, Environmental Defence and West Coast Environmental Law, as well as the government's own climate institute, are all calling for legally binding climate targets. When will the government put its climate targets into law with legally binding milestones so we never miss another target again? Hon. Navdeep Bains (MississaugaMalton, Lib.): Madam Chair, I thank my honourable colleague for her question. I totally agree with her when it comes to the environment. It is a priority not only for us as a government, but it should be a priority for all Canadians. That is why we have put measures in place to put a price on pollution through carbon pricing. That is why we have a comprehensive plan that also includes significant investments in clean technology, which will help reduce our carbon footprint. I am confident that these measures will enable us to not only meet but exceed our 2030 target and also allow us to achieve our net-zero 2050 target. Ms. Laurel Collins: That didn't answer my question. I asked when. Empty promises won't get us any closer to meeting our climate targets. Can the minister tell us when his government will introduce climate accountability laws? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I think the fundamental issue here is having a plan when it comes to the environment. I'm confident that the measures that we have takenputting a price on pollution, investing in clean technology, and other key measures to reduce our carbon footprint, including the investment in infrastructureunderpin a plan The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to the honourable member for Victoria. Ms. Laurel Collins: This government is not meeting its targets, but it is meeting with oil and gas lobbyists. The pandemic has made us reflect on our priorities. Are we going to choose a just recovery with good, sustainable jobs for Canadian workers, or are we going to keep subsidizing oil and gas companies to the tune of billions, subsidies that we know are ending up in the pockets of CEOs and shareholders? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will have a brief answer from the minister. Hon. Navdeep Bains: Again, Madam Chair, this is the fundamental difference between us and the NDP. We fundamentally believe that the entire economy needs to work together, including the energy sector, to enable us to achieve those 2030 and 2050 targets. We are going to work together to support our workers, including in the energy sector, to reduce our carbon footprint. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Now we will go to the honourable member for SaskatoonGrasswood, Mr. Waugh. Mr. Kevin Waugh (SaskatoonGrasswood, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. When I was last here in May, I was on my way back to Saskatoon from Toronto, and there was actually someone on my flight who tested positive for COVID-19. I was never informed of it by the airline. I found out two weeks later. The report was in the news media. Why hasn't the government put rules in place requiring airlines to reach out to individuals like me who may have been exposed to COVID on their flights? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, it's hard to speculate on what happened from such a vague description of his experience, but I will say that we have every confidence in local public health, which is doing the hard and heavy lifting of contact tracing and working very closely with all kinds of different sectors, including airline sectors, to make sure that close contacts of people who have tested positive for COVID-19 are found, are traced and are isolated. I assume that the member took appropriate precautions on the flight and I hope that he continues to do so. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, it was reported that the individual on my plane who had COVID was actually connecting in Toronto from an international flight. The Prime Minister announced last week that they would begin mandating temperature checks for those bound for Canada in July. Will international travellers be tested when they land in Canada, or will they be relying on the tests that take place in other countries? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, this is a very important question, because the protection and safety of all Canadiansin particular, Canadian travellersis a high priority for our government. We've been working very closely with the airlines. At the current time, we are putting temperature screening in place. That will initially be done primarily by the airlines that are in the best position to do it at this point in time. We are also now going to be including CATSA, the people who do the security screening, so that when people enter the airport, they will also be screened. We believe that is going to be the most effective measure to keep all travellers safe. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, last week five of the largest professional sports leagues in North America put out a statement of support for my private member's bill, the safe and regulated sports betting act. Given the struggles that clubs and leagues are facing due to COVID-19, including having no fans at all in the stands for the foreseeable future, the legalization of sports betting would be a welcome opportunity not only to engage fans but to generate much-needed revenue. Will the government commit now to supporting the sports and gaming industries by supporting my private member's bill, Bill C-218? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, I've had the opportunity on many occasions to speak to members of Parliament and also to mayors and councillors and people living in border communities where there are casinos. They've raised this issue a number of times. We've listened very carefully to the concerns that have been expressed by them. I would like to advise the member that I look forward to the opportunity for a careful examination of his bill. We are at all times concerned about maintaining the integrity of the gaming industry within our community. That's the best way to protect Canadians. At the same time, we will examine his bill with all of the necessary attention to make sure it's given full consideration. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, it's the first time in history that we've had the five professional leagues in this country joining together for this bill. Newspapers rely, as we all know, on advertising for a significant portion of their revenue. This includes the usual flyers as well as in-paper ads. I've heard major concerns from a number of newspapers in this country about competition they're receiving today from Canada Post, which is offering massive free postage services. In fact, I have one of their ads here, which says that the first 6,000 pieces of postage are 100% free. If the government is genuine about wanting to ensure that newspapers and journals can succeed in this country, why are you allowing Canada Post to use its monopoly power to actually threaten local newspapers in this country? Hon. Steven Guilbeault (Minister of Canadian Heritage): Thank you, Madame Chair, and I thank the member opposite for his question. As you well know, a healthy news and media sector in Canada is a priority for our government, which is why we have put in place a number of measures before COVID-19 and during COVID-19, and we will continue to be there for them after this crisis has gone by. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Before we go on, we will be taking a break to do a bit of a changeover. I also want to remind members to address their questions and comments to the chair. We will go now to the honourable member for BruceGreyOwen Sound, Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff (BruceGreyOwen Sound, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Mr. Blair stated yesterday here in the House that the AR-15 has been used in mass killings in Canada on many occasions. Mr. Blair, please provide just one specific instance in which an AR-15 was used in a mass killing in Canada. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I remind the member to address questions and comments to the chair. The honourable minister may respond. Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I think this is an excellent opportunity to point out to the member opposite how important it is to actually listen to what was said. If you go back and review that tape, and I would invite you to do so, you'll see that I said the AR-15 and other weapons like themreferring of course to military-style assault weaponshave been used in mass killings, and I actually cited a number of examples. Madam Chair, I think it would be very useful if the member's questions were based on facts. Mr. Alex Ruff: I can remind Mr. Blair that I actually have watched the video a couple of times, and he specifically states that the AR-15 was used in mass killings in Canada, yet he has yet to provide one. My additional question is to Mr. Blair. Out of the recently banned firearms on May 1, how many have been or are still currently in use by the Canadian Armed Forces? Hon. Bill Blair: That's an excellent question, Madam Chair, because it's very important to provide Canadians with clarity. We have prohibited these firearms for non-law enforcement and non-military use. The military uses weapons that were actually designed for soldiers to use in combat to shoot other soldiers. That's the appropriate use of such weapons, Madam Chair. They're not things to be played with in civilian society. Mr. Alex Ruff: As a soldier for 25 years, I'll remind Mr. Blair that none of the currently prohibited firearms would be used in the Canadian Armed Forces. I asked him a question on whether any of them is being or ever has been used in the Canadian Armed Forces. Are any of the recently banned firearms still in use, or have they ever been in use, in any military in the world? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, I think it's important to also recognize that the basic origin, the provenance of the weapons that we have prohibited, was in their original design. They were designed for military use for various military forces around the world. As I've said previously, they were designed for soldiers to use in combat to kill other soldiers. They're very efficient in their design for killing people. They have no purpose in Canadian society. Mr. Alex Ruff: As someone who has used many military-style firearms and who is actually involved in helping define what we purchase in the military, I would use none of the ones that are currently prohibited. I have a question, Chair, for Minister MacAulay. Can he please confirm whether Veterans Affairs has a plan to address the claims backlog, yes or no? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (Minister of Veterans Affairs): Madam Chair, I appreciate my honourable colleague's question, and yes, we've indicated that it's a major priority. That's why I'm so pleased that the supplementary estimates contained just under $90 million to address hiring more staff, improving the process and making sure that we attack the backlog in an appropriate manner. Mr. Alex Ruff: Madame Chair, does that plan exist in written form? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Well, Madam Chair, I can assure you that it's in the supplementary estimates, and of course, this money is The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We'll go back to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff: The question is about the plan, not how much money has been allocated. I am asking for the written plan on how to address the backlog. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Madam Chair, I can tell my honourable colleague that the money is in the supplementary estimates, and with the money we're able to attack this problem in an appropriate manner, and that's what is important for our veterans. Mr. Alex Ruff: The deputy minister committed on March 10 that a written plan would be provided to the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs within a month and made public. Did the deputy minister or the department provide the minister that plan within a month? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Madame Chair, I'm sure my honourable colleague wants an appropriate plan and he would be fully aware this just under $90 million would make a big difference in the plan to attack the backlog. We The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We'll go back to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff: Thank you, Chair. Therefore, my question is, if the deputy minister in the department provided him with an appropriate plan or a written plan, why is he questioning how appropriate that plan is? I have complete confidence in the deputy minister's ability to produce a written plan. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister may give a brief answer, please. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I can assure my honourable colleague that with the appropriate funding, we will address the backlog in Veterans Affairs. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Parry SoundMuskoka, Mr. Aitchison. Mr. Scott Aitchison: Thank you, Madam Chair. My question is about summer camps again. Three weeks ago, I asked this government if the finance minister would meet with the beleaguered summer camp sector. Summer camps, which are a social and economic mainstay in Parry SoundMuskoka and all of northern Ontario, have been crippled by the global pandemic. It's costing millions of jobs, and some camps are actually in danger of folding. Aside from a brief follow-up conversation over the phone with the junior minister, there has still been no action from this government. When will the Minister of Finance meet with summer camps to find a solution? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I recognize the honourable member's important question and his focus on summer camps. We recognize the importance of looking at that and paying attention to the needs of that community. We will continue to engage with them, as we have, to ensure and find ways in which we can get their feedback and find ways in which we can support them. That work is ongoing, and I assure the honourable member that our focus is on the kids and on ensuring that they have access to summer camps for this year. Mr. Scott Aitchison: I don't know why you need to find ways to get feedback. The summer camps association has given lots of feedback and my office has given lots of feedback, so I don't see what's confusing about this. However, I've become accustomed to not really getting answers to questions, so I will go to the next one. The Ontario government's regional reopening plan permits cruise boats to resume on Georgian Bay, yet the federal government is refusing to allow these vessels to operate until July 1. Therefore, small businesses such as the Island Queen cruiser in Parry Sound, which has only a very few precious weeks to operate in the first place, is losing yet another two weeks because of federal inaction. This not only hurts the cruise boat industry but also hurts tourism and small businesses all through our area. Will the Minister of Transport take a regional approach himself by lifting the federal ban on Georgian Bay, just like the Province of Ontario has done? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister may reply. Is there a response? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, there is. I apologize for the confusion. Let me respond, if I may, on behalf of the Minister of Transport. There have been a number of very important discussions with the provinces, in particular with the Province of Ontario, around provisions regarding pleasure craft. There are certain restrictions that will come to an end on June 30. We're working very closely with our provincial counterparts to address this issue, but we want to ensure that it will be done safely. Mr. Scott Aitchison: Madam Chair, I actually gave the minister a heads-up that I would be asking that question. He sent me an email today saying he was not going to be able to be in the House, and it's great of him to do that. He said that whoever was going to fill in for him would have an answer, but again, that was not really an answer. The next issue I would like to bring this government's attention to is the deplorable state of rural Internet service in Parry SoundMuskoka. Quite simply, there are too many gaps in service, and what is available is generally way too expensive. We have families trying to work and teach their kids from home on unreliable and outrageously expensive Internet service, and we have too many small businesses that either cannot access or afford reliable Internet services. Today Greg Rickford, the Ontario energy minister, and Laurie Scott, Ontario Minister of Infrastructure, announced $2. 3 million for seven northern Ontario broadband projects. Minister, will when your government get serious and become a reliable partner for the Government of Ontario and the private sector to deliver this crucial modern-day infrastructure to rural Canadians? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I remind the member that he needs to address the questions and comments to the chair. The honourable minister may reply. Hon. Maryam Monsef (Minister for Women and Gender Equality and Rural Economic Development): Madam Chair, in the best of times, life without access to high-speed Internet is hard. During a pandemic, the challenges are that much more pronounced. Our government's unprecedented investments are already connecting a million more Canadian households to this essential service, but until we achieve universal access our work is not done. We will work with our partners, including provinces across the country, to connect every Canadian household to high-quality Internet access that is affordable and reliable. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member has 30 seconds. Mr. Scott Aitchison: I think I can squeeze something in here, then. I'm wondering, then, Madam Chair, since the Province of Ontario has used the Northern Ontario Heritage Corporation Fund to make this announcement, what about using FedNor to make the same kind of announcement, and partner with the province? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister has a brief answer. Hon. Mlanie Joly: Obviously we believe in the importance of northern Ontario; that's why we nearly doubled the budget of FedNor. We will continue to invest in businesses and people all around Parry Sound, Muskoka and northern Ontario. If my colleague has specific projects in mind, please come and see me and let's have a conversation. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for Montmagny-L'Islet-KamouraskaRivire-du-Loup, Mr. Gnreux, has the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux (MontmagnyL'IsletKamouraskaRivire-du-Loup, CPC): Thank you, MadamChair. I will continue along the same lines as my colleague. During this pandemic, we are realizing the extent to which reliable high-speed Internet service is needed for Canada's economy. There are still places where telework is not possible today because of the lack of adequate coverage. However, since2015, the government has committed to addressing the situation through three new programs. Benot Pilotto, who is the mayor of Saint-Onsime-d'Ixworth, in my riding, wrote to me a few days ago. That is why I am asking you what concrete results the government plans to achieve for our rural areas by the end of the year. Hon. Maryam Monsef: At the best of times, life without high-speed Internet access is difficult. During a pandemic, the difficulties are even greater. Our government's unprecedented investments are already connecting an additional one million Canadian households to this essential service. However, until we achieve universal access, our job is not done. We are working The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Gnreux, you have the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, I am simply asking the minister to tell me when the mayor of Saint-Onsime-d'Ixworth will be able to tell his residents when the Internet will be available in his municipality. It is not complicated. What does the government plan to do so that rural municipalities across Canada can have access to the Internet as soon as possible? What is its plan? Hon. Maryam Monsef: We are working with partners across the country to ensure that every Canadian household is connected to a high-quality, accessible and affordable high-speed Internet service. Madam Chair, I assure my colleagues that we share the same goal, and we will work with all our partners across the country to ensure every Canadian household has access The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Gnreux, you have the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, I am still not getting a specific answer. According to the government's plan, when will rural Canadian businesses and households be connected? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I would ask the honourable minister to provide a brief answer. Hon. Maryam Monsef: Madam Chair, those plans are under way, and we will have more to share in the coming days. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: It seems that the Minister of Rural Economic Development plans to announce a new plan this week. Can she tell us how this program will differ from the Connect to Innovate program, which is already in place? Can the minister tell us whether her program will solve the problem of the 25square kilometre hexagonal zones, which unfortunately make many projects ineligible for the CRTC's broadband fund? Hon. Maryam Monsef: Madam Chair, I'm pleased to share with my colleague that the model he's referring to, the hexagon model, is no more. Our maps are much more precise now to ensure that we do not leave Canadians behind. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, this year, the Canada summer jobs program is a real fiasco. I think all my colleagues will agree with me. On May13,100jobs were announced in my riding; on May20,16jobs were announced; on May27,13jobs were announced; on June3,12jobs were announced; and on June10, only one job was announced. As we speak, an amount of $100,000 is still to be confirmed in my riding. Can we have an announcement, once and for all? Let's stop the piecemeal announcements and finally confirm the remaining jobs today so that our organizations can have young people before the summer starts on the weekend. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable minister. Hon. Ahmed Hussen: MadamChair, I thank the honourable member for his question. We recognize the important role that the Canada summer jobs program is playing in supporting employers and young workers in communities right across the country. Our government is working very hard to help employers adapt to the realities of the COVID-19 pandemic, and at the same time is supporting young Canadians as they begin to look for summer employment. We've introduced flexibilities into the program to ensure that more young workers have opportunities to get employed. The honourable member also has to understand that we're in the COVID-19 pandemic, and as such it will take some time for businesses to equip themselves to hire students. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for NanaimoLadysmith, Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly (NanaimoLadysmith, GP): Thank you, Madam Chair. In the first five months of this year, 554 B. C. residents died from opioid overdoses. They were teachers, construction workers, business owners, family members, neighbours and friends. Addiction is a health and social issue, but criminalization creates stigma, so people hide their drug use and die alone. Access to a safe supply of drugs and safe injection sites saves lives and puts addicts in daily contact with people who can help them. Will this government end the war on drugs by decriminalizing them, providing a safe supply and reallocating resources from policing addicts to providing treatment for them? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, I think it's really important we make sure that when we speak about people who use substances, we remove stigmatizing language like the word addict. We can stand together, as this government has, with people who use substances and their families to ensure a range of options for people who are struggling with addiction, who are using substances in a way that is harming their health and their communities. As you know, we have restored harm reduction to the Canadian drugs and substances strategy. We've made it easier for people to access safe supplies of substances. We've increased access to treatment and the variety of treatment through federal transfers to provinces and territories. Madam Chair, we're working with communities to make sure there are more community-based approaches to treating The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, the Geneva Convention considers both tear gas and pepper spray to be chemical weapons and prohibits their use in war, yet our police forces use these weapons on Canadian civilians. These weapons are indiscriminate and can affect peaceful protestors and innocent bystanders. Will the government prohibit the use of these weapons and require police to use de-escalation techniques to keep legal protests peaceful? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, the right to peaceful protest in this country is a constitutionally protected right. We want to ensure it's always respected. At the same time, Madam Chair, we recognize that the use of even less than lethal force can have significant impacts on people's safety. This is a highly regulated substance in Canada. It's prohibited for non-police use, and for the police it is and should be highly regulated. The RCMP have advised me they have not used tear gas in nine years. We'll continue to monitor it to ensure that peaceful protest is always respected. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, in 2012 the RCMP spent $14 million on 18 armoured personnel carriers. One's parked at the Nanaimo detachment. I can't imagine why we have weapons of war like this for policing civilians. Will the government rein in the RCMP budget and end wasteful spending on militarizing our civilian police forces? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, it's a very important tradition that our Canadian police are not militarized. At the same time, we've seen a number of tragedies when police have responded to situations in which people were armed with weapons designed for soldiers to kill soldiers, and they've been used to kill police officers. The militarization of our society, so strongly promoted by some, is the direct consequence of the militarization of the police. As we remove these weapons from our society and prohibit them, we'll make it safer for everyone and we can then move away from such a model of policing. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, the government spent $4. 5 billion to buy an old, leaky pipeline. Since 1961, there have been 82 reported spills from the Trans Mountain pipeline. Over 1. 5 million litres of crude oil has spilled into the surrounding environment. This weekend, the Trans Mountain pipeline leaked again, dumping 190,000 litres of oil. How much is this spill going to cost Canadian taxpayers to clean up? How much contingency funding has been budgeted to repair the environmental destruction from spills? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I want to thank the honourable colleague for his question. He full well knows that the acquisition that we made with regard to the TMX initiative is a reflection of the fact that we want this initiative to move forward in a sustainable manner and in a manner that protects the environment. I'll continue to work with my colleagues to endeavour to make sure that we have the appropriate processes in place to protect the environment and at the same time create good-quality, middle-class jobs for Canadians. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for RosemontLa PetitePatrie, Mr. Boulerice, has the floor. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice (RosemontLa Petite-Patrie, NDP): Thank you, MadamChair. The Black Lives Matter movement is right to discuss systemic racism in our societies. In Montreal, the city and the police department have recognized this, and measures will be put in place. The Liberal government, once again, is all talk and no walk. Although it spends $10million a day, we see no attempt to reform or change the RCMP. If the Prime Minister really wants to act, why is he delaying the action plan in response to the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls? Hon. Bill Blair: Let me assure this House and the member opposite that we're not dragging our feet. This is an important issue. Indigenous people, black Canadians and other racialized people are far too often experiencing systemic racism and disparate outcomes through the criminal justice system. It's incumbent upon all of us who work within the criminal justice system to take the steps and actions necessary to produce more equitable outcomes. All police services, including the RCMP, must be committed to ensuring that the people they're sworn to serve and protect are always treated with dignity and respect. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: MadamChair, why are the Liberals taking indigenous children to court to challenge the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal ruling in their favour? Hon. Marc Miller (Minister of Indigenous Services): Madam Chair, as the honourable member knows full well, a number of cases are pending, and we are currently negotiating with the parties. We are making progress, and I would be delighted to tell the member and the House about it in response to a later question. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: We've been asking questions about it for months, and as I see it, we should keep doing so. The Prime Minister's new pipeline, which taxpayers were forced to buy with their hard-earned money, has leaked. Some 190,000litres of oil spilled, and we can't even make the company pay for it because the Liberals bought the pipeline. Trans-Mountain, KeystoneXL and the resumption of gas exploration and development off the coast of Newfoundland and Labradorare these the projects the Liberals had in mind for their green recovery? Hon. Navdeep Bains: I'd like to thank the honourable member for his question. Our priority was to protect the health and safety of Canadians throughout the pandemic, especially when it comes to the environment. That's why environmental and climate change laws aimed at protecting the environment, human health and conservation will remain in force. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: Across Quebec, the cultural community is going through a harrowing time. Unions, associations, artists and creators have all taken part in public demonstrations recently to condemn the lack of a specific plan for the living arts, performing arts and festival sector. What is the government waiting for? Hon. Steven Guilbeault: I'd like to thank the member for his question. However, I strongly disagree with him. We haven't waited to develop a plan for the arts and culture sector. We listened to the community and we tailored our supports, as they were announced. We have an emergency plan for the arts and culture sector. We were asked to adapt the CERB to take royalties into account, and we did. We were asked to extend the CERB, and we did. We are fully aware that the recovery will take longer in the arts and culture sector. We have been there, we are there and we will be there for the arts and culture sector. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: Well, that wasn't at all what the artists and creators who were out demonstrating in the streets a few days ago thought. They were protesting on the weekend. The CERB extension announced by the government only brings us to September, but the cultural community is expecting the worst in the fall. What is the government's long-term plan to support creators and their entire teams? Hon. Steven Guilbeault: I'm not so sure those who were protesting last week had issues with our government, but we'd certainly be happy to speak with them. As for a long-term plan, we are currently consulting arts and culture stakeholders to contemplate together how the government can help the sector in response to the ongoing crisis. We are working on finding solutions, but until we have long-term solutions, we have seen to it that our artists and organizations have access to funding until September. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for BeauportLimoilou, Mrs. Vignola, has the floor. Mrs. Julie Vignola (BeauportLimoilou, BQ): Madam Chair, I will be sharing my time with the member for Montcalm. According to the latest news, Seaspan Shipyards will be spending an additional $1. 5billion to build two ships. Why? Because the ships were ordered in 2011 and still haven't been delivered. Davie built the Asterix without going over budget because it delivered the ship on time. Davie is currently the top shipyard, representing 50% of Canada's shipbuilding capacity. Why isn't Davie being awarded its fair share of contracts? Hon. Anita Anand (Minister of Public Services and Procurement): I'd like to thank the member for her question. Davie is certainly a strong and trusted partner that works very hard to help our government get results for Canadians. Building a new class of ships is highly complex, and it's not unusual for cost estimates to change throughout the procurement project. It's important to make sure additional funding is available for the joint support ships project to ensure the navy's vessels are delivered. Mrs. Julie Vignola: We are talking about $1. 5billion, here. In the beginning, eight years ago, the project was supposed to cost $2. 6billion. There can't be much missing when the cost overrun is double the initial estimate. Why haven't the ships been delivered yet? Why is Davie still not seen as a trusted partner? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Minister, please keep your answer brief. Hon. Anita Anand: Once again, I would point out that building a new class of ships is highly complex, and it's not unusual for the cost estimate to change for a procurement project as large as this one. I know that Davie works very hard, and we also believe it is an outstanding partner. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): It is now over to the honourable member for Montcalm, Mr. Thriault. Mr. Luc Thriault (Montcalm, BQ): Madam Chair, in Quebec, 12,000people have begun their training to work in residential and long-term care centres. They will be ready for duty in mid-September. In the meantime, we need the support of the army, which is helping us save lives. The dedication of the members of the armed forces is paramount, and I want to extend my heartfelt thanks. The government extended their mission until June26, which is only 10days away. What does the army have to do right now that is more important than helping our caregivers save lives? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, I'm glad my fellow member recognizes the fundamental role the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces have played and continue to play in residential and long-term care centres and many other areas in support of our seniors. We are in talks with the Quebec government. The discussions around providing continued assistance to Quebec are quite positive and productive. That assistance can take many forms, including the Red Cross. We will be there for our seniors, Madam Chair. Mr. Luc Thriault: We are short 12,000people, so if the Red Cross wants to help us, all the better. We'll take all the help we can get. Barely 800members of the military are still in Quebec. I repeat my question: What does the army have to do 10days from now that is more important if it's not to help caregivers save lives? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, all the members of the military are still in Quebec. They have done absolutely incredible work and are continuing to do so. The people at the Canadian Red Cross are well-trained paid workers who can perform the same work in partnership with the members of the armed forces, who can stay in Quebec as well. Right now, we are working with the Quebec government and discussing how we can keep the measure in place until September15. Mr. Luc Thriault: Madam Chair, our nurses and orderlies are exhausted. They're at the end of their ropes. Now is the time to thank them, not the time to turn our backs on them. It's not the time for dilly-dallying or discussions. It's the time to tell them that we will be there to help them until the end. I will repeat my question. What does the army have to do that is more important than helping caregivers save the lives of those who built Quebec? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The Leader of the Government in the House of Commons is asked to keep his answer brief. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, the Government of Canada is there and will continue to be there to help the people who built Quebec. The Government of Canada will work with the Quebec government to make that happen. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for Red DeerMountain View, Mr. Dreeshen. Mr. Earl Dreeshen (Red DeerMountain View, CPC): Thank you so much. Madam Chair, on May 14 I asked the Minister of Agriculture when the Liberal government would put aside its usual campaign rhetoric and recognize the very detrimental impact the carbon tax is having on farmers across this country. Minister Bibeau proudly noted that according to their data, the average cost of the carbon tax per farm across Canada is $210 to $819. We know that these numbers are completely unfounded and are not based on any factual evidence. The fact is that the Liberal government's own Parliamentary Budget Officer has estimated that at $25 per tonne, the cost for an 855-acre crop farm in Alberta is well over $6,000. The office came up with that using the government's statistics from the 2016 agricultural census. Madam Chair, the evidence is right in front of the minister. When will this Liberal government come clean with Canadians and recognize the disastrous impact the carbon tax is having on Canada's critical agriculture and agri-food sector? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food): Madam Chair, our pollution pricing policy is designed to grow a clean economy. To support this sector, we have put in place the following measures. Emissions from livestock and crop production are not priced. Farm fuels and fuels from cardlock facilities are exempt, and there is a partial rebate for propane and natural gas used in commercial greenhouses. Our government has been very open and transparent about our pollution pricing plan. We will do a review of our pollution pricing system in 2020, focused on competitiveness issues in trade-exposed industries such as agriculture. It is also important to remember that this is about tackling climate change and that 100% of the revenues stay in the province. We will continue to support our farmers and food processors as they provide an essential service across Canada. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Madam Chair, Minister Bibeau keeps talking about wanting to protect Canadians'environment. Well, the truth is that Canada's farmers, ranchers and processors have for years demonstrated their ability to deliver meaningful reductions in emissions and to safeguard the environment through the adoption of new technologies, education and innovative management practices, but the government ignores these efforts. Will the minister at the very least admit to Canadians that Canadian farmers are unable to pass on the cost of the carbon tax to consumers and instead have to absorb those extra costs out of their own pockets? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Madam Chair, allow me to explain again our government's position on pollution pricing. The price and method were developed so we could build an increasingly clean economy. We put a number of measures in place to help the agriculture sector. Emissions from animal and plant production aren't taxed. Farm fuels and fuels delivered to off-farm points-of-sale are also Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you, Madam Chair. I do have another question. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I am watching the time, Mr. Dreeshan. You have a couple more seconds. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you. Madam Chair, Minister Bibeau has repeatedly asked stakeholders to send her data about the impacts of the carbon tax on farmers, so this is exactly what they have been doing. The Atlantic Grains Council, the Grain Farmers of Ontario, Producteurs de grains du Qubec and the Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association issued a joint statement at the beginning of this year in which they estimated that the cumulative indirect inflation of carbon tax on farm costs will be $14. 50 an acre this year, with that cost escalating by more than double by 2022 to almost $30 an acre. These are huge numbers. Why does the Liberal government continue to ignore the facts presented to it and continue to misrepresent the truth to Canadians? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Madame Chair, I can assure you that we have paid close attention to all the information that has been provided to us and that our calculation was also based on this information provided by provinces and different stakeholders. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Our government has been very open and transparent about our pollution pricing plan. The department used data from stakeholders and provinces Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you very much, Madam Chair Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: as well as the 2019 agricultural tax data to estimate the average cost of pollution pricing associated with grain drying at up to 0. 4% of overall operating costs. It is important to remember that we have put in place many special provisions Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Madam Chair Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: like exempting farm fuel and providing other financial supports for farmers. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Dreeshen, I am watching the time, and the minister is allowed to answer for the same amount of time that you used to ask the question. Therefore, I would hope that we would allow her to finish. She has finished, and unfortunately the time is up. The committee now stands adjourned until tomorrow at noon.

Justin Trudeau was confident about the economic recovery after the pandemic, however, Cathy McLeod and Mona Fortier and some other members did not agree with him for that they thought Canada was undergoing an extreme uncertain time during which no one could foresee a bright future unless the prime minister kept the revenue report public. Furthermore, statistics showed that actually Canada had suffered decline in revenue in both the first and second season this year, and the forestry industry even reported depression before the outbreak. Various evidence showed a great challenge to the Canadian economy.

tr-sq-1249

tr-sq-1249_0

What did Cathy McLeod think of the forestry industry when talking about the uncertainty of Canadian economy and what the government should do during the special period? The Chair (Hon. Anthony Rota (NipissingTimiskaming, Lib.) ): I call this meeting to order. Welcome to the 23rd meeting of the House of Commons Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic. A reminder to all members that in order to avoid issues with sound, members participating in person should not also be connected to the video conference. For those of you who are joining via video conference, I will remind you that when speaking you should be on the same channel as the language you are speaking, and please use your headsets. As usual, please direct your remarks through the chair. As I understand, there are no ministerial announcements today. We will now proceed to presenting petitions. I remind members that any petition presented during a meeting of this special committee must have already been certified by the clerk of petitions. For members participating in person, I ask that they please come and drop their signed certificates off at the table once the petition is presented. I would ask members to be very brief and concise, and to summarize the exact content of the petition. We will continue. The first person presenting a petition today is Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May (SaanichGulf Islands, GP): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I present two petitions this morning. The residents of SaanichGulf Islands are calling on the government to simplify the process for protection of marine protected areas. It's a multi-layered communication process. The marine protected area first proposed in the 1970s for the southern Strait of Georgia, now called the Salish Sea, has been awaiting designation for so long that it was originally endorsed by Jacques Cousteau. That gives us a sense for why petitioners are calling for a simplified and more rapid process. The second petition is from petitioners who are very concerned about our obligations under the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and our commitments under the Truth and Reconciliation Commission calls to action. They specifically reference the RCMP violation of UNDRIP in its actions on Wet'suwet'en territory and ask the government to commit to actually living the principles embodied in UNDRIP. The Chair: We will now go to Mr. Hardie. Mr. Ken Hardie (FleetwoodPort Kells, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am presenting a petition on behalf of the one in a million Canadians who suffer severe and adverse effects from vaccinations. GuillainBarre syndrome is very debilitating, and this petition seeks the setting up of a no-fault accident or compensation system to help offset the loss of work, the loss of wages and the loss of quality of life that many of these people suffer. I'm pleased to present this petition pursuant to Standing Order 36. The Chair: Mr. Trudel, you have the floor. Mr. Denis Trudel (LongueuilSaint-Hubert, BQ): Mr. Chair, culture is the soul of a people. Over the past 20years or so, culture, especially music, has never been as accessible as it is now. Paradoxically, creators'incomes have never been so low. The advent of digital technology has completely overturned the system for distributing the wealth generated by creators for the benefit of various Web stakeholders, many of whom are billionaires. This petition addresses these problems and proposes realistic solutions. The first is to set a minimum royalty model for streaming platforms for artists. The second is to update the existing private copying system. The third is for Internet and cell phone providers who sell their services as direct access to culture to share their profits with artists. The fourth is that the GAFAMs have to pay taxes on their services. Six thousand people have already signed the first version of this petition, launched last month by musician JordanOfficer and supported by singer BarbaraSecours. As an artist, I am proud to present this petition today because the issues it raises are fundamental to the survival of Quebec culture. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood ParkFort Saskatchewan, CPC): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I have four petitions to present today. I will be as brief as you suggested, although I will observe that if some members are going on longer during petitions than they normally do, it might be because the government has taken away so many of the tools that opposition members normally have for raising important issues in the House. The first petition deals with the issue of euthanasia and long-term care. The petitioners are concerned that instead of focusing on improving medically assisted life, something that we know is a major issue in light of recent revelations, the government has put so much time and legislative energy into efforts to continually further expand euthanasia in Canada and remove vital safeguards. The second petition speaks to the ongoing conversations happening in Canada around systemic discrimination and systemic racism. I think we do need to reflect on systemic discrimination. This petition deals specifically with Bill 21 in Quebec and raises concerns. The reality of the way that bill applies is that people from certain backgrounds who wish to practise their faith are not able to fully participate in Canadian society if they are employed in the public service. This petition asks the government to provide a response on that issue, something it hasn't done in response to past petitions on this. The third petition deals with the issue of firearms. The petitioners want to see the government take a strong response in dealing with illegal guns and gun smuggling. The petition notes that the vast majority of firearms-related crimes in Canada involves illegal guns. At the same time, the petitioners are concerned that the government has the wrong focusthat is, harassing law-abiding firearms ownerswithout putting in place substantial measures to deal with illegal guns. The petitioners want to see the reversal of the order in council from May 1 and strong measures to deal with illegal firearms. The fourth and final petition deals with Bill S-204, a bill that would make it a criminal offence for a Canadian to go abroad and receive an organ from a person who has not consented to giving that organ. It would also create a mechanism by which someone could be deemed inadmissible to Canada if they were involved in organ harvesting and trafficking. The petitioners are supportive of Bill S-204 and of similar bills in previous parliaments and would like to see us pass that bill as soon as possible. The Chair: Presenting petitions, Mr. Lamoureux. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Winnipeg North, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. It is with pleasure that I table another petition by the residents of Winnipeg North. These residents have signed a petition asking the Government of Canada, and in fact all members of Parliament, to put a high priority on assisting our poorest seniors. The increases to the GIS by $200, and $300 to the OAS, have been well received. They just want to highlight how important it is to support our seniors, in particular the poorest of our seniors. The Chair: For members present in the Chamber, a reminder that they are asked to bring their petitions to the table. We'll now proceed to statements by members. We'll go to Ms. Atwin for the first one. Mrs. Jenica Atwin (Fredericton, GP): Thank you, Mr. Chair. June 21 is National Indigenous Peoples Day, a day of acknowledgement and a day of celebration of the beautiful diversity of indigenous peoples across Turtle Island. I wish to recognize the leadership of Chief Shelley Sabattis of the Welamukotuk First Nation in Oromocto, New Brunswick. Each year she and her council, volunteers and staff go above and beyond to show appreciation for their members and to demonstrate pride and culture while promoting well-being. We gather in an event where all are welcome to take part, from traditional hand drum-making with elders to moose meat and tacos. This year we will celebrate a bit differently, but we will still stay connected, virtually and in spirit, to the vast network of indigenous peoples and allies. We need each other now more than ever. May we come together in song and stories and in solidarity. We will remember those who are not among us. I hope all of Canada will join us in observing National Indigenous Peoples Day. Mawiyapasuwok: let us come together. Nit liech. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Beech. Mr. Terry Beech (Burnaby NorthSeymour, Lib.): Mr. Chair, COVID-19 is an unprecedented challenge for all communities across Canada, but as we do our part to flatten the curve, I often think about those who suit up every morning to serve on the front lines of our health care system. My mother is a home care worker and my sister is a nurse. Even before the crisis, they would often share the hardships they faced on a day-to-day basis. It's a tough job at the best of times. In a pandemic, these jobs are life-threatening. I think we can all agree that these workers deserve more than our good wishes. They deserve a raise. That is why we have worked with the provinces to implement pandemic pay. In British Columbia more than 250,000 front-line workers are eligible for this program. That works out to a pay increase of about $4 an hour. It's a small show of our appreciation for their difficult and priceless contribution to our country. Share this message and say thanks to our front-line workers, participate in the 7 p. m. cheer, and order a pizza for your local nurses. It's the least we can do. The Chair: We'll now go on to Mr. Shipley. Mr. Doug Shipley (BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. We've been living in difficult times. Slowly, we are getting back to some resemblance of normalcy, although unfortunately not soon enough for some of our great summer festivals. It will not be normal in BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte this summer without the iconic Boots and Hearts weekend music festival, Kempenfest, Oro World's Fair, the Elmvale Fall Fair, or the Midhurst Autumnfest. Canada Day celebrations have been cancelled, but we can still celebrate the great nation we call home. Because of the lack of Canada Day celebrations, I've created Happy Canada Day lawn signs that are available through my constituency office, free to all residents of BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte. I'm also hosting a drive-through party on Canada Day at the Royal Canadian Legion on St. Vincent Street in Barrie. All are welcome to attend. There will be cupcakes for all. Please drop by the legion between 11 a. m. and 2 p. m. , and we can celebrate Canada Day safely together. Thank you and have a great summer. The Chair: Now we'll go on to Ms. Young. Ms. Kate Young (London West, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Among the countless ordinary Canadians who have stepped up to do extraordinary work during COVID-19, I wish to draw attention to our teachers. Teachers have always had a special place in my heart. My father was a teacher, and my daughter-in-law, Kelly Webb, is one now. I'm certain that my colleagues can all easily remember a teacher in their past who played an important role in helping them achieve their potential. I remember my grade 12 English teacher, Vince Weaver, at Westminster Secondary School in London. He made me realize that I could do so much more than I believed. Across the country, as schools closed, teachers did not stop their work. Some took their classes online. Others found innovative ways to continue engaging with their students. This is not the school year anyone imagined, and what the next one will look like is unclear, but our teachers in London West and across Canada have shown that no matter what, they will be there to help our next generation shine. The Chair: Before proceeding to the next presenter, I just want to remind the honourable members in the chamber that I realize that the six-foot limit makes it harder to whisper to each other, but we're hearing a bit of rumble, so I just want you to try to whisper at your best. Mr. Bergeron, you have the floor. Mr. Stphane Bergeron (Montarville, BQ): Mr. Chair, on July1st, we will be celebrating one of the most important events for the riding of Montarville: the 175thanniversary of the city of Saint-Bruno-de-Montarville. The theme Proud of our traditions will be the focus of this celebration for the people of Montarville. This is a good illustration of the rich history of this municipality nestled in the western foothills of Mont-Saint-Bruno. The seigneury of Montarville was granted in1710 to the illustrious former governor of Trois-Rivires, PierreBoucher. The parish of Saint-Bruno, which took root there and in which a village grew, became a municipal corporation in1845. To this day, it is one of the most prosperous localities, with a strong sense of belonging, a very dynamic community life and jealously preserved natural environments. A whole program had been drawn up for the celebration, but the current health crisis has taken over some of the planned activities, which has in no way diminished the pride and festive spirit of the people of Montarville. On July1st, we will have a good reason to be proud, in spite of everything. Happy 175thanniversary to Saint-Bruno-de-Montarville. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Maloney. Mr. James Maloney (EtobicokeLakeshore, Lib.): Mr. Chair, thank you for allowing me to take a moment to highlight an initiative that I started early on during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Heroes of EtobicokeLakeshore is an opportunity for citizens in my riding to recognize the contributions of those in their community who make life a bit easier. I'm pleased with the number of nominations I received that honour everyone from front-line workers to businesses that are innovating in these difficult times to volunteers who are finding new ways to reach out. I think of Daniel Lauzon who set up Food for Now, a mobile service that helps take care of the homeless. I think of Toni Varone, who helped his business clients by forgiving their rents, or young Lucas, who wanted to thank his teachers. I've been moved and inspired by the countless stories of generosity, strength, resiliency, kindness, incredible character and creativity. I want to thank all the heroes, as well as the people who nominated them. Keep them coming. Stay safe, everyone, and I wish you happy Canada Day early. The Chair: We'll now move on to Ms. Wong. Hon. Alice Wong (Richmond Centre, CPC): Mr. Chair, it gives me great pleasure to thank a local Richmond-based charity, the Social Diversity for Children Foundation, SDC, for its hard work both in raising funds for the purchase of personal protective equipment and in distributing this PPE to long-term care facilities and individual seniors'homes in the lower mainland of B. C. The COVID-19 relief fund is supported by a dozen other non-profits, businesses and community groups. Over the past two months, SDC has been to 32 seniors homes and senior-related organizations. In total, it has delivered masks to 7,000 care workers, staff and seniors. It is amazing to have witnessed how the younger generation have gotten involved in caring for the elderly at this very challenging time. The Chair: We'll now go to Ms. Damoff. Ms. Pam Damoff (Oakville NorthBurlington, Lib.): Mr. Chair, June is ALS Awareness Month, and 79 years after Lou Gehrig died from ALS little has changed. There's still no cure, and those with ALS typically die within five years of diagnosis. On June 21, Canadians will gather virtually to raise funds for ALS Canada in the Walk to End ALS. In Halton, normally we meet each year at Bronte Creek Provincial Park on the May long weekend to raise funds for ALS Canada. This year I will virtually join Tim's Titans, a team formed to honour Tim Robertson, my friend who died in 2016 after living with ALS for 13 years. I have a T-shirt, with a picture of Lou Gehrig, that says, Great Player. . . Lousy Disease and Tim's Titans. . . Great Team! ALS. . . Still a Lousy Disease. Join me on June 21 for the virtual Walk to End ALS to raise funds to support patients and their families and for ALS research. The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Khera. Ms. Kamal Khera (Brampton West, Lib.): Mr. Chair, on Saturday our community stood and marched in solidarity against anti-black racism. The peaceful protests that we're seeing across the country and around the world were not triggered by an isolated incident. They are fuelled by decades of ineffective action against something that is so insidious and deeply entrenched in our history, systems and institutions. For us, that is the racial inequality faced by Canada's indigenous and black communities. Anti-black racism is real. It exists right here in Canada, in our communities, including in Brampton. It exists when racialized students at McCrimmon Middle School are called McCriminals. It exists when a shocking report exposes the Peel District School Board's failure to work fairly with the black community. It exists when D'Andre Campbell, who was fighting mental illness, loses his life at the hands of the police. It is clear that we need reform. We need to dismantle the systems that allow this privilege and oppression to take form, and address the unconscious bias plaguing our institutions. We'll need to be bold, and the time to do that is now. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd (Sturgeon RiverParkland, CPC): Mr. Chair, a few months ago I rose in the House on the eve of our closure due to COVID-19. I told Canadians we must not give in to fear, that we would carry on and get through this crisis stronger than ever. Today, in this city and across Canada, Canadians are enjoying a beer on their favourite patios. Businesses are reopening, jobs are returning and our lives are starting to feel a bit normal again. Canadians pulled together, and because of that we did not see the devastating death toll that many had predicted. Life may be returning to normal, but unfortunately, here in this chamber of democracy, the people's voices continue to be shut down. There is no good reason for Parliament to be suspended today. In the words of my grandfather, it's time for the Liberals to get with the program and bring back the House. The Chair: We will now proceed with Ms. Jones. Ms. Yvonne Jones (Labrador, Lib.): Mr. Chair, from in-person learning to virtual classrooms, COVID-19 has drastically changed the lives of students across the country, especially those in post-secondary education who are worried about covering costs like tuition or rent this coming fall. Our government recognized that students should not have to worry or put their futures on pause during this difficult time. That's why last month the federal government introduced the Canada emergency student benefit. If you're a high school student headed to a post-secondary school, or a current post-secondary student or a recent graduate, you can receive the Canada emergency student benefit every four weeks and have the financial support that you need to save for school. We also doubled Canada student grants and loans, enhanced the student loan program, increased supports for indigenous post-secondary education and introduced the Canada student service grant for those who wish to pursue it. Our government is here to help all students get the support they need to pursue their future goals successfully. I wish them all the very best, and I wish all of you, my colleagues and those across Canada, a very happy National Indigenous Peoples Day, which is coming up on June 21. The Chair: I want to remind the honourable members to keep to their 60 seconds so that we don't go over the time. I'm sure it would be a lot easier for everyone if we stuck to that limit. We will now go to Mr. Aitchison. Mr. Scott Aitchison (Parry SoundMuskoka, CPC): Mr. Chair, I rise today to once again implore the government to do something about the horrible lack of access to and crazy cost of rural Internet service. Right now, too many areas of my riding have no access to rural Internet service at all, and those who can get service are paying through the nose. I've even heard constituents say that during this pandemic, they are having to choose between feeding their kids and educating them. Over the last few weeks, Conservatives have been consulting with rural Canadians, and the results are in. My constituents are tired of fancy political promises. They are frustrated beyond belief by the new challenges created by this pandemic. They are absolutely fed up with having their pleas ignored. All we want is affordable and reliable Internet service. Is that too much to ask of the government? The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. MacGregor. Mr. Alistair MacGregor (CowichanMalahatLangford, NDP): Mr. Chair, these last few months have been incredibly challenging for the residents of CowichanMalahatLangford, who have been forced to deal with the economic and social consequences of COVID-19. The pandemic has laid bare the inadequacies of our social safety net, the weakness in our supply chains and the dependence of our society on essential workers, who often work long hours for low wages, putting themselves and their families at risk. We've also been forced to confront the systemic inequality, poverty and racism that continue to hold so many people back from achieving their full potential. I will not dishonour the sacrifice that so many have made during this time by allowing us to go back to the status quo that got us here in the first place. I will not apologize for demanding that the most vulnerable in our society get the supports and opportunities they need to live with dignity, and I will not relent from pushing my political colleagues to summon the courage necessary to implement policies that lead to environmental, economic and social justice. The Chair: I now give the floor to Mr. Blaney. Hon. Steven Blaney (BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, CPC): Mr. Chair, here is a beautiful story, the story of a woman from Bellechasse, a courageous young mother from Saint-Malachie, Marie-ChristineGoupil. With three children, including the eldest daughter with a disability, and realizing that her daughter with a disability had special clothing needs, she decided to go into business to meet the needs of other parents who, like her, were facing their child's clothing challenges. Last week, she presented her Handy clothing collection on the show Dans l'il du dragon. It was a very emotional moment for the audience and the dragons. They were so touched that they decided to give her the amount she wanted without diluting her shares. The video of her presentation has already been viewed over 1million times on social networks. Marie-ChristineGoupil has discovered a passion for entrepreneurship and has moved and inspired many people with her passionate and courageous attitude. Congratulations, Ms. Goupil, your example makes us proud. The Chair: Mr. Blanchet, you have the floor. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet (BeloeilChambly, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I lend my voice to the Chief of the Assembly of First Nations of Quebec-Labrador, GhislainPicard, whose message is as follows: There have been no fewer than 14reports and conclusions of commissions of inquiry since1967 highlighting major problems in relations between law enforcement agencies and indigenous people. Each time, the conclusions have been overwhelming and highlight a disturbing reality. The justice system has failed indigenous people. Are you going to respond, as you too often do, by moving on to the next one, or are you going to do what we expect you to do, which is to recognize that the justice system discriminates against indigenous people and that we have no less right to security than the rest of the population? In three months, police interventions have claimed more victims among our members than the pandemic. But it is not enough to simply take a knee and denounce racism. It's about standing up and taking action. Those are the words of GhislainPicard. The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Harder. Ms. Rachael Harder (Lethbridge, CPC): Over the last few months, Canada's democracy has been disregarded and an autocracy has been resurrected in its place. By refusing to hold regular parliamentary sittings, Mr. Trudeau is sending a strong message to the Canadian public that he alone is the one who matters. In 2014, he professed that Canadians want their Members of Parliament to be effective voices for their communities in Ottawa, and not merely mouthpieces for an all-too-powerful Prime Minister. As it stands, however, he has shut down Parliament. Effectively, he has stripped us, the opposition, of our privileges and our powers. Sadly, Mr. Trudeau has become the all-too-powerful Prime Minister that he once warned against. A government that does not allow for effective opposition is not functioning in the best interest of Canadians; it is operating in the best interest of itself and, even more so, the interest of the Prime Minister. Canadians deserve to flourish in a democracy, not merely survive under the autocracy that this Prime Minister has created. The Chair: We'll now go on to Ms. Zahid. Mrs. Salma Zahid (Scarborough Centre, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I would like to recognize the work of Agincourt Community Services Association and its tireless executive director, Lee Soda, who have been serving our community during the COVID-19 pandemic. Under more pressure than ever, their staff and volunteers continue to serve a community whose need was great even before the crisis. Their food bank helps over 4,000 people weekly. They have opened outdoor washrooms and hand-washing stations for vulnerable communities and are delivering groceries and other essentials to vulnerable seniors. ACSA is a bridge between those who can help and those who need help, and they are just one example of how our community has come together to meet this challenge. There are restaurants and businesses donating meals to front-line workers, residents answering the call to stock the food bank shelves and neighbours looking in on the vulnerable and isolated. I am so proud of our community's spirit. Scarborough is strong. The Chair: We'll now proceed to the questioning of ministers. Please note that we will suspend the proceedings twice in order to allow employees who provide support for the sitting to replace each other safely. The first question goes to the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Chair, for months Conservatives have been pointing out flaws in Liberal government programs that are preventing Canadians from getting the help they need. The Prime Minister has refused to make these very technical changes to get more help to Canadians who need it. For example, on the wage subsidy, more than two-thirds of the money allocated for that program has lapsed because businesses don't qualify. I have a simple question. Will the Prime Minister change the program to allow companies who have made acquisitions to access the wage subsidy to keep more people working? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Papineau, Lib.): Mr. Chair, from the very beginning we knew that as we rolled out measures, we would need to improve them and tweak them, and that's exactly what we've been doing over the past three months. We needed to make measures happen quickly for Canadians, and we did that. But we continued to improve them, to make additions and amendments so that more people could get the help they needed, including with the proposed legislation last week that expanded the reach of the wage subsidy to more businesses. Unfortunately, the Conservatives didn't even want us to debate that particular piece of legislation. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Actually, Mr. Chair, it was the Liberals who said no to the motion to allow this Parliament to sit to debate that motion, and even in that legislation they refused to allow businesses who have made acquisitions to access the program. Now, when we look at the rent relief program, it is so difficult to apply for it that many landlords are refusing to bother, leaving even more small businesses to fall through the cracks. In fact, of the $3 billion allocated to the rent relief program, only $39 million has been paid out. That's less than 2%. Now, the Prime Minister is still using talking points from April. It's now June and he has refused to fix these programs and has successfully talked out the calendar on the days that the House of Commons could meet to discuss these programs. When will he make these changes to get more help to Canadians who need it? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, throughout this pandemic, we have constantly been updating and expanding our various programs. We recognize, in conversations with the premiers, how important it is to make sure that we're working together, the provinces and the federal government, on issues like rent subsidies where commercial rent is indeed a provincial jurisdiction. Many provinces have moved forward with the eviction bans that are necessary to go along with this, and we'll continue to work with provinces to make sure that we're getting Canadians the help they need. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Mr. Chair, Canadians cannot wait. He has run down the clock on parliamentary sittings and he still refuses to make these changes to get more help to Canadians. Today, we learned that Telus has installed Huawei technology in downtown Ottawa. There are over 80 sites across the national capital region with Huawei technology installed. Some of these sites are very near sensitive government institutions, like government departments, the National Research Council, RCMP headquarters and the Bank of Canada. How long has the Prime Minister known that Huawei technology has been installed in the Ottawa area? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, first off, on the issue of Parliament, it has been meeting four times a week over the past many weeks, and members of the opposition have been able to continue to ask questions on COVID-19 and a broad range of subjects. Moreover, every two weeks the finance department puts forward at the finance committee the full transparent measures that we've taken, so that parliamentarians can study them. We are continuing to work in this crisis. At the same time Mr. Ziad Aboultaif (Edmonton Manning, CPC): Answer the question. The Chair: I'm sorry? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: in regard to Huawei technology there are strict rules for companies to follow and we assume they will all follow those. The Chair: We'll pause for a second and stop the clock. I want to remind the honourable members who are joining us virtually that heckling really does disrupt the whole session. Your face does come up and we do see who it is, so I just want to make sure that you're aware of that. Now we'll go back to Mr. Scheer. We have a minute and 10 seconds left. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister is bragging about accountability and transparency. Will he table an economic update before the House rises? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, throughout this unprecedented pandemic, we have been open and transparent about all of the measures we've put forward. We've updated the finance committee The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer: That's a long way of saying no, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister has pursued a policy of appeasement in pursuit of a personal vanity product at the UN. In the process, he's cozied up to dictators and human rights violators. He's abandoned Israel and committed funding to UNRWA, an organization whose schools have been used as storage facilities for Hamas rockets against Israeli civilians, and whose facilities have served as breeding grounds for racism and anti-Semitism. He has apologized for the Iranian regime when it shot down a plane full of Canadian citizens, and he refuses to list the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist entity. What's the point of having a seat at the table if you have to sell out Canadian principles to get there? The Chair: The Right Honourable Prime Minister. Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, we see that the Conservatives have kept with the Harper approach to international diplomacy. The failed presence of Canada on the world stage was an embarrassment for many Canadians for many years. That's why, when we took office five years ago, we demonstrated the kind of leadership on values that Canadians expected. We will continue to work around the world to defend multilateralism. The Chair: We have a point of order. Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May: This being a committee, we can have a point of order during what would have been question period. I am not sitting that far away from the Prime Minister, and I'm sorry, but Andrew Scheer used to be the Speaker of the House and should show better decorum. The Chair: We have a point of order from Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, on the same point of order, it is disgusting for the leader of the Green Party to use decorum as an excuse to interrupt the Leader of the Opposition in the middle of critical lines of questioning. The leader of the Green Party knows the rules of the House and shouldn't be abusing them to advance a partisan agenda. The Chair: We're getting into debate. I do want to point out that the time had run out. We're now moving on to the next line of questions. On a point of order, Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer: I appreciate the honourable leader of the Green Party, Elizabeth May, for that reminder. When I was Speaker I always appreciated her help and advice about how to improve decorum in here. I just want to say to the member, and to all members, that the reason that I cannot control myself is that the Prime Minister used the word embarrassment in answering a foreign affairs question, and it just made me think of the India trip. The Chair: I believe we're getting into debate and arguments. Mr. Blanchet, you have the floor. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: Mr. Chair, while the Greens and the Conservatives are saying that they'll be waiting outside after the meeting, I will ask a question. The Prime Minister has extended the Canada emergency response benefit, and that's good news, but it's not enough. Last week in the House, the government said it was urgent to fight fraud. For us, it was also urgent to adjust the CERB to the needs of the tourism, arts and agriculture sectors. Farmers are going to be seriously under-resourced. So what happened to the urgency of reforming the CERB? Why is the government refusing to talk to the opposition parties? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, I am very pleased to hear the hon. member finally align himself with the positions of the Liberal Party. Unfortunately, the Bloc is a week late. It should have let us debate these concerns in the House last week. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: It seems to me that the word alignment here is a fantasy. We have unequivocally proposed to extend the debate to reach an agreement, which brings me to my second question. Last week, the issue of assistance to people with disabilities was also a pressing concern, and it's even more so a week later. The Bloc proposed to extend the discussions and split the government's bill in two to help people with disabilities. Why is the government refusing this assistance to people with disabilities, when it could have been debated with the opposition in a civilized and proper way in a Parliament in which it has a minority? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: That was exactly what we wanted, but unanimous consent of the Chamber was required to debate this matter, and the Conservative Party of Canada voted against it. Unfortunately, we are going to have to find a different way to help people with disabilities. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: If the idea is so good and wonderful, why not start over and open the dialogue now? What's stopping the Prime Minister from being a rallying point and inviting us to take to each other and resolve the problem, rather than saying that he is going to pack up his toys and go home? The people with disabilities are the ones who will pay the price. Where was the Prime Minister on October21,2019? He received a minority mandate from Quebeckers and Canadians. Why is he behaving like something between a prime minister with a majority and a monarch by divine right? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: I've heard the Conservative Party and the Bloc Qubcois throw their accusations around. They don't point out that the House of Commons did indeed give its consent to extend the mandate of the Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic until the end of June. Three parties agreed, which was the right thing to do in the context of this minority government. We've been working with the other parties. However, as they did not get the results they wanted, they complained. Unfortunately, they too are part of a minority Parliament and must respect the voice of the majority of parliamentarians, just as we do. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: I might have been tempted, but that's unlikely to happen because the Prime Minister isn't me, he's him. It's therefore up to him to bring people together, open a dialogue and recall Parliament. All we were asking for was the opportunity to talk for an hour or two. However, suddenly he doesn't want to play anymore. It's not working anymore, and there's something a bit strange about that. In addition, the government wants to buy the right to interfere in provincial and Quebec jurisdictions for $14billion. However, Quebec and a number of provinces are refusing to allow it to interfere in their jurisdictions and are asking that this money be paid to them unconditionally. Is the Prime Minister trying to take advantage of the crisis or is he trying to create a constitutional crisis? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, the safety of Canadians is the responsibility of all levels of government. That's why we have proposed a $14billion agreement to ensure that all Canadians across the country experience a safe re-opening of the economy. This is a proposal that we are working on with the provinces because we know that there are needs across the country, including early childhood centres, screening and support for municipalities. The federal government wants to be there to help the provinces. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh (Burnaby South, NDP): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Indigenous leaders have expressed a lack of confidence in the RCMP commissioner's ability to tackle full-scale systemic racism, but the Prime Minister has expressed his confidence in the commissioner. What's that based on? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, over the past two years, Commissioner Lucki has made significant strides forward on an issue where there is still much more to do. We know that systemic racism exists in all of our institutions across this country The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: This is the same RCMP commissioner who just recently said that they couldn't explain what systemic racism was. Now the Prime Minister says that he has confidence, when indigenous leaders express their lack of confidence. Why does the Prime Minister believe that the RCMP commissioner can tackle systemic racism in the RCMP? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, systemic racism is something that touches every corner of our country, every corner of our institutions. It requires people to understand and move forward in coordinated ways with partners. The commissioner is committed to doing that, alongside members of our government. We will do that together and work with indigenous communities and black The Chair: Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, recent events have made it abundantly clear that to tackle the systemic racism at the level of the RCMP, we need a full-scale overhaul of the RCMP. Is the Prime Minister committed to a full-scale overhaul of the RCMP to root out systemic racism? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: As I've said many times, Mr. Chair, I am committed to addressing systemic racism in this country and taking significant, bold actions to reduce the amount of discrimination that indigenous peoples, that racialized Canadians face on a daily basis. We have much work to do, but we will do it together. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, Black Lives Matter has been calling for governments to defund the police. What it's saying is that we need to be better at where we spend our money, investing in communities and not policing. Will the Prime Minister commit to a review of the RCMP budget to allocate resources to community services and not to policing? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, over the past years we have been investing more directly and more money in community organizations, in the black community, and working with indigenous partners on the path to reconciliation. We have been investing in the kinds of community-based programs and solutions that are part of the solution. We know there is much more to do, and we will continue to look at all of our expenditures to make sure we're doing the right things. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, over the past few years, while the Prime Minister has been in office, the RCMP budget has increased by 31%. More money is going towards policing. In recent events we've seen people who needed a health care response to a health care crisis been killed by the RCMP. Does the Prime Minister believe that we need to be investing in a health care response instead of a police response for people who are faced with a crisis? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, the member opposite well knows that it's not an either-or. We need to make sure that our systems across the board, from our police systems to our judicial systems, to our health care systems, to our community systems, are actually addressing the systemic discrimination issues that are embedded within them That is exactly what we are going to continue to do in the coming years. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, with regard to the CERB extension, can the Prime Minister guarantee that everyone who is receiving CERB payments now will continue to do so without any gaps throughout the summer? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, I am happy to highlight that many Canadians who were on the CERB are now returning to work. Many more who are on the CERB now will be returning to work in the coming weeks. We know that as the economy gets back to work, people will want to The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Can the Prime Minister assure people who need it that they will continue to receive the CERB over the summer, yes or no? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: We are very pleased to point out that we are going to extend the Canada emergency response benefit for at least another eight weeks, because a lot of people are going to need it. Even if they want to work, there aren't enough jobs for everyone. So we'll be there for them, as we have been from the beginning. The Chair: We're going to pause and suspend proceedings just for a few moments to allow our support staff to substitute for one another in a healthy and safe way. We'll now proceed with Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod (KamloopsThompsonCariboo, CPC): Mr. Chair, it was really a surprise in the middle of a pandemic to see the Prime Minister at his first campaign stop last week in Ottawa. Certainly the game plan has become very transparent. He has a daily report show and he wants to sideline Parliament, dominate the news cycle and keep everyone in the dark about the state of the economy. According to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, there is no reason that he cannot provide the fiscal update during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the PBO has published a number of reports himself. Why won't the Prime Minister provide a fiscal update so we can all understand the state of our economy, or is that just not part of his campaign playbook? Hon. Mona Fortier (Minister of Middle Class Prosperity and Associate Minister of Finance): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Canada's economy is in a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We've been clear about that. We will continue to be open and transparent about the actions that we are taking to support families, businesses, workers, our health care system and our economy. This includes biweekly reports to Parliament on the full cost and status of our economic measures. Once it is possible to provide a clear economic projection, we will provide an update. We are in this together, and we are prepared to do whatever is necessary to support Canadians. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: Chair, Canada's economy was in trouble prior to the COVID, with some of the worst numbers since 2009. Government revenues in March dropped by 7. 2%, and it's shameful and, quite frankly, it's outrageous that they refuse to provide Parliament and Canadians with an economic update. Households during this challenging time know how much money is coming in and they know how much money is going out. The picture is not pretty, but they know what the picture is. Can the finance minister at least reveal the projected revenue decline in quarters one and two? Hon. Mona Fortier: The Canadian economy is going through a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We've known this for three months. We've continued to be open and transparent about the measures we've put in place for Canadians, workers and businesses. In fact, we have reported biweekly to Parliament on the total cost and status of our plan's measures. As soon as it's possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide a comprehensive update to Canadians The Chair: We go back to Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: Other governments have managed to provide updates for their citizens and carry out their responsibilities, but of course this government has sidelined Parliament with simply a question-but-no-answer period. Let's try something else. The forestry industry was in crisis even before the pandemic, with mills closing down and thousands of jobs lost. Eight weeks ago, Minister Freeland said, I have had many discussions with leaders in our forestry sector and the provinces about what we can do to support the industry today. Meanwhile, we've had support going to the arts and we've had support going to fisheries, just to name a few, but arguably for the industry that was having some of the most numerous challenges, it has been radio silence. That was eight weeks ago today. Can the government at least commit to releasing an updated softwood lumber transition plan before we rise? Hon. Seamus O'Regan (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Chair, we remain committed, of course, to the forestry industry and seeing it through this pandemic and this very uncertain time. The expanding market opportunities program, for instance, has helped Canada's forestry sector diversify, create jobs and open new markets. We've had new construction projects that are active today, using Canadian wood in key markets like Korea, Japan, China and the United States. Tomorrow this House will vote on our government's investment of $20. 97 million for this program. It's part of our budget 2019 commitment to invest $251 million over three years, and I hope the opposition will support us in that. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: It was stated in a major newspaper this morning that this government is like a sexy sports carvroom, vroom, vroombut with a history of breakdowns and major repairs. I think that might describe what has been happening. For forestry, it has been eight weeks and there has been nothing. There is another area that Deputy Prime Minister Freeland did talk about. We were talking about the U. S. softwood lumber duties that are being held in the United States. It's billions of dollars being held with the U. S. treasury. In April, she acknowledged that these duties are a real issue for the softwood lumber industry. What's been done since that time? Hon. David Lametti (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada): Mr. Chair, Canada's forestry industry supports good middle-class jobs in communities across our country. The sector is also an essential link in the medical equipment supply chain, and we thank them for all the work they're doing. We're aware of the immense pressures faced by this sector, especially at this time, and Deputy Prime Minister Freeland and others are taking that seriously and working through this issue. As our government has said repeatedly, we firmly believe that the U. S. duties on Canadian softwood lumber are unfair and unwarranted, and we will pursue all means in order to The Chair: Before continuing, I want to remind honourable members who are at home to make sure that the boom on their headsets is down. It just makes a better pickup. We heard everything, but it was a little distant. That's for everyone's benefit. We're now going to continue with Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell (Louis-Saint-Laurent, CPC): Mr. Chair, before I ask my question, I'd like to pay tribute to the Minister of Justice, particularly to his versatility. Today, he talked about forests. Yesterday, the Minister of Justice talked about Davie and indigenous affairs. Really, this minister is very versatile. My question is directly for the Minister of Finance. I like Mr. Lametti very much, but I'd like Mr. Morneau to answer my question. Yesterday, in a Senate parliamentary committee, the Minister of Finance half-opened the door to an economic update. Based on what he said, it seems that, as we speak, a committee of the Department of Finance is working on an economic update. Could Mr. Morneau tell Canadians when he is going to table this economic update? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, as we know, the Canadian economy is going through a period of extraordinary uncertainty. As soon as it's possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide a full update to Canadians. Right now, we can say that we have supported workers, businesses and Canadians with the emergency measures we have put in place. We will continue to do so, because we need to be sure that Canadians can get through this crisis. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I thought it was too good to be true. The Minister of Finance is opening the door, and the Minister of Small Business is closing it. We don't know when the economic update will take place, yet all across Canada, provinces are doing economic updates. Could Mr. Morneau explain to Canadians why he is unable to give one? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, since the beginning of the crisis, we have implemented the economic action plan to respond to COVID-19, and we've provided immediate assistance to Canadians, businesses and workers. Over 2. 5million jobs were protected by the Canada emergency wage subsidy. In addition, 8. 4million Canadians The Chair: We are returning to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, next Friday, the Quebec minister of finance, EricGirard, will give an economic update. If EricGirard can give one for Quebec, why can't BillMorneau give one for Canada? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, once again, we have been open and transparent from the outset. We have devoted our energy to support Canadians, workers and businesses. We will continue to do so. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I cannot judge the quality of the work done by the provinces, but what I do know is that Quebec, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland have also made efforts to support their residents economically. Those provinces are able to table economic updates. Yesterday, Saskatchewan even tabled a budget. Why is Bill Morneau unable to table an economic update for all Canadians? Hon. Mona Fortier: Let me repeat for my hon. colleague that we are going through extraordinarily uncertain times. We have continued to be open and transparent. We have reported biweekly to Parliament on the total cost and status of the measures in our economic response plan. Once again, as soon as clear economic projections can be provided, we will provide an update The Chair: Mr. Deltell has the floor. Mr. Grard Deltell: The minister talks about the total cost of the government's economic expenditures. So I ask the question: so far, over the past three months, how much has the pandemic cost Canadians? Hon. Mona Fortier: As I said earlier, it is important to note that we have put forward measures, including the wage subsidy, which have helped more than 2. 5million The Chair: Mr. Deltell has the floor. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I have been trying for four minutes to get anything remotely resembling an answer, and I'm getting absolutely nothing. I am not asking questions for myself; I am asking questions for Canadians. Why are the government and the Minister of Finance, Bill Morneau, not able to table an economic update when some provinces are able to? Hon. Mona Fortier: Once again, I would like to remind my hon. colleague that we have provided interest-free loans to businesses. More than 669,000loans have been approved. We have continued to support businesses and Canadians during this time The Chair: Mr. Deltell, you have time for a very brief question. Mr. Grard Deltell: The only thing that distinguishes the provinces that table economic updates and the current government is political will. Why does Bill Morneau not have the political will to tell Canadians the truth? Hon. Mona Fortier: Once again, we have been open and transparent. As soon as it is possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide Canadians with a full update. The Chair: We will now continue with Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya (MarkhamUnionville, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. COVID-19 has sparked and spurred anti-Asian racism. These are not just racist comments online; Asian Canadians have been attacked. What is the government doing to combat anti-Asian racism? Hon. Bardish Chagger (Minister of Diversity and Inclusion and Youth): Mr. Chair, since our government took office in 2015, we have been making investments and working with communities. The difference between our government and the previous government is that we will actually consult with Canadians, including black Canadians, including Asian Canadians, to respond to the challenges, including with an anti-racism secretariat and an anti-racism strategy. It will take all of us. I appreciate the member's question, so that we can also work together. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, one business owner I know in Markham has operated for 20 years. Now she's looking at over $9,000 in rent due on June 24. COVID-19 has crippled her sales and she's going to go out of business. Her landlord has no interest in the Canada emergency commercial rent assistance program. How can the government say this program is working? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, this program was made possible by working with the provinces, and we will continue to encourage landlords and tenants to work together to make sure they have relief for this very difficult time in which they're living. We're continuing to monitor the CECRA program and we will make it possible for businesses to have access to the program. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, the government business rent relief program has been a total disaster. Even the government's own numbers show it is a failure. As of June 8, less than 2% of the $3 billion budgeted has been spent. What is it going to take for the government to admit that the program is a disaster and needs changes? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we know our government has been working closely with the provinces and territories to deliver the Canada emergency commercial rent assistance. Although the tenant-landlord relationship is ultimately the responsibility of the provinces and territories, our government has stepped up to provide support through the tools we have and through CMHC so that small businesses can get the rent relief they need. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, according to the government, there are around 1. 1 million small businesses in Canada. At committee, we were told only around 5,500 of them are receiving COVID-19 rent relief. That number is shameful. When will the Liberal government wake up and make the changes? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we welcome the steps some provinces and territories have taken to further protect commercial tenants. We will continue to monitor this program closely and ensure that Canada's small businesses are supported during this challenging time. We will continue to monitor to see The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, there was no answer. When can the government make these changes? Hon. Mary Ng (Minister of Small Business, Export Promotion and International Trade): Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable colleague that we are doing everything and will continue to do everything to help small businesses in our country. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, on May 27 the CBSA seized 65 small handguns at Pearson airport, the largest firearms seizure on record. It is clear that smuggled handguns are the weapon of choice for criminals. Why is the Prime Minister focusing on an ineffective municipal ban? Hon. Bill Blair (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness): Mr. Chair, I would point out that gun violence in any of our communities is unacceptable, and it's important that governments and communities take steps to prevent guns from getting into the hands of criminals. That's why we do important work at our border to keep guns from being smuggled into our country, but it also necessitates additional work. I don't think you can talk about gun violence without talking about stronger gun control. That's why our government has taken a very strong position and will strengthen gun control to keep Canadians safe. The Chair: Mr. Saroya, you may have a 10-second question, if that's possible, please. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, COVID-19 has not stopped gun violence in the GTA. My constituents are concerned about shootings minutes away from their homes. We know the Liberals'gun ban won't change anything, but a focus on smuggled guns and criminals will. When will they make that change? Hon. Bill Blair: Mr. Chair, stronger gun control laws are an effective tool, and that's been told to us by police leadership and communities across the country. We're also making investments in borders and law enforcement. Most importantly, we're making investments in communities and in kids to keep communities safe. I look forward to the member's strong support of those measures when we bring them forward. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback (Prince Albert, CPC): Mr. Chair, the U. S. and the U. K. began their second round of free trade negotiations yesterday. Does the government intend to have a trade agreement in place before the U. K. tariffs come into effect on January 1? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, the U. K. is a strong partner of Canada, as is the European Union, and we're looking forward to continuing that strong relationship The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Thank you, Mr. Chair. With respect to the negotiations with the U. K. , when will the minister publish her goals and objectives for this agreement? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, we're going to continue to work to ensure that any future agreement is going to be based on the best interests of Canadians, and we will The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Can the minister confirm whether they've entered into negotiations with the U. K. at this point? Hon. Mary Ng: Our government is analyzing the most-favoured-nation tariff regimes schedule the U. K. has put out. I want to assure Canadians The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Mr. Chair, during the CUSMA negotiations, a deal was struck between the Liberal Party and the NDP that the government would notify this House 90 days before it starts any negotiations on any trade agreement. When will the minister notify this House? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that we will absolutely be sharing information. Right now, we are analyzing the most-favoured-nation tariff regimes schedule put out by the U. K. Mr. Randy Hoback: Mr. Chair, any meaningful attempts to reform the WTO needs buy-in from the United States. I think all countries agree on that. Has the minister discussed a WTO reform with the USTR, the United States trade representative? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, the Ottawa Group is a consensus-based group, and any decisions will be taken together. Of course, any meaningful reform must include the U. S. The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Has the U. S. been invited to the Ottawa Group meetings? Hon. Mary Ng: The Ottawa Group is a consensus-based group limited to WTO members who are committed to bringing forward ideas and proposals The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Just as with any other trade agreement, the minister has committed to this House that she will publish the list of goals and responsibilities for the negotiations. When will she publish the list for the Ottawa Group? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I'm thrilled that we had an excellent meeting of the Ottawa Group yesterday where, as a group, we agreed to take concrete action. Mr. Randy Hoback: Will the minister be releasing a list of Canada's objectives we would like to see the new WTO's director-general pursue prior to the upcoming DG election? Hon. Mary Ng: We published an action statement from the Ottawa Group yesterday. I would encourage the member opposite to have a look. I'm certainly happy to send it to him. Mr. Randy Hoback: Going back to economic prosperity, we know that the U. S. has been having talks with other countries around the world. Has Canada yet been invited to this group? Hon. Mary Ng: I'm pleased to continue to pursue the objectives of trade diversification. I would remind the member that we have access to a billion and a half customers through our very robust Mr. Randy Hoback: A billion and a half customers is fine if you have a functioning WTO, but if you don't have a functioning WTO, then a billion and a half customers may not be fully accessible to our suppliers, manufacturers and agriculture producers. Can the minister confirm that she's in discussions with the U. S. in joining this economic prosperity group? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that nothing is more important than standing up and helping create markets for our Canadian businesses and to help our small businesses get more export-ready so that they can grow into the international marketplace. This is work that we've committed to do, and we will keep working on it, particularly The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Yesterday Saskatchewan presented a budget. Not only did they present the budget, but they'll also actually debate the budget and pass the budget in Parliament. There's full accountability. Why won't this government do the same? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons): Mr. Chair, the House is sitting in this hybrid format so that people can participate in the House on the screens. I'm sure my colleague is happy to see that his own colleagues are able to ask questions and participate. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Williamson. Mr. John Williamson (New Brunswick Southwest, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will say that this is no substitute for Parliament, but I appreciate the opportunity. New Brunswick families and businesses are rapidly making adjustments to manage and live with the coronavirus pandemic. Businesses here are opening and services are being offered. Families are preparing for summer and even planning ahead for a new school year in September. We have a lot of work ahead of us. One notable absence is Service Canada. When does the government plan on opening its service counters to assist Canadians again? Hon. Ahmed Hussen (Minister of Families, Children and Social Development): Mr. Chair, our government is committed to ensuring that Canadians continue to have access to the benefits that they rely on through Service Canada. We have redeployed over 3,000 additional staff to ensure that Canadians continue to have access to their benefits. We've established a 1,500-agent call centre to make sure that people can get access to the phone lines to get the help they need. Mr. John Williamson: Service Canada is about more than providing COVID-19 information and benefits. Provincial governments are working hard to adjust to Canada's new normal by opening up businesses and front-line government services. When will we see Service Canada play its role and open its service counters in our communities? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Mr. Chair, we're currently working with our world-class public health experts to determine how best to reopen the Service Canada network for the public. Make no mistake: Our Service Canada employees have gone above and beyond to ensure that Canadians continue to have access to the services that they rely on and the benefits that they need. Mr. John Williamson: Please don't hide behind health experts when the Prime Minister is appearing in the middle of large protests, yet is afraid to bring back the Parliament of Canada to do its business. In fact, the New Brunswick legislature is open for regular business. Bills are being studied, opposition input is being heard and MLAs are voting on legislation, not rubber-stamping government bills. By comparison, our Parliament is stuck in pretending it cannot function like other law-making assemblies. Canadians are in the dark about our country's finances. When will the government table an economic update so taxpayers understand what was spent, what is owed by our kids and grandchildren, and what the government's fiscal footing looks like? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, nobody's hiding. Nobody's doing anything like that. The only reason my colleague is able to ask a question and I'm able to answer his question is that he's right there on the screen. We have this hybrid format that cares for MPs across the country, not only the ones sitting in the House. Mr. John Williamson: This is no substitute for Parliament. I will ask my question again. When will the government table an economic update so that taxpayers understand what was spent, what is owed by our kids and grandchildren, and what the government's fiscal footing looks like in today's environment? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, I thank my honourable colleague for his question. Canada's economy is still in a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We have been open and transparent about the measures we have been providing to support families, businesses and workers. Even our health care The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Williamson. Mr. John Williamson: Except you have not. The Auditor General is underfunded. We have no idea about the total of government spending. Again I will ask when the government will table an economic update so that we can have an understanding of what the government's fiscal footing looks like. Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we have included biweekly reports to Parliament on the full cost and status of our economic response plan measures since the beginning. I have said, and I will continue to say, that when it is possible to provide a clear economic projection, we will provide an update. Mr. John Williamson: What is the full cost to date of the government's COVID-19 relief measures, as the minister just claimed the government has provided to Parliament? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we have provided support for workers, and 2. 5 million Canadians have been helped through the Canadian wage subsidy. We have provided businesses with some loans, and 669,000 businesses have applied for these loans. Even for the CERB, we have over eight million Canadians who have applied. The Chair: We will now continue with Mr. Bergeron. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: Mr. Chair, as the leader of the Bloc Qubcois mentioned a few moments ago, the government promised $14billion to Quebec and the provinces, but in targeted transfers. That is very little compared to the considerable expenses incurred to deal with the current crisis. But Quebec and the provinces don't just want this money to be transferred unconditionally, they also want a real discussion on a permanent increase in health care transfers. PremierLegault was rightly concerned about the feds'interference into provincial jurisdictions. The federal government, which does not manage any hospitals or long-term care centres, must stop playing armchair quarterback and transfer the money to the only governments with jurisdiction over health, that is, Quebec and the provinces. Will it do so without delay and without nitpicking? The Honourable Patty Hajdu (Minister of Health): Mr. Chair, we know that the Government of Quebec is working hard to ensure the safety of Quebeckers and we are here to support them. As part of this co-operation, we have developed health and safety recommendations for workplaces, we have purchased medical equipment for workers and we have supported the province in developing its reopening program. We are continuing this important partnership to ensure the safety of Quebeckers and all Canadians. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: The co-operation is so effective that the money is staying in the federal government's coffers. In fact, when the federal government wants to impose conditions, it always takes longer. We see it with housing, for which Quebec has not received a dime of the $1. 4billion it is owed. We have also seen it with infrastructure funds, particularly for public transit, water systems and water treatment. The health crisis is now. The needs are now. The much needed reopening of our economy is now. Will the government finally transfer the money without messing around or quibbling? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I am pleased to confirm to my colleague that there is no messing around, no quibbling, nothing of the kind. There is co-operation between two levels of government. It is natural to have discussions with all the provinces and with Quebec. I myself am taking part in some discussions and several of my colleagues are taking part in others. There is a clear willingness on the part of the federal government to co-operate with Quebec and all the provinces. That is what we are doing and that is perhaps what the Bloc Qubcois does not like. It likes bickering, but for the time being, there is none. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: We don't want to bicker, we want the money to be paid out. It is not complicated, for heaven's sake! We do not want a blank cheque. Right now, the money remains in the federal government's coffers. There is $1. 4billion that should be paid to Quebec for social housing and is sitting in the federal government's coffers. We are waiting for money for water treatment and water systems, but it is sitting in the federal government's coffers. It's almost July. We are wasting precious months for construction. What is the government waiting for to pay out the money so that we can get our economy rolling? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: The federal government is a very active partner. We are discussing and working with Quebec on infrastructure projects. We are continuing our discussions and negotiations on the housing agreement. Nothing is at a standstill. We are discussing and co-operating for the well-being of all Quebeckers. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: MadamChair, things are definitely at a standstill, because the money is owed and has not been paid out. Months are going by while construction is not taking place. We need to reopen the economy. We need more flexibility in the gas tax program and Quebec's contribution to allow municipalities to undertake work on city halls, community centres and fire stations. We need the federal government to contribute to funding public transit operations, which have become a real financial drain because of the drop in ridership. What is the federal government waiting for to provide real help instead of just talking? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: When it comes to just talking, the Bloc Qubcois has a lot of experience, I admit. We, in the government, are working and co-operating. We are not waiting with our arms folded, we are discussing a series of issues with Quebec. We do more than discuss, we work and we co-operate. We are working on projects, not only in infrastructure, but in a number of other areas. Just think of the co-operation of our armed forces in the CHSLDs, for example. We are here for Quebeckers. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Your time has run out, Mr. Bergeron. We'll go now to Ms. Khalid, from MississaugaErin Mills. Ms. Iqra Khalid (MississaugaErin Mills, Lib.): Madam Chair, I'll be splitting my time with the member for GlengarryPrescottRussell. During a consultation with the business community in Mississauga, the concerns of businesses, big and small, included the need for stable, affordable and safe child care. With the lack of such child care spaces, an economic recovery plan post-COVID cannot be effective until and unless we make sure that people are able to get back to work. I've heard from parents across Mississauga that they're being forced to stay home because of inadequate child care and that they have to choose between putting food on the table and keeping family safe. More and more employers are realizing that good employees are unable to contribute to their business growth because of this challenge. Now more than ever, we need to find long-term sustainable solutions for Canadians who face challenges with regard to child care. I ask our Minister of Families, Children and Social Development this: What is our strategy to tackle this ever-growing need for a national child care plan? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I thank the honourable member for her question and for her important advocacy and work on this important issue. We understand that child care is important to our economic recovery and our social infrastructure. We know the pressure that COVID-19 has placed on families, especially parents. That is why we're committed to continuing to work with provinces and territories to renew our agreements on early learning and child care, and to provide, at the earliest opportunity, $400 million in support. In addition to that, the Prime Minister has already indicated that child care will be part of the $14-billion pledge to provinces and territories to assist them with respect to COVID-19 recovery efforts. Over the next decade, we will continue to invest $7. 5 billion, and together we have achieved the goal of over 40,000 affordable child care spaces. We are also committed to continuing to create over 250,000 before-school and after-school child care spaces for kids under the age of 10. We will continue to work with our partners in the provinces and territories to ensure that Canadians can continue to have access to safe, quality and affordable child care. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for GlengarryPrescottRussell has the floor. Mr. Francis Drouin (GlengarryPrescottRussell, Lib.): MadamChair, small businesses play a fundamental role in the Canadian economy. In an article in LaPresse, the Minister of Economic Development warned us that the economic crisis caused by severe lockdown measures could have more serious consequences in small municipalities than in large cities. Based on discussions with the chambers of commerce in my riding, it is clear that federal government assistance will be essential for the reopening of the economy, specifically for the rural economy. In fact, I would like to acknowledge the work of the Prescott-Russell community development corporation, under the leadership of John Candie. After announcing almost $57million to help SMEs adopt e-commerce, how does the minister plan to help SMEs and the business community in our rural areas? Hon. Mlanie Joly (Minister of Economic Development and Official Languages): MadamChair, I also thank my colleague from GlengarryPrescottRussell for his important question. Yes, our regions are important and the entrepreneurs in those regions are creative and daring. They take risks, but they are currently facing huge challenges. So we are here for them. We understand their anxiety and we want to help them. That is why we have decided to invest heavily in rural economic development. It is also why we have doubled the budget of CFDCs and Community Futures organizations across the country. In southern Ontario we have reinvested over $260million in the regional economic development agency FedDev. In the great riding of GlengarryPrescottRussell, which I am particularly fond of and where there is a very good member of Parliament, there is an additional $1million for entrepreneurs in the region. We have been, we are and we will be at your side. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for GlengarryPrescottRussell has 36seconds left. No? Then we'll go to the honourable member for ElmwoodTranscona. Mr. Daniel Blaikie (ElmwoodTranscona, NDP): Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with the member for Victoria. Madam Chair, Krystal is a community worker in Winnipeg. She has been working from home since late March, taking care of her child, who is out of school, and caring for her father, who is living with her and vulnerable to COVID-19. Her employer called her up recently and asked her to physically return to work or to take a leave. As a parent and a care provider to a vulnerable person, she's not comfortable with physically returning to work. Service Canada won't give Krystal a straight answer as to whether going on leave and collecting CERB would count as refusing a reasonable job offer. With Bill C-17 looming in the background, Krystal is worried about jail time and fines if she does right by her child and her father by applying for CERB. Can Krystal reasonably refuse to go back to work and collect CERB, or will she be considered a fraudster? That's my question for the minister that is specific to Krystal's case. As well, what is the minister doing to provide clear direction to Canadians and to Service Canada agents so that people can get a clear answer before making their decision about returning to work? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I want to thank the honourable member for his important question. We recognize that Canadian workers will face various different situations, including those who are ineligible for the Canada emergency support benefit. We'll continue to work with workers to make sure they're able to be supported throughout this pandemic. The fact of the matter is that every province has workplace health and safety regulations that must be supported. We understand that workers have the right not to work in unsafe situations. We also understand that many Canadians do want to go back to work; and in fact many have. We will make sure that we support Canadians throughout this recovery process. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member has 47 seconds left, and that includes the answer. Mr. Daniel Blaikie: Madam Chair, that answer is really not good enough, because the problem here is that Krystal needs to know whether she can continue receiving CERB or not. That's a federal government decision, and she needs to know whether the federal government is going to accuse her of fraud and put her in jail or assess fines against her if she refuses to go back to work because she wants to take care of her child and her father. What is the minister's answer to that? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister has 20 seconds to respond. Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that if a Canadian has to take care of a loved one due to circumstances surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, they are indeed eligible to receive the CERB and remain receiving that benefit. Ms. Laurel Collins (Victoria, NDP): As we deal with the global pandemic, we cannot lose sight of the ongoing climate emergency. Canada has missed every single climate target it set, and we need to break the cycle of empty promises. Canadians want their government to be accountable, and environmental groups such as Ecojustice, CAN-Rac, Environmental Defence and West Coast Environmental Law, as well as the government's own climate institute, are all calling for legally binding climate targets. When will the government put its climate targets into law with legally binding milestones so we never miss another target again? Hon. Navdeep Bains (MississaugaMalton, Lib.): Madam Chair, I thank my honourable colleague for her question. I totally agree with her when it comes to the environment. It is a priority not only for us as a government, but it should be a priority for all Canadians. That is why we have put measures in place to put a price on pollution through carbon pricing. That is why we have a comprehensive plan that also includes significant investments in clean technology, which will help reduce our carbon footprint. I am confident that these measures will enable us to not only meet but exceed our 2030 target and also allow us to achieve our net-zero 2050 target. Ms. Laurel Collins: That didn't answer my question. I asked when. Empty promises won't get us any closer to meeting our climate targets. Can the minister tell us when his government will introduce climate accountability laws? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I think the fundamental issue here is having a plan when it comes to the environment. I'm confident that the measures that we have takenputting a price on pollution, investing in clean technology, and other key measures to reduce our carbon footprint, including the investment in infrastructureunderpin a plan The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to the honourable member for Victoria. Ms. Laurel Collins: This government is not meeting its targets, but it is meeting with oil and gas lobbyists. The pandemic has made us reflect on our priorities. Are we going to choose a just recovery with good, sustainable jobs for Canadian workers, or are we going to keep subsidizing oil and gas companies to the tune of billions, subsidies that we know are ending up in the pockets of CEOs and shareholders? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will have a brief answer from the minister. Hon. Navdeep Bains: Again, Madam Chair, this is the fundamental difference between us and the NDP. We fundamentally believe that the entire economy needs to work together, including the energy sector, to enable us to achieve those 2030 and 2050 targets. We are going to work together to support our workers, including in the energy sector, to reduce our carbon footprint. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Now we will go to the honourable member for SaskatoonGrasswood, Mr. Waugh. Mr. Kevin Waugh (SaskatoonGrasswood, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. When I was last here in May, I was on my way back to Saskatoon from Toronto, and there was actually someone on my flight who tested positive for COVID-19. I was never informed of it by the airline. I found out two weeks later. The report was in the news media. Why hasn't the government put rules in place requiring airlines to reach out to individuals like me who may have been exposed to COVID on their flights? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, it's hard to speculate on what happened from such a vague description of his experience, but I will say that we have every confidence in local public health, which is doing the hard and heavy lifting of contact tracing and working very closely with all kinds of different sectors, including airline sectors, to make sure that close contacts of people who have tested positive for COVID-19 are found, are traced and are isolated. I assume that the member took appropriate precautions on the flight and I hope that he continues to do so. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, it was reported that the individual on my plane who had COVID was actually connecting in Toronto from an international flight. The Prime Minister announced last week that they would begin mandating temperature checks for those bound for Canada in July. Will international travellers be tested when they land in Canada, or will they be relying on the tests that take place in other countries? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, this is a very important question, because the protection and safety of all Canadiansin particular, Canadian travellersis a high priority for our government. We've been working very closely with the airlines. At the current time, we are putting temperature screening in place. That will initially be done primarily by the airlines that are in the best position to do it at this point in time. We are also now going to be including CATSA, the people who do the security screening, so that when people enter the airport, they will also be screened. We believe that is going to be the most effective measure to keep all travellers safe. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, last week five of the largest professional sports leagues in North America put out a statement of support for my private member's bill, the safe and regulated sports betting act. Given the struggles that clubs and leagues are facing due to COVID-19, including having no fans at all in the stands for the foreseeable future, the legalization of sports betting would be a welcome opportunity not only to engage fans but to generate much-needed revenue. Will the government commit now to supporting the sports and gaming industries by supporting my private member's bill, Bill C-218? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, I've had the opportunity on many occasions to speak to members of Parliament and also to mayors and councillors and people living in border communities where there are casinos. They've raised this issue a number of times. We've listened very carefully to the concerns that have been expressed by them. I would like to advise the member that I look forward to the opportunity for a careful examination of his bill. We are at all times concerned about maintaining the integrity of the gaming industry within our community. That's the best way to protect Canadians. At the same time, we will examine his bill with all of the necessary attention to make sure it's given full consideration. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, it's the first time in history that we've had the five professional leagues in this country joining together for this bill. Newspapers rely, as we all know, on advertising for a significant portion of their revenue. This includes the usual flyers as well as in-paper ads. I've heard major concerns from a number of newspapers in this country about competition they're receiving today from Canada Post, which is offering massive free postage services. In fact, I have one of their ads here, which says that the first 6,000 pieces of postage are 100% free. If the government is genuine about wanting to ensure that newspapers and journals can succeed in this country, why are you allowing Canada Post to use its monopoly power to actually threaten local newspapers in this country? Hon. Steven Guilbeault (Minister of Canadian Heritage): Thank you, Madame Chair, and I thank the member opposite for his question. As you well know, a healthy news and media sector in Canada is a priority for our government, which is why we have put in place a number of measures before COVID-19 and during COVID-19, and we will continue to be there for them after this crisis has gone by. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Before we go on, we will be taking a break to do a bit of a changeover. I also want to remind members to address their questions and comments to the chair. We will go now to the honourable member for BruceGreyOwen Sound, Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff (BruceGreyOwen Sound, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Mr. Blair stated yesterday here in the House that the AR-15 has been used in mass killings in Canada on many occasions. Mr. Blair, please provide just one specific instance in which an AR-15 was used in a mass killing in Canada. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I remind the member to address questions and comments to the chair. The honourable minister may respond. Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I think this is an excellent opportunity to point out to the member opposite how important it is to actually listen to what was said. If you go back and review that tape, and I would invite you to do so, you'll see that I said the AR-15 and other weapons like themreferring of course to military-style assault weaponshave been used in mass killings, and I actually cited a number of examples. Madam Chair, I think it would be very useful if the member's questions were based on facts. Mr. Alex Ruff: I can remind Mr. Blair that I actually have watched the video a couple of times, and he specifically states that the AR-15 was used in mass killings in Canada, yet he has yet to provide one. My additional question is to Mr. Blair. Out of the recently banned firearms on May 1, how many have been or are still currently in use by the Canadian Armed Forces? Hon. Bill Blair: That's an excellent question, Madam Chair, because it's very important to provide Canadians with clarity. We have prohibited these firearms for non-law enforcement and non-military use. The military uses weapons that were actually designed for soldiers to use in combat to shoot other soldiers. That's the appropriate use of such weapons, Madam Chair. They're not things to be played with in civilian society. Mr. Alex Ruff: As a soldier for 25 years, I'll remind Mr. Blair that none of the currently prohibited firearms would be used in the Canadian Armed Forces. I asked him a question on whether any of them is being or ever has been used in the Canadian Armed Forces. Are any of the recently banned firearms still in use, or have they ever been in use, in any military in the world? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, I think it's important to also recognize that the basic origin, the provenance of the weapons that we have prohibited, was in their original design. They were designed for military use for various military forces around the world. As I've said previously, they were designed for soldiers to use in combat to kill other soldiers. They're very efficient in their design for killing people. They have no purpose in Canadian society. Mr. Alex Ruff: As someone who has used many military-style firearms and who is actually involved in helping define what we purchase in the military, I would use none of the ones that are currently prohibited. I have a question, Chair, for Minister MacAulay. Can he please confirm whether Veterans Affairs has a plan to address the claims backlog, yes or no? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (Minister of Veterans Affairs): Madam Chair, I appreciate my honourable colleague's question, and yes, we've indicated that it's a major priority. That's why I'm so pleased that the supplementary estimates contained just under $90 million to address hiring more staff, improving the process and making sure that we attack the backlog in an appropriate manner. Mr. Alex Ruff: Madame Chair, does that plan exist in written form? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Well, Madam Chair, I can assure you that it's in the supplementary estimates, and of course, this money is The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We'll go back to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff: The question is about the plan, not how much money has been allocated. I am asking for the written plan on how to address the backlog. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Madam Chair, I can tell my honourable colleague that the money is in the supplementary estimates, and with the money we're able to attack this problem in an appropriate manner, and that's what is important for our veterans. Mr. Alex Ruff: The deputy minister committed on March 10 that a written plan would be provided to the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs within a month and made public. Did the deputy minister or the department provide the minister that plan within a month? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Madame Chair, I'm sure my honourable colleague wants an appropriate plan and he would be fully aware this just under $90 million would make a big difference in the plan to attack the backlog. We The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We'll go back to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff: Thank you, Chair. Therefore, my question is, if the deputy minister in the department provided him with an appropriate plan or a written plan, why is he questioning how appropriate that plan is? I have complete confidence in the deputy minister's ability to produce a written plan. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister may give a brief answer, please. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I can assure my honourable colleague that with the appropriate funding, we will address the backlog in Veterans Affairs. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Parry SoundMuskoka, Mr. Aitchison. Mr. Scott Aitchison: Thank you, Madam Chair. My question is about summer camps again. Three weeks ago, I asked this government if the finance minister would meet with the beleaguered summer camp sector. Summer camps, which are a social and economic mainstay in Parry SoundMuskoka and all of northern Ontario, have been crippled by the global pandemic. It's costing millions of jobs, and some camps are actually in danger of folding. Aside from a brief follow-up conversation over the phone with the junior minister, there has still been no action from this government. When will the Minister of Finance meet with summer camps to find a solution? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I recognize the honourable member's important question and his focus on summer camps. We recognize the importance of looking at that and paying attention to the needs of that community. We will continue to engage with them, as we have, to ensure and find ways in which we can get their feedback and find ways in which we can support them. That work is ongoing, and I assure the honourable member that our focus is on the kids and on ensuring that they have access to summer camps for this year. Mr. Scott Aitchison: I don't know why you need to find ways to get feedback. The summer camps association has given lots of feedback and my office has given lots of feedback, so I don't see what's confusing about this. However, I've become accustomed to not really getting answers to questions, so I will go to the next one. The Ontario government's regional reopening plan permits cruise boats to resume on Georgian Bay, yet the federal government is refusing to allow these vessels to operate until July 1. Therefore, small businesses such as the Island Queen cruiser in Parry Sound, which has only a very few precious weeks to operate in the first place, is losing yet another two weeks because of federal inaction. This not only hurts the cruise boat industry but also hurts tourism and small businesses all through our area. Will the Minister of Transport take a regional approach himself by lifting the federal ban on Georgian Bay, just like the Province of Ontario has done? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister may reply. Is there a response? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, there is. I apologize for the confusion. Let me respond, if I may, on behalf of the Minister of Transport. There have been a number of very important discussions with the provinces, in particular with the Province of Ontario, around provisions regarding pleasure craft. There are certain restrictions that will come to an end on June 30. We're working very closely with our provincial counterparts to address this issue, but we want to ensure that it will be done safely. Mr. Scott Aitchison: Madam Chair, I actually gave the minister a heads-up that I would be asking that question. He sent me an email today saying he was not going to be able to be in the House, and it's great of him to do that. He said that whoever was going to fill in for him would have an answer, but again, that was not really an answer. The next issue I would like to bring this government's attention to is the deplorable state of rural Internet service in Parry SoundMuskoka. Quite simply, there are too many gaps in service, and what is available is generally way too expensive. We have families trying to work and teach their kids from home on unreliable and outrageously expensive Internet service, and we have too many small businesses that either cannot access or afford reliable Internet services. Today Greg Rickford, the Ontario energy minister, and Laurie Scott, Ontario Minister of Infrastructure, announced $2. 3 million for seven northern Ontario broadband projects. Minister, will when your government get serious and become a reliable partner for the Government of Ontario and the private sector to deliver this crucial modern-day infrastructure to rural Canadians? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I remind the member that he needs to address the questions and comments to the chair. The honourable minister may reply. Hon. Maryam Monsef (Minister for Women and Gender Equality and Rural Economic Development): Madam Chair, in the best of times, life without access to high-speed Internet is hard. During a pandemic, the challenges are that much more pronounced. Our government's unprecedented investments are already connecting a million more Canadian households to this essential service, but until we achieve universal access our work is not done. We will work with our partners, including provinces across the country, to connect every Canadian household to high-quality Internet access that is affordable and reliable. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member has 30 seconds. Mr. Scott Aitchison: I think I can squeeze something in here, then. I'm wondering, then, Madam Chair, since the Province of Ontario has used the Northern Ontario Heritage Corporation Fund to make this announcement, what about using FedNor to make the same kind of announcement, and partner with the province? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister has a brief answer. Hon. Mlanie Joly: Obviously we believe in the importance of northern Ontario; that's why we nearly doubled the budget of FedNor. We will continue to invest in businesses and people all around Parry Sound, Muskoka and northern Ontario. If my colleague has specific projects in mind, please come and see me and let's have a conversation. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for Montmagny-L'Islet-KamouraskaRivire-du-Loup, Mr. Gnreux, has the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux (MontmagnyL'IsletKamouraskaRivire-du-Loup, CPC): Thank you, MadamChair. I will continue along the same lines as my colleague. During this pandemic, we are realizing the extent to which reliable high-speed Internet service is needed for Canada's economy. There are still places where telework is not possible today because of the lack of adequate coverage. However, since2015, the government has committed to addressing the situation through three new programs. Benot Pilotto, who is the mayor of Saint-Onsime-d'Ixworth, in my riding, wrote to me a few days ago. That is why I am asking you what concrete results the government plans to achieve for our rural areas by the end of the year. Hon. Maryam Monsef: At the best of times, life without high-speed Internet access is difficult. During a pandemic, the difficulties are even greater. Our government's unprecedented investments are already connecting an additional one million Canadian households to this essential service. However, until we achieve universal access, our job is not done. We are working The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Gnreux, you have the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, I am simply asking the minister to tell me when the mayor of Saint-Onsime-d'Ixworth will be able to tell his residents when the Internet will be available in his municipality. It is not complicated. What does the government plan to do so that rural municipalities across Canada can have access to the Internet as soon as possible? What is its plan? Hon. Maryam Monsef: We are working with partners across the country to ensure that every Canadian household is connected to a high-quality, accessible and affordable high-speed Internet service. Madam Chair, I assure my colleagues that we share the same goal, and we will work with all our partners across the country to ensure every Canadian household has access The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Gnreux, you have the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, I am still not getting a specific answer. According to the government's plan, when will rural Canadian businesses and households be connected? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I would ask the honourable minister to provide a brief answer. Hon. Maryam Monsef: Madam Chair, those plans are under way, and we will have more to share in the coming days. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: It seems that the Minister of Rural Economic Development plans to announce a new plan this week. Can she tell us how this program will differ from the Connect to Innovate program, which is already in place? Can the minister tell us whether her program will solve the problem of the 25square kilometre hexagonal zones, which unfortunately make many projects ineligible for the CRTC's broadband fund? Hon. Maryam Monsef: Madam Chair, I'm pleased to share with my colleague that the model he's referring to, the hexagon model, is no more. Our maps are much more precise now to ensure that we do not leave Canadians behind. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, this year, the Canada summer jobs program is a real fiasco. I think all my colleagues will agree with me. On May13,100jobs were announced in my riding; on May20,16jobs were announced; on May27,13jobs were announced; on June3,12jobs were announced; and on June10, only one job was announced. As we speak, an amount of $100,000 is still to be confirmed in my riding. Can we have an announcement, once and for all? Let's stop the piecemeal announcements and finally confirm the remaining jobs today so that our organizations can have young people before the summer starts on the weekend. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable minister. Hon. Ahmed Hussen: MadamChair, I thank the honourable member for his question. We recognize the important role that the Canada summer jobs program is playing in supporting employers and young workers in communities right across the country. Our government is working very hard to help employers adapt to the realities of the COVID-19 pandemic, and at the same time is supporting young Canadians as they begin to look for summer employment. We've introduced flexibilities into the program to ensure that more young workers have opportunities to get employed. The honourable member also has to understand that we're in the COVID-19 pandemic, and as such it will take some time for businesses to equip themselves to hire students. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for NanaimoLadysmith, Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly (NanaimoLadysmith, GP): Thank you, Madam Chair. In the first five months of this year, 554 B. C. residents died from opioid overdoses. They were teachers, construction workers, business owners, family members, neighbours and friends. Addiction is a health and social issue, but criminalization creates stigma, so people hide their drug use and die alone. Access to a safe supply of drugs and safe injection sites saves lives and puts addicts in daily contact with people who can help them. Will this government end the war on drugs by decriminalizing them, providing a safe supply and reallocating resources from policing addicts to providing treatment for them? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, I think it's really important we make sure that when we speak about people who use substances, we remove stigmatizing language like the word addict. We can stand together, as this government has, with people who use substances and their families to ensure a range of options for people who are struggling with addiction, who are using substances in a way that is harming their health and their communities. As you know, we have restored harm reduction to the Canadian drugs and substances strategy. We've made it easier for people to access safe supplies of substances. We've increased access to treatment and the variety of treatment through federal transfers to provinces and territories. Madam Chair, we're working with communities to make sure there are more community-based approaches to treating The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, the Geneva Convention considers both tear gas and pepper spray to be chemical weapons and prohibits their use in war, yet our police forces use these weapons on Canadian civilians. These weapons are indiscriminate and can affect peaceful protestors and innocent bystanders. Will the government prohibit the use of these weapons and require police to use de-escalation techniques to keep legal protests peaceful? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, the right to peaceful protest in this country is a constitutionally protected right. We want to ensure it's always respected. At the same time, Madam Chair, we recognize that the use of even less than lethal force can have significant impacts on people's safety. This is a highly regulated substance in Canada. It's prohibited for non-police use, and for the police it is and should be highly regulated. The RCMP have advised me they have not used tear gas in nine years. We'll continue to monitor it to ensure that peaceful protest is always respected. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, in 2012 the RCMP spent $14 million on 18 armoured personnel carriers. One's parked at the Nanaimo detachment. I can't imagine why we have weapons of war like this for policing civilians. Will the government rein in the RCMP budget and end wasteful spending on militarizing our civilian police forces? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, it's a very important tradition that our Canadian police are not militarized. At the same time, we've seen a number of tragedies when police have responded to situations in which people were armed with weapons designed for soldiers to kill soldiers, and they've been used to kill police officers. The militarization of our society, so strongly promoted by some, is the direct consequence of the militarization of the police. As we remove these weapons from our society and prohibit them, we'll make it safer for everyone and we can then move away from such a model of policing. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, the government spent $4. 5 billion to buy an old, leaky pipeline. Since 1961, there have been 82 reported spills from the Trans Mountain pipeline. Over 1. 5 million litres of crude oil has spilled into the surrounding environment. This weekend, the Trans Mountain pipeline leaked again, dumping 190,000 litres of oil. How much is this spill going to cost Canadian taxpayers to clean up? How much contingency funding has been budgeted to repair the environmental destruction from spills? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I want to thank the honourable colleague for his question. He full well knows that the acquisition that we made with regard to the TMX initiative is a reflection of the fact that we want this initiative to move forward in a sustainable manner and in a manner that protects the environment. I'll continue to work with my colleagues to endeavour to make sure that we have the appropriate processes in place to protect the environment and at the same time create good-quality, middle-class jobs for Canadians. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for RosemontLa PetitePatrie, Mr. Boulerice, has the floor. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice (RosemontLa Petite-Patrie, NDP): Thank you, MadamChair. The Black Lives Matter movement is right to discuss systemic racism in our societies. In Montreal, the city and the police department have recognized this, and measures will be put in place. The Liberal government, once again, is all talk and no walk. Although it spends $10million a day, we see no attempt to reform or change the RCMP. If the Prime Minister really wants to act, why is he delaying the action plan in response to the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls? Hon. Bill Blair: Let me assure this House and the member opposite that we're not dragging our feet. This is an important issue. Indigenous people, black Canadians and other racialized people are far too often experiencing systemic racism and disparate outcomes through the criminal justice system. It's incumbent upon all of us who work within the criminal justice system to take the steps and actions necessary to produce more equitable outcomes. All police services, including the RCMP, must be committed to ensuring that the people they're sworn to serve and protect are always treated with dignity and respect. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: MadamChair, why are the Liberals taking indigenous children to court to challenge the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal ruling in their favour? Hon. Marc Miller (Minister of Indigenous Services): Madam Chair, as the honourable member knows full well, a number of cases are pending, and we are currently negotiating with the parties. We are making progress, and I would be delighted to tell the member and the House about it in response to a later question. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: We've been asking questions about it for months, and as I see it, we should keep doing so. The Prime Minister's new pipeline, which taxpayers were forced to buy with their hard-earned money, has leaked. Some 190,000litres of oil spilled, and we can't even make the company pay for it because the Liberals bought the pipeline. Trans-Mountain, KeystoneXL and the resumption of gas exploration and development off the coast of Newfoundland and Labradorare these the projects the Liberals had in mind for their green recovery? Hon. Navdeep Bains: I'd like to thank the honourable member for his question. Our priority was to protect the health and safety of Canadians throughout the pandemic, especially when it comes to the environment. That's why environmental and climate change laws aimed at protecting the environment, human health and conservation will remain in force. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: Across Quebec, the cultural community is going through a harrowing time. Unions, associations, artists and creators have all taken part in public demonstrations recently to condemn the lack of a specific plan for the living arts, performing arts and festival sector. What is the government waiting for? Hon. Steven Guilbeault: I'd like to thank the member for his question. However, I strongly disagree with him. We haven't waited to develop a plan for the arts and culture sector. We listened to the community and we tailored our supports, as they were announced. We have an emergency plan for the arts and culture sector. We were asked to adapt the CERB to take royalties into account, and we did. We were asked to extend the CERB, and we did. We are fully aware that the recovery will take longer in the arts and culture sector. We have been there, we are there and we will be there for the arts and culture sector. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: Well, that wasn't at all what the artists and creators who were out demonstrating in the streets a few days ago thought. They were protesting on the weekend. The CERB extension announced by the government only brings us to September, but the cultural community is expecting the worst in the fall. What is the government's long-term plan to support creators and their entire teams? Hon. Steven Guilbeault: I'm not so sure those who were protesting last week had issues with our government, but we'd certainly be happy to speak with them. As for a long-term plan, we are currently consulting arts and culture stakeholders to contemplate together how the government can help the sector in response to the ongoing crisis. We are working on finding solutions, but until we have long-term solutions, we have seen to it that our artists and organizations have access to funding until September. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for BeauportLimoilou, Mrs. Vignola, has the floor. Mrs. Julie Vignola (BeauportLimoilou, BQ): Madam Chair, I will be sharing my time with the member for Montcalm. According to the latest news, Seaspan Shipyards will be spending an additional $1. 5billion to build two ships. Why? Because the ships were ordered in 2011 and still haven't been delivered. Davie built the Asterix without going over budget because it delivered the ship on time. Davie is currently the top shipyard, representing 50% of Canada's shipbuilding capacity. Why isn't Davie being awarded its fair share of contracts? Hon. Anita Anand (Minister of Public Services and Procurement): I'd like to thank the member for her question. Davie is certainly a strong and trusted partner that works very hard to help our government get results for Canadians. Building a new class of ships is highly complex, and it's not unusual for cost estimates to change throughout the procurement project. It's important to make sure additional funding is available for the joint support ships project to ensure the navy's vessels are delivered. Mrs. Julie Vignola: We are talking about $1. 5billion, here. In the beginning, eight years ago, the project was supposed to cost $2. 6billion. There can't be much missing when the cost overrun is double the initial estimate. Why haven't the ships been delivered yet? Why is Davie still not seen as a trusted partner? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Minister, please keep your answer brief. Hon. Anita Anand: Once again, I would point out that building a new class of ships is highly complex, and it's not unusual for the cost estimate to change for a procurement project as large as this one. I know that Davie works very hard, and we also believe it is an outstanding partner. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): It is now over to the honourable member for Montcalm, Mr. Thriault. Mr. Luc Thriault (Montcalm, BQ): Madam Chair, in Quebec, 12,000people have begun their training to work in residential and long-term care centres. They will be ready for duty in mid-September. In the meantime, we need the support of the army, which is helping us save lives. The dedication of the members of the armed forces is paramount, and I want to extend my heartfelt thanks. The government extended their mission until June26, which is only 10days away. What does the army have to do right now that is more important than helping our caregivers save lives? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, I'm glad my fellow member recognizes the fundamental role the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces have played and continue to play in residential and long-term care centres and many other areas in support of our seniors. We are in talks with the Quebec government. The discussions around providing continued assistance to Quebec are quite positive and productive. That assistance can take many forms, including the Red Cross. We will be there for our seniors, Madam Chair. Mr. Luc Thriault: We are short 12,000people, so if the Red Cross wants to help us, all the better. We'll take all the help we can get. Barely 800members of the military are still in Quebec. I repeat my question: What does the army have to do 10days from now that is more important if it's not to help caregivers save lives? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, all the members of the military are still in Quebec. They have done absolutely incredible work and are continuing to do so. The people at the Canadian Red Cross are well-trained paid workers who can perform the same work in partnership with the members of the armed forces, who can stay in Quebec as well. Right now, we are working with the Quebec government and discussing how we can keep the measure in place until September15. Mr. Luc Thriault: Madam Chair, our nurses and orderlies are exhausted. They're at the end of their ropes. Now is the time to thank them, not the time to turn our backs on them. It's not the time for dilly-dallying or discussions. It's the time to tell them that we will be there to help them until the end. I will repeat my question. What does the army have to do that is more important than helping caregivers save the lives of those who built Quebec? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The Leader of the Government in the House of Commons is asked to keep his answer brief. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, the Government of Canada is there and will continue to be there to help the people who built Quebec. The Government of Canada will work with the Quebec government to make that happen. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for Red DeerMountain View, Mr. Dreeshen. Mr. Earl Dreeshen (Red DeerMountain View, CPC): Thank you so much. Madam Chair, on May 14 I asked the Minister of Agriculture when the Liberal government would put aside its usual campaign rhetoric and recognize the very detrimental impact the carbon tax is having on farmers across this country. Minister Bibeau proudly noted that according to their data, the average cost of the carbon tax per farm across Canada is $210 to $819. We know that these numbers are completely unfounded and are not based on any factual evidence. The fact is that the Liberal government's own Parliamentary Budget Officer has estimated that at $25 per tonne, the cost for an 855-acre crop farm in Alberta is well over $6,000. The office came up with that using the government's statistics from the 2016 agricultural census. Madam Chair, the evidence is right in front of the minister. When will this Liberal government come clean with Canadians and recognize the disastrous impact the carbon tax is having on Canada's critical agriculture and agri-food sector? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food): Madam Chair, our pollution pricing policy is designed to grow a clean economy. To support this sector, we have put in place the following measures. Emissions from livestock and crop production are not priced. Farm fuels and fuels from cardlock facilities are exempt, and there is a partial rebate for propane and natural gas used in commercial greenhouses. Our government has been very open and transparent about our pollution pricing plan. We will do a review of our pollution pricing system in 2020, focused on competitiveness issues in trade-exposed industries such as agriculture. It is also important to remember that this is about tackling climate change and that 100% of the revenues stay in the province. We will continue to support our farmers and food processors as they provide an essential service across Canada. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Madam Chair, Minister Bibeau keeps talking about wanting to protect Canadians'environment. Well, the truth is that Canada's farmers, ranchers and processors have for years demonstrated their ability to deliver meaningful reductions in emissions and to safeguard the environment through the adoption of new technologies, education and innovative management practices, but the government ignores these efforts. Will the minister at the very least admit to Canadians that Canadian farmers are unable to pass on the cost of the carbon tax to consumers and instead have to absorb those extra costs out of their own pockets? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Madam Chair, allow me to explain again our government's position on pollution pricing. The price and method were developed so we could build an increasingly clean economy. We put a number of measures in place to help the agriculture sector. Emissions from animal and plant production aren't taxed. Farm fuels and fuels delivered to off-farm points-of-sale are also Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you, Madam Chair. I do have another question. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I am watching the time, Mr. Dreeshan. You have a couple more seconds. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you. Madam Chair, Minister Bibeau has repeatedly asked stakeholders to send her data about the impacts of the carbon tax on farmers, so this is exactly what they have been doing. The Atlantic Grains Council, the Grain Farmers of Ontario, Producteurs de grains du Qubec and the Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association issued a joint statement at the beginning of this year in which they estimated that the cumulative indirect inflation of carbon tax on farm costs will be $14. 50 an acre this year, with that cost escalating by more than double by 2022 to almost $30 an acre. These are huge numbers. Why does the Liberal government continue to ignore the facts presented to it and continue to misrepresent the truth to Canadians? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Madame Chair, I can assure you that we have paid close attention to all the information that has been provided to us and that our calculation was also based on this information provided by provinces and different stakeholders. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Our government has been very open and transparent about our pollution pricing plan. The department used data from stakeholders and provinces Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you very much, Madam Chair Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: as well as the 2019 agricultural tax data to estimate the average cost of pollution pricing associated with grain drying at up to 0. 4% of overall operating costs. It is important to remember that we have put in place many special provisions Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Madam Chair Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: like exempting farm fuel and providing other financial supports for farmers. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Dreeshen, I am watching the time, and the minister is allowed to answer for the same amount of time that you used to ask the question. Therefore, I would hope that we would allow her to finish. She has finished, and unfortunately the time is up. The committee now stands adjourned until tomorrow at noon.

When talking about the uncertainty of Canadian economy and what the government should do, Cathy McLeod mentioned that the forestry industry even suffered depression before the outbreak of the COVID-19. The plants closed, and thousands of workers were unemployed. Meanwhile, both the art industry and fishery industry had received support from the government. Therefore, Cathy McLeod asked for more attention to the forestry to help them go through the difficulty. In response to her petition, ministers said that they did consider a lot of the solutions, including further investment and industrial revolution.

tr-sq-1250

tr-sq-1250_0

What did Mona Fortier think of the governmental support when discussing the uncertainty of Canadian economy? The Chair (Hon. Anthony Rota (NipissingTimiskaming, Lib.) ): I call this meeting to order. Welcome to the 23rd meeting of the House of Commons Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic. A reminder to all members that in order to avoid issues with sound, members participating in person should not also be connected to the video conference. For those of you who are joining via video conference, I will remind you that when speaking you should be on the same channel as the language you are speaking, and please use your headsets. As usual, please direct your remarks through the chair. As I understand, there are no ministerial announcements today. We will now proceed to presenting petitions. I remind members that any petition presented during a meeting of this special committee must have already been certified by the clerk of petitions. For members participating in person, I ask that they please come and drop their signed certificates off at the table once the petition is presented. I would ask members to be very brief and concise, and to summarize the exact content of the petition. We will continue. The first person presenting a petition today is Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May (SaanichGulf Islands, GP): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I present two petitions this morning. The residents of SaanichGulf Islands are calling on the government to simplify the process for protection of marine protected areas. It's a multi-layered communication process. The marine protected area first proposed in the 1970s for the southern Strait of Georgia, now called the Salish Sea, has been awaiting designation for so long that it was originally endorsed by Jacques Cousteau. That gives us a sense for why petitioners are calling for a simplified and more rapid process. The second petition is from petitioners who are very concerned about our obligations under the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and our commitments under the Truth and Reconciliation Commission calls to action. They specifically reference the RCMP violation of UNDRIP in its actions on Wet'suwet'en territory and ask the government to commit to actually living the principles embodied in UNDRIP. The Chair: We will now go to Mr. Hardie. Mr. Ken Hardie (FleetwoodPort Kells, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am presenting a petition on behalf of the one in a million Canadians who suffer severe and adverse effects from vaccinations. GuillainBarre syndrome is very debilitating, and this petition seeks the setting up of a no-fault accident or compensation system to help offset the loss of work, the loss of wages and the loss of quality of life that many of these people suffer. I'm pleased to present this petition pursuant to Standing Order 36. The Chair: Mr. Trudel, you have the floor. Mr. Denis Trudel (LongueuilSaint-Hubert, BQ): Mr. Chair, culture is the soul of a people. Over the past 20years or so, culture, especially music, has never been as accessible as it is now. Paradoxically, creators'incomes have never been so low. The advent of digital technology has completely overturned the system for distributing the wealth generated by creators for the benefit of various Web stakeholders, many of whom are billionaires. This petition addresses these problems and proposes realistic solutions. The first is to set a minimum royalty model for streaming platforms for artists. The second is to update the existing private copying system. The third is for Internet and cell phone providers who sell their services as direct access to culture to share their profits with artists. The fourth is that the GAFAMs have to pay taxes on their services. Six thousand people have already signed the first version of this petition, launched last month by musician JordanOfficer and supported by singer BarbaraSecours. As an artist, I am proud to present this petition today because the issues it raises are fundamental to the survival of Quebec culture. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood ParkFort Saskatchewan, CPC): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I have four petitions to present today. I will be as brief as you suggested, although I will observe that if some members are going on longer during petitions than they normally do, it might be because the government has taken away so many of the tools that opposition members normally have for raising important issues in the House. The first petition deals with the issue of euthanasia and long-term care. The petitioners are concerned that instead of focusing on improving medically assisted life, something that we know is a major issue in light of recent revelations, the government has put so much time and legislative energy into efforts to continually further expand euthanasia in Canada and remove vital safeguards. The second petition speaks to the ongoing conversations happening in Canada around systemic discrimination and systemic racism. I think we do need to reflect on systemic discrimination. This petition deals specifically with Bill 21 in Quebec and raises concerns. The reality of the way that bill applies is that people from certain backgrounds who wish to practise their faith are not able to fully participate in Canadian society if they are employed in the public service. This petition asks the government to provide a response on that issue, something it hasn't done in response to past petitions on this. The third petition deals with the issue of firearms. The petitioners want to see the government take a strong response in dealing with illegal guns and gun smuggling. The petition notes that the vast majority of firearms-related crimes in Canada involves illegal guns. At the same time, the petitioners are concerned that the government has the wrong focusthat is, harassing law-abiding firearms ownerswithout putting in place substantial measures to deal with illegal guns. The petitioners want to see the reversal of the order in council from May 1 and strong measures to deal with illegal firearms. The fourth and final petition deals with Bill S-204, a bill that would make it a criminal offence for a Canadian to go abroad and receive an organ from a person who has not consented to giving that organ. It would also create a mechanism by which someone could be deemed inadmissible to Canada if they were involved in organ harvesting and trafficking. The petitioners are supportive of Bill S-204 and of similar bills in previous parliaments and would like to see us pass that bill as soon as possible. The Chair: Presenting petitions, Mr. Lamoureux. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Winnipeg North, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. It is with pleasure that I table another petition by the residents of Winnipeg North. These residents have signed a petition asking the Government of Canada, and in fact all members of Parliament, to put a high priority on assisting our poorest seniors. The increases to the GIS by $200, and $300 to the OAS, have been well received. They just want to highlight how important it is to support our seniors, in particular the poorest of our seniors. The Chair: For members present in the Chamber, a reminder that they are asked to bring their petitions to the table. We'll now proceed to statements by members. We'll go to Ms. Atwin for the first one. Mrs. Jenica Atwin (Fredericton, GP): Thank you, Mr. Chair. June 21 is National Indigenous Peoples Day, a day of acknowledgement and a day of celebration of the beautiful diversity of indigenous peoples across Turtle Island. I wish to recognize the leadership of Chief Shelley Sabattis of the Welamukotuk First Nation in Oromocto, New Brunswick. Each year she and her council, volunteers and staff go above and beyond to show appreciation for their members and to demonstrate pride and culture while promoting well-being. We gather in an event where all are welcome to take part, from traditional hand drum-making with elders to moose meat and tacos. This year we will celebrate a bit differently, but we will still stay connected, virtually and in spirit, to the vast network of indigenous peoples and allies. We need each other now more than ever. May we come together in song and stories and in solidarity. We will remember those who are not among us. I hope all of Canada will join us in observing National Indigenous Peoples Day. Mawiyapasuwok: let us come together. Nit liech. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Beech. Mr. Terry Beech (Burnaby NorthSeymour, Lib.): Mr. Chair, COVID-19 is an unprecedented challenge for all communities across Canada, but as we do our part to flatten the curve, I often think about those who suit up every morning to serve on the front lines of our health care system. My mother is a home care worker and my sister is a nurse. Even before the crisis, they would often share the hardships they faced on a day-to-day basis. It's a tough job at the best of times. In a pandemic, these jobs are life-threatening. I think we can all agree that these workers deserve more than our good wishes. They deserve a raise. That is why we have worked with the provinces to implement pandemic pay. In British Columbia more than 250,000 front-line workers are eligible for this program. That works out to a pay increase of about $4 an hour. It's a small show of our appreciation for their difficult and priceless contribution to our country. Share this message and say thanks to our front-line workers, participate in the 7 p. m. cheer, and order a pizza for your local nurses. It's the least we can do. The Chair: We'll now go on to Mr. Shipley. Mr. Doug Shipley (BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. We've been living in difficult times. Slowly, we are getting back to some resemblance of normalcy, although unfortunately not soon enough for some of our great summer festivals. It will not be normal in BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte this summer without the iconic Boots and Hearts weekend music festival, Kempenfest, Oro World's Fair, the Elmvale Fall Fair, or the Midhurst Autumnfest. Canada Day celebrations have been cancelled, but we can still celebrate the great nation we call home. Because of the lack of Canada Day celebrations, I've created Happy Canada Day lawn signs that are available through my constituency office, free to all residents of BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte. I'm also hosting a drive-through party on Canada Day at the Royal Canadian Legion on St. Vincent Street in Barrie. All are welcome to attend. There will be cupcakes for all. Please drop by the legion between 11 a. m. and 2 p. m. , and we can celebrate Canada Day safely together. Thank you and have a great summer. The Chair: Now we'll go on to Ms. Young. Ms. Kate Young (London West, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Among the countless ordinary Canadians who have stepped up to do extraordinary work during COVID-19, I wish to draw attention to our teachers. Teachers have always had a special place in my heart. My father was a teacher, and my daughter-in-law, Kelly Webb, is one now. I'm certain that my colleagues can all easily remember a teacher in their past who played an important role in helping them achieve their potential. I remember my grade 12 English teacher, Vince Weaver, at Westminster Secondary School in London. He made me realize that I could do so much more than I believed. Across the country, as schools closed, teachers did not stop their work. Some took their classes online. Others found innovative ways to continue engaging with their students. This is not the school year anyone imagined, and what the next one will look like is unclear, but our teachers in London West and across Canada have shown that no matter what, they will be there to help our next generation shine. The Chair: Before proceeding to the next presenter, I just want to remind the honourable members in the chamber that I realize that the six-foot limit makes it harder to whisper to each other, but we're hearing a bit of rumble, so I just want you to try to whisper at your best. Mr. Bergeron, you have the floor. Mr. Stphane Bergeron (Montarville, BQ): Mr. Chair, on July1st, we will be celebrating one of the most important events for the riding of Montarville: the 175thanniversary of the city of Saint-Bruno-de-Montarville. The theme Proud of our traditions will be the focus of this celebration for the people of Montarville. This is a good illustration of the rich history of this municipality nestled in the western foothills of Mont-Saint-Bruno. The seigneury of Montarville was granted in1710 to the illustrious former governor of Trois-Rivires, PierreBoucher. The parish of Saint-Bruno, which took root there and in which a village grew, became a municipal corporation in1845. To this day, it is one of the most prosperous localities, with a strong sense of belonging, a very dynamic community life and jealously preserved natural environments. A whole program had been drawn up for the celebration, but the current health crisis has taken over some of the planned activities, which has in no way diminished the pride and festive spirit of the people of Montarville. On July1st, we will have a good reason to be proud, in spite of everything. Happy 175thanniversary to Saint-Bruno-de-Montarville. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Maloney. Mr. James Maloney (EtobicokeLakeshore, Lib.): Mr. Chair, thank you for allowing me to take a moment to highlight an initiative that I started early on during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Heroes of EtobicokeLakeshore is an opportunity for citizens in my riding to recognize the contributions of those in their community who make life a bit easier. I'm pleased with the number of nominations I received that honour everyone from front-line workers to businesses that are innovating in these difficult times to volunteers who are finding new ways to reach out. I think of Daniel Lauzon who set up Food for Now, a mobile service that helps take care of the homeless. I think of Toni Varone, who helped his business clients by forgiving their rents, or young Lucas, who wanted to thank his teachers. I've been moved and inspired by the countless stories of generosity, strength, resiliency, kindness, incredible character and creativity. I want to thank all the heroes, as well as the people who nominated them. Keep them coming. Stay safe, everyone, and I wish you happy Canada Day early. The Chair: We'll now move on to Ms. Wong. Hon. Alice Wong (Richmond Centre, CPC): Mr. Chair, it gives me great pleasure to thank a local Richmond-based charity, the Social Diversity for Children Foundation, SDC, for its hard work both in raising funds for the purchase of personal protective equipment and in distributing this PPE to long-term care facilities and individual seniors'homes in the lower mainland of B. C. The COVID-19 relief fund is supported by a dozen other non-profits, businesses and community groups. Over the past two months, SDC has been to 32 seniors homes and senior-related organizations. In total, it has delivered masks to 7,000 care workers, staff and seniors. It is amazing to have witnessed how the younger generation have gotten involved in caring for the elderly at this very challenging time. The Chair: We'll now go to Ms. Damoff. Ms. Pam Damoff (Oakville NorthBurlington, Lib.): Mr. Chair, June is ALS Awareness Month, and 79 years after Lou Gehrig died from ALS little has changed. There's still no cure, and those with ALS typically die within five years of diagnosis. On June 21, Canadians will gather virtually to raise funds for ALS Canada in the Walk to End ALS. In Halton, normally we meet each year at Bronte Creek Provincial Park on the May long weekend to raise funds for ALS Canada. This year I will virtually join Tim's Titans, a team formed to honour Tim Robertson, my friend who died in 2016 after living with ALS for 13 years. I have a T-shirt, with a picture of Lou Gehrig, that says, Great Player. . . Lousy Disease and Tim's Titans. . . Great Team! ALS. . . Still a Lousy Disease. Join me on June 21 for the virtual Walk to End ALS to raise funds to support patients and their families and for ALS research. The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Khera. Ms. Kamal Khera (Brampton West, Lib.): Mr. Chair, on Saturday our community stood and marched in solidarity against anti-black racism. The peaceful protests that we're seeing across the country and around the world were not triggered by an isolated incident. They are fuelled by decades of ineffective action against something that is so insidious and deeply entrenched in our history, systems and institutions. For us, that is the racial inequality faced by Canada's indigenous and black communities. Anti-black racism is real. It exists right here in Canada, in our communities, including in Brampton. It exists when racialized students at McCrimmon Middle School are called McCriminals. It exists when a shocking report exposes the Peel District School Board's failure to work fairly with the black community. It exists when D'Andre Campbell, who was fighting mental illness, loses his life at the hands of the police. It is clear that we need reform. We need to dismantle the systems that allow this privilege and oppression to take form, and address the unconscious bias plaguing our institutions. We'll need to be bold, and the time to do that is now. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd (Sturgeon RiverParkland, CPC): Mr. Chair, a few months ago I rose in the House on the eve of our closure due to COVID-19. I told Canadians we must not give in to fear, that we would carry on and get through this crisis stronger than ever. Today, in this city and across Canada, Canadians are enjoying a beer on their favourite patios. Businesses are reopening, jobs are returning and our lives are starting to feel a bit normal again. Canadians pulled together, and because of that we did not see the devastating death toll that many had predicted. Life may be returning to normal, but unfortunately, here in this chamber of democracy, the people's voices continue to be shut down. There is no good reason for Parliament to be suspended today. In the words of my grandfather, it's time for the Liberals to get with the program and bring back the House. The Chair: We will now proceed with Ms. Jones. Ms. Yvonne Jones (Labrador, Lib.): Mr. Chair, from in-person learning to virtual classrooms, COVID-19 has drastically changed the lives of students across the country, especially those in post-secondary education who are worried about covering costs like tuition or rent this coming fall. Our government recognized that students should not have to worry or put their futures on pause during this difficult time. That's why last month the federal government introduced the Canada emergency student benefit. If you're a high school student headed to a post-secondary school, or a current post-secondary student or a recent graduate, you can receive the Canada emergency student benefit every four weeks and have the financial support that you need to save for school. We also doubled Canada student grants and loans, enhanced the student loan program, increased supports for indigenous post-secondary education and introduced the Canada student service grant for those who wish to pursue it. Our government is here to help all students get the support they need to pursue their future goals successfully. I wish them all the very best, and I wish all of you, my colleagues and those across Canada, a very happy National Indigenous Peoples Day, which is coming up on June 21. The Chair: I want to remind the honourable members to keep to their 60 seconds so that we don't go over the time. I'm sure it would be a lot easier for everyone if we stuck to that limit. We will now go to Mr. Aitchison. Mr. Scott Aitchison (Parry SoundMuskoka, CPC): Mr. Chair, I rise today to once again implore the government to do something about the horrible lack of access to and crazy cost of rural Internet service. Right now, too many areas of my riding have no access to rural Internet service at all, and those who can get service are paying through the nose. I've even heard constituents say that during this pandemic, they are having to choose between feeding their kids and educating them. Over the last few weeks, Conservatives have been consulting with rural Canadians, and the results are in. My constituents are tired of fancy political promises. They are frustrated beyond belief by the new challenges created by this pandemic. They are absolutely fed up with having their pleas ignored. All we want is affordable and reliable Internet service. Is that too much to ask of the government? The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. MacGregor. Mr. Alistair MacGregor (CowichanMalahatLangford, NDP): Mr. Chair, these last few months have been incredibly challenging for the residents of CowichanMalahatLangford, who have been forced to deal with the economic and social consequences of COVID-19. The pandemic has laid bare the inadequacies of our social safety net, the weakness in our supply chains and the dependence of our society on essential workers, who often work long hours for low wages, putting themselves and their families at risk. We've also been forced to confront the systemic inequality, poverty and racism that continue to hold so many people back from achieving their full potential. I will not dishonour the sacrifice that so many have made during this time by allowing us to go back to the status quo that got us here in the first place. I will not apologize for demanding that the most vulnerable in our society get the supports and opportunities they need to live with dignity, and I will not relent from pushing my political colleagues to summon the courage necessary to implement policies that lead to environmental, economic and social justice. The Chair: I now give the floor to Mr. Blaney. Hon. Steven Blaney (BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, CPC): Mr. Chair, here is a beautiful story, the story of a woman from Bellechasse, a courageous young mother from Saint-Malachie, Marie-ChristineGoupil. With three children, including the eldest daughter with a disability, and realizing that her daughter with a disability had special clothing needs, she decided to go into business to meet the needs of other parents who, like her, were facing their child's clothing challenges. Last week, she presented her Handy clothing collection on the show Dans l'il du dragon. It was a very emotional moment for the audience and the dragons. They were so touched that they decided to give her the amount she wanted without diluting her shares. The video of her presentation has already been viewed over 1million times on social networks. Marie-ChristineGoupil has discovered a passion for entrepreneurship and has moved and inspired many people with her passionate and courageous attitude. Congratulations, Ms. Goupil, your example makes us proud. The Chair: Mr. Blanchet, you have the floor. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet (BeloeilChambly, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I lend my voice to the Chief of the Assembly of First Nations of Quebec-Labrador, GhislainPicard, whose message is as follows: There have been no fewer than 14reports and conclusions of commissions of inquiry since1967 highlighting major problems in relations between law enforcement agencies and indigenous people. Each time, the conclusions have been overwhelming and highlight a disturbing reality. The justice system has failed indigenous people. Are you going to respond, as you too often do, by moving on to the next one, or are you going to do what we expect you to do, which is to recognize that the justice system discriminates against indigenous people and that we have no less right to security than the rest of the population? In three months, police interventions have claimed more victims among our members than the pandemic. But it is not enough to simply take a knee and denounce racism. It's about standing up and taking action. Those are the words of GhislainPicard. The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Harder. Ms. Rachael Harder (Lethbridge, CPC): Over the last few months, Canada's democracy has been disregarded and an autocracy has been resurrected in its place. By refusing to hold regular parliamentary sittings, Mr. Trudeau is sending a strong message to the Canadian public that he alone is the one who matters. In 2014, he professed that Canadians want their Members of Parliament to be effective voices for their communities in Ottawa, and not merely mouthpieces for an all-too-powerful Prime Minister. As it stands, however, he has shut down Parliament. Effectively, he has stripped us, the opposition, of our privileges and our powers. Sadly, Mr. Trudeau has become the all-too-powerful Prime Minister that he once warned against. A government that does not allow for effective opposition is not functioning in the best interest of Canadians; it is operating in the best interest of itself and, even more so, the interest of the Prime Minister. Canadians deserve to flourish in a democracy, not merely survive under the autocracy that this Prime Minister has created. The Chair: We'll now go on to Ms. Zahid. Mrs. Salma Zahid (Scarborough Centre, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I would like to recognize the work of Agincourt Community Services Association and its tireless executive director, Lee Soda, who have been serving our community during the COVID-19 pandemic. Under more pressure than ever, their staff and volunteers continue to serve a community whose need was great even before the crisis. Their food bank helps over 4,000 people weekly. They have opened outdoor washrooms and hand-washing stations for vulnerable communities and are delivering groceries and other essentials to vulnerable seniors. ACSA is a bridge between those who can help and those who need help, and they are just one example of how our community has come together to meet this challenge. There are restaurants and businesses donating meals to front-line workers, residents answering the call to stock the food bank shelves and neighbours looking in on the vulnerable and isolated. I am so proud of our community's spirit. Scarborough is strong. The Chair: We'll now proceed to the questioning of ministers. Please note that we will suspend the proceedings twice in order to allow employees who provide support for the sitting to replace each other safely. The first question goes to the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Chair, for months Conservatives have been pointing out flaws in Liberal government programs that are preventing Canadians from getting the help they need. The Prime Minister has refused to make these very technical changes to get more help to Canadians who need it. For example, on the wage subsidy, more than two-thirds of the money allocated for that program has lapsed because businesses don't qualify. I have a simple question. Will the Prime Minister change the program to allow companies who have made acquisitions to access the wage subsidy to keep more people working? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Papineau, Lib.): Mr. Chair, from the very beginning we knew that as we rolled out measures, we would need to improve them and tweak them, and that's exactly what we've been doing over the past three months. We needed to make measures happen quickly for Canadians, and we did that. But we continued to improve them, to make additions and amendments so that more people could get the help they needed, including with the proposed legislation last week that expanded the reach of the wage subsidy to more businesses. Unfortunately, the Conservatives didn't even want us to debate that particular piece of legislation. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Actually, Mr. Chair, it was the Liberals who said no to the motion to allow this Parliament to sit to debate that motion, and even in that legislation they refused to allow businesses who have made acquisitions to access the program. Now, when we look at the rent relief program, it is so difficult to apply for it that many landlords are refusing to bother, leaving even more small businesses to fall through the cracks. In fact, of the $3 billion allocated to the rent relief program, only $39 million has been paid out. That's less than 2%. Now, the Prime Minister is still using talking points from April. It's now June and he has refused to fix these programs and has successfully talked out the calendar on the days that the House of Commons could meet to discuss these programs. When will he make these changes to get more help to Canadians who need it? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, throughout this pandemic, we have constantly been updating and expanding our various programs. We recognize, in conversations with the premiers, how important it is to make sure that we're working together, the provinces and the federal government, on issues like rent subsidies where commercial rent is indeed a provincial jurisdiction. Many provinces have moved forward with the eviction bans that are necessary to go along with this, and we'll continue to work with provinces to make sure that we're getting Canadians the help they need. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Mr. Chair, Canadians cannot wait. He has run down the clock on parliamentary sittings and he still refuses to make these changes to get more help to Canadians. Today, we learned that Telus has installed Huawei technology in downtown Ottawa. There are over 80 sites across the national capital region with Huawei technology installed. Some of these sites are very near sensitive government institutions, like government departments, the National Research Council, RCMP headquarters and the Bank of Canada. How long has the Prime Minister known that Huawei technology has been installed in the Ottawa area? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, first off, on the issue of Parliament, it has been meeting four times a week over the past many weeks, and members of the opposition have been able to continue to ask questions on COVID-19 and a broad range of subjects. Moreover, every two weeks the finance department puts forward at the finance committee the full transparent measures that we've taken, so that parliamentarians can study them. We are continuing to work in this crisis. At the same time Mr. Ziad Aboultaif (Edmonton Manning, CPC): Answer the question. The Chair: I'm sorry? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: in regard to Huawei technology there are strict rules for companies to follow and we assume they will all follow those. The Chair: We'll pause for a second and stop the clock. I want to remind the honourable members who are joining us virtually that heckling really does disrupt the whole session. Your face does come up and we do see who it is, so I just want to make sure that you're aware of that. Now we'll go back to Mr. Scheer. We have a minute and 10 seconds left. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister is bragging about accountability and transparency. Will he table an economic update before the House rises? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, throughout this unprecedented pandemic, we have been open and transparent about all of the measures we've put forward. We've updated the finance committee The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer: That's a long way of saying no, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister has pursued a policy of appeasement in pursuit of a personal vanity product at the UN. In the process, he's cozied up to dictators and human rights violators. He's abandoned Israel and committed funding to UNRWA, an organization whose schools have been used as storage facilities for Hamas rockets against Israeli civilians, and whose facilities have served as breeding grounds for racism and anti-Semitism. He has apologized for the Iranian regime when it shot down a plane full of Canadian citizens, and he refuses to list the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist entity. What's the point of having a seat at the table if you have to sell out Canadian principles to get there? The Chair: The Right Honourable Prime Minister. Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, we see that the Conservatives have kept with the Harper approach to international diplomacy. The failed presence of Canada on the world stage was an embarrassment for many Canadians for many years. That's why, when we took office five years ago, we demonstrated the kind of leadership on values that Canadians expected. We will continue to work around the world to defend multilateralism. The Chair: We have a point of order. Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May: This being a committee, we can have a point of order during what would have been question period. I am not sitting that far away from the Prime Minister, and I'm sorry, but Andrew Scheer used to be the Speaker of the House and should show better decorum. The Chair: We have a point of order from Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, on the same point of order, it is disgusting for the leader of the Green Party to use decorum as an excuse to interrupt the Leader of the Opposition in the middle of critical lines of questioning. The leader of the Green Party knows the rules of the House and shouldn't be abusing them to advance a partisan agenda. The Chair: We're getting into debate. I do want to point out that the time had run out. We're now moving on to the next line of questions. On a point of order, Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer: I appreciate the honourable leader of the Green Party, Elizabeth May, for that reminder. When I was Speaker I always appreciated her help and advice about how to improve decorum in here. I just want to say to the member, and to all members, that the reason that I cannot control myself is that the Prime Minister used the word embarrassment in answering a foreign affairs question, and it just made me think of the India trip. The Chair: I believe we're getting into debate and arguments. Mr. Blanchet, you have the floor. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: Mr. Chair, while the Greens and the Conservatives are saying that they'll be waiting outside after the meeting, I will ask a question. The Prime Minister has extended the Canada emergency response benefit, and that's good news, but it's not enough. Last week in the House, the government said it was urgent to fight fraud. For us, it was also urgent to adjust the CERB to the needs of the tourism, arts and agriculture sectors. Farmers are going to be seriously under-resourced. So what happened to the urgency of reforming the CERB? Why is the government refusing to talk to the opposition parties? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, I am very pleased to hear the hon. member finally align himself with the positions of the Liberal Party. Unfortunately, the Bloc is a week late. It should have let us debate these concerns in the House last week. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: It seems to me that the word alignment here is a fantasy. We have unequivocally proposed to extend the debate to reach an agreement, which brings me to my second question. Last week, the issue of assistance to people with disabilities was also a pressing concern, and it's even more so a week later. The Bloc proposed to extend the discussions and split the government's bill in two to help people with disabilities. Why is the government refusing this assistance to people with disabilities, when it could have been debated with the opposition in a civilized and proper way in a Parliament in which it has a minority? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: That was exactly what we wanted, but unanimous consent of the Chamber was required to debate this matter, and the Conservative Party of Canada voted against it. Unfortunately, we are going to have to find a different way to help people with disabilities. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: If the idea is so good and wonderful, why not start over and open the dialogue now? What's stopping the Prime Minister from being a rallying point and inviting us to take to each other and resolve the problem, rather than saying that he is going to pack up his toys and go home? The people with disabilities are the ones who will pay the price. Where was the Prime Minister on October21,2019? He received a minority mandate from Quebeckers and Canadians. Why is he behaving like something between a prime minister with a majority and a monarch by divine right? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: I've heard the Conservative Party and the Bloc Qubcois throw their accusations around. They don't point out that the House of Commons did indeed give its consent to extend the mandate of the Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic until the end of June. Three parties agreed, which was the right thing to do in the context of this minority government. We've been working with the other parties. However, as they did not get the results they wanted, they complained. Unfortunately, they too are part of a minority Parliament and must respect the voice of the majority of parliamentarians, just as we do. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: I might have been tempted, but that's unlikely to happen because the Prime Minister isn't me, he's him. It's therefore up to him to bring people together, open a dialogue and recall Parliament. All we were asking for was the opportunity to talk for an hour or two. However, suddenly he doesn't want to play anymore. It's not working anymore, and there's something a bit strange about that. In addition, the government wants to buy the right to interfere in provincial and Quebec jurisdictions for $14billion. However, Quebec and a number of provinces are refusing to allow it to interfere in their jurisdictions and are asking that this money be paid to them unconditionally. Is the Prime Minister trying to take advantage of the crisis or is he trying to create a constitutional crisis? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, the safety of Canadians is the responsibility of all levels of government. That's why we have proposed a $14billion agreement to ensure that all Canadians across the country experience a safe re-opening of the economy. This is a proposal that we are working on with the provinces because we know that there are needs across the country, including early childhood centres, screening and support for municipalities. The federal government wants to be there to help the provinces. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh (Burnaby South, NDP): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Indigenous leaders have expressed a lack of confidence in the RCMP commissioner's ability to tackle full-scale systemic racism, but the Prime Minister has expressed his confidence in the commissioner. What's that based on? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, over the past two years, Commissioner Lucki has made significant strides forward on an issue where there is still much more to do. We know that systemic racism exists in all of our institutions across this country The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: This is the same RCMP commissioner who just recently said that they couldn't explain what systemic racism was. Now the Prime Minister says that he has confidence, when indigenous leaders express their lack of confidence. Why does the Prime Minister believe that the RCMP commissioner can tackle systemic racism in the RCMP? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, systemic racism is something that touches every corner of our country, every corner of our institutions. It requires people to understand and move forward in coordinated ways with partners. The commissioner is committed to doing that, alongside members of our government. We will do that together and work with indigenous communities and black The Chair: Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, recent events have made it abundantly clear that to tackle the systemic racism at the level of the RCMP, we need a full-scale overhaul of the RCMP. Is the Prime Minister committed to a full-scale overhaul of the RCMP to root out systemic racism? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: As I've said many times, Mr. Chair, I am committed to addressing systemic racism in this country and taking significant, bold actions to reduce the amount of discrimination that indigenous peoples, that racialized Canadians face on a daily basis. We have much work to do, but we will do it together. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, Black Lives Matter has been calling for governments to defund the police. What it's saying is that we need to be better at where we spend our money, investing in communities and not policing. Will the Prime Minister commit to a review of the RCMP budget to allocate resources to community services and not to policing? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, over the past years we have been investing more directly and more money in community organizations, in the black community, and working with indigenous partners on the path to reconciliation. We have been investing in the kinds of community-based programs and solutions that are part of the solution. We know there is much more to do, and we will continue to look at all of our expenditures to make sure we're doing the right things. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, over the past few years, while the Prime Minister has been in office, the RCMP budget has increased by 31%. More money is going towards policing. In recent events we've seen people who needed a health care response to a health care crisis been killed by the RCMP. Does the Prime Minister believe that we need to be investing in a health care response instead of a police response for people who are faced with a crisis? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, the member opposite well knows that it's not an either-or. We need to make sure that our systems across the board, from our police systems to our judicial systems, to our health care systems, to our community systems, are actually addressing the systemic discrimination issues that are embedded within them That is exactly what we are going to continue to do in the coming years. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, with regard to the CERB extension, can the Prime Minister guarantee that everyone who is receiving CERB payments now will continue to do so without any gaps throughout the summer? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, I am happy to highlight that many Canadians who were on the CERB are now returning to work. Many more who are on the CERB now will be returning to work in the coming weeks. We know that as the economy gets back to work, people will want to The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Can the Prime Minister assure people who need it that they will continue to receive the CERB over the summer, yes or no? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: We are very pleased to point out that we are going to extend the Canada emergency response benefit for at least another eight weeks, because a lot of people are going to need it. Even if they want to work, there aren't enough jobs for everyone. So we'll be there for them, as we have been from the beginning. The Chair: We're going to pause and suspend proceedings just for a few moments to allow our support staff to substitute for one another in a healthy and safe way. We'll now proceed with Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod (KamloopsThompsonCariboo, CPC): Mr. Chair, it was really a surprise in the middle of a pandemic to see the Prime Minister at his first campaign stop last week in Ottawa. Certainly the game plan has become very transparent. He has a daily report show and he wants to sideline Parliament, dominate the news cycle and keep everyone in the dark about the state of the economy. According to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, there is no reason that he cannot provide the fiscal update during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the PBO has published a number of reports himself. Why won't the Prime Minister provide a fiscal update so we can all understand the state of our economy, or is that just not part of his campaign playbook? Hon. Mona Fortier (Minister of Middle Class Prosperity and Associate Minister of Finance): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Canada's economy is in a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We've been clear about that. We will continue to be open and transparent about the actions that we are taking to support families, businesses, workers, our health care system and our economy. This includes biweekly reports to Parliament on the full cost and status of our economic measures. Once it is possible to provide a clear economic projection, we will provide an update. We are in this together, and we are prepared to do whatever is necessary to support Canadians. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: Chair, Canada's economy was in trouble prior to the COVID, with some of the worst numbers since 2009. Government revenues in March dropped by 7. 2%, and it's shameful and, quite frankly, it's outrageous that they refuse to provide Parliament and Canadians with an economic update. Households during this challenging time know how much money is coming in and they know how much money is going out. The picture is not pretty, but they know what the picture is. Can the finance minister at least reveal the projected revenue decline in quarters one and two? Hon. Mona Fortier: The Canadian economy is going through a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We've known this for three months. We've continued to be open and transparent about the measures we've put in place for Canadians, workers and businesses. In fact, we have reported biweekly to Parliament on the total cost and status of our plan's measures. As soon as it's possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide a comprehensive update to Canadians The Chair: We go back to Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: Other governments have managed to provide updates for their citizens and carry out their responsibilities, but of course this government has sidelined Parliament with simply a question-but-no-answer period. Let's try something else. The forestry industry was in crisis even before the pandemic, with mills closing down and thousands of jobs lost. Eight weeks ago, Minister Freeland said, I have had many discussions with leaders in our forestry sector and the provinces about what we can do to support the industry today. Meanwhile, we've had support going to the arts and we've had support going to fisheries, just to name a few, but arguably for the industry that was having some of the most numerous challenges, it has been radio silence. That was eight weeks ago today. Can the government at least commit to releasing an updated softwood lumber transition plan before we rise? Hon. Seamus O'Regan (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Chair, we remain committed, of course, to the forestry industry and seeing it through this pandemic and this very uncertain time. The expanding market opportunities program, for instance, has helped Canada's forestry sector diversify, create jobs and open new markets. We've had new construction projects that are active today, using Canadian wood in key markets like Korea, Japan, China and the United States. Tomorrow this House will vote on our government's investment of $20. 97 million for this program. It's part of our budget 2019 commitment to invest $251 million over three years, and I hope the opposition will support us in that. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: It was stated in a major newspaper this morning that this government is like a sexy sports carvroom, vroom, vroombut with a history of breakdowns and major repairs. I think that might describe what has been happening. For forestry, it has been eight weeks and there has been nothing. There is another area that Deputy Prime Minister Freeland did talk about. We were talking about the U. S. softwood lumber duties that are being held in the United States. It's billions of dollars being held with the U. S. treasury. In April, she acknowledged that these duties are a real issue for the softwood lumber industry. What's been done since that time? Hon. David Lametti (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada): Mr. Chair, Canada's forestry industry supports good middle-class jobs in communities across our country. The sector is also an essential link in the medical equipment supply chain, and we thank them for all the work they're doing. We're aware of the immense pressures faced by this sector, especially at this time, and Deputy Prime Minister Freeland and others are taking that seriously and working through this issue. As our government has said repeatedly, we firmly believe that the U. S. duties on Canadian softwood lumber are unfair and unwarranted, and we will pursue all means in order to The Chair: Before continuing, I want to remind honourable members who are at home to make sure that the boom on their headsets is down. It just makes a better pickup. We heard everything, but it was a little distant. That's for everyone's benefit. We're now going to continue with Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell (Louis-Saint-Laurent, CPC): Mr. Chair, before I ask my question, I'd like to pay tribute to the Minister of Justice, particularly to his versatility. Today, he talked about forests. Yesterday, the Minister of Justice talked about Davie and indigenous affairs. Really, this minister is very versatile. My question is directly for the Minister of Finance. I like Mr. Lametti very much, but I'd like Mr. Morneau to answer my question. Yesterday, in a Senate parliamentary committee, the Minister of Finance half-opened the door to an economic update. Based on what he said, it seems that, as we speak, a committee of the Department of Finance is working on an economic update. Could Mr. Morneau tell Canadians when he is going to table this economic update? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, as we know, the Canadian economy is going through a period of extraordinary uncertainty. As soon as it's possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide a full update to Canadians. Right now, we can say that we have supported workers, businesses and Canadians with the emergency measures we have put in place. We will continue to do so, because we need to be sure that Canadians can get through this crisis. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I thought it was too good to be true. The Minister of Finance is opening the door, and the Minister of Small Business is closing it. We don't know when the economic update will take place, yet all across Canada, provinces are doing economic updates. Could Mr. Morneau explain to Canadians why he is unable to give one? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, since the beginning of the crisis, we have implemented the economic action plan to respond to COVID-19, and we've provided immediate assistance to Canadians, businesses and workers. Over 2. 5million jobs were protected by the Canada emergency wage subsidy. In addition, 8. 4million Canadians The Chair: We are returning to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, next Friday, the Quebec minister of finance, EricGirard, will give an economic update. If EricGirard can give one for Quebec, why can't BillMorneau give one for Canada? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, once again, we have been open and transparent from the outset. We have devoted our energy to support Canadians, workers and businesses. We will continue to do so. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I cannot judge the quality of the work done by the provinces, but what I do know is that Quebec, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland have also made efforts to support their residents economically. Those provinces are able to table economic updates. Yesterday, Saskatchewan even tabled a budget. Why is Bill Morneau unable to table an economic update for all Canadians? Hon. Mona Fortier: Let me repeat for my hon. colleague that we are going through extraordinarily uncertain times. We have continued to be open and transparent. We have reported biweekly to Parliament on the total cost and status of the measures in our economic response plan. Once again, as soon as clear economic projections can be provided, we will provide an update The Chair: Mr. Deltell has the floor. Mr. Grard Deltell: The minister talks about the total cost of the government's economic expenditures. So I ask the question: so far, over the past three months, how much has the pandemic cost Canadians? Hon. Mona Fortier: As I said earlier, it is important to note that we have put forward measures, including the wage subsidy, which have helped more than 2. 5million The Chair: Mr. Deltell has the floor. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I have been trying for four minutes to get anything remotely resembling an answer, and I'm getting absolutely nothing. I am not asking questions for myself; I am asking questions for Canadians. Why are the government and the Minister of Finance, Bill Morneau, not able to table an economic update when some provinces are able to? Hon. Mona Fortier: Once again, I would like to remind my hon. colleague that we have provided interest-free loans to businesses. More than 669,000loans have been approved. We have continued to support businesses and Canadians during this time The Chair: Mr. Deltell, you have time for a very brief question. Mr. Grard Deltell: The only thing that distinguishes the provinces that table economic updates and the current government is political will. Why does Bill Morneau not have the political will to tell Canadians the truth? Hon. Mona Fortier: Once again, we have been open and transparent. As soon as it is possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide Canadians with a full update. The Chair: We will now continue with Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya (MarkhamUnionville, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. COVID-19 has sparked and spurred anti-Asian racism. These are not just racist comments online; Asian Canadians have been attacked. What is the government doing to combat anti-Asian racism? Hon. Bardish Chagger (Minister of Diversity and Inclusion and Youth): Mr. Chair, since our government took office in 2015, we have been making investments and working with communities. The difference between our government and the previous government is that we will actually consult with Canadians, including black Canadians, including Asian Canadians, to respond to the challenges, including with an anti-racism secretariat and an anti-racism strategy. It will take all of us. I appreciate the member's question, so that we can also work together. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, one business owner I know in Markham has operated for 20 years. Now she's looking at over $9,000 in rent due on June 24. COVID-19 has crippled her sales and she's going to go out of business. Her landlord has no interest in the Canada emergency commercial rent assistance program. How can the government say this program is working? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, this program was made possible by working with the provinces, and we will continue to encourage landlords and tenants to work together to make sure they have relief for this very difficult time in which they're living. We're continuing to monitor the CECRA program and we will make it possible for businesses to have access to the program. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, the government business rent relief program has been a total disaster. Even the government's own numbers show it is a failure. As of June 8, less than 2% of the $3 billion budgeted has been spent. What is it going to take for the government to admit that the program is a disaster and needs changes? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we know our government has been working closely with the provinces and territories to deliver the Canada emergency commercial rent assistance. Although the tenant-landlord relationship is ultimately the responsibility of the provinces and territories, our government has stepped up to provide support through the tools we have and through CMHC so that small businesses can get the rent relief they need. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, according to the government, there are around 1. 1 million small businesses in Canada. At committee, we were told only around 5,500 of them are receiving COVID-19 rent relief. That number is shameful. When will the Liberal government wake up and make the changes? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we welcome the steps some provinces and territories have taken to further protect commercial tenants. We will continue to monitor this program closely and ensure that Canada's small businesses are supported during this challenging time. We will continue to monitor to see The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, there was no answer. When can the government make these changes? Hon. Mary Ng (Minister of Small Business, Export Promotion and International Trade): Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable colleague that we are doing everything and will continue to do everything to help small businesses in our country. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, on May 27 the CBSA seized 65 small handguns at Pearson airport, the largest firearms seizure on record. It is clear that smuggled handguns are the weapon of choice for criminals. Why is the Prime Minister focusing on an ineffective municipal ban? Hon. Bill Blair (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness): Mr. Chair, I would point out that gun violence in any of our communities is unacceptable, and it's important that governments and communities take steps to prevent guns from getting into the hands of criminals. That's why we do important work at our border to keep guns from being smuggled into our country, but it also necessitates additional work. I don't think you can talk about gun violence without talking about stronger gun control. That's why our government has taken a very strong position and will strengthen gun control to keep Canadians safe. The Chair: Mr. Saroya, you may have a 10-second question, if that's possible, please. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, COVID-19 has not stopped gun violence in the GTA. My constituents are concerned about shootings minutes away from their homes. We know the Liberals'gun ban won't change anything, but a focus on smuggled guns and criminals will. When will they make that change? Hon. Bill Blair: Mr. Chair, stronger gun control laws are an effective tool, and that's been told to us by police leadership and communities across the country. We're also making investments in borders and law enforcement. Most importantly, we're making investments in communities and in kids to keep communities safe. I look forward to the member's strong support of those measures when we bring them forward. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback (Prince Albert, CPC): Mr. Chair, the U. S. and the U. K. began their second round of free trade negotiations yesterday. Does the government intend to have a trade agreement in place before the U. K. tariffs come into effect on January 1? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, the U. K. is a strong partner of Canada, as is the European Union, and we're looking forward to continuing that strong relationship The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Thank you, Mr. Chair. With respect to the negotiations with the U. K. , when will the minister publish her goals and objectives for this agreement? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, we're going to continue to work to ensure that any future agreement is going to be based on the best interests of Canadians, and we will The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Can the minister confirm whether they've entered into negotiations with the U. K. at this point? Hon. Mary Ng: Our government is analyzing the most-favoured-nation tariff regimes schedule the U. K. has put out. I want to assure Canadians The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Mr. Chair, during the CUSMA negotiations, a deal was struck between the Liberal Party and the NDP that the government would notify this House 90 days before it starts any negotiations on any trade agreement. When will the minister notify this House? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that we will absolutely be sharing information. Right now, we are analyzing the most-favoured-nation tariff regimes schedule put out by the U. K. Mr. Randy Hoback: Mr. Chair, any meaningful attempts to reform the WTO needs buy-in from the United States. I think all countries agree on that. Has the minister discussed a WTO reform with the USTR, the United States trade representative? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, the Ottawa Group is a consensus-based group, and any decisions will be taken together. Of course, any meaningful reform must include the U. S. The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Has the U. S. been invited to the Ottawa Group meetings? Hon. Mary Ng: The Ottawa Group is a consensus-based group limited to WTO members who are committed to bringing forward ideas and proposals The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Just as with any other trade agreement, the minister has committed to this House that she will publish the list of goals and responsibilities for the negotiations. When will she publish the list for the Ottawa Group? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I'm thrilled that we had an excellent meeting of the Ottawa Group yesterday where, as a group, we agreed to take concrete action. Mr. Randy Hoback: Will the minister be releasing a list of Canada's objectives we would like to see the new WTO's director-general pursue prior to the upcoming DG election? Hon. Mary Ng: We published an action statement from the Ottawa Group yesterday. I would encourage the member opposite to have a look. I'm certainly happy to send it to him. Mr. Randy Hoback: Going back to economic prosperity, we know that the U. S. has been having talks with other countries around the world. Has Canada yet been invited to this group? Hon. Mary Ng: I'm pleased to continue to pursue the objectives of trade diversification. I would remind the member that we have access to a billion and a half customers through our very robust Mr. Randy Hoback: A billion and a half customers is fine if you have a functioning WTO, but if you don't have a functioning WTO, then a billion and a half customers may not be fully accessible to our suppliers, manufacturers and agriculture producers. Can the minister confirm that she's in discussions with the U. S. in joining this economic prosperity group? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that nothing is more important than standing up and helping create markets for our Canadian businesses and to help our small businesses get more export-ready so that they can grow into the international marketplace. This is work that we've committed to do, and we will keep working on it, particularly The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Yesterday Saskatchewan presented a budget. Not only did they present the budget, but they'll also actually debate the budget and pass the budget in Parliament. There's full accountability. Why won't this government do the same? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons): Mr. Chair, the House is sitting in this hybrid format so that people can participate in the House on the screens. I'm sure my colleague is happy to see that his own colleagues are able to ask questions and participate. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Williamson. Mr. John Williamson (New Brunswick Southwest, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will say that this is no substitute for Parliament, but I appreciate the opportunity. New Brunswick families and businesses are rapidly making adjustments to manage and live with the coronavirus pandemic. Businesses here are opening and services are being offered. Families are preparing for summer and even planning ahead for a new school year in September. We have a lot of work ahead of us. One notable absence is Service Canada. When does the government plan on opening its service counters to assist Canadians again? Hon. Ahmed Hussen (Minister of Families, Children and Social Development): Mr. Chair, our government is committed to ensuring that Canadians continue to have access to the benefits that they rely on through Service Canada. We have redeployed over 3,000 additional staff to ensure that Canadians continue to have access to their benefits. We've established a 1,500-agent call centre to make sure that people can get access to the phone lines to get the help they need. Mr. John Williamson: Service Canada is about more than providing COVID-19 information and benefits. Provincial governments are working hard to adjust to Canada's new normal by opening up businesses and front-line government services. When will we see Service Canada play its role and open its service counters in our communities? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Mr. Chair, we're currently working with our world-class public health experts to determine how best to reopen the Service Canada network for the public. Make no mistake: Our Service Canada employees have gone above and beyond to ensure that Canadians continue to have access to the services that they rely on and the benefits that they need. Mr. John Williamson: Please don't hide behind health experts when the Prime Minister is appearing in the middle of large protests, yet is afraid to bring back the Parliament of Canada to do its business. In fact, the New Brunswick legislature is open for regular business. Bills are being studied, opposition input is being heard and MLAs are voting on legislation, not rubber-stamping government bills. By comparison, our Parliament is stuck in pretending it cannot function like other law-making assemblies. Canadians are in the dark about our country's finances. When will the government table an economic update so taxpayers understand what was spent, what is owed by our kids and grandchildren, and what the government's fiscal footing looks like? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, nobody's hiding. Nobody's doing anything like that. The only reason my colleague is able to ask a question and I'm able to answer his question is that he's right there on the screen. We have this hybrid format that cares for MPs across the country, not only the ones sitting in the House. Mr. John Williamson: This is no substitute for Parliament. I will ask my question again. When will the government table an economic update so that taxpayers understand what was spent, what is owed by our kids and grandchildren, and what the government's fiscal footing looks like in today's environment? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, I thank my honourable colleague for his question. Canada's economy is still in a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We have been open and transparent about the measures we have been providing to support families, businesses and workers. Even our health care The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Williamson. Mr. John Williamson: Except you have not. The Auditor General is underfunded. We have no idea about the total of government spending. Again I will ask when the government will table an economic update so that we can have an understanding of what the government's fiscal footing looks like. Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we have included biweekly reports to Parliament on the full cost and status of our economic response plan measures since the beginning. I have said, and I will continue to say, that when it is possible to provide a clear economic projection, we will provide an update. Mr. John Williamson: What is the full cost to date of the government's COVID-19 relief measures, as the minister just claimed the government has provided to Parliament? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we have provided support for workers, and 2. 5 million Canadians have been helped through the Canadian wage subsidy. We have provided businesses with some loans, and 669,000 businesses have applied for these loans. Even for the CERB, we have over eight million Canadians who have applied. The Chair: We will now continue with Mr. Bergeron. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: Mr. Chair, as the leader of the Bloc Qubcois mentioned a few moments ago, the government promised $14billion to Quebec and the provinces, but in targeted transfers. That is very little compared to the considerable expenses incurred to deal with the current crisis. But Quebec and the provinces don't just want this money to be transferred unconditionally, they also want a real discussion on a permanent increase in health care transfers. PremierLegault was rightly concerned about the feds'interference into provincial jurisdictions. The federal government, which does not manage any hospitals or long-term care centres, must stop playing armchair quarterback and transfer the money to the only governments with jurisdiction over health, that is, Quebec and the provinces. Will it do so without delay and without nitpicking? The Honourable Patty Hajdu (Minister of Health): Mr. Chair, we know that the Government of Quebec is working hard to ensure the safety of Quebeckers and we are here to support them. As part of this co-operation, we have developed health and safety recommendations for workplaces, we have purchased medical equipment for workers and we have supported the province in developing its reopening program. We are continuing this important partnership to ensure the safety of Quebeckers and all Canadians. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: The co-operation is so effective that the money is staying in the federal government's coffers. In fact, when the federal government wants to impose conditions, it always takes longer. We see it with housing, for which Quebec has not received a dime of the $1. 4billion it is owed. We have also seen it with infrastructure funds, particularly for public transit, water systems and water treatment. The health crisis is now. The needs are now. The much needed reopening of our economy is now. Will the government finally transfer the money without messing around or quibbling? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I am pleased to confirm to my colleague that there is no messing around, no quibbling, nothing of the kind. There is co-operation between two levels of government. It is natural to have discussions with all the provinces and with Quebec. I myself am taking part in some discussions and several of my colleagues are taking part in others. There is a clear willingness on the part of the federal government to co-operate with Quebec and all the provinces. That is what we are doing and that is perhaps what the Bloc Qubcois does not like. It likes bickering, but for the time being, there is none. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: We don't want to bicker, we want the money to be paid out. It is not complicated, for heaven's sake! We do not want a blank cheque. Right now, the money remains in the federal government's coffers. There is $1. 4billion that should be paid to Quebec for social housing and is sitting in the federal government's coffers. We are waiting for money for water treatment and water systems, but it is sitting in the federal government's coffers. It's almost July. We are wasting precious months for construction. What is the government waiting for to pay out the money so that we can get our economy rolling? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: The federal government is a very active partner. We are discussing and working with Quebec on infrastructure projects. We are continuing our discussions and negotiations on the housing agreement. Nothing is at a standstill. We are discussing and co-operating for the well-being of all Quebeckers. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: MadamChair, things are definitely at a standstill, because the money is owed and has not been paid out. Months are going by while construction is not taking place. We need to reopen the economy. We need more flexibility in the gas tax program and Quebec's contribution to allow municipalities to undertake work on city halls, community centres and fire stations. We need the federal government to contribute to funding public transit operations, which have become a real financial drain because of the drop in ridership. What is the federal government waiting for to provide real help instead of just talking? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: When it comes to just talking, the Bloc Qubcois has a lot of experience, I admit. We, in the government, are working and co-operating. We are not waiting with our arms folded, we are discussing a series of issues with Quebec. We do more than discuss, we work and we co-operate. We are working on projects, not only in infrastructure, but in a number of other areas. Just think of the co-operation of our armed forces in the CHSLDs, for example. We are here for Quebeckers. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Your time has run out, Mr. Bergeron. We'll go now to Ms. Khalid, from MississaugaErin Mills. Ms. Iqra Khalid (MississaugaErin Mills, Lib.): Madam Chair, I'll be splitting my time with the member for GlengarryPrescottRussell. During a consultation with the business community in Mississauga, the concerns of businesses, big and small, included the need for stable, affordable and safe child care. With the lack of such child care spaces, an economic recovery plan post-COVID cannot be effective until and unless we make sure that people are able to get back to work. I've heard from parents across Mississauga that they're being forced to stay home because of inadequate child care and that they have to choose between putting food on the table and keeping family safe. More and more employers are realizing that good employees are unable to contribute to their business growth because of this challenge. Now more than ever, we need to find long-term sustainable solutions for Canadians who face challenges with regard to child care. I ask our Minister of Families, Children and Social Development this: What is our strategy to tackle this ever-growing need for a national child care plan? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I thank the honourable member for her question and for her important advocacy and work on this important issue. We understand that child care is important to our economic recovery and our social infrastructure. We know the pressure that COVID-19 has placed on families, especially parents. That is why we're committed to continuing to work with provinces and territories to renew our agreements on early learning and child care, and to provide, at the earliest opportunity, $400 million in support. In addition to that, the Prime Minister has already indicated that child care will be part of the $14-billion pledge to provinces and territories to assist them with respect to COVID-19 recovery efforts. Over the next decade, we will continue to invest $7. 5 billion, and together we have achieved the goal of over 40,000 affordable child care spaces. We are also committed to continuing to create over 250,000 before-school and after-school child care spaces for kids under the age of 10. We will continue to work with our partners in the provinces and territories to ensure that Canadians can continue to have access to safe, quality and affordable child care. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for GlengarryPrescottRussell has the floor. Mr. Francis Drouin (GlengarryPrescottRussell, Lib.): MadamChair, small businesses play a fundamental role in the Canadian economy. In an article in LaPresse, the Minister of Economic Development warned us that the economic crisis caused by severe lockdown measures could have more serious consequences in small municipalities than in large cities. Based on discussions with the chambers of commerce in my riding, it is clear that federal government assistance will be essential for the reopening of the economy, specifically for the rural economy. In fact, I would like to acknowledge the work of the Prescott-Russell community development corporation, under the leadership of John Candie. After announcing almost $57million to help SMEs adopt e-commerce, how does the minister plan to help SMEs and the business community in our rural areas? Hon. Mlanie Joly (Minister of Economic Development and Official Languages): MadamChair, I also thank my colleague from GlengarryPrescottRussell for his important question. Yes, our regions are important and the entrepreneurs in those regions are creative and daring. They take risks, but they are currently facing huge challenges. So we are here for them. We understand their anxiety and we want to help them. That is why we have decided to invest heavily in rural economic development. It is also why we have doubled the budget of CFDCs and Community Futures organizations across the country. In southern Ontario we have reinvested over $260million in the regional economic development agency FedDev. In the great riding of GlengarryPrescottRussell, which I am particularly fond of and where there is a very good member of Parliament, there is an additional $1million for entrepreneurs in the region. We have been, we are and we will be at your side. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for GlengarryPrescottRussell has 36seconds left. No? Then we'll go to the honourable member for ElmwoodTranscona. Mr. Daniel Blaikie (ElmwoodTranscona, NDP): Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with the member for Victoria. Madam Chair, Krystal is a community worker in Winnipeg. She has been working from home since late March, taking care of her child, who is out of school, and caring for her father, who is living with her and vulnerable to COVID-19. Her employer called her up recently and asked her to physically return to work or to take a leave. As a parent and a care provider to a vulnerable person, she's not comfortable with physically returning to work. Service Canada won't give Krystal a straight answer as to whether going on leave and collecting CERB would count as refusing a reasonable job offer. With Bill C-17 looming in the background, Krystal is worried about jail time and fines if she does right by her child and her father by applying for CERB. Can Krystal reasonably refuse to go back to work and collect CERB, or will she be considered a fraudster? That's my question for the minister that is specific to Krystal's case. As well, what is the minister doing to provide clear direction to Canadians and to Service Canada agents so that people can get a clear answer before making their decision about returning to work? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I want to thank the honourable member for his important question. We recognize that Canadian workers will face various different situations, including those who are ineligible for the Canada emergency support benefit. We'll continue to work with workers to make sure they're able to be supported throughout this pandemic. The fact of the matter is that every province has workplace health and safety regulations that must be supported. We understand that workers have the right not to work in unsafe situations. We also understand that many Canadians do want to go back to work; and in fact many have. We will make sure that we support Canadians throughout this recovery process. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member has 47 seconds left, and that includes the answer. Mr. Daniel Blaikie: Madam Chair, that answer is really not good enough, because the problem here is that Krystal needs to know whether she can continue receiving CERB or not. That's a federal government decision, and she needs to know whether the federal government is going to accuse her of fraud and put her in jail or assess fines against her if she refuses to go back to work because she wants to take care of her child and her father. What is the minister's answer to that? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister has 20 seconds to respond. Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that if a Canadian has to take care of a loved one due to circumstances surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, they are indeed eligible to receive the CERB and remain receiving that benefit. Ms. Laurel Collins (Victoria, NDP): As we deal with the global pandemic, we cannot lose sight of the ongoing climate emergency. Canada has missed every single climate target it set, and we need to break the cycle of empty promises. Canadians want their government to be accountable, and environmental groups such as Ecojustice, CAN-Rac, Environmental Defence and West Coast Environmental Law, as well as the government's own climate institute, are all calling for legally binding climate targets. When will the government put its climate targets into law with legally binding milestones so we never miss another target again? Hon. Navdeep Bains (MississaugaMalton, Lib.): Madam Chair, I thank my honourable colleague for her question. I totally agree with her when it comes to the environment. It is a priority not only for us as a government, but it should be a priority for all Canadians. That is why we have put measures in place to put a price on pollution through carbon pricing. That is why we have a comprehensive plan that also includes significant investments in clean technology, which will help reduce our carbon footprint. I am confident that these measures will enable us to not only meet but exceed our 2030 target and also allow us to achieve our net-zero 2050 target. Ms. Laurel Collins: That didn't answer my question. I asked when. Empty promises won't get us any closer to meeting our climate targets. Can the minister tell us when his government will introduce climate accountability laws? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I think the fundamental issue here is having a plan when it comes to the environment. I'm confident that the measures that we have takenputting a price on pollution, investing in clean technology, and other key measures to reduce our carbon footprint, including the investment in infrastructureunderpin a plan The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to the honourable member for Victoria. Ms. Laurel Collins: This government is not meeting its targets, but it is meeting with oil and gas lobbyists. The pandemic has made us reflect on our priorities. Are we going to choose a just recovery with good, sustainable jobs for Canadian workers, or are we going to keep subsidizing oil and gas companies to the tune of billions, subsidies that we know are ending up in the pockets of CEOs and shareholders? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will have a brief answer from the minister. Hon. Navdeep Bains: Again, Madam Chair, this is the fundamental difference between us and the NDP. We fundamentally believe that the entire economy needs to work together, including the energy sector, to enable us to achieve those 2030 and 2050 targets. We are going to work together to support our workers, including in the energy sector, to reduce our carbon footprint. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Now we will go to the honourable member for SaskatoonGrasswood, Mr. Waugh. Mr. Kevin Waugh (SaskatoonGrasswood, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. When I was last here in May, I was on my way back to Saskatoon from Toronto, and there was actually someone on my flight who tested positive for COVID-19. I was never informed of it by the airline. I found out two weeks later. The report was in the news media. Why hasn't the government put rules in place requiring airlines to reach out to individuals like me who may have been exposed to COVID on their flights? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, it's hard to speculate on what happened from such a vague description of his experience, but I will say that we have every confidence in local public health, which is doing the hard and heavy lifting of contact tracing and working very closely with all kinds of different sectors, including airline sectors, to make sure that close contacts of people who have tested positive for COVID-19 are found, are traced and are isolated. I assume that the member took appropriate precautions on the flight and I hope that he continues to do so. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, it was reported that the individual on my plane who had COVID was actually connecting in Toronto from an international flight. The Prime Minister announced last week that they would begin mandating temperature checks for those bound for Canada in July. Will international travellers be tested when they land in Canada, or will they be relying on the tests that take place in other countries? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, this is a very important question, because the protection and safety of all Canadiansin particular, Canadian travellersis a high priority for our government. We've been working very closely with the airlines. At the current time, we are putting temperature screening in place. That will initially be done primarily by the airlines that are in the best position to do it at this point in time. We are also now going to be including CATSA, the people who do the security screening, so that when people enter the airport, they will also be screened. We believe that is going to be the most effective measure to keep all travellers safe. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, last week five of the largest professional sports leagues in North America put out a statement of support for my private member's bill, the safe and regulated sports betting act. Given the struggles that clubs and leagues are facing due to COVID-19, including having no fans at all in the stands for the foreseeable future, the legalization of sports betting would be a welcome opportunity not only to engage fans but to generate much-needed revenue. Will the government commit now to supporting the sports and gaming industries by supporting my private member's bill, Bill C-218? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, I've had the opportunity on many occasions to speak to members of Parliament and also to mayors and councillors and people living in border communities where there are casinos. They've raised this issue a number of times. We've listened very carefully to the concerns that have been expressed by them. I would like to advise the member that I look forward to the opportunity for a careful examination of his bill. We are at all times concerned about maintaining the integrity of the gaming industry within our community. That's the best way to protect Canadians. At the same time, we will examine his bill with all of the necessary attention to make sure it's given full consideration. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, it's the first time in history that we've had the five professional leagues in this country joining together for this bill. Newspapers rely, as we all know, on advertising for a significant portion of their revenue. This includes the usual flyers as well as in-paper ads. I've heard major concerns from a number of newspapers in this country about competition they're receiving today from Canada Post, which is offering massive free postage services. In fact, I have one of their ads here, which says that the first 6,000 pieces of postage are 100% free. If the government is genuine about wanting to ensure that newspapers and journals can succeed in this country, why are you allowing Canada Post to use its monopoly power to actually threaten local newspapers in this country? Hon. Steven Guilbeault (Minister of Canadian Heritage): Thank you, Madame Chair, and I thank the member opposite for his question. As you well know, a healthy news and media sector in Canada is a priority for our government, which is why we have put in place a number of measures before COVID-19 and during COVID-19, and we will continue to be there for them after this crisis has gone by. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Before we go on, we will be taking a break to do a bit of a changeover. I also want to remind members to address their questions and comments to the chair. We will go now to the honourable member for BruceGreyOwen Sound, Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff (BruceGreyOwen Sound, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Mr. Blair stated yesterday here in the House that the AR-15 has been used in mass killings in Canada on many occasions. Mr. Blair, please provide just one specific instance in which an AR-15 was used in a mass killing in Canada. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I remind the member to address questions and comments to the chair. The honourable minister may respond. Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I think this is an excellent opportunity to point out to the member opposite how important it is to actually listen to what was said. If you go back and review that tape, and I would invite you to do so, you'll see that I said the AR-15 and other weapons like themreferring of course to military-style assault weaponshave been used in mass killings, and I actually cited a number of examples. Madam Chair, I think it would be very useful if the member's questions were based on facts. Mr. Alex Ruff: I can remind Mr. Blair that I actually have watched the video a couple of times, and he specifically states that the AR-15 was used in mass killings in Canada, yet he has yet to provide one. My additional question is to Mr. Blair. Out of the recently banned firearms on May 1, how many have been or are still currently in use by the Canadian Armed Forces? Hon. Bill Blair: That's an excellent question, Madam Chair, because it's very important to provide Canadians with clarity. We have prohibited these firearms for non-law enforcement and non-military use. The military uses weapons that were actually designed for soldiers to use in combat to shoot other soldiers. That's the appropriate use of such weapons, Madam Chair. They're not things to be played with in civilian society. Mr. Alex Ruff: As a soldier for 25 years, I'll remind Mr. Blair that none of the currently prohibited firearms would be used in the Canadian Armed Forces. I asked him a question on whether any of them is being or ever has been used in the Canadian Armed Forces. Are any of the recently banned firearms still in use, or have they ever been in use, in any military in the world? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, I think it's important to also recognize that the basic origin, the provenance of the weapons that we have prohibited, was in their original design. They were designed for military use for various military forces around the world. As I've said previously, they were designed for soldiers to use in combat to kill other soldiers. They're very efficient in their design for killing people. They have no purpose in Canadian society. Mr. Alex Ruff: As someone who has used many military-style firearms and who is actually involved in helping define what we purchase in the military, I would use none of the ones that are currently prohibited. I have a question, Chair, for Minister MacAulay. Can he please confirm whether Veterans Affairs has a plan to address the claims backlog, yes or no? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (Minister of Veterans Affairs): Madam Chair, I appreciate my honourable colleague's question, and yes, we've indicated that it's a major priority. That's why I'm so pleased that the supplementary estimates contained just under $90 million to address hiring more staff, improving the process and making sure that we attack the backlog in an appropriate manner. Mr. Alex Ruff: Madame Chair, does that plan exist in written form? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Well, Madam Chair, I can assure you that it's in the supplementary estimates, and of course, this money is The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We'll go back to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff: The question is about the plan, not how much money has been allocated. I am asking for the written plan on how to address the backlog. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Madam Chair, I can tell my honourable colleague that the money is in the supplementary estimates, and with the money we're able to attack this problem in an appropriate manner, and that's what is important for our veterans. Mr. Alex Ruff: The deputy minister committed on March 10 that a written plan would be provided to the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs within a month and made public. Did the deputy minister or the department provide the minister that plan within a month? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Madame Chair, I'm sure my honourable colleague wants an appropriate plan and he would be fully aware this just under $90 million would make a big difference in the plan to attack the backlog. We The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We'll go back to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff: Thank you, Chair. Therefore, my question is, if the deputy minister in the department provided him with an appropriate plan or a written plan, why is he questioning how appropriate that plan is? I have complete confidence in the deputy minister's ability to produce a written plan. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister may give a brief answer, please. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I can assure my honourable colleague that with the appropriate funding, we will address the backlog in Veterans Affairs. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Parry SoundMuskoka, Mr. Aitchison. Mr. Scott Aitchison: Thank you, Madam Chair. My question is about summer camps again. Three weeks ago, I asked this government if the finance minister would meet with the beleaguered summer camp sector. Summer camps, which are a social and economic mainstay in Parry SoundMuskoka and all of northern Ontario, have been crippled by the global pandemic. It's costing millions of jobs, and some camps are actually in danger of folding. Aside from a brief follow-up conversation over the phone with the junior minister, there has still been no action from this government. When will the Minister of Finance meet with summer camps to find a solution? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I recognize the honourable member's important question and his focus on summer camps. We recognize the importance of looking at that and paying attention to the needs of that community. We will continue to engage with them, as we have, to ensure and find ways in which we can get their feedback and find ways in which we can support them. That work is ongoing, and I assure the honourable member that our focus is on the kids and on ensuring that they have access to summer camps for this year. Mr. Scott Aitchison: I don't know why you need to find ways to get feedback. The summer camps association has given lots of feedback and my office has given lots of feedback, so I don't see what's confusing about this. However, I've become accustomed to not really getting answers to questions, so I will go to the next one. The Ontario government's regional reopening plan permits cruise boats to resume on Georgian Bay, yet the federal government is refusing to allow these vessels to operate until July 1. Therefore, small businesses such as the Island Queen cruiser in Parry Sound, which has only a very few precious weeks to operate in the first place, is losing yet another two weeks because of federal inaction. This not only hurts the cruise boat industry but also hurts tourism and small businesses all through our area. Will the Minister of Transport take a regional approach himself by lifting the federal ban on Georgian Bay, just like the Province of Ontario has done? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister may reply. Is there a response? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, there is. I apologize for the confusion. Let me respond, if I may, on behalf of the Minister of Transport. There have been a number of very important discussions with the provinces, in particular with the Province of Ontario, around provisions regarding pleasure craft. There are certain restrictions that will come to an end on June 30. We're working very closely with our provincial counterparts to address this issue, but we want to ensure that it will be done safely. Mr. Scott Aitchison: Madam Chair, I actually gave the minister a heads-up that I would be asking that question. He sent me an email today saying he was not going to be able to be in the House, and it's great of him to do that. He said that whoever was going to fill in for him would have an answer, but again, that was not really an answer. The next issue I would like to bring this government's attention to is the deplorable state of rural Internet service in Parry SoundMuskoka. Quite simply, there are too many gaps in service, and what is available is generally way too expensive. We have families trying to work and teach their kids from home on unreliable and outrageously expensive Internet service, and we have too many small businesses that either cannot access or afford reliable Internet services. Today Greg Rickford, the Ontario energy minister, and Laurie Scott, Ontario Minister of Infrastructure, announced $2. 3 million for seven northern Ontario broadband projects. Minister, will when your government get serious and become a reliable partner for the Government of Ontario and the private sector to deliver this crucial modern-day infrastructure to rural Canadians? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I remind the member that he needs to address the questions and comments to the chair. The honourable minister may reply. Hon. Maryam Monsef (Minister for Women and Gender Equality and Rural Economic Development): Madam Chair, in the best of times, life without access to high-speed Internet is hard. During a pandemic, the challenges are that much more pronounced. Our government's unprecedented investments are already connecting a million more Canadian households to this essential service, but until we achieve universal access our work is not done. We will work with our partners, including provinces across the country, to connect every Canadian household to high-quality Internet access that is affordable and reliable. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member has 30 seconds. Mr. Scott Aitchison: I think I can squeeze something in here, then. I'm wondering, then, Madam Chair, since the Province of Ontario has used the Northern Ontario Heritage Corporation Fund to make this announcement, what about using FedNor to make the same kind of announcement, and partner with the province? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister has a brief answer. Hon. Mlanie Joly: Obviously we believe in the importance of northern Ontario; that's why we nearly doubled the budget of FedNor. We will continue to invest in businesses and people all around Parry Sound, Muskoka and northern Ontario. If my colleague has specific projects in mind, please come and see me and let's have a conversation. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for Montmagny-L'Islet-KamouraskaRivire-du-Loup, Mr. Gnreux, has the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux (MontmagnyL'IsletKamouraskaRivire-du-Loup, CPC): Thank you, MadamChair. I will continue along the same lines as my colleague. During this pandemic, we are realizing the extent to which reliable high-speed Internet service is needed for Canada's economy. There are still places where telework is not possible today because of the lack of adequate coverage. However, since2015, the government has committed to addressing the situation through three new programs. Benot Pilotto, who is the mayor of Saint-Onsime-d'Ixworth, in my riding, wrote to me a few days ago. That is why I am asking you what concrete results the government plans to achieve for our rural areas by the end of the year. Hon. Maryam Monsef: At the best of times, life without high-speed Internet access is difficult. During a pandemic, the difficulties are even greater. Our government's unprecedented investments are already connecting an additional one million Canadian households to this essential service. However, until we achieve universal access, our job is not done. We are working The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Gnreux, you have the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, I am simply asking the minister to tell me when the mayor of Saint-Onsime-d'Ixworth will be able to tell his residents when the Internet will be available in his municipality. It is not complicated. What does the government plan to do so that rural municipalities across Canada can have access to the Internet as soon as possible? What is its plan? Hon. Maryam Monsef: We are working with partners across the country to ensure that every Canadian household is connected to a high-quality, accessible and affordable high-speed Internet service. Madam Chair, I assure my colleagues that we share the same goal, and we will work with all our partners across the country to ensure every Canadian household has access The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Gnreux, you have the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, I am still not getting a specific answer. According to the government's plan, when will rural Canadian businesses and households be connected? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I would ask the honourable minister to provide a brief answer. Hon. Maryam Monsef: Madam Chair, those plans are under way, and we will have more to share in the coming days. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: It seems that the Minister of Rural Economic Development plans to announce a new plan this week. Can she tell us how this program will differ from the Connect to Innovate program, which is already in place? Can the minister tell us whether her program will solve the problem of the 25square kilometre hexagonal zones, which unfortunately make many projects ineligible for the CRTC's broadband fund? Hon. Maryam Monsef: Madam Chair, I'm pleased to share with my colleague that the model he's referring to, the hexagon model, is no more. Our maps are much more precise now to ensure that we do not leave Canadians behind. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, this year, the Canada summer jobs program is a real fiasco. I think all my colleagues will agree with me. On May13,100jobs were announced in my riding; on May20,16jobs were announced; on May27,13jobs were announced; on June3,12jobs were announced; and on June10, only one job was announced. As we speak, an amount of $100,000 is still to be confirmed in my riding. Can we have an announcement, once and for all? Let's stop the piecemeal announcements and finally confirm the remaining jobs today so that our organizations can have young people before the summer starts on the weekend. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable minister. Hon. Ahmed Hussen: MadamChair, I thank the honourable member for his question. We recognize the important role that the Canada summer jobs program is playing in supporting employers and young workers in communities right across the country. Our government is working very hard to help employers adapt to the realities of the COVID-19 pandemic, and at the same time is supporting young Canadians as they begin to look for summer employment. We've introduced flexibilities into the program to ensure that more young workers have opportunities to get employed. The honourable member also has to understand that we're in the COVID-19 pandemic, and as such it will take some time for businesses to equip themselves to hire students. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for NanaimoLadysmith, Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly (NanaimoLadysmith, GP): Thank you, Madam Chair. In the first five months of this year, 554 B. C. residents died from opioid overdoses. They were teachers, construction workers, business owners, family members, neighbours and friends. Addiction is a health and social issue, but criminalization creates stigma, so people hide their drug use and die alone. Access to a safe supply of drugs and safe injection sites saves lives and puts addicts in daily contact with people who can help them. Will this government end the war on drugs by decriminalizing them, providing a safe supply and reallocating resources from policing addicts to providing treatment for them? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, I think it's really important we make sure that when we speak about people who use substances, we remove stigmatizing language like the word addict. We can stand together, as this government has, with people who use substances and their families to ensure a range of options for people who are struggling with addiction, who are using substances in a way that is harming their health and their communities. As you know, we have restored harm reduction to the Canadian drugs and substances strategy. We've made it easier for people to access safe supplies of substances. We've increased access to treatment and the variety of treatment through federal transfers to provinces and territories. Madam Chair, we're working with communities to make sure there are more community-based approaches to treating The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, the Geneva Convention considers both tear gas and pepper spray to be chemical weapons and prohibits their use in war, yet our police forces use these weapons on Canadian civilians. These weapons are indiscriminate and can affect peaceful protestors and innocent bystanders. Will the government prohibit the use of these weapons and require police to use de-escalation techniques to keep legal protests peaceful? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, the right to peaceful protest in this country is a constitutionally protected right. We want to ensure it's always respected. At the same time, Madam Chair, we recognize that the use of even less than lethal force can have significant impacts on people's safety. This is a highly regulated substance in Canada. It's prohibited for non-police use, and for the police it is and should be highly regulated. The RCMP have advised me they have not used tear gas in nine years. We'll continue to monitor it to ensure that peaceful protest is always respected. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, in 2012 the RCMP spent $14 million on 18 armoured personnel carriers. One's parked at the Nanaimo detachment. I can't imagine why we have weapons of war like this for policing civilians. Will the government rein in the RCMP budget and end wasteful spending on militarizing our civilian police forces? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, it's a very important tradition that our Canadian police are not militarized. At the same time, we've seen a number of tragedies when police have responded to situations in which people were armed with weapons designed for soldiers to kill soldiers, and they've been used to kill police officers. The militarization of our society, so strongly promoted by some, is the direct consequence of the militarization of the police. As we remove these weapons from our society and prohibit them, we'll make it safer for everyone and we can then move away from such a model of policing. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, the government spent $4. 5 billion to buy an old, leaky pipeline. Since 1961, there have been 82 reported spills from the Trans Mountain pipeline. Over 1. 5 million litres of crude oil has spilled into the surrounding environment. This weekend, the Trans Mountain pipeline leaked again, dumping 190,000 litres of oil. How much is this spill going to cost Canadian taxpayers to clean up? How much contingency funding has been budgeted to repair the environmental destruction from spills? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I want to thank the honourable colleague for his question. He full well knows that the acquisition that we made with regard to the TMX initiative is a reflection of the fact that we want this initiative to move forward in a sustainable manner and in a manner that protects the environment. I'll continue to work with my colleagues to endeavour to make sure that we have the appropriate processes in place to protect the environment and at the same time create good-quality, middle-class jobs for Canadians. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for RosemontLa PetitePatrie, Mr. Boulerice, has the floor. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice (RosemontLa Petite-Patrie, NDP): Thank you, MadamChair. The Black Lives Matter movement is right to discuss systemic racism in our societies. In Montreal, the city and the police department have recognized this, and measures will be put in place. The Liberal government, once again, is all talk and no walk. Although it spends $10million a day, we see no attempt to reform or change the RCMP. If the Prime Minister really wants to act, why is he delaying the action plan in response to the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls? Hon. Bill Blair: Let me assure this House and the member opposite that we're not dragging our feet. This is an important issue. Indigenous people, black Canadians and other racialized people are far too often experiencing systemic racism and disparate outcomes through the criminal justice system. It's incumbent upon all of us who work within the criminal justice system to take the steps and actions necessary to produce more equitable outcomes. All police services, including the RCMP, must be committed to ensuring that the people they're sworn to serve and protect are always treated with dignity and respect. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: MadamChair, why are the Liberals taking indigenous children to court to challenge the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal ruling in their favour? Hon. Marc Miller (Minister of Indigenous Services): Madam Chair, as the honourable member knows full well, a number of cases are pending, and we are currently negotiating with the parties. We are making progress, and I would be delighted to tell the member and the House about it in response to a later question. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: We've been asking questions about it for months, and as I see it, we should keep doing so. The Prime Minister's new pipeline, which taxpayers were forced to buy with their hard-earned money, has leaked. Some 190,000litres of oil spilled, and we can't even make the company pay for it because the Liberals bought the pipeline. Trans-Mountain, KeystoneXL and the resumption of gas exploration and development off the coast of Newfoundland and Labradorare these the projects the Liberals had in mind for their green recovery? Hon. Navdeep Bains: I'd like to thank the honourable member for his question. Our priority was to protect the health and safety of Canadians throughout the pandemic, especially when it comes to the environment. That's why environmental and climate change laws aimed at protecting the environment, human health and conservation will remain in force. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: Across Quebec, the cultural community is going through a harrowing time. Unions, associations, artists and creators have all taken part in public demonstrations recently to condemn the lack of a specific plan for the living arts, performing arts and festival sector. What is the government waiting for? Hon. Steven Guilbeault: I'd like to thank the member for his question. However, I strongly disagree with him. We haven't waited to develop a plan for the arts and culture sector. We listened to the community and we tailored our supports, as they were announced. We have an emergency plan for the arts and culture sector. We were asked to adapt the CERB to take royalties into account, and we did. We were asked to extend the CERB, and we did. We are fully aware that the recovery will take longer in the arts and culture sector. We have been there, we are there and we will be there for the arts and culture sector. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: Well, that wasn't at all what the artists and creators who were out demonstrating in the streets a few days ago thought. They were protesting on the weekend. The CERB extension announced by the government only brings us to September, but the cultural community is expecting the worst in the fall. What is the government's long-term plan to support creators and their entire teams? Hon. Steven Guilbeault: I'm not so sure those who were protesting last week had issues with our government, but we'd certainly be happy to speak with them. As for a long-term plan, we are currently consulting arts and culture stakeholders to contemplate together how the government can help the sector in response to the ongoing crisis. We are working on finding solutions, but until we have long-term solutions, we have seen to it that our artists and organizations have access to funding until September. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for BeauportLimoilou, Mrs. Vignola, has the floor. Mrs. Julie Vignola (BeauportLimoilou, BQ): Madam Chair, I will be sharing my time with the member for Montcalm. According to the latest news, Seaspan Shipyards will be spending an additional $1. 5billion to build two ships. Why? Because the ships were ordered in 2011 and still haven't been delivered. Davie built the Asterix without going over budget because it delivered the ship on time. Davie is currently the top shipyard, representing 50% of Canada's shipbuilding capacity. Why isn't Davie being awarded its fair share of contracts? Hon. Anita Anand (Minister of Public Services and Procurement): I'd like to thank the member for her question. Davie is certainly a strong and trusted partner that works very hard to help our government get results for Canadians. Building a new class of ships is highly complex, and it's not unusual for cost estimates to change throughout the procurement project. It's important to make sure additional funding is available for the joint support ships project to ensure the navy's vessels are delivered. Mrs. Julie Vignola: We are talking about $1. 5billion, here. In the beginning, eight years ago, the project was supposed to cost $2. 6billion. There can't be much missing when the cost overrun is double the initial estimate. Why haven't the ships been delivered yet? Why is Davie still not seen as a trusted partner? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Minister, please keep your answer brief. Hon. Anita Anand: Once again, I would point out that building a new class of ships is highly complex, and it's not unusual for the cost estimate to change for a procurement project as large as this one. I know that Davie works very hard, and we also believe it is an outstanding partner. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): It is now over to the honourable member for Montcalm, Mr. Thriault. Mr. Luc Thriault (Montcalm, BQ): Madam Chair, in Quebec, 12,000people have begun their training to work in residential and long-term care centres. They will be ready for duty in mid-September. In the meantime, we need the support of the army, which is helping us save lives. The dedication of the members of the armed forces is paramount, and I want to extend my heartfelt thanks. The government extended their mission until June26, which is only 10days away. What does the army have to do right now that is more important than helping our caregivers save lives? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, I'm glad my fellow member recognizes the fundamental role the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces have played and continue to play in residential and long-term care centres and many other areas in support of our seniors. We are in talks with the Quebec government. The discussions around providing continued assistance to Quebec are quite positive and productive. That assistance can take many forms, including the Red Cross. We will be there for our seniors, Madam Chair. Mr. Luc Thriault: We are short 12,000people, so if the Red Cross wants to help us, all the better. We'll take all the help we can get. Barely 800members of the military are still in Quebec. I repeat my question: What does the army have to do 10days from now that is more important if it's not to help caregivers save lives? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, all the members of the military are still in Quebec. They have done absolutely incredible work and are continuing to do so. The people at the Canadian Red Cross are well-trained paid workers who can perform the same work in partnership with the members of the armed forces, who can stay in Quebec as well. Right now, we are working with the Quebec government and discussing how we can keep the measure in place until September15. Mr. Luc Thriault: Madam Chair, our nurses and orderlies are exhausted. They're at the end of their ropes. Now is the time to thank them, not the time to turn our backs on them. It's not the time for dilly-dallying or discussions. It's the time to tell them that we will be there to help them until the end. I will repeat my question. What does the army have to do that is more important than helping caregivers save the lives of those who built Quebec? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The Leader of the Government in the House of Commons is asked to keep his answer brief. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, the Government of Canada is there and will continue to be there to help the people who built Quebec. The Government of Canada will work with the Quebec government to make that happen. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for Red DeerMountain View, Mr. Dreeshen. Mr. Earl Dreeshen (Red DeerMountain View, CPC): Thank you so much. Madam Chair, on May 14 I asked the Minister of Agriculture when the Liberal government would put aside its usual campaign rhetoric and recognize the very detrimental impact the carbon tax is having on farmers across this country. Minister Bibeau proudly noted that according to their data, the average cost of the carbon tax per farm across Canada is $210 to $819. We know that these numbers are completely unfounded and are not based on any factual evidence. The fact is that the Liberal government's own Parliamentary Budget Officer has estimated that at $25 per tonne, the cost for an 855-acre crop farm in Alberta is well over $6,000. The office came up with that using the government's statistics from the 2016 agricultural census. Madam Chair, the evidence is right in front of the minister. When will this Liberal government come clean with Canadians and recognize the disastrous impact the carbon tax is having on Canada's critical agriculture and agri-food sector? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food): Madam Chair, our pollution pricing policy is designed to grow a clean economy. To support this sector, we have put in place the following measures. Emissions from livestock and crop production are not priced. Farm fuels and fuels from cardlock facilities are exempt, and there is a partial rebate for propane and natural gas used in commercial greenhouses. Our government has been very open and transparent about our pollution pricing plan. We will do a review of our pollution pricing system in 2020, focused on competitiveness issues in trade-exposed industries such as agriculture. It is also important to remember that this is about tackling climate change and that 100% of the revenues stay in the province. We will continue to support our farmers and food processors as they provide an essential service across Canada. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Madam Chair, Minister Bibeau keeps talking about wanting to protect Canadians'environment. Well, the truth is that Canada's farmers, ranchers and processors have for years demonstrated their ability to deliver meaningful reductions in emissions and to safeguard the environment through the adoption of new technologies, education and innovative management practices, but the government ignores these efforts. Will the minister at the very least admit to Canadians that Canadian farmers are unable to pass on the cost of the carbon tax to consumers and instead have to absorb those extra costs out of their own pockets? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Madam Chair, allow me to explain again our government's position on pollution pricing. The price and method were developed so we could build an increasingly clean economy. We put a number of measures in place to help the agriculture sector. Emissions from animal and plant production aren't taxed. Farm fuels and fuels delivered to off-farm points-of-sale are also Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you, Madam Chair. I do have another question. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I am watching the time, Mr. Dreeshan. You have a couple more seconds. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you. Madam Chair, Minister Bibeau has repeatedly asked stakeholders to send her data about the impacts of the carbon tax on farmers, so this is exactly what they have been doing. The Atlantic Grains Council, the Grain Farmers of Ontario, Producteurs de grains du Qubec and the Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association issued a joint statement at the beginning of this year in which they estimated that the cumulative indirect inflation of carbon tax on farm costs will be $14. 50 an acre this year, with that cost escalating by more than double by 2022 to almost $30 an acre. These are huge numbers. Why does the Liberal government continue to ignore the facts presented to it and continue to misrepresent the truth to Canadians? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Madame Chair, I can assure you that we have paid close attention to all the information that has been provided to us and that our calculation was also based on this information provided by provinces and different stakeholders. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Our government has been very open and transparent about our pollution pricing plan. The department used data from stakeholders and provinces Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you very much, Madam Chair Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: as well as the 2019 agricultural tax data to estimate the average cost of pollution pricing associated with grain drying at up to 0. 4% of overall operating costs. It is important to remember that we have put in place many special provisions Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Madam Chair Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: like exempting farm fuel and providing other financial supports for farmers. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Dreeshen, I am watching the time, and the minister is allowed to answer for the same amount of time that you used to ask the question. Therefore, I would hope that we would allow her to finish. She has finished, and unfortunately the time is up. The committee now stands adjourned until tomorrow at noon.

Since many members called for more governmental support for their respective industry, MonaFortier, as the Minister of Middle-Class Prosperity and Associate Minister of Finance responded that Canadian government had financially supported more than 2. 5 million jobs with wage subsidy. In addition, she promised to lay stress on supporting the industry, the workers, and all the Canadians in their next working phase, as well as keeping the revenue report updated and public.

tr-sq-1251

tr-sq-1251_0

Summarize the measures to guarantee social stability, including reducing the rent for those individual businesses and strictly restraining the weapon. The Chair (Hon. Anthony Rota (NipissingTimiskaming, Lib.) ): I call this meeting to order. Welcome to the 23rd meeting of the House of Commons Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic. A reminder to all members that in order to avoid issues with sound, members participating in person should not also be connected to the video conference. For those of you who are joining via video conference, I will remind you that when speaking you should be on the same channel as the language you are speaking, and please use your headsets. As usual, please direct your remarks through the chair. As I understand, there are no ministerial announcements today. We will now proceed to presenting petitions. I remind members that any petition presented during a meeting of this special committee must have already been certified by the clerk of petitions. For members participating in person, I ask that they please come and drop their signed certificates off at the table once the petition is presented. I would ask members to be very brief and concise, and to summarize the exact content of the petition. We will continue. The first person presenting a petition today is Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May (SaanichGulf Islands, GP): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I present two petitions this morning. The residents of SaanichGulf Islands are calling on the government to simplify the process for protection of marine protected areas. It's a multi-layered communication process. The marine protected area first proposed in the 1970s for the southern Strait of Georgia, now called the Salish Sea, has been awaiting designation for so long that it was originally endorsed by Jacques Cousteau. That gives us a sense for why petitioners are calling for a simplified and more rapid process. The second petition is from petitioners who are very concerned about our obligations under the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and our commitments under the Truth and Reconciliation Commission calls to action. They specifically reference the RCMP violation of UNDRIP in its actions on Wet'suwet'en territory and ask the government to commit to actually living the principles embodied in UNDRIP. The Chair: We will now go to Mr. Hardie. Mr. Ken Hardie (FleetwoodPort Kells, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am presenting a petition on behalf of the one in a million Canadians who suffer severe and adverse effects from vaccinations. GuillainBarre syndrome is very debilitating, and this petition seeks the setting up of a no-fault accident or compensation system to help offset the loss of work, the loss of wages and the loss of quality of life that many of these people suffer. I'm pleased to present this petition pursuant to Standing Order 36. The Chair: Mr. Trudel, you have the floor. Mr. Denis Trudel (LongueuilSaint-Hubert, BQ): Mr. Chair, culture is the soul of a people. Over the past 20years or so, culture, especially music, has never been as accessible as it is now. Paradoxically, creators'incomes have never been so low. The advent of digital technology has completely overturned the system for distributing the wealth generated by creators for the benefit of various Web stakeholders, many of whom are billionaires. This petition addresses these problems and proposes realistic solutions. The first is to set a minimum royalty model for streaming platforms for artists. The second is to update the existing private copying system. The third is for Internet and cell phone providers who sell their services as direct access to culture to share their profits with artists. The fourth is that the GAFAMs have to pay taxes on their services. Six thousand people have already signed the first version of this petition, launched last month by musician JordanOfficer and supported by singer BarbaraSecours. As an artist, I am proud to present this petition today because the issues it raises are fundamental to the survival of Quebec culture. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood ParkFort Saskatchewan, CPC): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I have four petitions to present today. I will be as brief as you suggested, although I will observe that if some members are going on longer during petitions than they normally do, it might be because the government has taken away so many of the tools that opposition members normally have for raising important issues in the House. The first petition deals with the issue of euthanasia and long-term care. The petitioners are concerned that instead of focusing on improving medically assisted life, something that we know is a major issue in light of recent revelations, the government has put so much time and legislative energy into efforts to continually further expand euthanasia in Canada and remove vital safeguards. The second petition speaks to the ongoing conversations happening in Canada around systemic discrimination and systemic racism. I think we do need to reflect on systemic discrimination. This petition deals specifically with Bill 21 in Quebec and raises concerns. The reality of the way that bill applies is that people from certain backgrounds who wish to practise their faith are not able to fully participate in Canadian society if they are employed in the public service. This petition asks the government to provide a response on that issue, something it hasn't done in response to past petitions on this. The third petition deals with the issue of firearms. The petitioners want to see the government take a strong response in dealing with illegal guns and gun smuggling. The petition notes that the vast majority of firearms-related crimes in Canada involves illegal guns. At the same time, the petitioners are concerned that the government has the wrong focusthat is, harassing law-abiding firearms ownerswithout putting in place substantial measures to deal with illegal guns. The petitioners want to see the reversal of the order in council from May 1 and strong measures to deal with illegal firearms. The fourth and final petition deals with Bill S-204, a bill that would make it a criminal offence for a Canadian to go abroad and receive an organ from a person who has not consented to giving that organ. It would also create a mechanism by which someone could be deemed inadmissible to Canada if they were involved in organ harvesting and trafficking. The petitioners are supportive of Bill S-204 and of similar bills in previous parliaments and would like to see us pass that bill as soon as possible. The Chair: Presenting petitions, Mr. Lamoureux. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Winnipeg North, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. It is with pleasure that I table another petition by the residents of Winnipeg North. These residents have signed a petition asking the Government of Canada, and in fact all members of Parliament, to put a high priority on assisting our poorest seniors. The increases to the GIS by $200, and $300 to the OAS, have been well received. They just want to highlight how important it is to support our seniors, in particular the poorest of our seniors. The Chair: For members present in the Chamber, a reminder that they are asked to bring their petitions to the table. We'll now proceed to statements by members. We'll go to Ms. Atwin for the first one. Mrs. Jenica Atwin (Fredericton, GP): Thank you, Mr. Chair. June 21 is National Indigenous Peoples Day, a day of acknowledgement and a day of celebration of the beautiful diversity of indigenous peoples across Turtle Island. I wish to recognize the leadership of Chief Shelley Sabattis of the Welamukotuk First Nation in Oromocto, New Brunswick. Each year she and her council, volunteers and staff go above and beyond to show appreciation for their members and to demonstrate pride and culture while promoting well-being. We gather in an event where all are welcome to take part, from traditional hand drum-making with elders to moose meat and tacos. This year we will celebrate a bit differently, but we will still stay connected, virtually and in spirit, to the vast network of indigenous peoples and allies. We need each other now more than ever. May we come together in song and stories and in solidarity. We will remember those who are not among us. I hope all of Canada will join us in observing National Indigenous Peoples Day. Mawiyapasuwok: let us come together. Nit liech. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Beech. Mr. Terry Beech (Burnaby NorthSeymour, Lib.): Mr. Chair, COVID-19 is an unprecedented challenge for all communities across Canada, but as we do our part to flatten the curve, I often think about those who suit up every morning to serve on the front lines of our health care system. My mother is a home care worker and my sister is a nurse. Even before the crisis, they would often share the hardships they faced on a day-to-day basis. It's a tough job at the best of times. In a pandemic, these jobs are life-threatening. I think we can all agree that these workers deserve more than our good wishes. They deserve a raise. That is why we have worked with the provinces to implement pandemic pay. In British Columbia more than 250,000 front-line workers are eligible for this program. That works out to a pay increase of about $4 an hour. It's a small show of our appreciation for their difficult and priceless contribution to our country. Share this message and say thanks to our front-line workers, participate in the 7 p. m. cheer, and order a pizza for your local nurses. It's the least we can do. The Chair: We'll now go on to Mr. Shipley. Mr. Doug Shipley (BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. We've been living in difficult times. Slowly, we are getting back to some resemblance of normalcy, although unfortunately not soon enough for some of our great summer festivals. It will not be normal in BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte this summer without the iconic Boots and Hearts weekend music festival, Kempenfest, Oro World's Fair, the Elmvale Fall Fair, or the Midhurst Autumnfest. Canada Day celebrations have been cancelled, but we can still celebrate the great nation we call home. Because of the lack of Canada Day celebrations, I've created Happy Canada Day lawn signs that are available through my constituency office, free to all residents of BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte. I'm also hosting a drive-through party on Canada Day at the Royal Canadian Legion on St. Vincent Street in Barrie. All are welcome to attend. There will be cupcakes for all. Please drop by the legion between 11 a. m. and 2 p. m. , and we can celebrate Canada Day safely together. Thank you and have a great summer. The Chair: Now we'll go on to Ms. Young. Ms. Kate Young (London West, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Among the countless ordinary Canadians who have stepped up to do extraordinary work during COVID-19, I wish to draw attention to our teachers. Teachers have always had a special place in my heart. My father was a teacher, and my daughter-in-law, Kelly Webb, is one now. I'm certain that my colleagues can all easily remember a teacher in their past who played an important role in helping them achieve their potential. I remember my grade 12 English teacher, Vince Weaver, at Westminster Secondary School in London. He made me realize that I could do so much more than I believed. Across the country, as schools closed, teachers did not stop their work. Some took their classes online. Others found innovative ways to continue engaging with their students. This is not the school year anyone imagined, and what the next one will look like is unclear, but our teachers in London West and across Canada have shown that no matter what, they will be there to help our next generation shine. The Chair: Before proceeding to the next presenter, I just want to remind the honourable members in the chamber that I realize that the six-foot limit makes it harder to whisper to each other, but we're hearing a bit of rumble, so I just want you to try to whisper at your best. Mr. Bergeron, you have the floor. Mr. Stphane Bergeron (Montarville, BQ): Mr. Chair, on July1st, we will be celebrating one of the most important events for the riding of Montarville: the 175thanniversary of the city of Saint-Bruno-de-Montarville. The theme Proud of our traditions will be the focus of this celebration for the people of Montarville. This is a good illustration of the rich history of this municipality nestled in the western foothills of Mont-Saint-Bruno. The seigneury of Montarville was granted in1710 to the illustrious former governor of Trois-Rivires, PierreBoucher. The parish of Saint-Bruno, which took root there and in which a village grew, became a municipal corporation in1845. To this day, it is one of the most prosperous localities, with a strong sense of belonging, a very dynamic community life and jealously preserved natural environments. A whole program had been drawn up for the celebration, but the current health crisis has taken over some of the planned activities, which has in no way diminished the pride and festive spirit of the people of Montarville. On July1st, we will have a good reason to be proud, in spite of everything. Happy 175thanniversary to Saint-Bruno-de-Montarville. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Maloney. Mr. James Maloney (EtobicokeLakeshore, Lib.): Mr. Chair, thank you for allowing me to take a moment to highlight an initiative that I started early on during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Heroes of EtobicokeLakeshore is an opportunity for citizens in my riding to recognize the contributions of those in their community who make life a bit easier. I'm pleased with the number of nominations I received that honour everyone from front-line workers to businesses that are innovating in these difficult times to volunteers who are finding new ways to reach out. I think of Daniel Lauzon who set up Food for Now, a mobile service that helps take care of the homeless. I think of Toni Varone, who helped his business clients by forgiving their rents, or young Lucas, who wanted to thank his teachers. I've been moved and inspired by the countless stories of generosity, strength, resiliency, kindness, incredible character and creativity. I want to thank all the heroes, as well as the people who nominated them. Keep them coming. Stay safe, everyone, and I wish you happy Canada Day early. The Chair: We'll now move on to Ms. Wong. Hon. Alice Wong (Richmond Centre, CPC): Mr. Chair, it gives me great pleasure to thank a local Richmond-based charity, the Social Diversity for Children Foundation, SDC, for its hard work both in raising funds for the purchase of personal protective equipment and in distributing this PPE to long-term care facilities and individual seniors'homes in the lower mainland of B. C. The COVID-19 relief fund is supported by a dozen other non-profits, businesses and community groups. Over the past two months, SDC has been to 32 seniors homes and senior-related organizations. In total, it has delivered masks to 7,000 care workers, staff and seniors. It is amazing to have witnessed how the younger generation have gotten involved in caring for the elderly at this very challenging time. The Chair: We'll now go to Ms. Damoff. Ms. Pam Damoff (Oakville NorthBurlington, Lib.): Mr. Chair, June is ALS Awareness Month, and 79 years after Lou Gehrig died from ALS little has changed. There's still no cure, and those with ALS typically die within five years of diagnosis. On June 21, Canadians will gather virtually to raise funds for ALS Canada in the Walk to End ALS. In Halton, normally we meet each year at Bronte Creek Provincial Park on the May long weekend to raise funds for ALS Canada. This year I will virtually join Tim's Titans, a team formed to honour Tim Robertson, my friend who died in 2016 after living with ALS for 13 years. I have a T-shirt, with a picture of Lou Gehrig, that says, Great Player. . . Lousy Disease and Tim's Titans. . . Great Team! ALS. . . Still a Lousy Disease. Join me on June 21 for the virtual Walk to End ALS to raise funds to support patients and their families and for ALS research. The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Khera. Ms. Kamal Khera (Brampton West, Lib.): Mr. Chair, on Saturday our community stood and marched in solidarity against anti-black racism. The peaceful protests that we're seeing across the country and around the world were not triggered by an isolated incident. They are fuelled by decades of ineffective action against something that is so insidious and deeply entrenched in our history, systems and institutions. For us, that is the racial inequality faced by Canada's indigenous and black communities. Anti-black racism is real. It exists right here in Canada, in our communities, including in Brampton. It exists when racialized students at McCrimmon Middle School are called McCriminals. It exists when a shocking report exposes the Peel District School Board's failure to work fairly with the black community. It exists when D'Andre Campbell, who was fighting mental illness, loses his life at the hands of the police. It is clear that we need reform. We need to dismantle the systems that allow this privilege and oppression to take form, and address the unconscious bias plaguing our institutions. We'll need to be bold, and the time to do that is now. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd (Sturgeon RiverParkland, CPC): Mr. Chair, a few months ago I rose in the House on the eve of our closure due to COVID-19. I told Canadians we must not give in to fear, that we would carry on and get through this crisis stronger than ever. Today, in this city and across Canada, Canadians are enjoying a beer on their favourite patios. Businesses are reopening, jobs are returning and our lives are starting to feel a bit normal again. Canadians pulled together, and because of that we did not see the devastating death toll that many had predicted. Life may be returning to normal, but unfortunately, here in this chamber of democracy, the people's voices continue to be shut down. There is no good reason for Parliament to be suspended today. In the words of my grandfather, it's time for the Liberals to get with the program and bring back the House. The Chair: We will now proceed with Ms. Jones. Ms. Yvonne Jones (Labrador, Lib.): Mr. Chair, from in-person learning to virtual classrooms, COVID-19 has drastically changed the lives of students across the country, especially those in post-secondary education who are worried about covering costs like tuition or rent this coming fall. Our government recognized that students should not have to worry or put their futures on pause during this difficult time. That's why last month the federal government introduced the Canada emergency student benefit. If you're a high school student headed to a post-secondary school, or a current post-secondary student or a recent graduate, you can receive the Canada emergency student benefit every four weeks and have the financial support that you need to save for school. We also doubled Canada student grants and loans, enhanced the student loan program, increased supports for indigenous post-secondary education and introduced the Canada student service grant for those who wish to pursue it. Our government is here to help all students get the support they need to pursue their future goals successfully. I wish them all the very best, and I wish all of you, my colleagues and those across Canada, a very happy National Indigenous Peoples Day, which is coming up on June 21. The Chair: I want to remind the honourable members to keep to their 60 seconds so that we don't go over the time. I'm sure it would be a lot easier for everyone if we stuck to that limit. We will now go to Mr. Aitchison. Mr. Scott Aitchison (Parry SoundMuskoka, CPC): Mr. Chair, I rise today to once again implore the government to do something about the horrible lack of access to and crazy cost of rural Internet service. Right now, too many areas of my riding have no access to rural Internet service at all, and those who can get service are paying through the nose. I've even heard constituents say that during this pandemic, they are having to choose between feeding their kids and educating them. Over the last few weeks, Conservatives have been consulting with rural Canadians, and the results are in. My constituents are tired of fancy political promises. They are frustrated beyond belief by the new challenges created by this pandemic. They are absolutely fed up with having their pleas ignored. All we want is affordable and reliable Internet service. Is that too much to ask of the government? The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. MacGregor. Mr. Alistair MacGregor (CowichanMalahatLangford, NDP): Mr. Chair, these last few months have been incredibly challenging for the residents of CowichanMalahatLangford, who have been forced to deal with the economic and social consequences of COVID-19. The pandemic has laid bare the inadequacies of our social safety net, the weakness in our supply chains and the dependence of our society on essential workers, who often work long hours for low wages, putting themselves and their families at risk. We've also been forced to confront the systemic inequality, poverty and racism that continue to hold so many people back from achieving their full potential. I will not dishonour the sacrifice that so many have made during this time by allowing us to go back to the status quo that got us here in the first place. I will not apologize for demanding that the most vulnerable in our society get the supports and opportunities they need to live with dignity, and I will not relent from pushing my political colleagues to summon the courage necessary to implement policies that lead to environmental, economic and social justice. The Chair: I now give the floor to Mr. Blaney. Hon. Steven Blaney (BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, CPC): Mr. Chair, here is a beautiful story, the story of a woman from Bellechasse, a courageous young mother from Saint-Malachie, Marie-ChristineGoupil. With three children, including the eldest daughter with a disability, and realizing that her daughter with a disability had special clothing needs, she decided to go into business to meet the needs of other parents who, like her, were facing their child's clothing challenges. Last week, she presented her Handy clothing collection on the show Dans l'il du dragon. It was a very emotional moment for the audience and the dragons. They were so touched that they decided to give her the amount she wanted without diluting her shares. The video of her presentation has already been viewed over 1million times on social networks. Marie-ChristineGoupil has discovered a passion for entrepreneurship and has moved and inspired many people with her passionate and courageous attitude. Congratulations, Ms. Goupil, your example makes us proud. The Chair: Mr. Blanchet, you have the floor. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet (BeloeilChambly, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I lend my voice to the Chief of the Assembly of First Nations of Quebec-Labrador, GhislainPicard, whose message is as follows: There have been no fewer than 14reports and conclusions of commissions of inquiry since1967 highlighting major problems in relations between law enforcement agencies and indigenous people. Each time, the conclusions have been overwhelming and highlight a disturbing reality. The justice system has failed indigenous people. Are you going to respond, as you too often do, by moving on to the next one, or are you going to do what we expect you to do, which is to recognize that the justice system discriminates against indigenous people and that we have no less right to security than the rest of the population? In three months, police interventions have claimed more victims among our members than the pandemic. But it is not enough to simply take a knee and denounce racism. It's about standing up and taking action. Those are the words of GhislainPicard. The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Harder. Ms. Rachael Harder (Lethbridge, CPC): Over the last few months, Canada's democracy has been disregarded and an autocracy has been resurrected in its place. By refusing to hold regular parliamentary sittings, Mr. Trudeau is sending a strong message to the Canadian public that he alone is the one who matters. In 2014, he professed that Canadians want their Members of Parliament to be effective voices for their communities in Ottawa, and not merely mouthpieces for an all-too-powerful Prime Minister. As it stands, however, he has shut down Parliament. Effectively, he has stripped us, the opposition, of our privileges and our powers. Sadly, Mr. Trudeau has become the all-too-powerful Prime Minister that he once warned against. A government that does not allow for effective opposition is not functioning in the best interest of Canadians; it is operating in the best interest of itself and, even more so, the interest of the Prime Minister. Canadians deserve to flourish in a democracy, not merely survive under the autocracy that this Prime Minister has created. The Chair: We'll now go on to Ms. Zahid. Mrs. Salma Zahid (Scarborough Centre, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I would like to recognize the work of Agincourt Community Services Association and its tireless executive director, Lee Soda, who have been serving our community during the COVID-19 pandemic. Under more pressure than ever, their staff and volunteers continue to serve a community whose need was great even before the crisis. Their food bank helps over 4,000 people weekly. They have opened outdoor washrooms and hand-washing stations for vulnerable communities and are delivering groceries and other essentials to vulnerable seniors. ACSA is a bridge between those who can help and those who need help, and they are just one example of how our community has come together to meet this challenge. There are restaurants and businesses donating meals to front-line workers, residents answering the call to stock the food bank shelves and neighbours looking in on the vulnerable and isolated. I am so proud of our community's spirit. Scarborough is strong. The Chair: We'll now proceed to the questioning of ministers. Please note that we will suspend the proceedings twice in order to allow employees who provide support for the sitting to replace each other safely. The first question goes to the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Chair, for months Conservatives have been pointing out flaws in Liberal government programs that are preventing Canadians from getting the help they need. The Prime Minister has refused to make these very technical changes to get more help to Canadians who need it. For example, on the wage subsidy, more than two-thirds of the money allocated for that program has lapsed because businesses don't qualify. I have a simple question. Will the Prime Minister change the program to allow companies who have made acquisitions to access the wage subsidy to keep more people working? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Papineau, Lib.): Mr. Chair, from the very beginning we knew that as we rolled out measures, we would need to improve them and tweak them, and that's exactly what we've been doing over the past three months. We needed to make measures happen quickly for Canadians, and we did that. But we continued to improve them, to make additions and amendments so that more people could get the help they needed, including with the proposed legislation last week that expanded the reach of the wage subsidy to more businesses. Unfortunately, the Conservatives didn't even want us to debate that particular piece of legislation. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Actually, Mr. Chair, it was the Liberals who said no to the motion to allow this Parliament to sit to debate that motion, and even in that legislation they refused to allow businesses who have made acquisitions to access the program. Now, when we look at the rent relief program, it is so difficult to apply for it that many landlords are refusing to bother, leaving even more small businesses to fall through the cracks. In fact, of the $3 billion allocated to the rent relief program, only $39 million has been paid out. That's less than 2%. Now, the Prime Minister is still using talking points from April. It's now June and he has refused to fix these programs and has successfully talked out the calendar on the days that the House of Commons could meet to discuss these programs. When will he make these changes to get more help to Canadians who need it? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, throughout this pandemic, we have constantly been updating and expanding our various programs. We recognize, in conversations with the premiers, how important it is to make sure that we're working together, the provinces and the federal government, on issues like rent subsidies where commercial rent is indeed a provincial jurisdiction. Many provinces have moved forward with the eviction bans that are necessary to go along with this, and we'll continue to work with provinces to make sure that we're getting Canadians the help they need. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Mr. Chair, Canadians cannot wait. He has run down the clock on parliamentary sittings and he still refuses to make these changes to get more help to Canadians. Today, we learned that Telus has installed Huawei technology in downtown Ottawa. There are over 80 sites across the national capital region with Huawei technology installed. Some of these sites are very near sensitive government institutions, like government departments, the National Research Council, RCMP headquarters and the Bank of Canada. How long has the Prime Minister known that Huawei technology has been installed in the Ottawa area? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, first off, on the issue of Parliament, it has been meeting four times a week over the past many weeks, and members of the opposition have been able to continue to ask questions on COVID-19 and a broad range of subjects. Moreover, every two weeks the finance department puts forward at the finance committee the full transparent measures that we've taken, so that parliamentarians can study them. We are continuing to work in this crisis. At the same time Mr. Ziad Aboultaif (Edmonton Manning, CPC): Answer the question. The Chair: I'm sorry? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: in regard to Huawei technology there are strict rules for companies to follow and we assume they will all follow those. The Chair: We'll pause for a second and stop the clock. I want to remind the honourable members who are joining us virtually that heckling really does disrupt the whole session. Your face does come up and we do see who it is, so I just want to make sure that you're aware of that. Now we'll go back to Mr. Scheer. We have a minute and 10 seconds left. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister is bragging about accountability and transparency. Will he table an economic update before the House rises? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, throughout this unprecedented pandemic, we have been open and transparent about all of the measures we've put forward. We've updated the finance committee The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer: That's a long way of saying no, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister has pursued a policy of appeasement in pursuit of a personal vanity product at the UN. In the process, he's cozied up to dictators and human rights violators. He's abandoned Israel and committed funding to UNRWA, an organization whose schools have been used as storage facilities for Hamas rockets against Israeli civilians, and whose facilities have served as breeding grounds for racism and anti-Semitism. He has apologized for the Iranian regime when it shot down a plane full of Canadian citizens, and he refuses to list the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist entity. What's the point of having a seat at the table if you have to sell out Canadian principles to get there? The Chair: The Right Honourable Prime Minister. Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, we see that the Conservatives have kept with the Harper approach to international diplomacy. The failed presence of Canada on the world stage was an embarrassment for many Canadians for many years. That's why, when we took office five years ago, we demonstrated the kind of leadership on values that Canadians expected. We will continue to work around the world to defend multilateralism. The Chair: We have a point of order. Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May: This being a committee, we can have a point of order during what would have been question period. I am not sitting that far away from the Prime Minister, and I'm sorry, but Andrew Scheer used to be the Speaker of the House and should show better decorum. The Chair: We have a point of order from Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, on the same point of order, it is disgusting for the leader of the Green Party to use decorum as an excuse to interrupt the Leader of the Opposition in the middle of critical lines of questioning. The leader of the Green Party knows the rules of the House and shouldn't be abusing them to advance a partisan agenda. The Chair: We're getting into debate. I do want to point out that the time had run out. We're now moving on to the next line of questions. On a point of order, Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer: I appreciate the honourable leader of the Green Party, Elizabeth May, for that reminder. When I was Speaker I always appreciated her help and advice about how to improve decorum in here. I just want to say to the member, and to all members, that the reason that I cannot control myself is that the Prime Minister used the word embarrassment in answering a foreign affairs question, and it just made me think of the India trip. The Chair: I believe we're getting into debate and arguments. Mr. Blanchet, you have the floor. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: Mr. Chair, while the Greens and the Conservatives are saying that they'll be waiting outside after the meeting, I will ask a question. The Prime Minister has extended the Canada emergency response benefit, and that's good news, but it's not enough. Last week in the House, the government said it was urgent to fight fraud. For us, it was also urgent to adjust the CERB to the needs of the tourism, arts and agriculture sectors. Farmers are going to be seriously under-resourced. So what happened to the urgency of reforming the CERB? Why is the government refusing to talk to the opposition parties? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, I am very pleased to hear the hon. member finally align himself with the positions of the Liberal Party. Unfortunately, the Bloc is a week late. It should have let us debate these concerns in the House last week. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: It seems to me that the word alignment here is a fantasy. We have unequivocally proposed to extend the debate to reach an agreement, which brings me to my second question. Last week, the issue of assistance to people with disabilities was also a pressing concern, and it's even more so a week later. The Bloc proposed to extend the discussions and split the government's bill in two to help people with disabilities. Why is the government refusing this assistance to people with disabilities, when it could have been debated with the opposition in a civilized and proper way in a Parliament in which it has a minority? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: That was exactly what we wanted, but unanimous consent of the Chamber was required to debate this matter, and the Conservative Party of Canada voted against it. Unfortunately, we are going to have to find a different way to help people with disabilities. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: If the idea is so good and wonderful, why not start over and open the dialogue now? What's stopping the Prime Minister from being a rallying point and inviting us to take to each other and resolve the problem, rather than saying that he is going to pack up his toys and go home? The people with disabilities are the ones who will pay the price. Where was the Prime Minister on October21,2019? He received a minority mandate from Quebeckers and Canadians. Why is he behaving like something between a prime minister with a majority and a monarch by divine right? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: I've heard the Conservative Party and the Bloc Qubcois throw their accusations around. They don't point out that the House of Commons did indeed give its consent to extend the mandate of the Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic until the end of June. Three parties agreed, which was the right thing to do in the context of this minority government. We've been working with the other parties. However, as they did not get the results they wanted, they complained. Unfortunately, they too are part of a minority Parliament and must respect the voice of the majority of parliamentarians, just as we do. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: I might have been tempted, but that's unlikely to happen because the Prime Minister isn't me, he's him. It's therefore up to him to bring people together, open a dialogue and recall Parliament. All we were asking for was the opportunity to talk for an hour or two. However, suddenly he doesn't want to play anymore. It's not working anymore, and there's something a bit strange about that. In addition, the government wants to buy the right to interfere in provincial and Quebec jurisdictions for $14billion. However, Quebec and a number of provinces are refusing to allow it to interfere in their jurisdictions and are asking that this money be paid to them unconditionally. Is the Prime Minister trying to take advantage of the crisis or is he trying to create a constitutional crisis? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, the safety of Canadians is the responsibility of all levels of government. That's why we have proposed a $14billion agreement to ensure that all Canadians across the country experience a safe re-opening of the economy. This is a proposal that we are working on with the provinces because we know that there are needs across the country, including early childhood centres, screening and support for municipalities. The federal government wants to be there to help the provinces. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh (Burnaby South, NDP): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Indigenous leaders have expressed a lack of confidence in the RCMP commissioner's ability to tackle full-scale systemic racism, but the Prime Minister has expressed his confidence in the commissioner. What's that based on? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, over the past two years, Commissioner Lucki has made significant strides forward on an issue where there is still much more to do. We know that systemic racism exists in all of our institutions across this country The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: This is the same RCMP commissioner who just recently said that they couldn't explain what systemic racism was. Now the Prime Minister says that he has confidence, when indigenous leaders express their lack of confidence. Why does the Prime Minister believe that the RCMP commissioner can tackle systemic racism in the RCMP? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, systemic racism is something that touches every corner of our country, every corner of our institutions. It requires people to understand and move forward in coordinated ways with partners. The commissioner is committed to doing that, alongside members of our government. We will do that together and work with indigenous communities and black The Chair: Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, recent events have made it abundantly clear that to tackle the systemic racism at the level of the RCMP, we need a full-scale overhaul of the RCMP. Is the Prime Minister committed to a full-scale overhaul of the RCMP to root out systemic racism? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: As I've said many times, Mr. Chair, I am committed to addressing systemic racism in this country and taking significant, bold actions to reduce the amount of discrimination that indigenous peoples, that racialized Canadians face on a daily basis. We have much work to do, but we will do it together. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, Black Lives Matter has been calling for governments to defund the police. What it's saying is that we need to be better at where we spend our money, investing in communities and not policing. Will the Prime Minister commit to a review of the RCMP budget to allocate resources to community services and not to policing? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, over the past years we have been investing more directly and more money in community organizations, in the black community, and working with indigenous partners on the path to reconciliation. We have been investing in the kinds of community-based programs and solutions that are part of the solution. We know there is much more to do, and we will continue to look at all of our expenditures to make sure we're doing the right things. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, over the past few years, while the Prime Minister has been in office, the RCMP budget has increased by 31%. More money is going towards policing. In recent events we've seen people who needed a health care response to a health care crisis been killed by the RCMP. Does the Prime Minister believe that we need to be investing in a health care response instead of a police response for people who are faced with a crisis? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, the member opposite well knows that it's not an either-or. We need to make sure that our systems across the board, from our police systems to our judicial systems, to our health care systems, to our community systems, are actually addressing the systemic discrimination issues that are embedded within them That is exactly what we are going to continue to do in the coming years. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, with regard to the CERB extension, can the Prime Minister guarantee that everyone who is receiving CERB payments now will continue to do so without any gaps throughout the summer? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, I am happy to highlight that many Canadians who were on the CERB are now returning to work. Many more who are on the CERB now will be returning to work in the coming weeks. We know that as the economy gets back to work, people will want to The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Can the Prime Minister assure people who need it that they will continue to receive the CERB over the summer, yes or no? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: We are very pleased to point out that we are going to extend the Canada emergency response benefit for at least another eight weeks, because a lot of people are going to need it. Even if they want to work, there aren't enough jobs for everyone. So we'll be there for them, as we have been from the beginning. The Chair: We're going to pause and suspend proceedings just for a few moments to allow our support staff to substitute for one another in a healthy and safe way. We'll now proceed with Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod (KamloopsThompsonCariboo, CPC): Mr. Chair, it was really a surprise in the middle of a pandemic to see the Prime Minister at his first campaign stop last week in Ottawa. Certainly the game plan has become very transparent. He has a daily report show and he wants to sideline Parliament, dominate the news cycle and keep everyone in the dark about the state of the economy. According to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, there is no reason that he cannot provide the fiscal update during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the PBO has published a number of reports himself. Why won't the Prime Minister provide a fiscal update so we can all understand the state of our economy, or is that just not part of his campaign playbook? Hon. Mona Fortier (Minister of Middle Class Prosperity and Associate Minister of Finance): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Canada's economy is in a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We've been clear about that. We will continue to be open and transparent about the actions that we are taking to support families, businesses, workers, our health care system and our economy. This includes biweekly reports to Parliament on the full cost and status of our economic measures. Once it is possible to provide a clear economic projection, we will provide an update. We are in this together, and we are prepared to do whatever is necessary to support Canadians. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: Chair, Canada's economy was in trouble prior to the COVID, with some of the worst numbers since 2009. Government revenues in March dropped by 7. 2%, and it's shameful and, quite frankly, it's outrageous that they refuse to provide Parliament and Canadians with an economic update. Households during this challenging time know how much money is coming in and they know how much money is going out. The picture is not pretty, but they know what the picture is. Can the finance minister at least reveal the projected revenue decline in quarters one and two? Hon. Mona Fortier: The Canadian economy is going through a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We've known this for three months. We've continued to be open and transparent about the measures we've put in place for Canadians, workers and businesses. In fact, we have reported biweekly to Parliament on the total cost and status of our plan's measures. As soon as it's possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide a comprehensive update to Canadians The Chair: We go back to Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: Other governments have managed to provide updates for their citizens and carry out their responsibilities, but of course this government has sidelined Parliament with simply a question-but-no-answer period. Let's try something else. The forestry industry was in crisis even before the pandemic, with mills closing down and thousands of jobs lost. Eight weeks ago, Minister Freeland said, I have had many discussions with leaders in our forestry sector and the provinces about what we can do to support the industry today. Meanwhile, we've had support going to the arts and we've had support going to fisheries, just to name a few, but arguably for the industry that was having some of the most numerous challenges, it has been radio silence. That was eight weeks ago today. Can the government at least commit to releasing an updated softwood lumber transition plan before we rise? Hon. Seamus O'Regan (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Chair, we remain committed, of course, to the forestry industry and seeing it through this pandemic and this very uncertain time. The expanding market opportunities program, for instance, has helped Canada's forestry sector diversify, create jobs and open new markets. We've had new construction projects that are active today, using Canadian wood in key markets like Korea, Japan, China and the United States. Tomorrow this House will vote on our government's investment of $20. 97 million for this program. It's part of our budget 2019 commitment to invest $251 million over three years, and I hope the opposition will support us in that. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: It was stated in a major newspaper this morning that this government is like a sexy sports carvroom, vroom, vroombut with a history of breakdowns and major repairs. I think that might describe what has been happening. For forestry, it has been eight weeks and there has been nothing. There is another area that Deputy Prime Minister Freeland did talk about. We were talking about the U. S. softwood lumber duties that are being held in the United States. It's billions of dollars being held with the U. S. treasury. In April, she acknowledged that these duties are a real issue for the softwood lumber industry. What's been done since that time? Hon. David Lametti (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada): Mr. Chair, Canada's forestry industry supports good middle-class jobs in communities across our country. The sector is also an essential link in the medical equipment supply chain, and we thank them for all the work they're doing. We're aware of the immense pressures faced by this sector, especially at this time, and Deputy Prime Minister Freeland and others are taking that seriously and working through this issue. As our government has said repeatedly, we firmly believe that the U. S. duties on Canadian softwood lumber are unfair and unwarranted, and we will pursue all means in order to The Chair: Before continuing, I want to remind honourable members who are at home to make sure that the boom on their headsets is down. It just makes a better pickup. We heard everything, but it was a little distant. That's for everyone's benefit. We're now going to continue with Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell (Louis-Saint-Laurent, CPC): Mr. Chair, before I ask my question, I'd like to pay tribute to the Minister of Justice, particularly to his versatility. Today, he talked about forests. Yesterday, the Minister of Justice talked about Davie and indigenous affairs. Really, this minister is very versatile. My question is directly for the Minister of Finance. I like Mr. Lametti very much, but I'd like Mr. Morneau to answer my question. Yesterday, in a Senate parliamentary committee, the Minister of Finance half-opened the door to an economic update. Based on what he said, it seems that, as we speak, a committee of the Department of Finance is working on an economic update. Could Mr. Morneau tell Canadians when he is going to table this economic update? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, as we know, the Canadian economy is going through a period of extraordinary uncertainty. As soon as it's possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide a full update to Canadians. Right now, we can say that we have supported workers, businesses and Canadians with the emergency measures we have put in place. We will continue to do so, because we need to be sure that Canadians can get through this crisis. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I thought it was too good to be true. The Minister of Finance is opening the door, and the Minister of Small Business is closing it. We don't know when the economic update will take place, yet all across Canada, provinces are doing economic updates. Could Mr. Morneau explain to Canadians why he is unable to give one? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, since the beginning of the crisis, we have implemented the economic action plan to respond to COVID-19, and we've provided immediate assistance to Canadians, businesses and workers. Over 2. 5million jobs were protected by the Canada emergency wage subsidy. In addition, 8. 4million Canadians The Chair: We are returning to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, next Friday, the Quebec minister of finance, EricGirard, will give an economic update. If EricGirard can give one for Quebec, why can't BillMorneau give one for Canada? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, once again, we have been open and transparent from the outset. We have devoted our energy to support Canadians, workers and businesses. We will continue to do so. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I cannot judge the quality of the work done by the provinces, but what I do know is that Quebec, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland have also made efforts to support their residents economically. Those provinces are able to table economic updates. Yesterday, Saskatchewan even tabled a budget. Why is Bill Morneau unable to table an economic update for all Canadians? Hon. Mona Fortier: Let me repeat for my hon. colleague that we are going through extraordinarily uncertain times. We have continued to be open and transparent. We have reported biweekly to Parliament on the total cost and status of the measures in our economic response plan. Once again, as soon as clear economic projections can be provided, we will provide an update The Chair: Mr. Deltell has the floor. Mr. Grard Deltell: The minister talks about the total cost of the government's economic expenditures. So I ask the question: so far, over the past three months, how much has the pandemic cost Canadians? Hon. Mona Fortier: As I said earlier, it is important to note that we have put forward measures, including the wage subsidy, which have helped more than 2. 5million The Chair: Mr. Deltell has the floor. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I have been trying for four minutes to get anything remotely resembling an answer, and I'm getting absolutely nothing. I am not asking questions for myself; I am asking questions for Canadians. Why are the government and the Minister of Finance, Bill Morneau, not able to table an economic update when some provinces are able to? Hon. Mona Fortier: Once again, I would like to remind my hon. colleague that we have provided interest-free loans to businesses. More than 669,000loans have been approved. We have continued to support businesses and Canadians during this time The Chair: Mr. Deltell, you have time for a very brief question. Mr. Grard Deltell: The only thing that distinguishes the provinces that table economic updates and the current government is political will. Why does Bill Morneau not have the political will to tell Canadians the truth? Hon. Mona Fortier: Once again, we have been open and transparent. As soon as it is possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide Canadians with a full update. The Chair: We will now continue with Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya (MarkhamUnionville, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. COVID-19 has sparked and spurred anti-Asian racism. These are not just racist comments online; Asian Canadians have been attacked. What is the government doing to combat anti-Asian racism? Hon. Bardish Chagger (Minister of Diversity and Inclusion and Youth): Mr. Chair, since our government took office in 2015, we have been making investments and working with communities. The difference between our government and the previous government is that we will actually consult with Canadians, including black Canadians, including Asian Canadians, to respond to the challenges, including with an anti-racism secretariat and an anti-racism strategy. It will take all of us. I appreciate the member's question, so that we can also work together. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, one business owner I know in Markham has operated for 20 years. Now she's looking at over $9,000 in rent due on June 24. COVID-19 has crippled her sales and she's going to go out of business. Her landlord has no interest in the Canada emergency commercial rent assistance program. How can the government say this program is working? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, this program was made possible by working with the provinces, and we will continue to encourage landlords and tenants to work together to make sure they have relief for this very difficult time in which they're living. We're continuing to monitor the CECRA program and we will make it possible for businesses to have access to the program. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, the government business rent relief program has been a total disaster. Even the government's own numbers show it is a failure. As of June 8, less than 2% of the $3 billion budgeted has been spent. What is it going to take for the government to admit that the program is a disaster and needs changes? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we know our government has been working closely with the provinces and territories to deliver the Canada emergency commercial rent assistance. Although the tenant-landlord relationship is ultimately the responsibility of the provinces and territories, our government has stepped up to provide support through the tools we have and through CMHC so that small businesses can get the rent relief they need. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, according to the government, there are around 1. 1 million small businesses in Canada. At committee, we were told only around 5,500 of them are receiving COVID-19 rent relief. That number is shameful. When will the Liberal government wake up and make the changes? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we welcome the steps some provinces and territories have taken to further protect commercial tenants. We will continue to monitor this program closely and ensure that Canada's small businesses are supported during this challenging time. We will continue to monitor to see The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, there was no answer. When can the government make these changes? Hon. Mary Ng (Minister of Small Business, Export Promotion and International Trade): Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable colleague that we are doing everything and will continue to do everything to help small businesses in our country. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, on May 27 the CBSA seized 65 small handguns at Pearson airport, the largest firearms seizure on record. It is clear that smuggled handguns are the weapon of choice for criminals. Why is the Prime Minister focusing on an ineffective municipal ban? Hon. Bill Blair (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness): Mr. Chair, I would point out that gun violence in any of our communities is unacceptable, and it's important that governments and communities take steps to prevent guns from getting into the hands of criminals. That's why we do important work at our border to keep guns from being smuggled into our country, but it also necessitates additional work. I don't think you can talk about gun violence without talking about stronger gun control. That's why our government has taken a very strong position and will strengthen gun control to keep Canadians safe. The Chair: Mr. Saroya, you may have a 10-second question, if that's possible, please. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, COVID-19 has not stopped gun violence in the GTA. My constituents are concerned about shootings minutes away from their homes. We know the Liberals'gun ban won't change anything, but a focus on smuggled guns and criminals will. When will they make that change? Hon. Bill Blair: Mr. Chair, stronger gun control laws are an effective tool, and that's been told to us by police leadership and communities across the country. We're also making investments in borders and law enforcement. Most importantly, we're making investments in communities and in kids to keep communities safe. I look forward to the member's strong support of those measures when we bring them forward. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback (Prince Albert, CPC): Mr. Chair, the U. S. and the U. K. began their second round of free trade negotiations yesterday. Does the government intend to have a trade agreement in place before the U. K. tariffs come into effect on January 1? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, the U. K. is a strong partner of Canada, as is the European Union, and we're looking forward to continuing that strong relationship The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Thank you, Mr. Chair. With respect to the negotiations with the U. K. , when will the minister publish her goals and objectives for this agreement? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, we're going to continue to work to ensure that any future agreement is going to be based on the best interests of Canadians, and we will The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Can the minister confirm whether they've entered into negotiations with the U. K. at this point? Hon. Mary Ng: Our government is analyzing the most-favoured-nation tariff regimes schedule the U. K. has put out. I want to assure Canadians The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Mr. Chair, during the CUSMA negotiations, a deal was struck between the Liberal Party and the NDP that the government would notify this House 90 days before it starts any negotiations on any trade agreement. When will the minister notify this House? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that we will absolutely be sharing information. Right now, we are analyzing the most-favoured-nation tariff regimes schedule put out by the U. K. Mr. Randy Hoback: Mr. Chair, any meaningful attempts to reform the WTO needs buy-in from the United States. I think all countries agree on that. Has the minister discussed a WTO reform with the USTR, the United States trade representative? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, the Ottawa Group is a consensus-based group, and any decisions will be taken together. Of course, any meaningful reform must include the U. S. The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Has the U. S. been invited to the Ottawa Group meetings? Hon. Mary Ng: The Ottawa Group is a consensus-based group limited to WTO members who are committed to bringing forward ideas and proposals The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Just as with any other trade agreement, the minister has committed to this House that she will publish the list of goals and responsibilities for the negotiations. When will she publish the list for the Ottawa Group? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I'm thrilled that we had an excellent meeting of the Ottawa Group yesterday where, as a group, we agreed to take concrete action. Mr. Randy Hoback: Will the minister be releasing a list of Canada's objectives we would like to see the new WTO's director-general pursue prior to the upcoming DG election? Hon. Mary Ng: We published an action statement from the Ottawa Group yesterday. I would encourage the member opposite to have a look. I'm certainly happy to send it to him. Mr. Randy Hoback: Going back to economic prosperity, we know that the U. S. has been having talks with other countries around the world. Has Canada yet been invited to this group? Hon. Mary Ng: I'm pleased to continue to pursue the objectives of trade diversification. I would remind the member that we have access to a billion and a half customers through our very robust Mr. Randy Hoback: A billion and a half customers is fine if you have a functioning WTO, but if you don't have a functioning WTO, then a billion and a half customers may not be fully accessible to our suppliers, manufacturers and agriculture producers. Can the minister confirm that she's in discussions with the U. S. in joining this economic prosperity group? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that nothing is more important than standing up and helping create markets for our Canadian businesses and to help our small businesses get more export-ready so that they can grow into the international marketplace. This is work that we've committed to do, and we will keep working on it, particularly The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Yesterday Saskatchewan presented a budget. Not only did they present the budget, but they'll also actually debate the budget and pass the budget in Parliament. There's full accountability. Why won't this government do the same? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons): Mr. Chair, the House is sitting in this hybrid format so that people can participate in the House on the screens. I'm sure my colleague is happy to see that his own colleagues are able to ask questions and participate. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Williamson. Mr. John Williamson (New Brunswick Southwest, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will say that this is no substitute for Parliament, but I appreciate the opportunity. New Brunswick families and businesses are rapidly making adjustments to manage and live with the coronavirus pandemic. Businesses here are opening and services are being offered. Families are preparing for summer and even planning ahead for a new school year in September. We have a lot of work ahead of us. One notable absence is Service Canada. When does the government plan on opening its service counters to assist Canadians again? Hon. Ahmed Hussen (Minister of Families, Children and Social Development): Mr. Chair, our government is committed to ensuring that Canadians continue to have access to the benefits that they rely on through Service Canada. We have redeployed over 3,000 additional staff to ensure that Canadians continue to have access to their benefits. We've established a 1,500-agent call centre to make sure that people can get access to the phone lines to get the help they need. Mr. John Williamson: Service Canada is about more than providing COVID-19 information and benefits. Provincial governments are working hard to adjust to Canada's new normal by opening up businesses and front-line government services. When will we see Service Canada play its role and open its service counters in our communities? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Mr. Chair, we're currently working with our world-class public health experts to determine how best to reopen the Service Canada network for the public. Make no mistake: Our Service Canada employees have gone above and beyond to ensure that Canadians continue to have access to the services that they rely on and the benefits that they need. Mr. John Williamson: Please don't hide behind health experts when the Prime Minister is appearing in the middle of large protests, yet is afraid to bring back the Parliament of Canada to do its business. In fact, the New Brunswick legislature is open for regular business. Bills are being studied, opposition input is being heard and MLAs are voting on legislation, not rubber-stamping government bills. By comparison, our Parliament is stuck in pretending it cannot function like other law-making assemblies. Canadians are in the dark about our country's finances. When will the government table an economic update so taxpayers understand what was spent, what is owed by our kids and grandchildren, and what the government's fiscal footing looks like? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, nobody's hiding. Nobody's doing anything like that. The only reason my colleague is able to ask a question and I'm able to answer his question is that he's right there on the screen. We have this hybrid format that cares for MPs across the country, not only the ones sitting in the House. Mr. John Williamson: This is no substitute for Parliament. I will ask my question again. When will the government table an economic update so that taxpayers understand what was spent, what is owed by our kids and grandchildren, and what the government's fiscal footing looks like in today's environment? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, I thank my honourable colleague for his question. Canada's economy is still in a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We have been open and transparent about the measures we have been providing to support families, businesses and workers. Even our health care The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Williamson. Mr. John Williamson: Except you have not. The Auditor General is underfunded. We have no idea about the total of government spending. Again I will ask when the government will table an economic update so that we can have an understanding of what the government's fiscal footing looks like. Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we have included biweekly reports to Parliament on the full cost and status of our economic response plan measures since the beginning. I have said, and I will continue to say, that when it is possible to provide a clear economic projection, we will provide an update. Mr. John Williamson: What is the full cost to date of the government's COVID-19 relief measures, as the minister just claimed the government has provided to Parliament? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we have provided support for workers, and 2. 5 million Canadians have been helped through the Canadian wage subsidy. We have provided businesses with some loans, and 669,000 businesses have applied for these loans. Even for the CERB, we have over eight million Canadians who have applied. The Chair: We will now continue with Mr. Bergeron. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: Mr. Chair, as the leader of the Bloc Qubcois mentioned a few moments ago, the government promised $14billion to Quebec and the provinces, but in targeted transfers. That is very little compared to the considerable expenses incurred to deal with the current crisis. But Quebec and the provinces don't just want this money to be transferred unconditionally, they also want a real discussion on a permanent increase in health care transfers. PremierLegault was rightly concerned about the feds'interference into provincial jurisdictions. The federal government, which does not manage any hospitals or long-term care centres, must stop playing armchair quarterback and transfer the money to the only governments with jurisdiction over health, that is, Quebec and the provinces. Will it do so without delay and without nitpicking? The Honourable Patty Hajdu (Minister of Health): Mr. Chair, we know that the Government of Quebec is working hard to ensure the safety of Quebeckers and we are here to support them. As part of this co-operation, we have developed health and safety recommendations for workplaces, we have purchased medical equipment for workers and we have supported the province in developing its reopening program. We are continuing this important partnership to ensure the safety of Quebeckers and all Canadians. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: The co-operation is so effective that the money is staying in the federal government's coffers. In fact, when the federal government wants to impose conditions, it always takes longer. We see it with housing, for which Quebec has not received a dime of the $1. 4billion it is owed. We have also seen it with infrastructure funds, particularly for public transit, water systems and water treatment. The health crisis is now. The needs are now. The much needed reopening of our economy is now. Will the government finally transfer the money without messing around or quibbling? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I am pleased to confirm to my colleague that there is no messing around, no quibbling, nothing of the kind. There is co-operation between two levels of government. It is natural to have discussions with all the provinces and with Quebec. I myself am taking part in some discussions and several of my colleagues are taking part in others. There is a clear willingness on the part of the federal government to co-operate with Quebec and all the provinces. That is what we are doing and that is perhaps what the Bloc Qubcois does not like. It likes bickering, but for the time being, there is none. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: We don't want to bicker, we want the money to be paid out. It is not complicated, for heaven's sake! We do not want a blank cheque. Right now, the money remains in the federal government's coffers. There is $1. 4billion that should be paid to Quebec for social housing and is sitting in the federal government's coffers. We are waiting for money for water treatment and water systems, but it is sitting in the federal government's coffers. It's almost July. We are wasting precious months for construction. What is the government waiting for to pay out the money so that we can get our economy rolling? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: The federal government is a very active partner. We are discussing and working with Quebec on infrastructure projects. We are continuing our discussions and negotiations on the housing agreement. Nothing is at a standstill. We are discussing and co-operating for the well-being of all Quebeckers. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: MadamChair, things are definitely at a standstill, because the money is owed and has not been paid out. Months are going by while construction is not taking place. We need to reopen the economy. We need more flexibility in the gas tax program and Quebec's contribution to allow municipalities to undertake work on city halls, community centres and fire stations. We need the federal government to contribute to funding public transit operations, which have become a real financial drain because of the drop in ridership. What is the federal government waiting for to provide real help instead of just talking? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: When it comes to just talking, the Bloc Qubcois has a lot of experience, I admit. We, in the government, are working and co-operating. We are not waiting with our arms folded, we are discussing a series of issues with Quebec. We do more than discuss, we work and we co-operate. We are working on projects, not only in infrastructure, but in a number of other areas. Just think of the co-operation of our armed forces in the CHSLDs, for example. We are here for Quebeckers. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Your time has run out, Mr. Bergeron. We'll go now to Ms. Khalid, from MississaugaErin Mills. Ms. Iqra Khalid (MississaugaErin Mills, Lib.): Madam Chair, I'll be splitting my time with the member for GlengarryPrescottRussell. During a consultation with the business community in Mississauga, the concerns of businesses, big and small, included the need for stable, affordable and safe child care. With the lack of such child care spaces, an economic recovery plan post-COVID cannot be effective until and unless we make sure that people are able to get back to work. I've heard from parents across Mississauga that they're being forced to stay home because of inadequate child care and that they have to choose between putting food on the table and keeping family safe. More and more employers are realizing that good employees are unable to contribute to their business growth because of this challenge. Now more than ever, we need to find long-term sustainable solutions for Canadians who face challenges with regard to child care. I ask our Minister of Families, Children and Social Development this: What is our strategy to tackle this ever-growing need for a national child care plan? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I thank the honourable member for her question and for her important advocacy and work on this important issue. We understand that child care is important to our economic recovery and our social infrastructure. We know the pressure that COVID-19 has placed on families, especially parents. That is why we're committed to continuing to work with provinces and territories to renew our agreements on early learning and child care, and to provide, at the earliest opportunity, $400 million in support. In addition to that, the Prime Minister has already indicated that child care will be part of the $14-billion pledge to provinces and territories to assist them with respect to COVID-19 recovery efforts. Over the next decade, we will continue to invest $7. 5 billion, and together we have achieved the goal of over 40,000 affordable child care spaces. We are also committed to continuing to create over 250,000 before-school and after-school child care spaces for kids under the age of 10. We will continue to work with our partners in the provinces and territories to ensure that Canadians can continue to have access to safe, quality and affordable child care. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for GlengarryPrescottRussell has the floor. Mr. Francis Drouin (GlengarryPrescottRussell, Lib.): MadamChair, small businesses play a fundamental role in the Canadian economy. In an article in LaPresse, the Minister of Economic Development warned us that the economic crisis caused by severe lockdown measures could have more serious consequences in small municipalities than in large cities. Based on discussions with the chambers of commerce in my riding, it is clear that federal government assistance will be essential for the reopening of the economy, specifically for the rural economy. In fact, I would like to acknowledge the work of the Prescott-Russell community development corporation, under the leadership of John Candie. After announcing almost $57million to help SMEs adopt e-commerce, how does the minister plan to help SMEs and the business community in our rural areas? Hon. Mlanie Joly (Minister of Economic Development and Official Languages): MadamChair, I also thank my colleague from GlengarryPrescottRussell for his important question. Yes, our regions are important and the entrepreneurs in those regions are creative and daring. They take risks, but they are currently facing huge challenges. So we are here for them. We understand their anxiety and we want to help them. That is why we have decided to invest heavily in rural economic development. It is also why we have doubled the budget of CFDCs and Community Futures organizations across the country. In southern Ontario we have reinvested over $260million in the regional economic development agency FedDev. In the great riding of GlengarryPrescottRussell, which I am particularly fond of and where there is a very good member of Parliament, there is an additional $1million for entrepreneurs in the region. We have been, we are and we will be at your side. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for GlengarryPrescottRussell has 36seconds left. No? Then we'll go to the honourable member for ElmwoodTranscona. Mr. Daniel Blaikie (ElmwoodTranscona, NDP): Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with the member for Victoria. Madam Chair, Krystal is a community worker in Winnipeg. She has been working from home since late March, taking care of her child, who is out of school, and caring for her father, who is living with her and vulnerable to COVID-19. Her employer called her up recently and asked her to physically return to work or to take a leave. As a parent and a care provider to a vulnerable person, she's not comfortable with physically returning to work. Service Canada won't give Krystal a straight answer as to whether going on leave and collecting CERB would count as refusing a reasonable job offer. With Bill C-17 looming in the background, Krystal is worried about jail time and fines if she does right by her child and her father by applying for CERB. Can Krystal reasonably refuse to go back to work and collect CERB, or will she be considered a fraudster? That's my question for the minister that is specific to Krystal's case. As well, what is the minister doing to provide clear direction to Canadians and to Service Canada agents so that people can get a clear answer before making their decision about returning to work? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I want to thank the honourable member for his important question. We recognize that Canadian workers will face various different situations, including those who are ineligible for the Canada emergency support benefit. We'll continue to work with workers to make sure they're able to be supported throughout this pandemic. The fact of the matter is that every province has workplace health and safety regulations that must be supported. We understand that workers have the right not to work in unsafe situations. We also understand that many Canadians do want to go back to work; and in fact many have. We will make sure that we support Canadians throughout this recovery process. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member has 47 seconds left, and that includes the answer. Mr. Daniel Blaikie: Madam Chair, that answer is really not good enough, because the problem here is that Krystal needs to know whether she can continue receiving CERB or not. That's a federal government decision, and she needs to know whether the federal government is going to accuse her of fraud and put her in jail or assess fines against her if she refuses to go back to work because she wants to take care of her child and her father. What is the minister's answer to that? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister has 20 seconds to respond. Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that if a Canadian has to take care of a loved one due to circumstances surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, they are indeed eligible to receive the CERB and remain receiving that benefit. Ms. Laurel Collins (Victoria, NDP): As we deal with the global pandemic, we cannot lose sight of the ongoing climate emergency. Canada has missed every single climate target it set, and we need to break the cycle of empty promises. Canadians want their government to be accountable, and environmental groups such as Ecojustice, CAN-Rac, Environmental Defence and West Coast Environmental Law, as well as the government's own climate institute, are all calling for legally binding climate targets. When will the government put its climate targets into law with legally binding milestones so we never miss another target again? Hon. Navdeep Bains (MississaugaMalton, Lib.): Madam Chair, I thank my honourable colleague for her question. I totally agree with her when it comes to the environment. It is a priority not only for us as a government, but it should be a priority for all Canadians. That is why we have put measures in place to put a price on pollution through carbon pricing. That is why we have a comprehensive plan that also includes significant investments in clean technology, which will help reduce our carbon footprint. I am confident that these measures will enable us to not only meet but exceed our 2030 target and also allow us to achieve our net-zero 2050 target. Ms. Laurel Collins: That didn't answer my question. I asked when. Empty promises won't get us any closer to meeting our climate targets. Can the minister tell us when his government will introduce climate accountability laws? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I think the fundamental issue here is having a plan when it comes to the environment. I'm confident that the measures that we have takenputting a price on pollution, investing in clean technology, and other key measures to reduce our carbon footprint, including the investment in infrastructureunderpin a plan The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to the honourable member for Victoria. Ms. Laurel Collins: This government is not meeting its targets, but it is meeting with oil and gas lobbyists. The pandemic has made us reflect on our priorities. Are we going to choose a just recovery with good, sustainable jobs for Canadian workers, or are we going to keep subsidizing oil and gas companies to the tune of billions, subsidies that we know are ending up in the pockets of CEOs and shareholders? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will have a brief answer from the minister. Hon. Navdeep Bains: Again, Madam Chair, this is the fundamental difference between us and the NDP. We fundamentally believe that the entire economy needs to work together, including the energy sector, to enable us to achieve those 2030 and 2050 targets. We are going to work together to support our workers, including in the energy sector, to reduce our carbon footprint. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Now we will go to the honourable member for SaskatoonGrasswood, Mr. Waugh. Mr. Kevin Waugh (SaskatoonGrasswood, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. When I was last here in May, I was on my way back to Saskatoon from Toronto, and there was actually someone on my flight who tested positive for COVID-19. I was never informed of it by the airline. I found out two weeks later. The report was in the news media. Why hasn't the government put rules in place requiring airlines to reach out to individuals like me who may have been exposed to COVID on their flights? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, it's hard to speculate on what happened from such a vague description of his experience, but I will say that we have every confidence in local public health, which is doing the hard and heavy lifting of contact tracing and working very closely with all kinds of different sectors, including airline sectors, to make sure that close contacts of people who have tested positive for COVID-19 are found, are traced and are isolated. I assume that the member took appropriate precautions on the flight and I hope that he continues to do so. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, it was reported that the individual on my plane who had COVID was actually connecting in Toronto from an international flight. The Prime Minister announced last week that they would begin mandating temperature checks for those bound for Canada in July. Will international travellers be tested when they land in Canada, or will they be relying on the tests that take place in other countries? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, this is a very important question, because the protection and safety of all Canadiansin particular, Canadian travellersis a high priority for our government. We've been working very closely with the airlines. At the current time, we are putting temperature screening in place. That will initially be done primarily by the airlines that are in the best position to do it at this point in time. We are also now going to be including CATSA, the people who do the security screening, so that when people enter the airport, they will also be screened. We believe that is going to be the most effective measure to keep all travellers safe. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, last week five of the largest professional sports leagues in North America put out a statement of support for my private member's bill, the safe and regulated sports betting act. Given the struggles that clubs and leagues are facing due to COVID-19, including having no fans at all in the stands for the foreseeable future, the legalization of sports betting would be a welcome opportunity not only to engage fans but to generate much-needed revenue. Will the government commit now to supporting the sports and gaming industries by supporting my private member's bill, Bill C-218? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, I've had the opportunity on many occasions to speak to members of Parliament and also to mayors and councillors and people living in border communities where there are casinos. They've raised this issue a number of times. We've listened very carefully to the concerns that have been expressed by them. I would like to advise the member that I look forward to the opportunity for a careful examination of his bill. We are at all times concerned about maintaining the integrity of the gaming industry within our community. That's the best way to protect Canadians. At the same time, we will examine his bill with all of the necessary attention to make sure it's given full consideration. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, it's the first time in history that we've had the five professional leagues in this country joining together for this bill. Newspapers rely, as we all know, on advertising for a significant portion of their revenue. This includes the usual flyers as well as in-paper ads. I've heard major concerns from a number of newspapers in this country about competition they're receiving today from Canada Post, which is offering massive free postage services. In fact, I have one of their ads here, which says that the first 6,000 pieces of postage are 100% free. If the government is genuine about wanting to ensure that newspapers and journals can succeed in this country, why are you allowing Canada Post to use its monopoly power to actually threaten local newspapers in this country? Hon. Steven Guilbeault (Minister of Canadian Heritage): Thank you, Madame Chair, and I thank the member opposite for his question. As you well know, a healthy news and media sector in Canada is a priority for our government, which is why we have put in place a number of measures before COVID-19 and during COVID-19, and we will continue to be there for them after this crisis has gone by. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Before we go on, we will be taking a break to do a bit of a changeover. I also want to remind members to address their questions and comments to the chair. We will go now to the honourable member for BruceGreyOwen Sound, Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff (BruceGreyOwen Sound, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Mr. Blair stated yesterday here in the House that the AR-15 has been used in mass killings in Canada on many occasions. Mr. Blair, please provide just one specific instance in which an AR-15 was used in a mass killing in Canada. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I remind the member to address questions and comments to the chair. The honourable minister may respond. Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I think this is an excellent opportunity to point out to the member opposite how important it is to actually listen to what was said. If you go back and review that tape, and I would invite you to do so, you'll see that I said the AR-15 and other weapons like themreferring of course to military-style assault weaponshave been used in mass killings, and I actually cited a number of examples. Madam Chair, I think it would be very useful if the member's questions were based on facts. Mr. Alex Ruff: I can remind Mr. Blair that I actually have watched the video a couple of times, and he specifically states that the AR-15 was used in mass killings in Canada, yet he has yet to provide one. My additional question is to Mr. Blair. Out of the recently banned firearms on May 1, how many have been or are still currently in use by the Canadian Armed Forces? Hon. Bill Blair: That's an excellent question, Madam Chair, because it's very important to provide Canadians with clarity. We have prohibited these firearms for non-law enforcement and non-military use. The military uses weapons that were actually designed for soldiers to use in combat to shoot other soldiers. That's the appropriate use of such weapons, Madam Chair. They're not things to be played with in civilian society. Mr. Alex Ruff: As a soldier for 25 years, I'll remind Mr. Blair that none of the currently prohibited firearms would be used in the Canadian Armed Forces. I asked him a question on whether any of them is being or ever has been used in the Canadian Armed Forces. Are any of the recently banned firearms still in use, or have they ever been in use, in any military in the world? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, I think it's important to also recognize that the basic origin, the provenance of the weapons that we have prohibited, was in their original design. They were designed for military use for various military forces around the world. As I've said previously, they were designed for soldiers to use in combat to kill other soldiers. They're very efficient in their design for killing people. They have no purpose in Canadian society. Mr. Alex Ruff: As someone who has used many military-style firearms and who is actually involved in helping define what we purchase in the military, I would use none of the ones that are currently prohibited. I have a question, Chair, for Minister MacAulay. Can he please confirm whether Veterans Affairs has a plan to address the claims backlog, yes or no? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (Minister of Veterans Affairs): Madam Chair, I appreciate my honourable colleague's question, and yes, we've indicated that it's a major priority. That's why I'm so pleased that the supplementary estimates contained just under $90 million to address hiring more staff, improving the process and making sure that we attack the backlog in an appropriate manner. Mr. Alex Ruff: Madame Chair, does that plan exist in written form? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Well, Madam Chair, I can assure you that it's in the supplementary estimates, and of course, this money is The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We'll go back to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff: The question is about the plan, not how much money has been allocated. I am asking for the written plan on how to address the backlog. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Madam Chair, I can tell my honourable colleague that the money is in the supplementary estimates, and with the money we're able to attack this problem in an appropriate manner, and that's what is important for our veterans. Mr. Alex Ruff: The deputy minister committed on March 10 that a written plan would be provided to the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs within a month and made public. Did the deputy minister or the department provide the minister that plan within a month? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Madame Chair, I'm sure my honourable colleague wants an appropriate plan and he would be fully aware this just under $90 million would make a big difference in the plan to attack the backlog. We The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We'll go back to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff: Thank you, Chair. Therefore, my question is, if the deputy minister in the department provided him with an appropriate plan or a written plan, why is he questioning how appropriate that plan is? I have complete confidence in the deputy minister's ability to produce a written plan. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister may give a brief answer, please. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I can assure my honourable colleague that with the appropriate funding, we will address the backlog in Veterans Affairs. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Parry SoundMuskoka, Mr. Aitchison. Mr. Scott Aitchison: Thank you, Madam Chair. My question is about summer camps again. Three weeks ago, I asked this government if the finance minister would meet with the beleaguered summer camp sector. Summer camps, which are a social and economic mainstay in Parry SoundMuskoka and all of northern Ontario, have been crippled by the global pandemic. It's costing millions of jobs, and some camps are actually in danger of folding. Aside from a brief follow-up conversation over the phone with the junior minister, there has still been no action from this government. When will the Minister of Finance meet with summer camps to find a solution? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I recognize the honourable member's important question and his focus on summer camps. We recognize the importance of looking at that and paying attention to the needs of that community. We will continue to engage with them, as we have, to ensure and find ways in which we can get their feedback and find ways in which we can support them. That work is ongoing, and I assure the honourable member that our focus is on the kids and on ensuring that they have access to summer camps for this year. Mr. Scott Aitchison: I don't know why you need to find ways to get feedback. The summer camps association has given lots of feedback and my office has given lots of feedback, so I don't see what's confusing about this. However, I've become accustomed to not really getting answers to questions, so I will go to the next one. The Ontario government's regional reopening plan permits cruise boats to resume on Georgian Bay, yet the federal government is refusing to allow these vessels to operate until July 1. Therefore, small businesses such as the Island Queen cruiser in Parry Sound, which has only a very few precious weeks to operate in the first place, is losing yet another two weeks because of federal inaction. This not only hurts the cruise boat industry but also hurts tourism and small businesses all through our area. Will the Minister of Transport take a regional approach himself by lifting the federal ban on Georgian Bay, just like the Province of Ontario has done? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister may reply. Is there a response? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, there is. I apologize for the confusion. Let me respond, if I may, on behalf of the Minister of Transport. There have been a number of very important discussions with the provinces, in particular with the Province of Ontario, around provisions regarding pleasure craft. There are certain restrictions that will come to an end on June 30. We're working very closely with our provincial counterparts to address this issue, but we want to ensure that it will be done safely. Mr. Scott Aitchison: Madam Chair, I actually gave the minister a heads-up that I would be asking that question. He sent me an email today saying he was not going to be able to be in the House, and it's great of him to do that. He said that whoever was going to fill in for him would have an answer, but again, that was not really an answer. The next issue I would like to bring this government's attention to is the deplorable state of rural Internet service in Parry SoundMuskoka. Quite simply, there are too many gaps in service, and what is available is generally way too expensive. We have families trying to work and teach their kids from home on unreliable and outrageously expensive Internet service, and we have too many small businesses that either cannot access or afford reliable Internet services. Today Greg Rickford, the Ontario energy minister, and Laurie Scott, Ontario Minister of Infrastructure, announced $2. 3 million for seven northern Ontario broadband projects. Minister, will when your government get serious and become a reliable partner for the Government of Ontario and the private sector to deliver this crucial modern-day infrastructure to rural Canadians? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I remind the member that he needs to address the questions and comments to the chair. The honourable minister may reply. Hon. Maryam Monsef (Minister for Women and Gender Equality and Rural Economic Development): Madam Chair, in the best of times, life without access to high-speed Internet is hard. During a pandemic, the challenges are that much more pronounced. Our government's unprecedented investments are already connecting a million more Canadian households to this essential service, but until we achieve universal access our work is not done. We will work with our partners, including provinces across the country, to connect every Canadian household to high-quality Internet access that is affordable and reliable. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member has 30 seconds. Mr. Scott Aitchison: I think I can squeeze something in here, then. I'm wondering, then, Madam Chair, since the Province of Ontario has used the Northern Ontario Heritage Corporation Fund to make this announcement, what about using FedNor to make the same kind of announcement, and partner with the province? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister has a brief answer. Hon. Mlanie Joly: Obviously we believe in the importance of northern Ontario; that's why we nearly doubled the budget of FedNor. We will continue to invest in businesses and people all around Parry Sound, Muskoka and northern Ontario. If my colleague has specific projects in mind, please come and see me and let's have a conversation. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for Montmagny-L'Islet-KamouraskaRivire-du-Loup, Mr. Gnreux, has the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux (MontmagnyL'IsletKamouraskaRivire-du-Loup, CPC): Thank you, MadamChair. I will continue along the same lines as my colleague. During this pandemic, we are realizing the extent to which reliable high-speed Internet service is needed for Canada's economy. There are still places where telework is not possible today because of the lack of adequate coverage. However, since2015, the government has committed to addressing the situation through three new programs. Benot Pilotto, who is the mayor of Saint-Onsime-d'Ixworth, in my riding, wrote to me a few days ago. That is why I am asking you what concrete results the government plans to achieve for our rural areas by the end of the year. Hon. Maryam Monsef: At the best of times, life without high-speed Internet access is difficult. During a pandemic, the difficulties are even greater. Our government's unprecedented investments are already connecting an additional one million Canadian households to this essential service. However, until we achieve universal access, our job is not done. We are working The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Gnreux, you have the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, I am simply asking the minister to tell me when the mayor of Saint-Onsime-d'Ixworth will be able to tell his residents when the Internet will be available in his municipality. It is not complicated. What does the government plan to do so that rural municipalities across Canada can have access to the Internet as soon as possible? What is its plan? Hon. Maryam Monsef: We are working with partners across the country to ensure that every Canadian household is connected to a high-quality, accessible and affordable high-speed Internet service. Madam Chair, I assure my colleagues that we share the same goal, and we will work with all our partners across the country to ensure every Canadian household has access The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Gnreux, you have the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, I am still not getting a specific answer. According to the government's plan, when will rural Canadian businesses and households be connected? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I would ask the honourable minister to provide a brief answer. Hon. Maryam Monsef: Madam Chair, those plans are under way, and we will have more to share in the coming days. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: It seems that the Minister of Rural Economic Development plans to announce a new plan this week. Can she tell us how this program will differ from the Connect to Innovate program, which is already in place? Can the minister tell us whether her program will solve the problem of the 25square kilometre hexagonal zones, which unfortunately make many projects ineligible for the CRTC's broadband fund? Hon. Maryam Monsef: Madam Chair, I'm pleased to share with my colleague that the model he's referring to, the hexagon model, is no more. Our maps are much more precise now to ensure that we do not leave Canadians behind. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, this year, the Canada summer jobs program is a real fiasco. I think all my colleagues will agree with me. On May13,100jobs were announced in my riding; on May20,16jobs were announced; on May27,13jobs were announced; on June3,12jobs were announced; and on June10, only one job was announced. As we speak, an amount of $100,000 is still to be confirmed in my riding. Can we have an announcement, once and for all? Let's stop the piecemeal announcements and finally confirm the remaining jobs today so that our organizations can have young people before the summer starts on the weekend. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable minister. Hon. Ahmed Hussen: MadamChair, I thank the honourable member for his question. We recognize the important role that the Canada summer jobs program is playing in supporting employers and young workers in communities right across the country. Our government is working very hard to help employers adapt to the realities of the COVID-19 pandemic, and at the same time is supporting young Canadians as they begin to look for summer employment. We've introduced flexibilities into the program to ensure that more young workers have opportunities to get employed. The honourable member also has to understand that we're in the COVID-19 pandemic, and as such it will take some time for businesses to equip themselves to hire students. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for NanaimoLadysmith, Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly (NanaimoLadysmith, GP): Thank you, Madam Chair. In the first five months of this year, 554 B. C. residents died from opioid overdoses. They were teachers, construction workers, business owners, family members, neighbours and friends. Addiction is a health and social issue, but criminalization creates stigma, so people hide their drug use and die alone. Access to a safe supply of drugs and safe injection sites saves lives and puts addicts in daily contact with people who can help them. Will this government end the war on drugs by decriminalizing them, providing a safe supply and reallocating resources from policing addicts to providing treatment for them? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, I think it's really important we make sure that when we speak about people who use substances, we remove stigmatizing language like the word addict. We can stand together, as this government has, with people who use substances and their families to ensure a range of options for people who are struggling with addiction, who are using substances in a way that is harming their health and their communities. As you know, we have restored harm reduction to the Canadian drugs and substances strategy. We've made it easier for people to access safe supplies of substances. We've increased access to treatment and the variety of treatment through federal transfers to provinces and territories. Madam Chair, we're working with communities to make sure there are more community-based approaches to treating The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, the Geneva Convention considers both tear gas and pepper spray to be chemical weapons and prohibits their use in war, yet our police forces use these weapons on Canadian civilians. These weapons are indiscriminate and can affect peaceful protestors and innocent bystanders. Will the government prohibit the use of these weapons and require police to use de-escalation techniques to keep legal protests peaceful? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, the right to peaceful protest in this country is a constitutionally protected right. We want to ensure it's always respected. At the same time, Madam Chair, we recognize that the use of even less than lethal force can have significant impacts on people's safety. This is a highly regulated substance in Canada. It's prohibited for non-police use, and for the police it is and should be highly regulated. The RCMP have advised me they have not used tear gas in nine years. We'll continue to monitor it to ensure that peaceful protest is always respected. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, in 2012 the RCMP spent $14 million on 18 armoured personnel carriers. One's parked at the Nanaimo detachment. I can't imagine why we have weapons of war like this for policing civilians. Will the government rein in the RCMP budget and end wasteful spending on militarizing our civilian police forces? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, it's a very important tradition that our Canadian police are not militarized. At the same time, we've seen a number of tragedies when police have responded to situations in which people were armed with weapons designed for soldiers to kill soldiers, and they've been used to kill police officers. The militarization of our society, so strongly promoted by some, is the direct consequence of the militarization of the police. As we remove these weapons from our society and prohibit them, we'll make it safer for everyone and we can then move away from such a model of policing. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, the government spent $4. 5 billion to buy an old, leaky pipeline. Since 1961, there have been 82 reported spills from the Trans Mountain pipeline. Over 1. 5 million litres of crude oil has spilled into the surrounding environment. This weekend, the Trans Mountain pipeline leaked again, dumping 190,000 litres of oil. How much is this spill going to cost Canadian taxpayers to clean up? How much contingency funding has been budgeted to repair the environmental destruction from spills? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I want to thank the honourable colleague for his question. He full well knows that the acquisition that we made with regard to the TMX initiative is a reflection of the fact that we want this initiative to move forward in a sustainable manner and in a manner that protects the environment. I'll continue to work with my colleagues to endeavour to make sure that we have the appropriate processes in place to protect the environment and at the same time create good-quality, middle-class jobs for Canadians. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for RosemontLa PetitePatrie, Mr. Boulerice, has the floor. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice (RosemontLa Petite-Patrie, NDP): Thank you, MadamChair. The Black Lives Matter movement is right to discuss systemic racism in our societies. In Montreal, the city and the police department have recognized this, and measures will be put in place. The Liberal government, once again, is all talk and no walk. Although it spends $10million a day, we see no attempt to reform or change the RCMP. If the Prime Minister really wants to act, why is he delaying the action plan in response to the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls? Hon. Bill Blair: Let me assure this House and the member opposite that we're not dragging our feet. This is an important issue. Indigenous people, black Canadians and other racialized people are far too often experiencing systemic racism and disparate outcomes through the criminal justice system. It's incumbent upon all of us who work within the criminal justice system to take the steps and actions necessary to produce more equitable outcomes. All police services, including the RCMP, must be committed to ensuring that the people they're sworn to serve and protect are always treated with dignity and respect. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: MadamChair, why are the Liberals taking indigenous children to court to challenge the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal ruling in their favour? Hon. Marc Miller (Minister of Indigenous Services): Madam Chair, as the honourable member knows full well, a number of cases are pending, and we are currently negotiating with the parties. We are making progress, and I would be delighted to tell the member and the House about it in response to a later question. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: We've been asking questions about it for months, and as I see it, we should keep doing so. The Prime Minister's new pipeline, which taxpayers were forced to buy with their hard-earned money, has leaked. Some 190,000litres of oil spilled, and we can't even make the company pay for it because the Liberals bought the pipeline. Trans-Mountain, KeystoneXL and the resumption of gas exploration and development off the coast of Newfoundland and Labradorare these the projects the Liberals had in mind for their green recovery? Hon. Navdeep Bains: I'd like to thank the honourable member for his question. Our priority was to protect the health and safety of Canadians throughout the pandemic, especially when it comes to the environment. That's why environmental and climate change laws aimed at protecting the environment, human health and conservation will remain in force. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: Across Quebec, the cultural community is going through a harrowing time. Unions, associations, artists and creators have all taken part in public demonstrations recently to condemn the lack of a specific plan for the living arts, performing arts and festival sector. What is the government waiting for? Hon. Steven Guilbeault: I'd like to thank the member for his question. However, I strongly disagree with him. We haven't waited to develop a plan for the arts and culture sector. We listened to the community and we tailored our supports, as they were announced. We have an emergency plan for the arts and culture sector. We were asked to adapt the CERB to take royalties into account, and we did. We were asked to extend the CERB, and we did. We are fully aware that the recovery will take longer in the arts and culture sector. We have been there, we are there and we will be there for the arts and culture sector. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: Well, that wasn't at all what the artists and creators who were out demonstrating in the streets a few days ago thought. They were protesting on the weekend. The CERB extension announced by the government only brings us to September, but the cultural community is expecting the worst in the fall. What is the government's long-term plan to support creators and their entire teams? Hon. Steven Guilbeault: I'm not so sure those who were protesting last week had issues with our government, but we'd certainly be happy to speak with them. As for a long-term plan, we are currently consulting arts and culture stakeholders to contemplate together how the government can help the sector in response to the ongoing crisis. We are working on finding solutions, but until we have long-term solutions, we have seen to it that our artists and organizations have access to funding until September. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for BeauportLimoilou, Mrs. Vignola, has the floor. Mrs. Julie Vignola (BeauportLimoilou, BQ): Madam Chair, I will be sharing my time with the member for Montcalm. According to the latest news, Seaspan Shipyards will be spending an additional $1. 5billion to build two ships. Why? Because the ships were ordered in 2011 and still haven't been delivered. Davie built the Asterix without going over budget because it delivered the ship on time. Davie is currently the top shipyard, representing 50% of Canada's shipbuilding capacity. Why isn't Davie being awarded its fair share of contracts? Hon. Anita Anand (Minister of Public Services and Procurement): I'd like to thank the member for her question. Davie is certainly a strong and trusted partner that works very hard to help our government get results for Canadians. Building a new class of ships is highly complex, and it's not unusual for cost estimates to change throughout the procurement project. It's important to make sure additional funding is available for the joint support ships project to ensure the navy's vessels are delivered. Mrs. Julie Vignola: We are talking about $1. 5billion, here. In the beginning, eight years ago, the project was supposed to cost $2. 6billion. There can't be much missing when the cost overrun is double the initial estimate. Why haven't the ships been delivered yet? Why is Davie still not seen as a trusted partner? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Minister, please keep your answer brief. Hon. Anita Anand: Once again, I would point out that building a new class of ships is highly complex, and it's not unusual for the cost estimate to change for a procurement project as large as this one. I know that Davie works very hard, and we also believe it is an outstanding partner. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): It is now over to the honourable member for Montcalm, Mr. Thriault. Mr. Luc Thriault (Montcalm, BQ): Madam Chair, in Quebec, 12,000people have begun their training to work in residential and long-term care centres. They will be ready for duty in mid-September. In the meantime, we need the support of the army, which is helping us save lives. The dedication of the members of the armed forces is paramount, and I want to extend my heartfelt thanks. The government extended their mission until June26, which is only 10days away. What does the army have to do right now that is more important than helping our caregivers save lives? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, I'm glad my fellow member recognizes the fundamental role the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces have played and continue to play in residential and long-term care centres and many other areas in support of our seniors. We are in talks with the Quebec government. The discussions around providing continued assistance to Quebec are quite positive and productive. That assistance can take many forms, including the Red Cross. We will be there for our seniors, Madam Chair. Mr. Luc Thriault: We are short 12,000people, so if the Red Cross wants to help us, all the better. We'll take all the help we can get. Barely 800members of the military are still in Quebec. I repeat my question: What does the army have to do 10days from now that is more important if it's not to help caregivers save lives? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, all the members of the military are still in Quebec. They have done absolutely incredible work and are continuing to do so. The people at the Canadian Red Cross are well-trained paid workers who can perform the same work in partnership with the members of the armed forces, who can stay in Quebec as well. Right now, we are working with the Quebec government and discussing how we can keep the measure in place until September15. Mr. Luc Thriault: Madam Chair, our nurses and orderlies are exhausted. They're at the end of their ropes. Now is the time to thank them, not the time to turn our backs on them. It's not the time for dilly-dallying or discussions. It's the time to tell them that we will be there to help them until the end. I will repeat my question. What does the army have to do that is more important than helping caregivers save the lives of those who built Quebec? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The Leader of the Government in the House of Commons is asked to keep his answer brief. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, the Government of Canada is there and will continue to be there to help the people who built Quebec. The Government of Canada will work with the Quebec government to make that happen. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for Red DeerMountain View, Mr. Dreeshen. Mr. Earl Dreeshen (Red DeerMountain View, CPC): Thank you so much. Madam Chair, on May 14 I asked the Minister of Agriculture when the Liberal government would put aside its usual campaign rhetoric and recognize the very detrimental impact the carbon tax is having on farmers across this country. Minister Bibeau proudly noted that according to their data, the average cost of the carbon tax per farm across Canada is $210 to $819. We know that these numbers are completely unfounded and are not based on any factual evidence. The fact is that the Liberal government's own Parliamentary Budget Officer has estimated that at $25 per tonne, the cost for an 855-acre crop farm in Alberta is well over $6,000. The office came up with that using the government's statistics from the 2016 agricultural census. Madam Chair, the evidence is right in front of the minister. When will this Liberal government come clean with Canadians and recognize the disastrous impact the carbon tax is having on Canada's critical agriculture and agri-food sector? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food): Madam Chair, our pollution pricing policy is designed to grow a clean economy. To support this sector, we have put in place the following measures. Emissions from livestock and crop production are not priced. Farm fuels and fuels from cardlock facilities are exempt, and there is a partial rebate for propane and natural gas used in commercial greenhouses. Our government has been very open and transparent about our pollution pricing plan. We will do a review of our pollution pricing system in 2020, focused on competitiveness issues in trade-exposed industries such as agriculture. It is also important to remember that this is about tackling climate change and that 100% of the revenues stay in the province. We will continue to support our farmers and food processors as they provide an essential service across Canada. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Madam Chair, Minister Bibeau keeps talking about wanting to protect Canadians'environment. Well, the truth is that Canada's farmers, ranchers and processors have for years demonstrated their ability to deliver meaningful reductions in emissions and to safeguard the environment through the adoption of new technologies, education and innovative management practices, but the government ignores these efforts. Will the minister at the very least admit to Canadians that Canadian farmers are unable to pass on the cost of the carbon tax to consumers and instead have to absorb those extra costs out of their own pockets? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Madam Chair, allow me to explain again our government's position on pollution pricing. The price and method were developed so we could build an increasingly clean economy. We put a number of measures in place to help the agriculture sector. Emissions from animal and plant production aren't taxed. Farm fuels and fuels delivered to off-farm points-of-sale are also Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you, Madam Chair. I do have another question. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I am watching the time, Mr. Dreeshan. You have a couple more seconds. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you. Madam Chair, Minister Bibeau has repeatedly asked stakeholders to send her data about the impacts of the carbon tax on farmers, so this is exactly what they have been doing. The Atlantic Grains Council, the Grain Farmers of Ontario, Producteurs de grains du Qubec and the Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association issued a joint statement at the beginning of this year in which they estimated that the cumulative indirect inflation of carbon tax on farm costs will be $14. 50 an acre this year, with that cost escalating by more than double by 2022 to almost $30 an acre. These are huge numbers. Why does the Liberal government continue to ignore the facts presented to it and continue to misrepresent the truth to Canadians? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Madame Chair, I can assure you that we have paid close attention to all the information that has been provided to us and that our calculation was also based on this information provided by provinces and different stakeholders. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Our government has been very open and transparent about our pollution pricing plan. The department used data from stakeholders and provinces Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you very much, Madam Chair Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: as well as the 2019 agricultural tax data to estimate the average cost of pollution pricing associated with grain drying at up to 0. 4% of overall operating costs. It is important to remember that we have put in place many special provisions Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Madam Chair Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: like exempting farm fuel and providing other financial supports for farmers. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Dreeshen, I am watching the time, and the minister is allowed to answer for the same amount of time that you used to ask the question. Therefore, I would hope that we would allow her to finish. She has finished, and unfortunately the time is up. The committee now stands adjourned until tomorrow at noon.

The group mentioned that during the pandemic, countless individual businesses reported bankruptcy, which would do harm to social stability. Therefore, according to Mona Fortier, Canadian government had tried a lot to support them. However, not so many people were willing to accept the rent reduction, indicating that the policy might not be very effective. Another problem related to social safety was the handgun smuggling. Bill Blair, the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, in response to the firearms seizure issue, promised to implement a stronger gun control in the near future.

tr-sq-1252

tr-sq-1252_0

Why did Bob Saroya disagree with the government when talking about reducing the rent for those individual businesses? The Chair (Hon. Anthony Rota (NipissingTimiskaming, Lib.) ): I call this meeting to order. Welcome to the 23rd meeting of the House of Commons Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic. A reminder to all members that in order to avoid issues with sound, members participating in person should not also be connected to the video conference. For those of you who are joining via video conference, I will remind you that when speaking you should be on the same channel as the language you are speaking, and please use your headsets. As usual, please direct your remarks through the chair. As I understand, there are no ministerial announcements today. We will now proceed to presenting petitions. I remind members that any petition presented during a meeting of this special committee must have already been certified by the clerk of petitions. For members participating in person, I ask that they please come and drop their signed certificates off at the table once the petition is presented. I would ask members to be very brief and concise, and to summarize the exact content of the petition. We will continue. The first person presenting a petition today is Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May (SaanichGulf Islands, GP): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I present two petitions this morning. The residents of SaanichGulf Islands are calling on the government to simplify the process for protection of marine protected areas. It's a multi-layered communication process. The marine protected area first proposed in the 1970s for the southern Strait of Georgia, now called the Salish Sea, has been awaiting designation for so long that it was originally endorsed by Jacques Cousteau. That gives us a sense for why petitioners are calling for a simplified and more rapid process. The second petition is from petitioners who are very concerned about our obligations under the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and our commitments under the Truth and Reconciliation Commission calls to action. They specifically reference the RCMP violation of UNDRIP in its actions on Wet'suwet'en territory and ask the government to commit to actually living the principles embodied in UNDRIP. The Chair: We will now go to Mr. Hardie. Mr. Ken Hardie (FleetwoodPort Kells, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am presenting a petition on behalf of the one in a million Canadians who suffer severe and adverse effects from vaccinations. GuillainBarre syndrome is very debilitating, and this petition seeks the setting up of a no-fault accident or compensation system to help offset the loss of work, the loss of wages and the loss of quality of life that many of these people suffer. I'm pleased to present this petition pursuant to Standing Order 36. The Chair: Mr. Trudel, you have the floor. Mr. Denis Trudel (LongueuilSaint-Hubert, BQ): Mr. Chair, culture is the soul of a people. Over the past 20years or so, culture, especially music, has never been as accessible as it is now. Paradoxically, creators'incomes have never been so low. The advent of digital technology has completely overturned the system for distributing the wealth generated by creators for the benefit of various Web stakeholders, many of whom are billionaires. This petition addresses these problems and proposes realistic solutions. The first is to set a minimum royalty model for streaming platforms for artists. The second is to update the existing private copying system. The third is for Internet and cell phone providers who sell their services as direct access to culture to share their profits with artists. The fourth is that the GAFAMs have to pay taxes on their services. Six thousand people have already signed the first version of this petition, launched last month by musician JordanOfficer and supported by singer BarbaraSecours. As an artist, I am proud to present this petition today because the issues it raises are fundamental to the survival of Quebec culture. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood ParkFort Saskatchewan, CPC): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I have four petitions to present today. I will be as brief as you suggested, although I will observe that if some members are going on longer during petitions than they normally do, it might be because the government has taken away so many of the tools that opposition members normally have for raising important issues in the House. The first petition deals with the issue of euthanasia and long-term care. The petitioners are concerned that instead of focusing on improving medically assisted life, something that we know is a major issue in light of recent revelations, the government has put so much time and legislative energy into efforts to continually further expand euthanasia in Canada and remove vital safeguards. The second petition speaks to the ongoing conversations happening in Canada around systemic discrimination and systemic racism. I think we do need to reflect on systemic discrimination. This petition deals specifically with Bill 21 in Quebec and raises concerns. The reality of the way that bill applies is that people from certain backgrounds who wish to practise their faith are not able to fully participate in Canadian society if they are employed in the public service. This petition asks the government to provide a response on that issue, something it hasn't done in response to past petitions on this. The third petition deals with the issue of firearms. The petitioners want to see the government take a strong response in dealing with illegal guns and gun smuggling. The petition notes that the vast majority of firearms-related crimes in Canada involves illegal guns. At the same time, the petitioners are concerned that the government has the wrong focusthat is, harassing law-abiding firearms ownerswithout putting in place substantial measures to deal with illegal guns. The petitioners want to see the reversal of the order in council from May 1 and strong measures to deal with illegal firearms. The fourth and final petition deals with Bill S-204, a bill that would make it a criminal offence for a Canadian to go abroad and receive an organ from a person who has not consented to giving that organ. It would also create a mechanism by which someone could be deemed inadmissible to Canada if they were involved in organ harvesting and trafficking. The petitioners are supportive of Bill S-204 and of similar bills in previous parliaments and would like to see us pass that bill as soon as possible. The Chair: Presenting petitions, Mr. Lamoureux. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Winnipeg North, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. It is with pleasure that I table another petition by the residents of Winnipeg North. These residents have signed a petition asking the Government of Canada, and in fact all members of Parliament, to put a high priority on assisting our poorest seniors. The increases to the GIS by $200, and $300 to the OAS, have been well received. They just want to highlight how important it is to support our seniors, in particular the poorest of our seniors. The Chair: For members present in the Chamber, a reminder that they are asked to bring their petitions to the table. We'll now proceed to statements by members. We'll go to Ms. Atwin for the first one. Mrs. Jenica Atwin (Fredericton, GP): Thank you, Mr. Chair. June 21 is National Indigenous Peoples Day, a day of acknowledgement and a day of celebration of the beautiful diversity of indigenous peoples across Turtle Island. I wish to recognize the leadership of Chief Shelley Sabattis of the Welamukotuk First Nation in Oromocto, New Brunswick. Each year she and her council, volunteers and staff go above and beyond to show appreciation for their members and to demonstrate pride and culture while promoting well-being. We gather in an event where all are welcome to take part, from traditional hand drum-making with elders to moose meat and tacos. This year we will celebrate a bit differently, but we will still stay connected, virtually and in spirit, to the vast network of indigenous peoples and allies. We need each other now more than ever. May we come together in song and stories and in solidarity. We will remember those who are not among us. I hope all of Canada will join us in observing National Indigenous Peoples Day. Mawiyapasuwok: let us come together. Nit liech. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Beech. Mr. Terry Beech (Burnaby NorthSeymour, Lib.): Mr. Chair, COVID-19 is an unprecedented challenge for all communities across Canada, but as we do our part to flatten the curve, I often think about those who suit up every morning to serve on the front lines of our health care system. My mother is a home care worker and my sister is a nurse. Even before the crisis, they would often share the hardships they faced on a day-to-day basis. It's a tough job at the best of times. In a pandemic, these jobs are life-threatening. I think we can all agree that these workers deserve more than our good wishes. They deserve a raise. That is why we have worked with the provinces to implement pandemic pay. In British Columbia more than 250,000 front-line workers are eligible for this program. That works out to a pay increase of about $4 an hour. It's a small show of our appreciation for their difficult and priceless contribution to our country. Share this message and say thanks to our front-line workers, participate in the 7 p. m. cheer, and order a pizza for your local nurses. It's the least we can do. The Chair: We'll now go on to Mr. Shipley. Mr. Doug Shipley (BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. We've been living in difficult times. Slowly, we are getting back to some resemblance of normalcy, although unfortunately not soon enough for some of our great summer festivals. It will not be normal in BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte this summer without the iconic Boots and Hearts weekend music festival, Kempenfest, Oro World's Fair, the Elmvale Fall Fair, or the Midhurst Autumnfest. Canada Day celebrations have been cancelled, but we can still celebrate the great nation we call home. Because of the lack of Canada Day celebrations, I've created Happy Canada Day lawn signs that are available through my constituency office, free to all residents of BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte. I'm also hosting a drive-through party on Canada Day at the Royal Canadian Legion on St. Vincent Street in Barrie. All are welcome to attend. There will be cupcakes for all. Please drop by the legion between 11 a. m. and 2 p. m. , and we can celebrate Canada Day safely together. Thank you and have a great summer. The Chair: Now we'll go on to Ms. Young. Ms. Kate Young (London West, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Among the countless ordinary Canadians who have stepped up to do extraordinary work during COVID-19, I wish to draw attention to our teachers. Teachers have always had a special place in my heart. My father was a teacher, and my daughter-in-law, Kelly Webb, is one now. I'm certain that my colleagues can all easily remember a teacher in their past who played an important role in helping them achieve their potential. I remember my grade 12 English teacher, Vince Weaver, at Westminster Secondary School in London. He made me realize that I could do so much more than I believed. Across the country, as schools closed, teachers did not stop their work. Some took their classes online. Others found innovative ways to continue engaging with their students. This is not the school year anyone imagined, and what the next one will look like is unclear, but our teachers in London West and across Canada have shown that no matter what, they will be there to help our next generation shine. The Chair: Before proceeding to the next presenter, I just want to remind the honourable members in the chamber that I realize that the six-foot limit makes it harder to whisper to each other, but we're hearing a bit of rumble, so I just want you to try to whisper at your best. Mr. Bergeron, you have the floor. Mr. Stphane Bergeron (Montarville, BQ): Mr. Chair, on July1st, we will be celebrating one of the most important events for the riding of Montarville: the 175thanniversary of the city of Saint-Bruno-de-Montarville. The theme Proud of our traditions will be the focus of this celebration for the people of Montarville. This is a good illustration of the rich history of this municipality nestled in the western foothills of Mont-Saint-Bruno. The seigneury of Montarville was granted in1710 to the illustrious former governor of Trois-Rivires, PierreBoucher. The parish of Saint-Bruno, which took root there and in which a village grew, became a municipal corporation in1845. To this day, it is one of the most prosperous localities, with a strong sense of belonging, a very dynamic community life and jealously preserved natural environments. A whole program had been drawn up for the celebration, but the current health crisis has taken over some of the planned activities, which has in no way diminished the pride and festive spirit of the people of Montarville. On July1st, we will have a good reason to be proud, in spite of everything. Happy 175thanniversary to Saint-Bruno-de-Montarville. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Maloney. Mr. James Maloney (EtobicokeLakeshore, Lib.): Mr. Chair, thank you for allowing me to take a moment to highlight an initiative that I started early on during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Heroes of EtobicokeLakeshore is an opportunity for citizens in my riding to recognize the contributions of those in their community who make life a bit easier. I'm pleased with the number of nominations I received that honour everyone from front-line workers to businesses that are innovating in these difficult times to volunteers who are finding new ways to reach out. I think of Daniel Lauzon who set up Food for Now, a mobile service that helps take care of the homeless. I think of Toni Varone, who helped his business clients by forgiving their rents, or young Lucas, who wanted to thank his teachers. I've been moved and inspired by the countless stories of generosity, strength, resiliency, kindness, incredible character and creativity. I want to thank all the heroes, as well as the people who nominated them. Keep them coming. Stay safe, everyone, and I wish you happy Canada Day early. The Chair: We'll now move on to Ms. Wong. Hon. Alice Wong (Richmond Centre, CPC): Mr. Chair, it gives me great pleasure to thank a local Richmond-based charity, the Social Diversity for Children Foundation, SDC, for its hard work both in raising funds for the purchase of personal protective equipment and in distributing this PPE to long-term care facilities and individual seniors'homes in the lower mainland of B. C. The COVID-19 relief fund is supported by a dozen other non-profits, businesses and community groups. Over the past two months, SDC has been to 32 seniors homes and senior-related organizations. In total, it has delivered masks to 7,000 care workers, staff and seniors. It is amazing to have witnessed how the younger generation have gotten involved in caring for the elderly at this very challenging time. The Chair: We'll now go to Ms. Damoff. Ms. Pam Damoff (Oakville NorthBurlington, Lib.): Mr. Chair, June is ALS Awareness Month, and 79 years after Lou Gehrig died from ALS little has changed. There's still no cure, and those with ALS typically die within five years of diagnosis. On June 21, Canadians will gather virtually to raise funds for ALS Canada in the Walk to End ALS. In Halton, normally we meet each year at Bronte Creek Provincial Park on the May long weekend to raise funds for ALS Canada. This year I will virtually join Tim's Titans, a team formed to honour Tim Robertson, my friend who died in 2016 after living with ALS for 13 years. I have a T-shirt, with a picture of Lou Gehrig, that says, Great Player. . . Lousy Disease and Tim's Titans. . . Great Team! ALS. . . Still a Lousy Disease. Join me on June 21 for the virtual Walk to End ALS to raise funds to support patients and their families and for ALS research. The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Khera. Ms. Kamal Khera (Brampton West, Lib.): Mr. Chair, on Saturday our community stood and marched in solidarity against anti-black racism. The peaceful protests that we're seeing across the country and around the world were not triggered by an isolated incident. They are fuelled by decades of ineffective action against something that is so insidious and deeply entrenched in our history, systems and institutions. For us, that is the racial inequality faced by Canada's indigenous and black communities. Anti-black racism is real. It exists right here in Canada, in our communities, including in Brampton. It exists when racialized students at McCrimmon Middle School are called McCriminals. It exists when a shocking report exposes the Peel District School Board's failure to work fairly with the black community. It exists when D'Andre Campbell, who was fighting mental illness, loses his life at the hands of the police. It is clear that we need reform. We need to dismantle the systems that allow this privilege and oppression to take form, and address the unconscious bias plaguing our institutions. We'll need to be bold, and the time to do that is now. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd (Sturgeon RiverParkland, CPC): Mr. Chair, a few months ago I rose in the House on the eve of our closure due to COVID-19. I told Canadians we must not give in to fear, that we would carry on and get through this crisis stronger than ever. Today, in this city and across Canada, Canadians are enjoying a beer on their favourite patios. Businesses are reopening, jobs are returning and our lives are starting to feel a bit normal again. Canadians pulled together, and because of that we did not see the devastating death toll that many had predicted. Life may be returning to normal, but unfortunately, here in this chamber of democracy, the people's voices continue to be shut down. There is no good reason for Parliament to be suspended today. In the words of my grandfather, it's time for the Liberals to get with the program and bring back the House. The Chair: We will now proceed with Ms. Jones. Ms. Yvonne Jones (Labrador, Lib.): Mr. Chair, from in-person learning to virtual classrooms, COVID-19 has drastically changed the lives of students across the country, especially those in post-secondary education who are worried about covering costs like tuition or rent this coming fall. Our government recognized that students should not have to worry or put their futures on pause during this difficult time. That's why last month the federal government introduced the Canada emergency student benefit. If you're a high school student headed to a post-secondary school, or a current post-secondary student or a recent graduate, you can receive the Canada emergency student benefit every four weeks and have the financial support that you need to save for school. We also doubled Canada student grants and loans, enhanced the student loan program, increased supports for indigenous post-secondary education and introduced the Canada student service grant for those who wish to pursue it. Our government is here to help all students get the support they need to pursue their future goals successfully. I wish them all the very best, and I wish all of you, my colleagues and those across Canada, a very happy National Indigenous Peoples Day, which is coming up on June 21. The Chair: I want to remind the honourable members to keep to their 60 seconds so that we don't go over the time. I'm sure it would be a lot easier for everyone if we stuck to that limit. We will now go to Mr. Aitchison. Mr. Scott Aitchison (Parry SoundMuskoka, CPC): Mr. Chair, I rise today to once again implore the government to do something about the horrible lack of access to and crazy cost of rural Internet service. Right now, too many areas of my riding have no access to rural Internet service at all, and those who can get service are paying through the nose. I've even heard constituents say that during this pandemic, they are having to choose between feeding their kids and educating them. Over the last few weeks, Conservatives have been consulting with rural Canadians, and the results are in. My constituents are tired of fancy political promises. They are frustrated beyond belief by the new challenges created by this pandemic. They are absolutely fed up with having their pleas ignored. All we want is affordable and reliable Internet service. Is that too much to ask of the government? The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. MacGregor. Mr. Alistair MacGregor (CowichanMalahatLangford, NDP): Mr. Chair, these last few months have been incredibly challenging for the residents of CowichanMalahatLangford, who have been forced to deal with the economic and social consequences of COVID-19. The pandemic has laid bare the inadequacies of our social safety net, the weakness in our supply chains and the dependence of our society on essential workers, who often work long hours for low wages, putting themselves and their families at risk. We've also been forced to confront the systemic inequality, poverty and racism that continue to hold so many people back from achieving their full potential. I will not dishonour the sacrifice that so many have made during this time by allowing us to go back to the status quo that got us here in the first place. I will not apologize for demanding that the most vulnerable in our society get the supports and opportunities they need to live with dignity, and I will not relent from pushing my political colleagues to summon the courage necessary to implement policies that lead to environmental, economic and social justice. The Chair: I now give the floor to Mr. Blaney. Hon. Steven Blaney (BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, CPC): Mr. Chair, here is a beautiful story, the story of a woman from Bellechasse, a courageous young mother from Saint-Malachie, Marie-ChristineGoupil. With three children, including the eldest daughter with a disability, and realizing that her daughter with a disability had special clothing needs, she decided to go into business to meet the needs of other parents who, like her, were facing their child's clothing challenges. Last week, she presented her Handy clothing collection on the show Dans l'il du dragon. It was a very emotional moment for the audience and the dragons. They were so touched that they decided to give her the amount she wanted without diluting her shares. The video of her presentation has already been viewed over 1million times on social networks. Marie-ChristineGoupil has discovered a passion for entrepreneurship and has moved and inspired many people with her passionate and courageous attitude. Congratulations, Ms. Goupil, your example makes us proud. The Chair: Mr. Blanchet, you have the floor. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet (BeloeilChambly, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I lend my voice to the Chief of the Assembly of First Nations of Quebec-Labrador, GhislainPicard, whose message is as follows: There have been no fewer than 14reports and conclusions of commissions of inquiry since1967 highlighting major problems in relations between law enforcement agencies and indigenous people. Each time, the conclusions have been overwhelming and highlight a disturbing reality. The justice system has failed indigenous people. Are you going to respond, as you too often do, by moving on to the next one, or are you going to do what we expect you to do, which is to recognize that the justice system discriminates against indigenous people and that we have no less right to security than the rest of the population? In three months, police interventions have claimed more victims among our members than the pandemic. But it is not enough to simply take a knee and denounce racism. It's about standing up and taking action. Those are the words of GhislainPicard. The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Harder. Ms. Rachael Harder (Lethbridge, CPC): Over the last few months, Canada's democracy has been disregarded and an autocracy has been resurrected in its place. By refusing to hold regular parliamentary sittings, Mr. Trudeau is sending a strong message to the Canadian public that he alone is the one who matters. In 2014, he professed that Canadians want their Members of Parliament to be effective voices for their communities in Ottawa, and not merely mouthpieces for an all-too-powerful Prime Minister. As it stands, however, he has shut down Parliament. Effectively, he has stripped us, the opposition, of our privileges and our powers. Sadly, Mr. Trudeau has become the all-too-powerful Prime Minister that he once warned against. A government that does not allow for effective opposition is not functioning in the best interest of Canadians; it is operating in the best interest of itself and, even more so, the interest of the Prime Minister. Canadians deserve to flourish in a democracy, not merely survive under the autocracy that this Prime Minister has created. The Chair: We'll now go on to Ms. Zahid. Mrs. Salma Zahid (Scarborough Centre, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I would like to recognize the work of Agincourt Community Services Association and its tireless executive director, Lee Soda, who have been serving our community during the COVID-19 pandemic. Under more pressure than ever, their staff and volunteers continue to serve a community whose need was great even before the crisis. Their food bank helps over 4,000 people weekly. They have opened outdoor washrooms and hand-washing stations for vulnerable communities and are delivering groceries and other essentials to vulnerable seniors. ACSA is a bridge between those who can help and those who need help, and they are just one example of how our community has come together to meet this challenge. There are restaurants and businesses donating meals to front-line workers, residents answering the call to stock the food bank shelves and neighbours looking in on the vulnerable and isolated. I am so proud of our community's spirit. Scarborough is strong. The Chair: We'll now proceed to the questioning of ministers. Please note that we will suspend the proceedings twice in order to allow employees who provide support for the sitting to replace each other safely. The first question goes to the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Chair, for months Conservatives have been pointing out flaws in Liberal government programs that are preventing Canadians from getting the help they need. The Prime Minister has refused to make these very technical changes to get more help to Canadians who need it. For example, on the wage subsidy, more than two-thirds of the money allocated for that program has lapsed because businesses don't qualify. I have a simple question. Will the Prime Minister change the program to allow companies who have made acquisitions to access the wage subsidy to keep more people working? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Papineau, Lib.): Mr. Chair, from the very beginning we knew that as we rolled out measures, we would need to improve them and tweak them, and that's exactly what we've been doing over the past three months. We needed to make measures happen quickly for Canadians, and we did that. But we continued to improve them, to make additions and amendments so that more people could get the help they needed, including with the proposed legislation last week that expanded the reach of the wage subsidy to more businesses. Unfortunately, the Conservatives didn't even want us to debate that particular piece of legislation. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Actually, Mr. Chair, it was the Liberals who said no to the motion to allow this Parliament to sit to debate that motion, and even in that legislation they refused to allow businesses who have made acquisitions to access the program. Now, when we look at the rent relief program, it is so difficult to apply for it that many landlords are refusing to bother, leaving even more small businesses to fall through the cracks. In fact, of the $3 billion allocated to the rent relief program, only $39 million has been paid out. That's less than 2%. Now, the Prime Minister is still using talking points from April. It's now June and he has refused to fix these programs and has successfully talked out the calendar on the days that the House of Commons could meet to discuss these programs. When will he make these changes to get more help to Canadians who need it? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, throughout this pandemic, we have constantly been updating and expanding our various programs. We recognize, in conversations with the premiers, how important it is to make sure that we're working together, the provinces and the federal government, on issues like rent subsidies where commercial rent is indeed a provincial jurisdiction. Many provinces have moved forward with the eviction bans that are necessary to go along with this, and we'll continue to work with provinces to make sure that we're getting Canadians the help they need. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Mr. Chair, Canadians cannot wait. He has run down the clock on parliamentary sittings and he still refuses to make these changes to get more help to Canadians. Today, we learned that Telus has installed Huawei technology in downtown Ottawa. There are over 80 sites across the national capital region with Huawei technology installed. Some of these sites are very near sensitive government institutions, like government departments, the National Research Council, RCMP headquarters and the Bank of Canada. How long has the Prime Minister known that Huawei technology has been installed in the Ottawa area? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, first off, on the issue of Parliament, it has been meeting four times a week over the past many weeks, and members of the opposition have been able to continue to ask questions on COVID-19 and a broad range of subjects. Moreover, every two weeks the finance department puts forward at the finance committee the full transparent measures that we've taken, so that parliamentarians can study them. We are continuing to work in this crisis. At the same time Mr. Ziad Aboultaif (Edmonton Manning, CPC): Answer the question. The Chair: I'm sorry? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: in regard to Huawei technology there are strict rules for companies to follow and we assume they will all follow those. The Chair: We'll pause for a second and stop the clock. I want to remind the honourable members who are joining us virtually that heckling really does disrupt the whole session. Your face does come up and we do see who it is, so I just want to make sure that you're aware of that. Now we'll go back to Mr. Scheer. We have a minute and 10 seconds left. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister is bragging about accountability and transparency. Will he table an economic update before the House rises? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, throughout this unprecedented pandemic, we have been open and transparent about all of the measures we've put forward. We've updated the finance committee The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer: That's a long way of saying no, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister has pursued a policy of appeasement in pursuit of a personal vanity product at the UN. In the process, he's cozied up to dictators and human rights violators. He's abandoned Israel and committed funding to UNRWA, an organization whose schools have been used as storage facilities for Hamas rockets against Israeli civilians, and whose facilities have served as breeding grounds for racism and anti-Semitism. He has apologized for the Iranian regime when it shot down a plane full of Canadian citizens, and he refuses to list the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist entity. What's the point of having a seat at the table if you have to sell out Canadian principles to get there? The Chair: The Right Honourable Prime Minister. Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, we see that the Conservatives have kept with the Harper approach to international diplomacy. The failed presence of Canada on the world stage was an embarrassment for many Canadians for many years. That's why, when we took office five years ago, we demonstrated the kind of leadership on values that Canadians expected. We will continue to work around the world to defend multilateralism. The Chair: We have a point of order. Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May: This being a committee, we can have a point of order during what would have been question period. I am not sitting that far away from the Prime Minister, and I'm sorry, but Andrew Scheer used to be the Speaker of the House and should show better decorum. The Chair: We have a point of order from Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, on the same point of order, it is disgusting for the leader of the Green Party to use decorum as an excuse to interrupt the Leader of the Opposition in the middle of critical lines of questioning. The leader of the Green Party knows the rules of the House and shouldn't be abusing them to advance a partisan agenda. The Chair: We're getting into debate. I do want to point out that the time had run out. We're now moving on to the next line of questions. On a point of order, Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer: I appreciate the honourable leader of the Green Party, Elizabeth May, for that reminder. When I was Speaker I always appreciated her help and advice about how to improve decorum in here. I just want to say to the member, and to all members, that the reason that I cannot control myself is that the Prime Minister used the word embarrassment in answering a foreign affairs question, and it just made me think of the India trip. The Chair: I believe we're getting into debate and arguments. Mr. Blanchet, you have the floor. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: Mr. Chair, while the Greens and the Conservatives are saying that they'll be waiting outside after the meeting, I will ask a question. The Prime Minister has extended the Canada emergency response benefit, and that's good news, but it's not enough. Last week in the House, the government said it was urgent to fight fraud. For us, it was also urgent to adjust the CERB to the needs of the tourism, arts and agriculture sectors. Farmers are going to be seriously under-resourced. So what happened to the urgency of reforming the CERB? Why is the government refusing to talk to the opposition parties? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, I am very pleased to hear the hon. member finally align himself with the positions of the Liberal Party. Unfortunately, the Bloc is a week late. It should have let us debate these concerns in the House last week. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: It seems to me that the word alignment here is a fantasy. We have unequivocally proposed to extend the debate to reach an agreement, which brings me to my second question. Last week, the issue of assistance to people with disabilities was also a pressing concern, and it's even more so a week later. The Bloc proposed to extend the discussions and split the government's bill in two to help people with disabilities. Why is the government refusing this assistance to people with disabilities, when it could have been debated with the opposition in a civilized and proper way in a Parliament in which it has a minority? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: That was exactly what we wanted, but unanimous consent of the Chamber was required to debate this matter, and the Conservative Party of Canada voted against it. Unfortunately, we are going to have to find a different way to help people with disabilities. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: If the idea is so good and wonderful, why not start over and open the dialogue now? What's stopping the Prime Minister from being a rallying point and inviting us to take to each other and resolve the problem, rather than saying that he is going to pack up his toys and go home? The people with disabilities are the ones who will pay the price. Where was the Prime Minister on October21,2019? He received a minority mandate from Quebeckers and Canadians. Why is he behaving like something between a prime minister with a majority and a monarch by divine right? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: I've heard the Conservative Party and the Bloc Qubcois throw their accusations around. They don't point out that the House of Commons did indeed give its consent to extend the mandate of the Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic until the end of June. Three parties agreed, which was the right thing to do in the context of this minority government. We've been working with the other parties. However, as they did not get the results they wanted, they complained. Unfortunately, they too are part of a minority Parliament and must respect the voice of the majority of parliamentarians, just as we do. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: I might have been tempted, but that's unlikely to happen because the Prime Minister isn't me, he's him. It's therefore up to him to bring people together, open a dialogue and recall Parliament. All we were asking for was the opportunity to talk for an hour or two. However, suddenly he doesn't want to play anymore. It's not working anymore, and there's something a bit strange about that. In addition, the government wants to buy the right to interfere in provincial and Quebec jurisdictions for $14billion. However, Quebec and a number of provinces are refusing to allow it to interfere in their jurisdictions and are asking that this money be paid to them unconditionally. Is the Prime Minister trying to take advantage of the crisis or is he trying to create a constitutional crisis? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, the safety of Canadians is the responsibility of all levels of government. That's why we have proposed a $14billion agreement to ensure that all Canadians across the country experience a safe re-opening of the economy. This is a proposal that we are working on with the provinces because we know that there are needs across the country, including early childhood centres, screening and support for municipalities. The federal government wants to be there to help the provinces. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh (Burnaby South, NDP): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Indigenous leaders have expressed a lack of confidence in the RCMP commissioner's ability to tackle full-scale systemic racism, but the Prime Minister has expressed his confidence in the commissioner. What's that based on? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, over the past two years, Commissioner Lucki has made significant strides forward on an issue where there is still much more to do. We know that systemic racism exists in all of our institutions across this country The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: This is the same RCMP commissioner who just recently said that they couldn't explain what systemic racism was. Now the Prime Minister says that he has confidence, when indigenous leaders express their lack of confidence. Why does the Prime Minister believe that the RCMP commissioner can tackle systemic racism in the RCMP? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, systemic racism is something that touches every corner of our country, every corner of our institutions. It requires people to understand and move forward in coordinated ways with partners. The commissioner is committed to doing that, alongside members of our government. We will do that together and work with indigenous communities and black The Chair: Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, recent events have made it abundantly clear that to tackle the systemic racism at the level of the RCMP, we need a full-scale overhaul of the RCMP. Is the Prime Minister committed to a full-scale overhaul of the RCMP to root out systemic racism? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: As I've said many times, Mr. Chair, I am committed to addressing systemic racism in this country and taking significant, bold actions to reduce the amount of discrimination that indigenous peoples, that racialized Canadians face on a daily basis. We have much work to do, but we will do it together. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, Black Lives Matter has been calling for governments to defund the police. What it's saying is that we need to be better at where we spend our money, investing in communities and not policing. Will the Prime Minister commit to a review of the RCMP budget to allocate resources to community services and not to policing? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, over the past years we have been investing more directly and more money in community organizations, in the black community, and working with indigenous partners on the path to reconciliation. We have been investing in the kinds of community-based programs and solutions that are part of the solution. We know there is much more to do, and we will continue to look at all of our expenditures to make sure we're doing the right things. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, over the past few years, while the Prime Minister has been in office, the RCMP budget has increased by 31%. More money is going towards policing. In recent events we've seen people who needed a health care response to a health care crisis been killed by the RCMP. Does the Prime Minister believe that we need to be investing in a health care response instead of a police response for people who are faced with a crisis? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, the member opposite well knows that it's not an either-or. We need to make sure that our systems across the board, from our police systems to our judicial systems, to our health care systems, to our community systems, are actually addressing the systemic discrimination issues that are embedded within them That is exactly what we are going to continue to do in the coming years. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, with regard to the CERB extension, can the Prime Minister guarantee that everyone who is receiving CERB payments now will continue to do so without any gaps throughout the summer? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, I am happy to highlight that many Canadians who were on the CERB are now returning to work. Many more who are on the CERB now will be returning to work in the coming weeks. We know that as the economy gets back to work, people will want to The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Can the Prime Minister assure people who need it that they will continue to receive the CERB over the summer, yes or no? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: We are very pleased to point out that we are going to extend the Canada emergency response benefit for at least another eight weeks, because a lot of people are going to need it. Even if they want to work, there aren't enough jobs for everyone. So we'll be there for them, as we have been from the beginning. The Chair: We're going to pause and suspend proceedings just for a few moments to allow our support staff to substitute for one another in a healthy and safe way. We'll now proceed with Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod (KamloopsThompsonCariboo, CPC): Mr. Chair, it was really a surprise in the middle of a pandemic to see the Prime Minister at his first campaign stop last week in Ottawa. Certainly the game plan has become very transparent. He has a daily report show and he wants to sideline Parliament, dominate the news cycle and keep everyone in the dark about the state of the economy. According to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, there is no reason that he cannot provide the fiscal update during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the PBO has published a number of reports himself. Why won't the Prime Minister provide a fiscal update so we can all understand the state of our economy, or is that just not part of his campaign playbook? Hon. Mona Fortier (Minister of Middle Class Prosperity and Associate Minister of Finance): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Canada's economy is in a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We've been clear about that. We will continue to be open and transparent about the actions that we are taking to support families, businesses, workers, our health care system and our economy. This includes biweekly reports to Parliament on the full cost and status of our economic measures. Once it is possible to provide a clear economic projection, we will provide an update. We are in this together, and we are prepared to do whatever is necessary to support Canadians. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: Chair, Canada's economy was in trouble prior to the COVID, with some of the worst numbers since 2009. Government revenues in March dropped by 7. 2%, and it's shameful and, quite frankly, it's outrageous that they refuse to provide Parliament and Canadians with an economic update. Households during this challenging time know how much money is coming in and they know how much money is going out. The picture is not pretty, but they know what the picture is. Can the finance minister at least reveal the projected revenue decline in quarters one and two? Hon. Mona Fortier: The Canadian economy is going through a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We've known this for three months. We've continued to be open and transparent about the measures we've put in place for Canadians, workers and businesses. In fact, we have reported biweekly to Parliament on the total cost and status of our plan's measures. As soon as it's possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide a comprehensive update to Canadians The Chair: We go back to Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: Other governments have managed to provide updates for their citizens and carry out their responsibilities, but of course this government has sidelined Parliament with simply a question-but-no-answer period. Let's try something else. The forestry industry was in crisis even before the pandemic, with mills closing down and thousands of jobs lost. Eight weeks ago, Minister Freeland said, I have had many discussions with leaders in our forestry sector and the provinces about what we can do to support the industry today. Meanwhile, we've had support going to the arts and we've had support going to fisheries, just to name a few, but arguably for the industry that was having some of the most numerous challenges, it has been radio silence. That was eight weeks ago today. Can the government at least commit to releasing an updated softwood lumber transition plan before we rise? Hon. Seamus O'Regan (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Chair, we remain committed, of course, to the forestry industry and seeing it through this pandemic and this very uncertain time. The expanding market opportunities program, for instance, has helped Canada's forestry sector diversify, create jobs and open new markets. We've had new construction projects that are active today, using Canadian wood in key markets like Korea, Japan, China and the United States. Tomorrow this House will vote on our government's investment of $20. 97 million for this program. It's part of our budget 2019 commitment to invest $251 million over three years, and I hope the opposition will support us in that. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: It was stated in a major newspaper this morning that this government is like a sexy sports carvroom, vroom, vroombut with a history of breakdowns and major repairs. I think that might describe what has been happening. For forestry, it has been eight weeks and there has been nothing. There is another area that Deputy Prime Minister Freeland did talk about. We were talking about the U. S. softwood lumber duties that are being held in the United States. It's billions of dollars being held with the U. S. treasury. In April, she acknowledged that these duties are a real issue for the softwood lumber industry. What's been done since that time? Hon. David Lametti (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada): Mr. Chair, Canada's forestry industry supports good middle-class jobs in communities across our country. The sector is also an essential link in the medical equipment supply chain, and we thank them for all the work they're doing. We're aware of the immense pressures faced by this sector, especially at this time, and Deputy Prime Minister Freeland and others are taking that seriously and working through this issue. As our government has said repeatedly, we firmly believe that the U. S. duties on Canadian softwood lumber are unfair and unwarranted, and we will pursue all means in order to The Chair: Before continuing, I want to remind honourable members who are at home to make sure that the boom on their headsets is down. It just makes a better pickup. We heard everything, but it was a little distant. That's for everyone's benefit. We're now going to continue with Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell (Louis-Saint-Laurent, CPC): Mr. Chair, before I ask my question, I'd like to pay tribute to the Minister of Justice, particularly to his versatility. Today, he talked about forests. Yesterday, the Minister of Justice talked about Davie and indigenous affairs. Really, this minister is very versatile. My question is directly for the Minister of Finance. I like Mr. Lametti very much, but I'd like Mr. Morneau to answer my question. Yesterday, in a Senate parliamentary committee, the Minister of Finance half-opened the door to an economic update. Based on what he said, it seems that, as we speak, a committee of the Department of Finance is working on an economic update. Could Mr. Morneau tell Canadians when he is going to table this economic update? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, as we know, the Canadian economy is going through a period of extraordinary uncertainty. As soon as it's possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide a full update to Canadians. Right now, we can say that we have supported workers, businesses and Canadians with the emergency measures we have put in place. We will continue to do so, because we need to be sure that Canadians can get through this crisis. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I thought it was too good to be true. The Minister of Finance is opening the door, and the Minister of Small Business is closing it. We don't know when the economic update will take place, yet all across Canada, provinces are doing economic updates. Could Mr. Morneau explain to Canadians why he is unable to give one? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, since the beginning of the crisis, we have implemented the economic action plan to respond to COVID-19, and we've provided immediate assistance to Canadians, businesses and workers. Over 2. 5million jobs were protected by the Canada emergency wage subsidy. In addition, 8. 4million Canadians The Chair: We are returning to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, next Friday, the Quebec minister of finance, EricGirard, will give an economic update. If EricGirard can give one for Quebec, why can't BillMorneau give one for Canada? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, once again, we have been open and transparent from the outset. We have devoted our energy to support Canadians, workers and businesses. We will continue to do so. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I cannot judge the quality of the work done by the provinces, but what I do know is that Quebec, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland have also made efforts to support their residents economically. Those provinces are able to table economic updates. Yesterday, Saskatchewan even tabled a budget. Why is Bill Morneau unable to table an economic update for all Canadians? Hon. Mona Fortier: Let me repeat for my hon. colleague that we are going through extraordinarily uncertain times. We have continued to be open and transparent. We have reported biweekly to Parliament on the total cost and status of the measures in our economic response plan. Once again, as soon as clear economic projections can be provided, we will provide an update The Chair: Mr. Deltell has the floor. Mr. Grard Deltell: The minister talks about the total cost of the government's economic expenditures. So I ask the question: so far, over the past three months, how much has the pandemic cost Canadians? Hon. Mona Fortier: As I said earlier, it is important to note that we have put forward measures, including the wage subsidy, which have helped more than 2. 5million The Chair: Mr. Deltell has the floor. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I have been trying for four minutes to get anything remotely resembling an answer, and I'm getting absolutely nothing. I am not asking questions for myself; I am asking questions for Canadians. Why are the government and the Minister of Finance, Bill Morneau, not able to table an economic update when some provinces are able to? Hon. Mona Fortier: Once again, I would like to remind my hon. colleague that we have provided interest-free loans to businesses. More than 669,000loans have been approved. We have continued to support businesses and Canadians during this time The Chair: Mr. Deltell, you have time for a very brief question. Mr. Grard Deltell: The only thing that distinguishes the provinces that table economic updates and the current government is political will. Why does Bill Morneau not have the political will to tell Canadians the truth? Hon. Mona Fortier: Once again, we have been open and transparent. As soon as it is possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide Canadians with a full update. The Chair: We will now continue with Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya (MarkhamUnionville, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. COVID-19 has sparked and spurred anti-Asian racism. These are not just racist comments online; Asian Canadians have been attacked. What is the government doing to combat anti-Asian racism? Hon. Bardish Chagger (Minister of Diversity and Inclusion and Youth): Mr. Chair, since our government took office in 2015, we have been making investments and working with communities. The difference between our government and the previous government is that we will actually consult with Canadians, including black Canadians, including Asian Canadians, to respond to the challenges, including with an anti-racism secretariat and an anti-racism strategy. It will take all of us. I appreciate the member's question, so that we can also work together. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, one business owner I know in Markham has operated for 20 years. Now she's looking at over $9,000 in rent due on June 24. COVID-19 has crippled her sales and she's going to go out of business. Her landlord has no interest in the Canada emergency commercial rent assistance program. How can the government say this program is working? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, this program was made possible by working with the provinces, and we will continue to encourage landlords and tenants to work together to make sure they have relief for this very difficult time in which they're living. We're continuing to monitor the CECRA program and we will make it possible for businesses to have access to the program. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, the government business rent relief program has been a total disaster. Even the government's own numbers show it is a failure. As of June 8, less than 2% of the $3 billion budgeted has been spent. What is it going to take for the government to admit that the program is a disaster and needs changes? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we know our government has been working closely with the provinces and territories to deliver the Canada emergency commercial rent assistance. Although the tenant-landlord relationship is ultimately the responsibility of the provinces and territories, our government has stepped up to provide support through the tools we have and through CMHC so that small businesses can get the rent relief they need. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, according to the government, there are around 1. 1 million small businesses in Canada. At committee, we were told only around 5,500 of them are receiving COVID-19 rent relief. That number is shameful. When will the Liberal government wake up and make the changes? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we welcome the steps some provinces and territories have taken to further protect commercial tenants. We will continue to monitor this program closely and ensure that Canada's small businesses are supported during this challenging time. We will continue to monitor to see The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, there was no answer. When can the government make these changes? Hon. Mary Ng (Minister of Small Business, Export Promotion and International Trade): Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable colleague that we are doing everything and will continue to do everything to help small businesses in our country. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, on May 27 the CBSA seized 65 small handguns at Pearson airport, the largest firearms seizure on record. It is clear that smuggled handguns are the weapon of choice for criminals. Why is the Prime Minister focusing on an ineffective municipal ban? Hon. Bill Blair (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness): Mr. Chair, I would point out that gun violence in any of our communities is unacceptable, and it's important that governments and communities take steps to prevent guns from getting into the hands of criminals. That's why we do important work at our border to keep guns from being smuggled into our country, but it also necessitates additional work. I don't think you can talk about gun violence without talking about stronger gun control. That's why our government has taken a very strong position and will strengthen gun control to keep Canadians safe. The Chair: Mr. Saroya, you may have a 10-second question, if that's possible, please. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, COVID-19 has not stopped gun violence in the GTA. My constituents are concerned about shootings minutes away from their homes. We know the Liberals'gun ban won't change anything, but a focus on smuggled guns and criminals will. When will they make that change? Hon. Bill Blair: Mr. Chair, stronger gun control laws are an effective tool, and that's been told to us by police leadership and communities across the country. We're also making investments in borders and law enforcement. Most importantly, we're making investments in communities and in kids to keep communities safe. I look forward to the member's strong support of those measures when we bring them forward. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback (Prince Albert, CPC): Mr. Chair, the U. S. and the U. K. began their second round of free trade negotiations yesterday. Does the government intend to have a trade agreement in place before the U. K. tariffs come into effect on January 1? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, the U. K. is a strong partner of Canada, as is the European Union, and we're looking forward to continuing that strong relationship The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Thank you, Mr. Chair. With respect to the negotiations with the U. K. , when will the minister publish her goals and objectives for this agreement? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, we're going to continue to work to ensure that any future agreement is going to be based on the best interests of Canadians, and we will The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Can the minister confirm whether they've entered into negotiations with the U. K. at this point? Hon. Mary Ng: Our government is analyzing the most-favoured-nation tariff regimes schedule the U. K. has put out. I want to assure Canadians The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Mr. Chair, during the CUSMA negotiations, a deal was struck between the Liberal Party and the NDP that the government would notify this House 90 days before it starts any negotiations on any trade agreement. When will the minister notify this House? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that we will absolutely be sharing information. Right now, we are analyzing the most-favoured-nation tariff regimes schedule put out by the U. K. Mr. Randy Hoback: Mr. Chair, any meaningful attempts to reform the WTO needs buy-in from the United States. I think all countries agree on that. Has the minister discussed a WTO reform with the USTR, the United States trade representative? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, the Ottawa Group is a consensus-based group, and any decisions will be taken together. Of course, any meaningful reform must include the U. S. The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Has the U. S. been invited to the Ottawa Group meetings? Hon. Mary Ng: The Ottawa Group is a consensus-based group limited to WTO members who are committed to bringing forward ideas and proposals The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Just as with any other trade agreement, the minister has committed to this House that she will publish the list of goals and responsibilities for the negotiations. When will she publish the list for the Ottawa Group? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I'm thrilled that we had an excellent meeting of the Ottawa Group yesterday where, as a group, we agreed to take concrete action. Mr. Randy Hoback: Will the minister be releasing a list of Canada's objectives we would like to see the new WTO's director-general pursue prior to the upcoming DG election? Hon. Mary Ng: We published an action statement from the Ottawa Group yesterday. I would encourage the member opposite to have a look. I'm certainly happy to send it to him. Mr. Randy Hoback: Going back to economic prosperity, we know that the U. S. has been having talks with other countries around the world. Has Canada yet been invited to this group? Hon. Mary Ng: I'm pleased to continue to pursue the objectives of trade diversification. I would remind the member that we have access to a billion and a half customers through our very robust Mr. Randy Hoback: A billion and a half customers is fine if you have a functioning WTO, but if you don't have a functioning WTO, then a billion and a half customers may not be fully accessible to our suppliers, manufacturers and agriculture producers. Can the minister confirm that she's in discussions with the U. S. in joining this economic prosperity group? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that nothing is more important than standing up and helping create markets for our Canadian businesses and to help our small businesses get more export-ready so that they can grow into the international marketplace. This is work that we've committed to do, and we will keep working on it, particularly The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Yesterday Saskatchewan presented a budget. Not only did they present the budget, but they'll also actually debate the budget and pass the budget in Parliament. There's full accountability. Why won't this government do the same? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons): Mr. Chair, the House is sitting in this hybrid format so that people can participate in the House on the screens. I'm sure my colleague is happy to see that his own colleagues are able to ask questions and participate. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Williamson. Mr. John Williamson (New Brunswick Southwest, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will say that this is no substitute for Parliament, but I appreciate the opportunity. New Brunswick families and businesses are rapidly making adjustments to manage and live with the coronavirus pandemic. Businesses here are opening and services are being offered. Families are preparing for summer and even planning ahead for a new school year in September. We have a lot of work ahead of us. One notable absence is Service Canada. When does the government plan on opening its service counters to assist Canadians again? Hon. Ahmed Hussen (Minister of Families, Children and Social Development): Mr. Chair, our government is committed to ensuring that Canadians continue to have access to the benefits that they rely on through Service Canada. We have redeployed over 3,000 additional staff to ensure that Canadians continue to have access to their benefits. We've established a 1,500-agent call centre to make sure that people can get access to the phone lines to get the help they need. Mr. John Williamson: Service Canada is about more than providing COVID-19 information and benefits. Provincial governments are working hard to adjust to Canada's new normal by opening up businesses and front-line government services. When will we see Service Canada play its role and open its service counters in our communities? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Mr. Chair, we're currently working with our world-class public health experts to determine how best to reopen the Service Canada network for the public. Make no mistake: Our Service Canada employees have gone above and beyond to ensure that Canadians continue to have access to the services that they rely on and the benefits that they need. Mr. John Williamson: Please don't hide behind health experts when the Prime Minister is appearing in the middle of large protests, yet is afraid to bring back the Parliament of Canada to do its business. In fact, the New Brunswick legislature is open for regular business. Bills are being studied, opposition input is being heard and MLAs are voting on legislation, not rubber-stamping government bills. By comparison, our Parliament is stuck in pretending it cannot function like other law-making assemblies. Canadians are in the dark about our country's finances. When will the government table an economic update so taxpayers understand what was spent, what is owed by our kids and grandchildren, and what the government's fiscal footing looks like? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, nobody's hiding. Nobody's doing anything like that. The only reason my colleague is able to ask a question and I'm able to answer his question is that he's right there on the screen. We have this hybrid format that cares for MPs across the country, not only the ones sitting in the House. Mr. John Williamson: This is no substitute for Parliament. I will ask my question again. When will the government table an economic update so that taxpayers understand what was spent, what is owed by our kids and grandchildren, and what the government's fiscal footing looks like in today's environment? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, I thank my honourable colleague for his question. Canada's economy is still in a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We have been open and transparent about the measures we have been providing to support families, businesses and workers. Even our health care The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Williamson. Mr. John Williamson: Except you have not. The Auditor General is underfunded. We have no idea about the total of government spending. Again I will ask when the government will table an economic update so that we can have an understanding of what the government's fiscal footing looks like. Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we have included biweekly reports to Parliament on the full cost and status of our economic response plan measures since the beginning. I have said, and I will continue to say, that when it is possible to provide a clear economic projection, we will provide an update. Mr. John Williamson: What is the full cost to date of the government's COVID-19 relief measures, as the minister just claimed the government has provided to Parliament? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we have provided support for workers, and 2. 5 million Canadians have been helped through the Canadian wage subsidy. We have provided businesses with some loans, and 669,000 businesses have applied for these loans. Even for the CERB, we have over eight million Canadians who have applied. The Chair: We will now continue with Mr. Bergeron. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: Mr. Chair, as the leader of the Bloc Qubcois mentioned a few moments ago, the government promised $14billion to Quebec and the provinces, but in targeted transfers. That is very little compared to the considerable expenses incurred to deal with the current crisis. But Quebec and the provinces don't just want this money to be transferred unconditionally, they also want a real discussion on a permanent increase in health care transfers. PremierLegault was rightly concerned about the feds'interference into provincial jurisdictions. The federal government, which does not manage any hospitals or long-term care centres, must stop playing armchair quarterback and transfer the money to the only governments with jurisdiction over health, that is, Quebec and the provinces. Will it do so without delay and without nitpicking? The Honourable Patty Hajdu (Minister of Health): Mr. Chair, we know that the Government of Quebec is working hard to ensure the safety of Quebeckers and we are here to support them. As part of this co-operation, we have developed health and safety recommendations for workplaces, we have purchased medical equipment for workers and we have supported the province in developing its reopening program. We are continuing this important partnership to ensure the safety of Quebeckers and all Canadians. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: The co-operation is so effective that the money is staying in the federal government's coffers. In fact, when the federal government wants to impose conditions, it always takes longer. We see it with housing, for which Quebec has not received a dime of the $1. 4billion it is owed. We have also seen it with infrastructure funds, particularly for public transit, water systems and water treatment. The health crisis is now. The needs are now. The much needed reopening of our economy is now. Will the government finally transfer the money without messing around or quibbling? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I am pleased to confirm to my colleague that there is no messing around, no quibbling, nothing of the kind. There is co-operation between two levels of government. It is natural to have discussions with all the provinces and with Quebec. I myself am taking part in some discussions and several of my colleagues are taking part in others. There is a clear willingness on the part of the federal government to co-operate with Quebec and all the provinces. That is what we are doing and that is perhaps what the Bloc Qubcois does not like. It likes bickering, but for the time being, there is none. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: We don't want to bicker, we want the money to be paid out. It is not complicated, for heaven's sake! We do not want a blank cheque. Right now, the money remains in the federal government's coffers. There is $1. 4billion that should be paid to Quebec for social housing and is sitting in the federal government's coffers. We are waiting for money for water treatment and water systems, but it is sitting in the federal government's coffers. It's almost July. We are wasting precious months for construction. What is the government waiting for to pay out the money so that we can get our economy rolling? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: The federal government is a very active partner. We are discussing and working with Quebec on infrastructure projects. We are continuing our discussions and negotiations on the housing agreement. Nothing is at a standstill. We are discussing and co-operating for the well-being of all Quebeckers. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: MadamChair, things are definitely at a standstill, because the money is owed and has not been paid out. Months are going by while construction is not taking place. We need to reopen the economy. We need more flexibility in the gas tax program and Quebec's contribution to allow municipalities to undertake work on city halls, community centres and fire stations. We need the federal government to contribute to funding public transit operations, which have become a real financial drain because of the drop in ridership. What is the federal government waiting for to provide real help instead of just talking? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: When it comes to just talking, the Bloc Qubcois has a lot of experience, I admit. We, in the government, are working and co-operating. We are not waiting with our arms folded, we are discussing a series of issues with Quebec. We do more than discuss, we work and we co-operate. We are working on projects, not only in infrastructure, but in a number of other areas. Just think of the co-operation of our armed forces in the CHSLDs, for example. We are here for Quebeckers. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Your time has run out, Mr. Bergeron. We'll go now to Ms. Khalid, from MississaugaErin Mills. Ms. Iqra Khalid (MississaugaErin Mills, Lib.): Madam Chair, I'll be splitting my time with the member for GlengarryPrescottRussell. During a consultation with the business community in Mississauga, the concerns of businesses, big and small, included the need for stable, affordable and safe child care. With the lack of such child care spaces, an economic recovery plan post-COVID cannot be effective until and unless we make sure that people are able to get back to work. I've heard from parents across Mississauga that they're being forced to stay home because of inadequate child care and that they have to choose between putting food on the table and keeping family safe. More and more employers are realizing that good employees are unable to contribute to their business growth because of this challenge. Now more than ever, we need to find long-term sustainable solutions for Canadians who face challenges with regard to child care. I ask our Minister of Families, Children and Social Development this: What is our strategy to tackle this ever-growing need for a national child care plan? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I thank the honourable member for her question and for her important advocacy and work on this important issue. We understand that child care is important to our economic recovery and our social infrastructure. We know the pressure that COVID-19 has placed on families, especially parents. That is why we're committed to continuing to work with provinces and territories to renew our agreements on early learning and child care, and to provide, at the earliest opportunity, $400 million in support. In addition to that, the Prime Minister has already indicated that child care will be part of the $14-billion pledge to provinces and territories to assist them with respect to COVID-19 recovery efforts. Over the next decade, we will continue to invest $7. 5 billion, and together we have achieved the goal of over 40,000 affordable child care spaces. We are also committed to continuing to create over 250,000 before-school and after-school child care spaces for kids under the age of 10. We will continue to work with our partners in the provinces and territories to ensure that Canadians can continue to have access to safe, quality and affordable child care. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for GlengarryPrescottRussell has the floor. Mr. Francis Drouin (GlengarryPrescottRussell, Lib.): MadamChair, small businesses play a fundamental role in the Canadian economy. In an article in LaPresse, the Minister of Economic Development warned us that the economic crisis caused by severe lockdown measures could have more serious consequences in small municipalities than in large cities. Based on discussions with the chambers of commerce in my riding, it is clear that federal government assistance will be essential for the reopening of the economy, specifically for the rural economy. In fact, I would like to acknowledge the work of the Prescott-Russell community development corporation, under the leadership of John Candie. After announcing almost $57million to help SMEs adopt e-commerce, how does the minister plan to help SMEs and the business community in our rural areas? Hon. Mlanie Joly (Minister of Economic Development and Official Languages): MadamChair, I also thank my colleague from GlengarryPrescottRussell for his important question. Yes, our regions are important and the entrepreneurs in those regions are creative and daring. They take risks, but they are currently facing huge challenges. So we are here for them. We understand their anxiety and we want to help them. That is why we have decided to invest heavily in rural economic development. It is also why we have doubled the budget of CFDCs and Community Futures organizations across the country. In southern Ontario we have reinvested over $260million in the regional economic development agency FedDev. In the great riding of GlengarryPrescottRussell, which I am particularly fond of and where there is a very good member of Parliament, there is an additional $1million for entrepreneurs in the region. We have been, we are and we will be at your side. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for GlengarryPrescottRussell has 36seconds left. No? Then we'll go to the honourable member for ElmwoodTranscona. Mr. Daniel Blaikie (ElmwoodTranscona, NDP): Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with the member for Victoria. Madam Chair, Krystal is a community worker in Winnipeg. She has been working from home since late March, taking care of her child, who is out of school, and caring for her father, who is living with her and vulnerable to COVID-19. Her employer called her up recently and asked her to physically return to work or to take a leave. As a parent and a care provider to a vulnerable person, she's not comfortable with physically returning to work. Service Canada won't give Krystal a straight answer as to whether going on leave and collecting CERB would count as refusing a reasonable job offer. With Bill C-17 looming in the background, Krystal is worried about jail time and fines if she does right by her child and her father by applying for CERB. Can Krystal reasonably refuse to go back to work and collect CERB, or will she be considered a fraudster? That's my question for the minister that is specific to Krystal's case. As well, what is the minister doing to provide clear direction to Canadians and to Service Canada agents so that people can get a clear answer before making their decision about returning to work? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I want to thank the honourable member for his important question. We recognize that Canadian workers will face various different situations, including those who are ineligible for the Canada emergency support benefit. We'll continue to work with workers to make sure they're able to be supported throughout this pandemic. The fact of the matter is that every province has workplace health and safety regulations that must be supported. We understand that workers have the right not to work in unsafe situations. We also understand that many Canadians do want to go back to work; and in fact many have. We will make sure that we support Canadians throughout this recovery process. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member has 47 seconds left, and that includes the answer. Mr. Daniel Blaikie: Madam Chair, that answer is really not good enough, because the problem here is that Krystal needs to know whether she can continue receiving CERB or not. That's a federal government decision, and she needs to know whether the federal government is going to accuse her of fraud and put her in jail or assess fines against her if she refuses to go back to work because she wants to take care of her child and her father. What is the minister's answer to that? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister has 20 seconds to respond. Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that if a Canadian has to take care of a loved one due to circumstances surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, they are indeed eligible to receive the CERB and remain receiving that benefit. Ms. Laurel Collins (Victoria, NDP): As we deal with the global pandemic, we cannot lose sight of the ongoing climate emergency. Canada has missed every single climate target it set, and we need to break the cycle of empty promises. Canadians want their government to be accountable, and environmental groups such as Ecojustice, CAN-Rac, Environmental Defence and West Coast Environmental Law, as well as the government's own climate institute, are all calling for legally binding climate targets. When will the government put its climate targets into law with legally binding milestones so we never miss another target again? Hon. Navdeep Bains (MississaugaMalton, Lib.): Madam Chair, I thank my honourable colleague for her question. I totally agree with her when it comes to the environment. It is a priority not only for us as a government, but it should be a priority for all Canadians. That is why we have put measures in place to put a price on pollution through carbon pricing. That is why we have a comprehensive plan that also includes significant investments in clean technology, which will help reduce our carbon footprint. I am confident that these measures will enable us to not only meet but exceed our 2030 target and also allow us to achieve our net-zero 2050 target. Ms. Laurel Collins: That didn't answer my question. I asked when. Empty promises won't get us any closer to meeting our climate targets. Can the minister tell us when his government will introduce climate accountability laws? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I think the fundamental issue here is having a plan when it comes to the environment. I'm confident that the measures that we have takenputting a price on pollution, investing in clean technology, and other key measures to reduce our carbon footprint, including the investment in infrastructureunderpin a plan The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to the honourable member for Victoria. Ms. Laurel Collins: This government is not meeting its targets, but it is meeting with oil and gas lobbyists. The pandemic has made us reflect on our priorities. Are we going to choose a just recovery with good, sustainable jobs for Canadian workers, or are we going to keep subsidizing oil and gas companies to the tune of billions, subsidies that we know are ending up in the pockets of CEOs and shareholders? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will have a brief answer from the minister. Hon. Navdeep Bains: Again, Madam Chair, this is the fundamental difference between us and the NDP. We fundamentally believe that the entire economy needs to work together, including the energy sector, to enable us to achieve those 2030 and 2050 targets. We are going to work together to support our workers, including in the energy sector, to reduce our carbon footprint. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Now we will go to the honourable member for SaskatoonGrasswood, Mr. Waugh. Mr. Kevin Waugh (SaskatoonGrasswood, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. When I was last here in May, I was on my way back to Saskatoon from Toronto, and there was actually someone on my flight who tested positive for COVID-19. I was never informed of it by the airline. I found out two weeks later. The report was in the news media. Why hasn't the government put rules in place requiring airlines to reach out to individuals like me who may have been exposed to COVID on their flights? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, it's hard to speculate on what happened from such a vague description of his experience, but I will say that we have every confidence in local public health, which is doing the hard and heavy lifting of contact tracing and working very closely with all kinds of different sectors, including airline sectors, to make sure that close contacts of people who have tested positive for COVID-19 are found, are traced and are isolated. I assume that the member took appropriate precautions on the flight and I hope that he continues to do so. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, it was reported that the individual on my plane who had COVID was actually connecting in Toronto from an international flight. The Prime Minister announced last week that they would begin mandating temperature checks for those bound for Canada in July. Will international travellers be tested when they land in Canada, or will they be relying on the tests that take place in other countries? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, this is a very important question, because the protection and safety of all Canadiansin particular, Canadian travellersis a high priority for our government. We've been working very closely with the airlines. At the current time, we are putting temperature screening in place. That will initially be done primarily by the airlines that are in the best position to do it at this point in time. We are also now going to be including CATSA, the people who do the security screening, so that when people enter the airport, they will also be screened. We believe that is going to be the most effective measure to keep all travellers safe. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, last week five of the largest professional sports leagues in North America put out a statement of support for my private member's bill, the safe and regulated sports betting act. Given the struggles that clubs and leagues are facing due to COVID-19, including having no fans at all in the stands for the foreseeable future, the legalization of sports betting would be a welcome opportunity not only to engage fans but to generate much-needed revenue. Will the government commit now to supporting the sports and gaming industries by supporting my private member's bill, Bill C-218? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, I've had the opportunity on many occasions to speak to members of Parliament and also to mayors and councillors and people living in border communities where there are casinos. They've raised this issue a number of times. We've listened very carefully to the concerns that have been expressed by them. I would like to advise the member that I look forward to the opportunity for a careful examination of his bill. We are at all times concerned about maintaining the integrity of the gaming industry within our community. That's the best way to protect Canadians. At the same time, we will examine his bill with all of the necessary attention to make sure it's given full consideration. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, it's the first time in history that we've had the five professional leagues in this country joining together for this bill. Newspapers rely, as we all know, on advertising for a significant portion of their revenue. This includes the usual flyers as well as in-paper ads. I've heard major concerns from a number of newspapers in this country about competition they're receiving today from Canada Post, which is offering massive free postage services. In fact, I have one of their ads here, which says that the first 6,000 pieces of postage are 100% free. If the government is genuine about wanting to ensure that newspapers and journals can succeed in this country, why are you allowing Canada Post to use its monopoly power to actually threaten local newspapers in this country? Hon. Steven Guilbeault (Minister of Canadian Heritage): Thank you, Madame Chair, and I thank the member opposite for his question. As you well know, a healthy news and media sector in Canada is a priority for our government, which is why we have put in place a number of measures before COVID-19 and during COVID-19, and we will continue to be there for them after this crisis has gone by. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Before we go on, we will be taking a break to do a bit of a changeover. I also want to remind members to address their questions and comments to the chair. We will go now to the honourable member for BruceGreyOwen Sound, Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff (BruceGreyOwen Sound, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Mr. Blair stated yesterday here in the House that the AR-15 has been used in mass killings in Canada on many occasions. Mr. Blair, please provide just one specific instance in which an AR-15 was used in a mass killing in Canada. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I remind the member to address questions and comments to the chair. The honourable minister may respond. Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I think this is an excellent opportunity to point out to the member opposite how important it is to actually listen to what was said. If you go back and review that tape, and I would invite you to do so, you'll see that I said the AR-15 and other weapons like themreferring of course to military-style assault weaponshave been used in mass killings, and I actually cited a number of examples. Madam Chair, I think it would be very useful if the member's questions were based on facts. Mr. Alex Ruff: I can remind Mr. Blair that I actually have watched the video a couple of times, and he specifically states that the AR-15 was used in mass killings in Canada, yet he has yet to provide one. My additional question is to Mr. Blair. Out of the recently banned firearms on May 1, how many have been or are still currently in use by the Canadian Armed Forces? Hon. Bill Blair: That's an excellent question, Madam Chair, because it's very important to provide Canadians with clarity. We have prohibited these firearms for non-law enforcement and non-military use. The military uses weapons that were actually designed for soldiers to use in combat to shoot other soldiers. That's the appropriate use of such weapons, Madam Chair. They're not things to be played with in civilian society. Mr. Alex Ruff: As a soldier for 25 years, I'll remind Mr. Blair that none of the currently prohibited firearms would be used in the Canadian Armed Forces. I asked him a question on whether any of them is being or ever has been used in the Canadian Armed Forces. Are any of the recently banned firearms still in use, or have they ever been in use, in any military in the world? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, I think it's important to also recognize that the basic origin, the provenance of the weapons that we have prohibited, was in their original design. They were designed for military use for various military forces around the world. As I've said previously, they were designed for soldiers to use in combat to kill other soldiers. They're very efficient in their design for killing people. They have no purpose in Canadian society. Mr. Alex Ruff: As someone who has used many military-style firearms and who is actually involved in helping define what we purchase in the military, I would use none of the ones that are currently prohibited. I have a question, Chair, for Minister MacAulay. Can he please confirm whether Veterans Affairs has a plan to address the claims backlog, yes or no? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (Minister of Veterans Affairs): Madam Chair, I appreciate my honourable colleague's question, and yes, we've indicated that it's a major priority. That's why I'm so pleased that the supplementary estimates contained just under $90 million to address hiring more staff, improving the process and making sure that we attack the backlog in an appropriate manner. Mr. Alex Ruff: Madame Chair, does that plan exist in written form? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Well, Madam Chair, I can assure you that it's in the supplementary estimates, and of course, this money is The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We'll go back to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff: The question is about the plan, not how much money has been allocated. I am asking for the written plan on how to address the backlog. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Madam Chair, I can tell my honourable colleague that the money is in the supplementary estimates, and with the money we're able to attack this problem in an appropriate manner, and that's what is important for our veterans. Mr. Alex Ruff: The deputy minister committed on March 10 that a written plan would be provided to the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs within a month and made public. Did the deputy minister or the department provide the minister that plan within a month? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Madame Chair, I'm sure my honourable colleague wants an appropriate plan and he would be fully aware this just under $90 million would make a big difference in the plan to attack the backlog. We The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We'll go back to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff: Thank you, Chair. Therefore, my question is, if the deputy minister in the department provided him with an appropriate plan or a written plan, why is he questioning how appropriate that plan is? I have complete confidence in the deputy minister's ability to produce a written plan. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister may give a brief answer, please. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I can assure my honourable colleague that with the appropriate funding, we will address the backlog in Veterans Affairs. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Parry SoundMuskoka, Mr. Aitchison. Mr. Scott Aitchison: Thank you, Madam Chair. My question is about summer camps again. Three weeks ago, I asked this government if the finance minister would meet with the beleaguered summer camp sector. Summer camps, which are a social and economic mainstay in Parry SoundMuskoka and all of northern Ontario, have been crippled by the global pandemic. It's costing millions of jobs, and some camps are actually in danger of folding. Aside from a brief follow-up conversation over the phone with the junior minister, there has still been no action from this government. When will the Minister of Finance meet with summer camps to find a solution? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I recognize the honourable member's important question and his focus on summer camps. We recognize the importance of looking at that and paying attention to the needs of that community. We will continue to engage with them, as we have, to ensure and find ways in which we can get their feedback and find ways in which we can support them. That work is ongoing, and I assure the honourable member that our focus is on the kids and on ensuring that they have access to summer camps for this year. Mr. Scott Aitchison: I don't know why you need to find ways to get feedback. The summer camps association has given lots of feedback and my office has given lots of feedback, so I don't see what's confusing about this. However, I've become accustomed to not really getting answers to questions, so I will go to the next one. The Ontario government's regional reopening plan permits cruise boats to resume on Georgian Bay, yet the federal government is refusing to allow these vessels to operate until July 1. Therefore, small businesses such as the Island Queen cruiser in Parry Sound, which has only a very few precious weeks to operate in the first place, is losing yet another two weeks because of federal inaction. This not only hurts the cruise boat industry but also hurts tourism and small businesses all through our area. Will the Minister of Transport take a regional approach himself by lifting the federal ban on Georgian Bay, just like the Province of Ontario has done? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister may reply. Is there a response? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, there is. I apologize for the confusion. Let me respond, if I may, on behalf of the Minister of Transport. There have been a number of very important discussions with the provinces, in particular with the Province of Ontario, around provisions regarding pleasure craft. There are certain restrictions that will come to an end on June 30. We're working very closely with our provincial counterparts to address this issue, but we want to ensure that it will be done safely. Mr. Scott Aitchison: Madam Chair, I actually gave the minister a heads-up that I would be asking that question. He sent me an email today saying he was not going to be able to be in the House, and it's great of him to do that. He said that whoever was going to fill in for him would have an answer, but again, that was not really an answer. The next issue I would like to bring this government's attention to is the deplorable state of rural Internet service in Parry SoundMuskoka. Quite simply, there are too many gaps in service, and what is available is generally way too expensive. We have families trying to work and teach their kids from home on unreliable and outrageously expensive Internet service, and we have too many small businesses that either cannot access or afford reliable Internet services. Today Greg Rickford, the Ontario energy minister, and Laurie Scott, Ontario Minister of Infrastructure, announced $2. 3 million for seven northern Ontario broadband projects. Minister, will when your government get serious and become a reliable partner for the Government of Ontario and the private sector to deliver this crucial modern-day infrastructure to rural Canadians? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I remind the member that he needs to address the questions and comments to the chair. The honourable minister may reply. Hon. Maryam Monsef (Minister for Women and Gender Equality and Rural Economic Development): Madam Chair, in the best of times, life without access to high-speed Internet is hard. During a pandemic, the challenges are that much more pronounced. Our government's unprecedented investments are already connecting a million more Canadian households to this essential service, but until we achieve universal access our work is not done. We will work with our partners, including provinces across the country, to connect every Canadian household to high-quality Internet access that is affordable and reliable. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member has 30 seconds. Mr. Scott Aitchison: I think I can squeeze something in here, then. I'm wondering, then, Madam Chair, since the Province of Ontario has used the Northern Ontario Heritage Corporation Fund to make this announcement, what about using FedNor to make the same kind of announcement, and partner with the province? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister has a brief answer. Hon. Mlanie Joly: Obviously we believe in the importance of northern Ontario; that's why we nearly doubled the budget of FedNor. We will continue to invest in businesses and people all around Parry Sound, Muskoka and northern Ontario. If my colleague has specific projects in mind, please come and see me and let's have a conversation. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for Montmagny-L'Islet-KamouraskaRivire-du-Loup, Mr. Gnreux, has the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux (MontmagnyL'IsletKamouraskaRivire-du-Loup, CPC): Thank you, MadamChair. I will continue along the same lines as my colleague. During this pandemic, we are realizing the extent to which reliable high-speed Internet service is needed for Canada's economy. There are still places where telework is not possible today because of the lack of adequate coverage. However, since2015, the government has committed to addressing the situation through three new programs. Benot Pilotto, who is the mayor of Saint-Onsime-d'Ixworth, in my riding, wrote to me a few days ago. That is why I am asking you what concrete results the government plans to achieve for our rural areas by the end of the year. Hon. Maryam Monsef: At the best of times, life without high-speed Internet access is difficult. During a pandemic, the difficulties are even greater. Our government's unprecedented investments are already connecting an additional one million Canadian households to this essential service. However, until we achieve universal access, our job is not done. We are working The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Gnreux, you have the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, I am simply asking the minister to tell me when the mayor of Saint-Onsime-d'Ixworth will be able to tell his residents when the Internet will be available in his municipality. It is not complicated. What does the government plan to do so that rural municipalities across Canada can have access to the Internet as soon as possible? What is its plan? Hon. Maryam Monsef: We are working with partners across the country to ensure that every Canadian household is connected to a high-quality, accessible and affordable high-speed Internet service. Madam Chair, I assure my colleagues that we share the same goal, and we will work with all our partners across the country to ensure every Canadian household has access The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Gnreux, you have the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, I am still not getting a specific answer. According to the government's plan, when will rural Canadian businesses and households be connected? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I would ask the honourable minister to provide a brief answer. Hon. Maryam Monsef: Madam Chair, those plans are under way, and we will have more to share in the coming days. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: It seems that the Minister of Rural Economic Development plans to announce a new plan this week. Can she tell us how this program will differ from the Connect to Innovate program, which is already in place? Can the minister tell us whether her program will solve the problem of the 25square kilometre hexagonal zones, which unfortunately make many projects ineligible for the CRTC's broadband fund? Hon. Maryam Monsef: Madam Chair, I'm pleased to share with my colleague that the model he's referring to, the hexagon model, is no more. Our maps are much more precise now to ensure that we do not leave Canadians behind. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, this year, the Canada summer jobs program is a real fiasco. I think all my colleagues will agree with me. On May13,100jobs were announced in my riding; on May20,16jobs were announced; on May27,13jobs were announced; on June3,12jobs were announced; and on June10, only one job was announced. As we speak, an amount of $100,000 is still to be confirmed in my riding. Can we have an announcement, once and for all? Let's stop the piecemeal announcements and finally confirm the remaining jobs today so that our organizations can have young people before the summer starts on the weekend. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable minister. Hon. Ahmed Hussen: MadamChair, I thank the honourable member for his question. We recognize the important role that the Canada summer jobs program is playing in supporting employers and young workers in communities right across the country. Our government is working very hard to help employers adapt to the realities of the COVID-19 pandemic, and at the same time is supporting young Canadians as they begin to look for summer employment. We've introduced flexibilities into the program to ensure that more young workers have opportunities to get employed. The honourable member also has to understand that we're in the COVID-19 pandemic, and as such it will take some time for businesses to equip themselves to hire students. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for NanaimoLadysmith, Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly (NanaimoLadysmith, GP): Thank you, Madam Chair. In the first five months of this year, 554 B. C. residents died from opioid overdoses. They were teachers, construction workers, business owners, family members, neighbours and friends. Addiction is a health and social issue, but criminalization creates stigma, so people hide their drug use and die alone. Access to a safe supply of drugs and safe injection sites saves lives and puts addicts in daily contact with people who can help them. Will this government end the war on drugs by decriminalizing them, providing a safe supply and reallocating resources from policing addicts to providing treatment for them? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, I think it's really important we make sure that when we speak about people who use substances, we remove stigmatizing language like the word addict. We can stand together, as this government has, with people who use substances and their families to ensure a range of options for people who are struggling with addiction, who are using substances in a way that is harming their health and their communities. As you know, we have restored harm reduction to the Canadian drugs and substances strategy. We've made it easier for people to access safe supplies of substances. We've increased access to treatment and the variety of treatment through federal transfers to provinces and territories. Madam Chair, we're working with communities to make sure there are more community-based approaches to treating The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, the Geneva Convention considers both tear gas and pepper spray to be chemical weapons and prohibits their use in war, yet our police forces use these weapons on Canadian civilians. These weapons are indiscriminate and can affect peaceful protestors and innocent bystanders. Will the government prohibit the use of these weapons and require police to use de-escalation techniques to keep legal protests peaceful? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, the right to peaceful protest in this country is a constitutionally protected right. We want to ensure it's always respected. At the same time, Madam Chair, we recognize that the use of even less than lethal force can have significant impacts on people's safety. This is a highly regulated substance in Canada. It's prohibited for non-police use, and for the police it is and should be highly regulated. The RCMP have advised me they have not used tear gas in nine years. We'll continue to monitor it to ensure that peaceful protest is always respected. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, in 2012 the RCMP spent $14 million on 18 armoured personnel carriers. One's parked at the Nanaimo detachment. I can't imagine why we have weapons of war like this for policing civilians. Will the government rein in the RCMP budget and end wasteful spending on militarizing our civilian police forces? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, it's a very important tradition that our Canadian police are not militarized. At the same time, we've seen a number of tragedies when police have responded to situations in which people were armed with weapons designed for soldiers to kill soldiers, and they've been used to kill police officers. The militarization of our society, so strongly promoted by some, is the direct consequence of the militarization of the police. As we remove these weapons from our society and prohibit them, we'll make it safer for everyone and we can then move away from such a model of policing. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, the government spent $4. 5 billion to buy an old, leaky pipeline. Since 1961, there have been 82 reported spills from the Trans Mountain pipeline. Over 1. 5 million litres of crude oil has spilled into the surrounding environment. This weekend, the Trans Mountain pipeline leaked again, dumping 190,000 litres of oil. How much is this spill going to cost Canadian taxpayers to clean up? How much contingency funding has been budgeted to repair the environmental destruction from spills? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I want to thank the honourable colleague for his question. He full well knows that the acquisition that we made with regard to the TMX initiative is a reflection of the fact that we want this initiative to move forward in a sustainable manner and in a manner that protects the environment. I'll continue to work with my colleagues to endeavour to make sure that we have the appropriate processes in place to protect the environment and at the same time create good-quality, middle-class jobs for Canadians. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for RosemontLa PetitePatrie, Mr. Boulerice, has the floor. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice (RosemontLa Petite-Patrie, NDP): Thank you, MadamChair. The Black Lives Matter movement is right to discuss systemic racism in our societies. In Montreal, the city and the police department have recognized this, and measures will be put in place. The Liberal government, once again, is all talk and no walk. Although it spends $10million a day, we see no attempt to reform or change the RCMP. If the Prime Minister really wants to act, why is he delaying the action plan in response to the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls? Hon. Bill Blair: Let me assure this House and the member opposite that we're not dragging our feet. This is an important issue. Indigenous people, black Canadians and other racialized people are far too often experiencing systemic racism and disparate outcomes through the criminal justice system. It's incumbent upon all of us who work within the criminal justice system to take the steps and actions necessary to produce more equitable outcomes. All police services, including the RCMP, must be committed to ensuring that the people they're sworn to serve and protect are always treated with dignity and respect. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: MadamChair, why are the Liberals taking indigenous children to court to challenge the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal ruling in their favour? Hon. Marc Miller (Minister of Indigenous Services): Madam Chair, as the honourable member knows full well, a number of cases are pending, and we are currently negotiating with the parties. We are making progress, and I would be delighted to tell the member and the House about it in response to a later question. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: We've been asking questions about it for months, and as I see it, we should keep doing so. The Prime Minister's new pipeline, which taxpayers were forced to buy with their hard-earned money, has leaked. Some 190,000litres of oil spilled, and we can't even make the company pay for it because the Liberals bought the pipeline. Trans-Mountain, KeystoneXL and the resumption of gas exploration and development off the coast of Newfoundland and Labradorare these the projects the Liberals had in mind for their green recovery? Hon. Navdeep Bains: I'd like to thank the honourable member for his question. Our priority was to protect the health and safety of Canadians throughout the pandemic, especially when it comes to the environment. That's why environmental and climate change laws aimed at protecting the environment, human health and conservation will remain in force. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: Across Quebec, the cultural community is going through a harrowing time. Unions, associations, artists and creators have all taken part in public demonstrations recently to condemn the lack of a specific plan for the living arts, performing arts and festival sector. What is the government waiting for? Hon. Steven Guilbeault: I'd like to thank the member for his question. However, I strongly disagree with him. We haven't waited to develop a plan for the arts and culture sector. We listened to the community and we tailored our supports, as they were announced. We have an emergency plan for the arts and culture sector. We were asked to adapt the CERB to take royalties into account, and we did. We were asked to extend the CERB, and we did. We are fully aware that the recovery will take longer in the arts and culture sector. We have been there, we are there and we will be there for the arts and culture sector. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: Well, that wasn't at all what the artists and creators who were out demonstrating in the streets a few days ago thought. They were protesting on the weekend. The CERB extension announced by the government only brings us to September, but the cultural community is expecting the worst in the fall. What is the government's long-term plan to support creators and their entire teams? Hon. Steven Guilbeault: I'm not so sure those who were protesting last week had issues with our government, but we'd certainly be happy to speak with them. As for a long-term plan, we are currently consulting arts and culture stakeholders to contemplate together how the government can help the sector in response to the ongoing crisis. We are working on finding solutions, but until we have long-term solutions, we have seen to it that our artists and organizations have access to funding until September. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for BeauportLimoilou, Mrs. Vignola, has the floor. Mrs. Julie Vignola (BeauportLimoilou, BQ): Madam Chair, I will be sharing my time with the member for Montcalm. According to the latest news, Seaspan Shipyards will be spending an additional $1. 5billion to build two ships. Why? Because the ships were ordered in 2011 and still haven't been delivered. Davie built the Asterix without going over budget because it delivered the ship on time. Davie is currently the top shipyard, representing 50% of Canada's shipbuilding capacity. Why isn't Davie being awarded its fair share of contracts? Hon. Anita Anand (Minister of Public Services and Procurement): I'd like to thank the member for her question. Davie is certainly a strong and trusted partner that works very hard to help our government get results for Canadians. Building a new class of ships is highly complex, and it's not unusual for cost estimates to change throughout the procurement project. It's important to make sure additional funding is available for the joint support ships project to ensure the navy's vessels are delivered. Mrs. Julie Vignola: We are talking about $1. 5billion, here. In the beginning, eight years ago, the project was supposed to cost $2. 6billion. There can't be much missing when the cost overrun is double the initial estimate. Why haven't the ships been delivered yet? Why is Davie still not seen as a trusted partner? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Minister, please keep your answer brief. Hon. Anita Anand: Once again, I would point out that building a new class of ships is highly complex, and it's not unusual for the cost estimate to change for a procurement project as large as this one. I know that Davie works very hard, and we also believe it is an outstanding partner. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): It is now over to the honourable member for Montcalm, Mr. Thriault. Mr. Luc Thriault (Montcalm, BQ): Madam Chair, in Quebec, 12,000people have begun their training to work in residential and long-term care centres. They will be ready for duty in mid-September. In the meantime, we need the support of the army, which is helping us save lives. The dedication of the members of the armed forces is paramount, and I want to extend my heartfelt thanks. The government extended their mission until June26, which is only 10days away. What does the army have to do right now that is more important than helping our caregivers save lives? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, I'm glad my fellow member recognizes the fundamental role the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces have played and continue to play in residential and long-term care centres and many other areas in support of our seniors. We are in talks with the Quebec government. The discussions around providing continued assistance to Quebec are quite positive and productive. That assistance can take many forms, including the Red Cross. We will be there for our seniors, Madam Chair. Mr. Luc Thriault: We are short 12,000people, so if the Red Cross wants to help us, all the better. We'll take all the help we can get. Barely 800members of the military are still in Quebec. I repeat my question: What does the army have to do 10days from now that is more important if it's not to help caregivers save lives? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, all the members of the military are still in Quebec. They have done absolutely incredible work and are continuing to do so. The people at the Canadian Red Cross are well-trained paid workers who can perform the same work in partnership with the members of the armed forces, who can stay in Quebec as well. Right now, we are working with the Quebec government and discussing how we can keep the measure in place until September15. Mr. Luc Thriault: Madam Chair, our nurses and orderlies are exhausted. They're at the end of their ropes. Now is the time to thank them, not the time to turn our backs on them. It's not the time for dilly-dallying or discussions. It's the time to tell them that we will be there to help them until the end. I will repeat my question. What does the army have to do that is more important than helping caregivers save the lives of those who built Quebec? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The Leader of the Government in the House of Commons is asked to keep his answer brief. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, the Government of Canada is there and will continue to be there to help the people who built Quebec. The Government of Canada will work with the Quebec government to make that happen. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for Red DeerMountain View, Mr. Dreeshen. Mr. Earl Dreeshen (Red DeerMountain View, CPC): Thank you so much. Madam Chair, on May 14 I asked the Minister of Agriculture when the Liberal government would put aside its usual campaign rhetoric and recognize the very detrimental impact the carbon tax is having on farmers across this country. Minister Bibeau proudly noted that according to their data, the average cost of the carbon tax per farm across Canada is $210 to $819. We know that these numbers are completely unfounded and are not based on any factual evidence. The fact is that the Liberal government's own Parliamentary Budget Officer has estimated that at $25 per tonne, the cost for an 855-acre crop farm in Alberta is well over $6,000. The office came up with that using the government's statistics from the 2016 agricultural census. Madam Chair, the evidence is right in front of the minister. When will this Liberal government come clean with Canadians and recognize the disastrous impact the carbon tax is having on Canada's critical agriculture and agri-food sector? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food): Madam Chair, our pollution pricing policy is designed to grow a clean economy. To support this sector, we have put in place the following measures. Emissions from livestock and crop production are not priced. Farm fuels and fuels from cardlock facilities are exempt, and there is a partial rebate for propane and natural gas used in commercial greenhouses. Our government has been very open and transparent about our pollution pricing plan. We will do a review of our pollution pricing system in 2020, focused on competitiveness issues in trade-exposed industries such as agriculture. It is also important to remember that this is about tackling climate change and that 100% of the revenues stay in the province. We will continue to support our farmers and food processors as they provide an essential service across Canada. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Madam Chair, Minister Bibeau keeps talking about wanting to protect Canadians'environment. Well, the truth is that Canada's farmers, ranchers and processors have for years demonstrated their ability to deliver meaningful reductions in emissions and to safeguard the environment through the adoption of new technologies, education and innovative management practices, but the government ignores these efforts. Will the minister at the very least admit to Canadians that Canadian farmers are unable to pass on the cost of the carbon tax to consumers and instead have to absorb those extra costs out of their own pockets? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Madam Chair, allow me to explain again our government's position on pollution pricing. The price and method were developed so we could build an increasingly clean economy. We put a number of measures in place to help the agriculture sector. Emissions from animal and plant production aren't taxed. Farm fuels and fuels delivered to off-farm points-of-sale are also Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you, Madam Chair. I do have another question. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I am watching the time, Mr. Dreeshan. You have a couple more seconds. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you. Madam Chair, Minister Bibeau has repeatedly asked stakeholders to send her data about the impacts of the carbon tax on farmers, so this is exactly what they have been doing. The Atlantic Grains Council, the Grain Farmers of Ontario, Producteurs de grains du Qubec and the Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association issued a joint statement at the beginning of this year in which they estimated that the cumulative indirect inflation of carbon tax on farm costs will be $14. 50 an acre this year, with that cost escalating by more than double by 2022 to almost $30 an acre. These are huge numbers. Why does the Liberal government continue to ignore the facts presented to it and continue to misrepresent the truth to Canadians? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Madame Chair, I can assure you that we have paid close attention to all the information that has been provided to us and that our calculation was also based on this information provided by provinces and different stakeholders. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Our government has been very open and transparent about our pollution pricing plan. The department used data from stakeholders and provinces Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you very much, Madam Chair Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: as well as the 2019 agricultural tax data to estimate the average cost of pollution pricing associated with grain drying at up to 0. 4% of overall operating costs. It is important to remember that we have put in place many special provisions Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Madam Chair Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: like exempting farm fuel and providing other financial supports for farmers. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Dreeshen, I am watching the time, and the minister is allowed to answer for the same amount of time that you used to ask the question. Therefore, I would hope that we would allow her to finish. She has finished, and unfortunately the time is up. The committee now stands adjourned until tomorrow at noon.

The government said that they had carried out a plan of reducing the rent for those individual business to go through the harsh time of the pandemic, however, as Bob Saroya pointed out, not so many people were willing to accept the little fund from the government, which made the plan not effective at all. Mona Fortier, in response to him, promised to follow up and monitor those businessmen and lords, as well as pay more attention to their CMHC support program.

tr-sq-1253

tr-sq-1253_0

What did Bill Blair respond to the firearms seizure issue at Pearson airport when talking about the measures to guarantee social stability? The Chair (Hon. Anthony Rota (NipissingTimiskaming, Lib.) ): I call this meeting to order. Welcome to the 23rd meeting of the House of Commons Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic. A reminder to all members that in order to avoid issues with sound, members participating in person should not also be connected to the video conference. For those of you who are joining via video conference, I will remind you that when speaking you should be on the same channel as the language you are speaking, and please use your headsets. As usual, please direct your remarks through the chair. As I understand, there are no ministerial announcements today. We will now proceed to presenting petitions. I remind members that any petition presented during a meeting of this special committee must have already been certified by the clerk of petitions. For members participating in person, I ask that they please come and drop their signed certificates off at the table once the petition is presented. I would ask members to be very brief and concise, and to summarize the exact content of the petition. We will continue. The first person presenting a petition today is Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May (SaanichGulf Islands, GP): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I present two petitions this morning. The residents of SaanichGulf Islands are calling on the government to simplify the process for protection of marine protected areas. It's a multi-layered communication process. The marine protected area first proposed in the 1970s for the southern Strait of Georgia, now called the Salish Sea, has been awaiting designation for so long that it was originally endorsed by Jacques Cousteau. That gives us a sense for why petitioners are calling for a simplified and more rapid process. The second petition is from petitioners who are very concerned about our obligations under the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and our commitments under the Truth and Reconciliation Commission calls to action. They specifically reference the RCMP violation of UNDRIP in its actions on Wet'suwet'en territory and ask the government to commit to actually living the principles embodied in UNDRIP. The Chair: We will now go to Mr. Hardie. Mr. Ken Hardie (FleetwoodPort Kells, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am presenting a petition on behalf of the one in a million Canadians who suffer severe and adverse effects from vaccinations. GuillainBarre syndrome is very debilitating, and this petition seeks the setting up of a no-fault accident or compensation system to help offset the loss of work, the loss of wages and the loss of quality of life that many of these people suffer. I'm pleased to present this petition pursuant to Standing Order 36. The Chair: Mr. Trudel, you have the floor. Mr. Denis Trudel (LongueuilSaint-Hubert, BQ): Mr. Chair, culture is the soul of a people. Over the past 20years or so, culture, especially music, has never been as accessible as it is now. Paradoxically, creators'incomes have never been so low. The advent of digital technology has completely overturned the system for distributing the wealth generated by creators for the benefit of various Web stakeholders, many of whom are billionaires. This petition addresses these problems and proposes realistic solutions. The first is to set a minimum royalty model for streaming platforms for artists. The second is to update the existing private copying system. The third is for Internet and cell phone providers who sell their services as direct access to culture to share their profits with artists. The fourth is that the GAFAMs have to pay taxes on their services. Six thousand people have already signed the first version of this petition, launched last month by musician JordanOfficer and supported by singer BarbaraSecours. As an artist, I am proud to present this petition today because the issues it raises are fundamental to the survival of Quebec culture. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood ParkFort Saskatchewan, CPC): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I have four petitions to present today. I will be as brief as you suggested, although I will observe that if some members are going on longer during petitions than they normally do, it might be because the government has taken away so many of the tools that opposition members normally have for raising important issues in the House. The first petition deals with the issue of euthanasia and long-term care. The petitioners are concerned that instead of focusing on improving medically assisted life, something that we know is a major issue in light of recent revelations, the government has put so much time and legislative energy into efforts to continually further expand euthanasia in Canada and remove vital safeguards. The second petition speaks to the ongoing conversations happening in Canada around systemic discrimination and systemic racism. I think we do need to reflect on systemic discrimination. This petition deals specifically with Bill 21 in Quebec and raises concerns. The reality of the way that bill applies is that people from certain backgrounds who wish to practise their faith are not able to fully participate in Canadian society if they are employed in the public service. This petition asks the government to provide a response on that issue, something it hasn't done in response to past petitions on this. The third petition deals with the issue of firearms. The petitioners want to see the government take a strong response in dealing with illegal guns and gun smuggling. The petition notes that the vast majority of firearms-related crimes in Canada involves illegal guns. At the same time, the petitioners are concerned that the government has the wrong focusthat is, harassing law-abiding firearms ownerswithout putting in place substantial measures to deal with illegal guns. The petitioners want to see the reversal of the order in council from May 1 and strong measures to deal with illegal firearms. The fourth and final petition deals with Bill S-204, a bill that would make it a criminal offence for a Canadian to go abroad and receive an organ from a person who has not consented to giving that organ. It would also create a mechanism by which someone could be deemed inadmissible to Canada if they were involved in organ harvesting and trafficking. The petitioners are supportive of Bill S-204 and of similar bills in previous parliaments and would like to see us pass that bill as soon as possible. The Chair: Presenting petitions, Mr. Lamoureux. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Winnipeg North, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. It is with pleasure that I table another petition by the residents of Winnipeg North. These residents have signed a petition asking the Government of Canada, and in fact all members of Parliament, to put a high priority on assisting our poorest seniors. The increases to the GIS by $200, and $300 to the OAS, have been well received. They just want to highlight how important it is to support our seniors, in particular the poorest of our seniors. The Chair: For members present in the Chamber, a reminder that they are asked to bring their petitions to the table. We'll now proceed to statements by members. We'll go to Ms. Atwin for the first one. Mrs. Jenica Atwin (Fredericton, GP): Thank you, Mr. Chair. June 21 is National Indigenous Peoples Day, a day of acknowledgement and a day of celebration of the beautiful diversity of indigenous peoples across Turtle Island. I wish to recognize the leadership of Chief Shelley Sabattis of the Welamukotuk First Nation in Oromocto, New Brunswick. Each year she and her council, volunteers and staff go above and beyond to show appreciation for their members and to demonstrate pride and culture while promoting well-being. We gather in an event where all are welcome to take part, from traditional hand drum-making with elders to moose meat and tacos. This year we will celebrate a bit differently, but we will still stay connected, virtually and in spirit, to the vast network of indigenous peoples and allies. We need each other now more than ever. May we come together in song and stories and in solidarity. We will remember those who are not among us. I hope all of Canada will join us in observing National Indigenous Peoples Day. Mawiyapasuwok: let us come together. Nit liech. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Beech. Mr. Terry Beech (Burnaby NorthSeymour, Lib.): Mr. Chair, COVID-19 is an unprecedented challenge for all communities across Canada, but as we do our part to flatten the curve, I often think about those who suit up every morning to serve on the front lines of our health care system. My mother is a home care worker and my sister is a nurse. Even before the crisis, they would often share the hardships they faced on a day-to-day basis. It's a tough job at the best of times. In a pandemic, these jobs are life-threatening. I think we can all agree that these workers deserve more than our good wishes. They deserve a raise. That is why we have worked with the provinces to implement pandemic pay. In British Columbia more than 250,000 front-line workers are eligible for this program. That works out to a pay increase of about $4 an hour. It's a small show of our appreciation for their difficult and priceless contribution to our country. Share this message and say thanks to our front-line workers, participate in the 7 p. m. cheer, and order a pizza for your local nurses. It's the least we can do. The Chair: We'll now go on to Mr. Shipley. Mr. Doug Shipley (BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. We've been living in difficult times. Slowly, we are getting back to some resemblance of normalcy, although unfortunately not soon enough for some of our great summer festivals. It will not be normal in BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte this summer without the iconic Boots and Hearts weekend music festival, Kempenfest, Oro World's Fair, the Elmvale Fall Fair, or the Midhurst Autumnfest. Canada Day celebrations have been cancelled, but we can still celebrate the great nation we call home. Because of the lack of Canada Day celebrations, I've created Happy Canada Day lawn signs that are available through my constituency office, free to all residents of BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte. I'm also hosting a drive-through party on Canada Day at the Royal Canadian Legion on St. Vincent Street in Barrie. All are welcome to attend. There will be cupcakes for all. Please drop by the legion between 11 a. m. and 2 p. m. , and we can celebrate Canada Day safely together. Thank you and have a great summer. The Chair: Now we'll go on to Ms. Young. Ms. Kate Young (London West, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Among the countless ordinary Canadians who have stepped up to do extraordinary work during COVID-19, I wish to draw attention to our teachers. Teachers have always had a special place in my heart. My father was a teacher, and my daughter-in-law, Kelly Webb, is one now. I'm certain that my colleagues can all easily remember a teacher in their past who played an important role in helping them achieve their potential. I remember my grade 12 English teacher, Vince Weaver, at Westminster Secondary School in London. He made me realize that I could do so much more than I believed. Across the country, as schools closed, teachers did not stop their work. Some took their classes online. Others found innovative ways to continue engaging with their students. This is not the school year anyone imagined, and what the next one will look like is unclear, but our teachers in London West and across Canada have shown that no matter what, they will be there to help our next generation shine. The Chair: Before proceeding to the next presenter, I just want to remind the honourable members in the chamber that I realize that the six-foot limit makes it harder to whisper to each other, but we're hearing a bit of rumble, so I just want you to try to whisper at your best. Mr. Bergeron, you have the floor. Mr. Stphane Bergeron (Montarville, BQ): Mr. Chair, on July1st, we will be celebrating one of the most important events for the riding of Montarville: the 175thanniversary of the city of Saint-Bruno-de-Montarville. The theme Proud of our traditions will be the focus of this celebration for the people of Montarville. This is a good illustration of the rich history of this municipality nestled in the western foothills of Mont-Saint-Bruno. The seigneury of Montarville was granted in1710 to the illustrious former governor of Trois-Rivires, PierreBoucher. The parish of Saint-Bruno, which took root there and in which a village grew, became a municipal corporation in1845. To this day, it is one of the most prosperous localities, with a strong sense of belonging, a very dynamic community life and jealously preserved natural environments. A whole program had been drawn up for the celebration, but the current health crisis has taken over some of the planned activities, which has in no way diminished the pride and festive spirit of the people of Montarville. On July1st, we will have a good reason to be proud, in spite of everything. Happy 175thanniversary to Saint-Bruno-de-Montarville. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Maloney. Mr. James Maloney (EtobicokeLakeshore, Lib.): Mr. Chair, thank you for allowing me to take a moment to highlight an initiative that I started early on during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Heroes of EtobicokeLakeshore is an opportunity for citizens in my riding to recognize the contributions of those in their community who make life a bit easier. I'm pleased with the number of nominations I received that honour everyone from front-line workers to businesses that are innovating in these difficult times to volunteers who are finding new ways to reach out. I think of Daniel Lauzon who set up Food for Now, a mobile service that helps take care of the homeless. I think of Toni Varone, who helped his business clients by forgiving their rents, or young Lucas, who wanted to thank his teachers. I've been moved and inspired by the countless stories of generosity, strength, resiliency, kindness, incredible character and creativity. I want to thank all the heroes, as well as the people who nominated them. Keep them coming. Stay safe, everyone, and I wish you happy Canada Day early. The Chair: We'll now move on to Ms. Wong. Hon. Alice Wong (Richmond Centre, CPC): Mr. Chair, it gives me great pleasure to thank a local Richmond-based charity, the Social Diversity for Children Foundation, SDC, for its hard work both in raising funds for the purchase of personal protective equipment and in distributing this PPE to long-term care facilities and individual seniors'homes in the lower mainland of B. C. The COVID-19 relief fund is supported by a dozen other non-profits, businesses and community groups. Over the past two months, SDC has been to 32 seniors homes and senior-related organizations. In total, it has delivered masks to 7,000 care workers, staff and seniors. It is amazing to have witnessed how the younger generation have gotten involved in caring for the elderly at this very challenging time. The Chair: We'll now go to Ms. Damoff. Ms. Pam Damoff (Oakville NorthBurlington, Lib.): Mr. Chair, June is ALS Awareness Month, and 79 years after Lou Gehrig died from ALS little has changed. There's still no cure, and those with ALS typically die within five years of diagnosis. On June 21, Canadians will gather virtually to raise funds for ALS Canada in the Walk to End ALS. In Halton, normally we meet each year at Bronte Creek Provincial Park on the May long weekend to raise funds for ALS Canada. This year I will virtually join Tim's Titans, a team formed to honour Tim Robertson, my friend who died in 2016 after living with ALS for 13 years. I have a T-shirt, with a picture of Lou Gehrig, that says, Great Player. . . Lousy Disease and Tim's Titans. . . Great Team! ALS. . . Still a Lousy Disease. Join me on June 21 for the virtual Walk to End ALS to raise funds to support patients and their families and for ALS research. The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Khera. Ms. Kamal Khera (Brampton West, Lib.): Mr. Chair, on Saturday our community stood and marched in solidarity against anti-black racism. The peaceful protests that we're seeing across the country and around the world were not triggered by an isolated incident. They are fuelled by decades of ineffective action against something that is so insidious and deeply entrenched in our history, systems and institutions. For us, that is the racial inequality faced by Canada's indigenous and black communities. Anti-black racism is real. It exists right here in Canada, in our communities, including in Brampton. It exists when racialized students at McCrimmon Middle School are called McCriminals. It exists when a shocking report exposes the Peel District School Board's failure to work fairly with the black community. It exists when D'Andre Campbell, who was fighting mental illness, loses his life at the hands of the police. It is clear that we need reform. We need to dismantle the systems that allow this privilege and oppression to take form, and address the unconscious bias plaguing our institutions. We'll need to be bold, and the time to do that is now. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd (Sturgeon RiverParkland, CPC): Mr. Chair, a few months ago I rose in the House on the eve of our closure due to COVID-19. I told Canadians we must not give in to fear, that we would carry on and get through this crisis stronger than ever. Today, in this city and across Canada, Canadians are enjoying a beer on their favourite patios. Businesses are reopening, jobs are returning and our lives are starting to feel a bit normal again. Canadians pulled together, and because of that we did not see the devastating death toll that many had predicted. Life may be returning to normal, but unfortunately, here in this chamber of democracy, the people's voices continue to be shut down. There is no good reason for Parliament to be suspended today. In the words of my grandfather, it's time for the Liberals to get with the program and bring back the House. The Chair: We will now proceed with Ms. Jones. Ms. Yvonne Jones (Labrador, Lib.): Mr. Chair, from in-person learning to virtual classrooms, COVID-19 has drastically changed the lives of students across the country, especially those in post-secondary education who are worried about covering costs like tuition or rent this coming fall. Our government recognized that students should not have to worry or put their futures on pause during this difficult time. That's why last month the federal government introduced the Canada emergency student benefit. If you're a high school student headed to a post-secondary school, or a current post-secondary student or a recent graduate, you can receive the Canada emergency student benefit every four weeks and have the financial support that you need to save for school. We also doubled Canada student grants and loans, enhanced the student loan program, increased supports for indigenous post-secondary education and introduced the Canada student service grant for those who wish to pursue it. Our government is here to help all students get the support they need to pursue their future goals successfully. I wish them all the very best, and I wish all of you, my colleagues and those across Canada, a very happy National Indigenous Peoples Day, which is coming up on June 21. The Chair: I want to remind the honourable members to keep to their 60 seconds so that we don't go over the time. I'm sure it would be a lot easier for everyone if we stuck to that limit. We will now go to Mr. Aitchison. Mr. Scott Aitchison (Parry SoundMuskoka, CPC): Mr. Chair, I rise today to once again implore the government to do something about the horrible lack of access to and crazy cost of rural Internet service. Right now, too many areas of my riding have no access to rural Internet service at all, and those who can get service are paying through the nose. I've even heard constituents say that during this pandemic, they are having to choose between feeding their kids and educating them. Over the last few weeks, Conservatives have been consulting with rural Canadians, and the results are in. My constituents are tired of fancy political promises. They are frustrated beyond belief by the new challenges created by this pandemic. They are absolutely fed up with having their pleas ignored. All we want is affordable and reliable Internet service. Is that too much to ask of the government? The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. MacGregor. Mr. Alistair MacGregor (CowichanMalahatLangford, NDP): Mr. Chair, these last few months have been incredibly challenging for the residents of CowichanMalahatLangford, who have been forced to deal with the economic and social consequences of COVID-19. The pandemic has laid bare the inadequacies of our social safety net, the weakness in our supply chains and the dependence of our society on essential workers, who often work long hours for low wages, putting themselves and their families at risk. We've also been forced to confront the systemic inequality, poverty and racism that continue to hold so many people back from achieving their full potential. I will not dishonour the sacrifice that so many have made during this time by allowing us to go back to the status quo that got us here in the first place. I will not apologize for demanding that the most vulnerable in our society get the supports and opportunities they need to live with dignity, and I will not relent from pushing my political colleagues to summon the courage necessary to implement policies that lead to environmental, economic and social justice. The Chair: I now give the floor to Mr. Blaney. Hon. Steven Blaney (BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, CPC): Mr. Chair, here is a beautiful story, the story of a woman from Bellechasse, a courageous young mother from Saint-Malachie, Marie-ChristineGoupil. With three children, including the eldest daughter with a disability, and realizing that her daughter with a disability had special clothing needs, she decided to go into business to meet the needs of other parents who, like her, were facing their child's clothing challenges. Last week, she presented her Handy clothing collection on the show Dans l'il du dragon. It was a very emotional moment for the audience and the dragons. They were so touched that they decided to give her the amount she wanted without diluting her shares. The video of her presentation has already been viewed over 1million times on social networks. Marie-ChristineGoupil has discovered a passion for entrepreneurship and has moved and inspired many people with her passionate and courageous attitude. Congratulations, Ms. Goupil, your example makes us proud. The Chair: Mr. Blanchet, you have the floor. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet (BeloeilChambly, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I lend my voice to the Chief of the Assembly of First Nations of Quebec-Labrador, GhislainPicard, whose message is as follows: There have been no fewer than 14reports and conclusions of commissions of inquiry since1967 highlighting major problems in relations between law enforcement agencies and indigenous people. Each time, the conclusions have been overwhelming and highlight a disturbing reality. The justice system has failed indigenous people. Are you going to respond, as you too often do, by moving on to the next one, or are you going to do what we expect you to do, which is to recognize that the justice system discriminates against indigenous people and that we have no less right to security than the rest of the population? In three months, police interventions have claimed more victims among our members than the pandemic. But it is not enough to simply take a knee and denounce racism. It's about standing up and taking action. Those are the words of GhislainPicard. The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Harder. Ms. Rachael Harder (Lethbridge, CPC): Over the last few months, Canada's democracy has been disregarded and an autocracy has been resurrected in its place. By refusing to hold regular parliamentary sittings, Mr. Trudeau is sending a strong message to the Canadian public that he alone is the one who matters. In 2014, he professed that Canadians want their Members of Parliament to be effective voices for their communities in Ottawa, and not merely mouthpieces for an all-too-powerful Prime Minister. As it stands, however, he has shut down Parliament. Effectively, he has stripped us, the opposition, of our privileges and our powers. Sadly, Mr. Trudeau has become the all-too-powerful Prime Minister that he once warned against. A government that does not allow for effective opposition is not functioning in the best interest of Canadians; it is operating in the best interest of itself and, even more so, the interest of the Prime Minister. Canadians deserve to flourish in a democracy, not merely survive under the autocracy that this Prime Minister has created. The Chair: We'll now go on to Ms. Zahid. Mrs. Salma Zahid (Scarborough Centre, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I would like to recognize the work of Agincourt Community Services Association and its tireless executive director, Lee Soda, who have been serving our community during the COVID-19 pandemic. Under more pressure than ever, their staff and volunteers continue to serve a community whose need was great even before the crisis. Their food bank helps over 4,000 people weekly. They have opened outdoor washrooms and hand-washing stations for vulnerable communities and are delivering groceries and other essentials to vulnerable seniors. ACSA is a bridge between those who can help and those who need help, and they are just one example of how our community has come together to meet this challenge. There are restaurants and businesses donating meals to front-line workers, residents answering the call to stock the food bank shelves and neighbours looking in on the vulnerable and isolated. I am so proud of our community's spirit. Scarborough is strong. The Chair: We'll now proceed to the questioning of ministers. Please note that we will suspend the proceedings twice in order to allow employees who provide support for the sitting to replace each other safely. The first question goes to the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Chair, for months Conservatives have been pointing out flaws in Liberal government programs that are preventing Canadians from getting the help they need. The Prime Minister has refused to make these very technical changes to get more help to Canadians who need it. For example, on the wage subsidy, more than two-thirds of the money allocated for that program has lapsed because businesses don't qualify. I have a simple question. Will the Prime Minister change the program to allow companies who have made acquisitions to access the wage subsidy to keep more people working? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Papineau, Lib.): Mr. Chair, from the very beginning we knew that as we rolled out measures, we would need to improve them and tweak them, and that's exactly what we've been doing over the past three months. We needed to make measures happen quickly for Canadians, and we did that. But we continued to improve them, to make additions and amendments so that more people could get the help they needed, including with the proposed legislation last week that expanded the reach of the wage subsidy to more businesses. Unfortunately, the Conservatives didn't even want us to debate that particular piece of legislation. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Actually, Mr. Chair, it was the Liberals who said no to the motion to allow this Parliament to sit to debate that motion, and even in that legislation they refused to allow businesses who have made acquisitions to access the program. Now, when we look at the rent relief program, it is so difficult to apply for it that many landlords are refusing to bother, leaving even more small businesses to fall through the cracks. In fact, of the $3 billion allocated to the rent relief program, only $39 million has been paid out. That's less than 2%. Now, the Prime Minister is still using talking points from April. It's now June and he has refused to fix these programs and has successfully talked out the calendar on the days that the House of Commons could meet to discuss these programs. When will he make these changes to get more help to Canadians who need it? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, throughout this pandemic, we have constantly been updating and expanding our various programs. We recognize, in conversations with the premiers, how important it is to make sure that we're working together, the provinces and the federal government, on issues like rent subsidies where commercial rent is indeed a provincial jurisdiction. Many provinces have moved forward with the eviction bans that are necessary to go along with this, and we'll continue to work with provinces to make sure that we're getting Canadians the help they need. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Mr. Chair, Canadians cannot wait. He has run down the clock on parliamentary sittings and he still refuses to make these changes to get more help to Canadians. Today, we learned that Telus has installed Huawei technology in downtown Ottawa. There are over 80 sites across the national capital region with Huawei technology installed. Some of these sites are very near sensitive government institutions, like government departments, the National Research Council, RCMP headquarters and the Bank of Canada. How long has the Prime Minister known that Huawei technology has been installed in the Ottawa area? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, first off, on the issue of Parliament, it has been meeting four times a week over the past many weeks, and members of the opposition have been able to continue to ask questions on COVID-19 and a broad range of subjects. Moreover, every two weeks the finance department puts forward at the finance committee the full transparent measures that we've taken, so that parliamentarians can study them. We are continuing to work in this crisis. At the same time Mr. Ziad Aboultaif (Edmonton Manning, CPC): Answer the question. The Chair: I'm sorry? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: in regard to Huawei technology there are strict rules for companies to follow and we assume they will all follow those. The Chair: We'll pause for a second and stop the clock. I want to remind the honourable members who are joining us virtually that heckling really does disrupt the whole session. Your face does come up and we do see who it is, so I just want to make sure that you're aware of that. Now we'll go back to Mr. Scheer. We have a minute and 10 seconds left. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister is bragging about accountability and transparency. Will he table an economic update before the House rises? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, throughout this unprecedented pandemic, we have been open and transparent about all of the measures we've put forward. We've updated the finance committee The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer: That's a long way of saying no, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister has pursued a policy of appeasement in pursuit of a personal vanity product at the UN. In the process, he's cozied up to dictators and human rights violators. He's abandoned Israel and committed funding to UNRWA, an organization whose schools have been used as storage facilities for Hamas rockets against Israeli civilians, and whose facilities have served as breeding grounds for racism and anti-Semitism. He has apologized for the Iranian regime when it shot down a plane full of Canadian citizens, and he refuses to list the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist entity. What's the point of having a seat at the table if you have to sell out Canadian principles to get there? The Chair: The Right Honourable Prime Minister. Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, we see that the Conservatives have kept with the Harper approach to international diplomacy. The failed presence of Canada on the world stage was an embarrassment for many Canadians for many years. That's why, when we took office five years ago, we demonstrated the kind of leadership on values that Canadians expected. We will continue to work around the world to defend multilateralism. The Chair: We have a point of order. Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May: This being a committee, we can have a point of order during what would have been question period. I am not sitting that far away from the Prime Minister, and I'm sorry, but Andrew Scheer used to be the Speaker of the House and should show better decorum. The Chair: We have a point of order from Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, on the same point of order, it is disgusting for the leader of the Green Party to use decorum as an excuse to interrupt the Leader of the Opposition in the middle of critical lines of questioning. The leader of the Green Party knows the rules of the House and shouldn't be abusing them to advance a partisan agenda. The Chair: We're getting into debate. I do want to point out that the time had run out. We're now moving on to the next line of questions. On a point of order, Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer: I appreciate the honourable leader of the Green Party, Elizabeth May, for that reminder. When I was Speaker I always appreciated her help and advice about how to improve decorum in here. I just want to say to the member, and to all members, that the reason that I cannot control myself is that the Prime Minister used the word embarrassment in answering a foreign affairs question, and it just made me think of the India trip. The Chair: I believe we're getting into debate and arguments. Mr. Blanchet, you have the floor. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: Mr. Chair, while the Greens and the Conservatives are saying that they'll be waiting outside after the meeting, I will ask a question. The Prime Minister has extended the Canada emergency response benefit, and that's good news, but it's not enough. Last week in the House, the government said it was urgent to fight fraud. For us, it was also urgent to adjust the CERB to the needs of the tourism, arts and agriculture sectors. Farmers are going to be seriously under-resourced. So what happened to the urgency of reforming the CERB? Why is the government refusing to talk to the opposition parties? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, I am very pleased to hear the hon. member finally align himself with the positions of the Liberal Party. Unfortunately, the Bloc is a week late. It should have let us debate these concerns in the House last week. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: It seems to me that the word alignment here is a fantasy. We have unequivocally proposed to extend the debate to reach an agreement, which brings me to my second question. Last week, the issue of assistance to people with disabilities was also a pressing concern, and it's even more so a week later. The Bloc proposed to extend the discussions and split the government's bill in two to help people with disabilities. Why is the government refusing this assistance to people with disabilities, when it could have been debated with the opposition in a civilized and proper way in a Parliament in which it has a minority? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: That was exactly what we wanted, but unanimous consent of the Chamber was required to debate this matter, and the Conservative Party of Canada voted against it. Unfortunately, we are going to have to find a different way to help people with disabilities. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: If the idea is so good and wonderful, why not start over and open the dialogue now? What's stopping the Prime Minister from being a rallying point and inviting us to take to each other and resolve the problem, rather than saying that he is going to pack up his toys and go home? The people with disabilities are the ones who will pay the price. Where was the Prime Minister on October21,2019? He received a minority mandate from Quebeckers and Canadians. Why is he behaving like something between a prime minister with a majority and a monarch by divine right? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: I've heard the Conservative Party and the Bloc Qubcois throw their accusations around. They don't point out that the House of Commons did indeed give its consent to extend the mandate of the Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic until the end of June. Three parties agreed, which was the right thing to do in the context of this minority government. We've been working with the other parties. However, as they did not get the results they wanted, they complained. Unfortunately, they too are part of a minority Parliament and must respect the voice of the majority of parliamentarians, just as we do. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: I might have been tempted, but that's unlikely to happen because the Prime Minister isn't me, he's him. It's therefore up to him to bring people together, open a dialogue and recall Parliament. All we were asking for was the opportunity to talk for an hour or two. However, suddenly he doesn't want to play anymore. It's not working anymore, and there's something a bit strange about that. In addition, the government wants to buy the right to interfere in provincial and Quebec jurisdictions for $14billion. However, Quebec and a number of provinces are refusing to allow it to interfere in their jurisdictions and are asking that this money be paid to them unconditionally. Is the Prime Minister trying to take advantage of the crisis or is he trying to create a constitutional crisis? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, the safety of Canadians is the responsibility of all levels of government. That's why we have proposed a $14billion agreement to ensure that all Canadians across the country experience a safe re-opening of the economy. This is a proposal that we are working on with the provinces because we know that there are needs across the country, including early childhood centres, screening and support for municipalities. The federal government wants to be there to help the provinces. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh (Burnaby South, NDP): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Indigenous leaders have expressed a lack of confidence in the RCMP commissioner's ability to tackle full-scale systemic racism, but the Prime Minister has expressed his confidence in the commissioner. What's that based on? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, over the past two years, Commissioner Lucki has made significant strides forward on an issue where there is still much more to do. We know that systemic racism exists in all of our institutions across this country The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: This is the same RCMP commissioner who just recently said that they couldn't explain what systemic racism was. Now the Prime Minister says that he has confidence, when indigenous leaders express their lack of confidence. Why does the Prime Minister believe that the RCMP commissioner can tackle systemic racism in the RCMP? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, systemic racism is something that touches every corner of our country, every corner of our institutions. It requires people to understand and move forward in coordinated ways with partners. The commissioner is committed to doing that, alongside members of our government. We will do that together and work with indigenous communities and black The Chair: Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, recent events have made it abundantly clear that to tackle the systemic racism at the level of the RCMP, we need a full-scale overhaul of the RCMP. Is the Prime Minister committed to a full-scale overhaul of the RCMP to root out systemic racism? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: As I've said many times, Mr. Chair, I am committed to addressing systemic racism in this country and taking significant, bold actions to reduce the amount of discrimination that indigenous peoples, that racialized Canadians face on a daily basis. We have much work to do, but we will do it together. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, Black Lives Matter has been calling for governments to defund the police. What it's saying is that we need to be better at where we spend our money, investing in communities and not policing. Will the Prime Minister commit to a review of the RCMP budget to allocate resources to community services and not to policing? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, over the past years we have been investing more directly and more money in community organizations, in the black community, and working with indigenous partners on the path to reconciliation. We have been investing in the kinds of community-based programs and solutions that are part of the solution. We know there is much more to do, and we will continue to look at all of our expenditures to make sure we're doing the right things. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, over the past few years, while the Prime Minister has been in office, the RCMP budget has increased by 31%. More money is going towards policing. In recent events we've seen people who needed a health care response to a health care crisis been killed by the RCMP. Does the Prime Minister believe that we need to be investing in a health care response instead of a police response for people who are faced with a crisis? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, the member opposite well knows that it's not an either-or. We need to make sure that our systems across the board, from our police systems to our judicial systems, to our health care systems, to our community systems, are actually addressing the systemic discrimination issues that are embedded within them That is exactly what we are going to continue to do in the coming years. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, with regard to the CERB extension, can the Prime Minister guarantee that everyone who is receiving CERB payments now will continue to do so without any gaps throughout the summer? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, I am happy to highlight that many Canadians who were on the CERB are now returning to work. Many more who are on the CERB now will be returning to work in the coming weeks. We know that as the economy gets back to work, people will want to The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Can the Prime Minister assure people who need it that they will continue to receive the CERB over the summer, yes or no? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: We are very pleased to point out that we are going to extend the Canada emergency response benefit for at least another eight weeks, because a lot of people are going to need it. Even if they want to work, there aren't enough jobs for everyone. So we'll be there for them, as we have been from the beginning. The Chair: We're going to pause and suspend proceedings just for a few moments to allow our support staff to substitute for one another in a healthy and safe way. We'll now proceed with Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod (KamloopsThompsonCariboo, CPC): Mr. Chair, it was really a surprise in the middle of a pandemic to see the Prime Minister at his first campaign stop last week in Ottawa. Certainly the game plan has become very transparent. He has a daily report show and he wants to sideline Parliament, dominate the news cycle and keep everyone in the dark about the state of the economy. According to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, there is no reason that he cannot provide the fiscal update during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the PBO has published a number of reports himself. Why won't the Prime Minister provide a fiscal update so we can all understand the state of our economy, or is that just not part of his campaign playbook? Hon. Mona Fortier (Minister of Middle Class Prosperity and Associate Minister of Finance): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Canada's economy is in a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We've been clear about that. We will continue to be open and transparent about the actions that we are taking to support families, businesses, workers, our health care system and our economy. This includes biweekly reports to Parliament on the full cost and status of our economic measures. Once it is possible to provide a clear economic projection, we will provide an update. We are in this together, and we are prepared to do whatever is necessary to support Canadians. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: Chair, Canada's economy was in trouble prior to the COVID, with some of the worst numbers since 2009. Government revenues in March dropped by 7. 2%, and it's shameful and, quite frankly, it's outrageous that they refuse to provide Parliament and Canadians with an economic update. Households during this challenging time know how much money is coming in and they know how much money is going out. The picture is not pretty, but they know what the picture is. Can the finance minister at least reveal the projected revenue decline in quarters one and two? Hon. Mona Fortier: The Canadian economy is going through a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We've known this for three months. We've continued to be open and transparent about the measures we've put in place for Canadians, workers and businesses. In fact, we have reported biweekly to Parliament on the total cost and status of our plan's measures. As soon as it's possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide a comprehensive update to Canadians The Chair: We go back to Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: Other governments have managed to provide updates for their citizens and carry out their responsibilities, but of course this government has sidelined Parliament with simply a question-but-no-answer period. Let's try something else. The forestry industry was in crisis even before the pandemic, with mills closing down and thousands of jobs lost. Eight weeks ago, Minister Freeland said, I have had many discussions with leaders in our forestry sector and the provinces about what we can do to support the industry today. Meanwhile, we've had support going to the arts and we've had support going to fisheries, just to name a few, but arguably for the industry that was having some of the most numerous challenges, it has been radio silence. That was eight weeks ago today. Can the government at least commit to releasing an updated softwood lumber transition plan before we rise? Hon. Seamus O'Regan (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Chair, we remain committed, of course, to the forestry industry and seeing it through this pandemic and this very uncertain time. The expanding market opportunities program, for instance, has helped Canada's forestry sector diversify, create jobs and open new markets. We've had new construction projects that are active today, using Canadian wood in key markets like Korea, Japan, China and the United States. Tomorrow this House will vote on our government's investment of $20. 97 million for this program. It's part of our budget 2019 commitment to invest $251 million over three years, and I hope the opposition will support us in that. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: It was stated in a major newspaper this morning that this government is like a sexy sports carvroom, vroom, vroombut with a history of breakdowns and major repairs. I think that might describe what has been happening. For forestry, it has been eight weeks and there has been nothing. There is another area that Deputy Prime Minister Freeland did talk about. We were talking about the U. S. softwood lumber duties that are being held in the United States. It's billions of dollars being held with the U. S. treasury. In April, she acknowledged that these duties are a real issue for the softwood lumber industry. What's been done since that time? Hon. David Lametti (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada): Mr. Chair, Canada's forestry industry supports good middle-class jobs in communities across our country. The sector is also an essential link in the medical equipment supply chain, and we thank them for all the work they're doing. We're aware of the immense pressures faced by this sector, especially at this time, and Deputy Prime Minister Freeland and others are taking that seriously and working through this issue. As our government has said repeatedly, we firmly believe that the U. S. duties on Canadian softwood lumber are unfair and unwarranted, and we will pursue all means in order to The Chair: Before continuing, I want to remind honourable members who are at home to make sure that the boom on their headsets is down. It just makes a better pickup. We heard everything, but it was a little distant. That's for everyone's benefit. We're now going to continue with Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell (Louis-Saint-Laurent, CPC): Mr. Chair, before I ask my question, I'd like to pay tribute to the Minister of Justice, particularly to his versatility. Today, he talked about forests. Yesterday, the Minister of Justice talked about Davie and indigenous affairs. Really, this minister is very versatile. My question is directly for the Minister of Finance. I like Mr. Lametti very much, but I'd like Mr. Morneau to answer my question. Yesterday, in a Senate parliamentary committee, the Minister of Finance half-opened the door to an economic update. Based on what he said, it seems that, as we speak, a committee of the Department of Finance is working on an economic update. Could Mr. Morneau tell Canadians when he is going to table this economic update? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, as we know, the Canadian economy is going through a period of extraordinary uncertainty. As soon as it's possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide a full update to Canadians. Right now, we can say that we have supported workers, businesses and Canadians with the emergency measures we have put in place. We will continue to do so, because we need to be sure that Canadians can get through this crisis. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I thought it was too good to be true. The Minister of Finance is opening the door, and the Minister of Small Business is closing it. We don't know when the economic update will take place, yet all across Canada, provinces are doing economic updates. Could Mr. Morneau explain to Canadians why he is unable to give one? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, since the beginning of the crisis, we have implemented the economic action plan to respond to COVID-19, and we've provided immediate assistance to Canadians, businesses and workers. Over 2. 5million jobs were protected by the Canada emergency wage subsidy. In addition, 8. 4million Canadians The Chair: We are returning to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, next Friday, the Quebec minister of finance, EricGirard, will give an economic update. If EricGirard can give one for Quebec, why can't BillMorneau give one for Canada? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, once again, we have been open and transparent from the outset. We have devoted our energy to support Canadians, workers and businesses. We will continue to do so. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I cannot judge the quality of the work done by the provinces, but what I do know is that Quebec, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland have also made efforts to support their residents economically. Those provinces are able to table economic updates. Yesterday, Saskatchewan even tabled a budget. Why is Bill Morneau unable to table an economic update for all Canadians? Hon. Mona Fortier: Let me repeat for my hon. colleague that we are going through extraordinarily uncertain times. We have continued to be open and transparent. We have reported biweekly to Parliament on the total cost and status of the measures in our economic response plan. Once again, as soon as clear economic projections can be provided, we will provide an update The Chair: Mr. Deltell has the floor. Mr. Grard Deltell: The minister talks about the total cost of the government's economic expenditures. So I ask the question: so far, over the past three months, how much has the pandemic cost Canadians? Hon. Mona Fortier: As I said earlier, it is important to note that we have put forward measures, including the wage subsidy, which have helped more than 2. 5million The Chair: Mr. Deltell has the floor. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I have been trying for four minutes to get anything remotely resembling an answer, and I'm getting absolutely nothing. I am not asking questions for myself; I am asking questions for Canadians. Why are the government and the Minister of Finance, Bill Morneau, not able to table an economic update when some provinces are able to? Hon. Mona Fortier: Once again, I would like to remind my hon. colleague that we have provided interest-free loans to businesses. More than 669,000loans have been approved. We have continued to support businesses and Canadians during this time The Chair: Mr. Deltell, you have time for a very brief question. Mr. Grard Deltell: The only thing that distinguishes the provinces that table economic updates and the current government is political will. Why does Bill Morneau not have the political will to tell Canadians the truth? Hon. Mona Fortier: Once again, we have been open and transparent. As soon as it is possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide Canadians with a full update. The Chair: We will now continue with Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya (MarkhamUnionville, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. COVID-19 has sparked and spurred anti-Asian racism. These are not just racist comments online; Asian Canadians have been attacked. What is the government doing to combat anti-Asian racism? Hon. Bardish Chagger (Minister of Diversity and Inclusion and Youth): Mr. Chair, since our government took office in 2015, we have been making investments and working with communities. The difference between our government and the previous government is that we will actually consult with Canadians, including black Canadians, including Asian Canadians, to respond to the challenges, including with an anti-racism secretariat and an anti-racism strategy. It will take all of us. I appreciate the member's question, so that we can also work together. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, one business owner I know in Markham has operated for 20 years. Now she's looking at over $9,000 in rent due on June 24. COVID-19 has crippled her sales and she's going to go out of business. Her landlord has no interest in the Canada emergency commercial rent assistance program. How can the government say this program is working? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, this program was made possible by working with the provinces, and we will continue to encourage landlords and tenants to work together to make sure they have relief for this very difficult time in which they're living. We're continuing to monitor the CECRA program and we will make it possible for businesses to have access to the program. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, the government business rent relief program has been a total disaster. Even the government's own numbers show it is a failure. As of June 8, less than 2% of the $3 billion budgeted has been spent. What is it going to take for the government to admit that the program is a disaster and needs changes? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we know our government has been working closely with the provinces and territories to deliver the Canada emergency commercial rent assistance. Although the tenant-landlord relationship is ultimately the responsibility of the provinces and territories, our government has stepped up to provide support through the tools we have and through CMHC so that small businesses can get the rent relief they need. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, according to the government, there are around 1. 1 million small businesses in Canada. At committee, we were told only around 5,500 of them are receiving COVID-19 rent relief. That number is shameful. When will the Liberal government wake up and make the changes? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we welcome the steps some provinces and territories have taken to further protect commercial tenants. We will continue to monitor this program closely and ensure that Canada's small businesses are supported during this challenging time. We will continue to monitor to see The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, there was no answer. When can the government make these changes? Hon. Mary Ng (Minister of Small Business, Export Promotion and International Trade): Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable colleague that we are doing everything and will continue to do everything to help small businesses in our country. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, on May 27 the CBSA seized 65 small handguns at Pearson airport, the largest firearms seizure on record. It is clear that smuggled handguns are the weapon of choice for criminals. Why is the Prime Minister focusing on an ineffective municipal ban? Hon. Bill Blair (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness): Mr. Chair, I would point out that gun violence in any of our communities is unacceptable, and it's important that governments and communities take steps to prevent guns from getting into the hands of criminals. That's why we do important work at our border to keep guns from being smuggled into our country, but it also necessitates additional work. I don't think you can talk about gun violence without talking about stronger gun control. That's why our government has taken a very strong position and will strengthen gun control to keep Canadians safe. The Chair: Mr. Saroya, you may have a 10-second question, if that's possible, please. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, COVID-19 has not stopped gun violence in the GTA. My constituents are concerned about shootings minutes away from their homes. We know the Liberals'gun ban won't change anything, but a focus on smuggled guns and criminals will. When will they make that change? Hon. Bill Blair: Mr. Chair, stronger gun control laws are an effective tool, and that's been told to us by police leadership and communities across the country. We're also making investments in borders and law enforcement. Most importantly, we're making investments in communities and in kids to keep communities safe. I look forward to the member's strong support of those measures when we bring them forward. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback (Prince Albert, CPC): Mr. Chair, the U. S. and the U. K. began their second round of free trade negotiations yesterday. Does the government intend to have a trade agreement in place before the U. K. tariffs come into effect on January 1? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, the U. K. is a strong partner of Canada, as is the European Union, and we're looking forward to continuing that strong relationship The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Thank you, Mr. Chair. With respect to the negotiations with the U. K. , when will the minister publish her goals and objectives for this agreement? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, we're going to continue to work to ensure that any future agreement is going to be based on the best interests of Canadians, and we will The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Can the minister confirm whether they've entered into negotiations with the U. K. at this point? Hon. Mary Ng: Our government is analyzing the most-favoured-nation tariff regimes schedule the U. K. has put out. I want to assure Canadians The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Mr. Chair, during the CUSMA negotiations, a deal was struck between the Liberal Party and the NDP that the government would notify this House 90 days before it starts any negotiations on any trade agreement. When will the minister notify this House? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that we will absolutely be sharing information. Right now, we are analyzing the most-favoured-nation tariff regimes schedule put out by the U. K. Mr. Randy Hoback: Mr. Chair, any meaningful attempts to reform the WTO needs buy-in from the United States. I think all countries agree on that. Has the minister discussed a WTO reform with the USTR, the United States trade representative? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, the Ottawa Group is a consensus-based group, and any decisions will be taken together. Of course, any meaningful reform must include the U. S. The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Has the U. S. been invited to the Ottawa Group meetings? Hon. Mary Ng: The Ottawa Group is a consensus-based group limited to WTO members who are committed to bringing forward ideas and proposals The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Just as with any other trade agreement, the minister has committed to this House that she will publish the list of goals and responsibilities for the negotiations. When will she publish the list for the Ottawa Group? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I'm thrilled that we had an excellent meeting of the Ottawa Group yesterday where, as a group, we agreed to take concrete action. Mr. Randy Hoback: Will the minister be releasing a list of Canada's objectives we would like to see the new WTO's director-general pursue prior to the upcoming DG election? Hon. Mary Ng: We published an action statement from the Ottawa Group yesterday. I would encourage the member opposite to have a look. I'm certainly happy to send it to him. Mr. Randy Hoback: Going back to economic prosperity, we know that the U. S. has been having talks with other countries around the world. Has Canada yet been invited to this group? Hon. Mary Ng: I'm pleased to continue to pursue the objectives of trade diversification. I would remind the member that we have access to a billion and a half customers through our very robust Mr. Randy Hoback: A billion and a half customers is fine if you have a functioning WTO, but if you don't have a functioning WTO, then a billion and a half customers may not be fully accessible to our suppliers, manufacturers and agriculture producers. Can the minister confirm that she's in discussions with the U. S. in joining this economic prosperity group? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that nothing is more important than standing up and helping create markets for our Canadian businesses and to help our small businesses get more export-ready so that they can grow into the international marketplace. This is work that we've committed to do, and we will keep working on it, particularly The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Yesterday Saskatchewan presented a budget. Not only did they present the budget, but they'll also actually debate the budget and pass the budget in Parliament. There's full accountability. Why won't this government do the same? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons): Mr. Chair, the House is sitting in this hybrid format so that people can participate in the House on the screens. I'm sure my colleague is happy to see that his own colleagues are able to ask questions and participate. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Williamson. Mr. John Williamson (New Brunswick Southwest, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will say that this is no substitute for Parliament, but I appreciate the opportunity. New Brunswick families and businesses are rapidly making adjustments to manage and live with the coronavirus pandemic. Businesses here are opening and services are being offered. Families are preparing for summer and even planning ahead for a new school year in September. We have a lot of work ahead of us. One notable absence is Service Canada. When does the government plan on opening its service counters to assist Canadians again? Hon. Ahmed Hussen (Minister of Families, Children and Social Development): Mr. Chair, our government is committed to ensuring that Canadians continue to have access to the benefits that they rely on through Service Canada. We have redeployed over 3,000 additional staff to ensure that Canadians continue to have access to their benefits. We've established a 1,500-agent call centre to make sure that people can get access to the phone lines to get the help they need. Mr. John Williamson: Service Canada is about more than providing COVID-19 information and benefits. Provincial governments are working hard to adjust to Canada's new normal by opening up businesses and front-line government services. When will we see Service Canada play its role and open its service counters in our communities? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Mr. Chair, we're currently working with our world-class public health experts to determine how best to reopen the Service Canada network for the public. Make no mistake: Our Service Canada employees have gone above and beyond to ensure that Canadians continue to have access to the services that they rely on and the benefits that they need. Mr. John Williamson: Please don't hide behind health experts when the Prime Minister is appearing in the middle of large protests, yet is afraid to bring back the Parliament of Canada to do its business. In fact, the New Brunswick legislature is open for regular business. Bills are being studied, opposition input is being heard and MLAs are voting on legislation, not rubber-stamping government bills. By comparison, our Parliament is stuck in pretending it cannot function like other law-making assemblies. Canadians are in the dark about our country's finances. When will the government table an economic update so taxpayers understand what was spent, what is owed by our kids and grandchildren, and what the government's fiscal footing looks like? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, nobody's hiding. Nobody's doing anything like that. The only reason my colleague is able to ask a question and I'm able to answer his question is that he's right there on the screen. We have this hybrid format that cares for MPs across the country, not only the ones sitting in the House. Mr. John Williamson: This is no substitute for Parliament. I will ask my question again. When will the government table an economic update so that taxpayers understand what was spent, what is owed by our kids and grandchildren, and what the government's fiscal footing looks like in today's environment? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, I thank my honourable colleague for his question. Canada's economy is still in a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We have been open and transparent about the measures we have been providing to support families, businesses and workers. Even our health care The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Williamson. Mr. John Williamson: Except you have not. The Auditor General is underfunded. We have no idea about the total of government spending. Again I will ask when the government will table an economic update so that we can have an understanding of what the government's fiscal footing looks like. Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we have included biweekly reports to Parliament on the full cost and status of our economic response plan measures since the beginning. I have said, and I will continue to say, that when it is possible to provide a clear economic projection, we will provide an update. Mr. John Williamson: What is the full cost to date of the government's COVID-19 relief measures, as the minister just claimed the government has provided to Parliament? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we have provided support for workers, and 2. 5 million Canadians have been helped through the Canadian wage subsidy. We have provided businesses with some loans, and 669,000 businesses have applied for these loans. Even for the CERB, we have over eight million Canadians who have applied. The Chair: We will now continue with Mr. Bergeron. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: Mr. Chair, as the leader of the Bloc Qubcois mentioned a few moments ago, the government promised $14billion to Quebec and the provinces, but in targeted transfers. That is very little compared to the considerable expenses incurred to deal with the current crisis. But Quebec and the provinces don't just want this money to be transferred unconditionally, they also want a real discussion on a permanent increase in health care transfers. PremierLegault was rightly concerned about the feds'interference into provincial jurisdictions. The federal government, which does not manage any hospitals or long-term care centres, must stop playing armchair quarterback and transfer the money to the only governments with jurisdiction over health, that is, Quebec and the provinces. Will it do so without delay and without nitpicking? The Honourable Patty Hajdu (Minister of Health): Mr. Chair, we know that the Government of Quebec is working hard to ensure the safety of Quebeckers and we are here to support them. As part of this co-operation, we have developed health and safety recommendations for workplaces, we have purchased medical equipment for workers and we have supported the province in developing its reopening program. We are continuing this important partnership to ensure the safety of Quebeckers and all Canadians. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: The co-operation is so effective that the money is staying in the federal government's coffers. In fact, when the federal government wants to impose conditions, it always takes longer. We see it with housing, for which Quebec has not received a dime of the $1. 4billion it is owed. We have also seen it with infrastructure funds, particularly for public transit, water systems and water treatment. The health crisis is now. The needs are now. The much needed reopening of our economy is now. Will the government finally transfer the money without messing around or quibbling? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I am pleased to confirm to my colleague that there is no messing around, no quibbling, nothing of the kind. There is co-operation between two levels of government. It is natural to have discussions with all the provinces and with Quebec. I myself am taking part in some discussions and several of my colleagues are taking part in others. There is a clear willingness on the part of the federal government to co-operate with Quebec and all the provinces. That is what we are doing and that is perhaps what the Bloc Qubcois does not like. It likes bickering, but for the time being, there is none. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: We don't want to bicker, we want the money to be paid out. It is not complicated, for heaven's sake! We do not want a blank cheque. Right now, the money remains in the federal government's coffers. There is $1. 4billion that should be paid to Quebec for social housing and is sitting in the federal government's coffers. We are waiting for money for water treatment and water systems, but it is sitting in the federal government's coffers. It's almost July. We are wasting precious months for construction. What is the government waiting for to pay out the money so that we can get our economy rolling? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: The federal government is a very active partner. We are discussing and working with Quebec on infrastructure projects. We are continuing our discussions and negotiations on the housing agreement. Nothing is at a standstill. We are discussing and co-operating for the well-being of all Quebeckers. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: MadamChair, things are definitely at a standstill, because the money is owed and has not been paid out. Months are going by while construction is not taking place. We need to reopen the economy. We need more flexibility in the gas tax program and Quebec's contribution to allow municipalities to undertake work on city halls, community centres and fire stations. We need the federal government to contribute to funding public transit operations, which have become a real financial drain because of the drop in ridership. What is the federal government waiting for to provide real help instead of just talking? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: When it comes to just talking, the Bloc Qubcois has a lot of experience, I admit. We, in the government, are working and co-operating. We are not waiting with our arms folded, we are discussing a series of issues with Quebec. We do more than discuss, we work and we co-operate. We are working on projects, not only in infrastructure, but in a number of other areas. Just think of the co-operation of our armed forces in the CHSLDs, for example. We are here for Quebeckers. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Your time has run out, Mr. Bergeron. We'll go now to Ms. Khalid, from MississaugaErin Mills. Ms. Iqra Khalid (MississaugaErin Mills, Lib.): Madam Chair, I'll be splitting my time with the member for GlengarryPrescottRussell. During a consultation with the business community in Mississauga, the concerns of businesses, big and small, included the need for stable, affordable and safe child care. With the lack of such child care spaces, an economic recovery plan post-COVID cannot be effective until and unless we make sure that people are able to get back to work. I've heard from parents across Mississauga that they're being forced to stay home because of inadequate child care and that they have to choose between putting food on the table and keeping family safe. More and more employers are realizing that good employees are unable to contribute to their business growth because of this challenge. Now more than ever, we need to find long-term sustainable solutions for Canadians who face challenges with regard to child care. I ask our Minister of Families, Children and Social Development this: What is our strategy to tackle this ever-growing need for a national child care plan? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I thank the honourable member for her question and for her important advocacy and work on this important issue. We understand that child care is important to our economic recovery and our social infrastructure. We know the pressure that COVID-19 has placed on families, especially parents. That is why we're committed to continuing to work with provinces and territories to renew our agreements on early learning and child care, and to provide, at the earliest opportunity, $400 million in support. In addition to that, the Prime Minister has already indicated that child care will be part of the $14-billion pledge to provinces and territories to assist them with respect to COVID-19 recovery efforts. Over the next decade, we will continue to invest $7. 5 billion, and together we have achieved the goal of over 40,000 affordable child care spaces. We are also committed to continuing to create over 250,000 before-school and after-school child care spaces for kids under the age of 10. We will continue to work with our partners in the provinces and territories to ensure that Canadians can continue to have access to safe, quality and affordable child care. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for GlengarryPrescottRussell has the floor. Mr. Francis Drouin (GlengarryPrescottRussell, Lib.): MadamChair, small businesses play a fundamental role in the Canadian economy. In an article in LaPresse, the Minister of Economic Development warned us that the economic crisis caused by severe lockdown measures could have more serious consequences in small municipalities than in large cities. Based on discussions with the chambers of commerce in my riding, it is clear that federal government assistance will be essential for the reopening of the economy, specifically for the rural economy. In fact, I would like to acknowledge the work of the Prescott-Russell community development corporation, under the leadership of John Candie. After announcing almost $57million to help SMEs adopt e-commerce, how does the minister plan to help SMEs and the business community in our rural areas? Hon. Mlanie Joly (Minister of Economic Development and Official Languages): MadamChair, I also thank my colleague from GlengarryPrescottRussell for his important question. Yes, our regions are important and the entrepreneurs in those regions are creative and daring. They take risks, but they are currently facing huge challenges. So we are here for them. We understand their anxiety and we want to help them. That is why we have decided to invest heavily in rural economic development. It is also why we have doubled the budget of CFDCs and Community Futures organizations across the country. In southern Ontario we have reinvested over $260million in the regional economic development agency FedDev. In the great riding of GlengarryPrescottRussell, which I am particularly fond of and where there is a very good member of Parliament, there is an additional $1million for entrepreneurs in the region. We have been, we are and we will be at your side. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for GlengarryPrescottRussell has 36seconds left. No? Then we'll go to the honourable member for ElmwoodTranscona. Mr. Daniel Blaikie (ElmwoodTranscona, NDP): Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with the member for Victoria. Madam Chair, Krystal is a community worker in Winnipeg. She has been working from home since late March, taking care of her child, who is out of school, and caring for her father, who is living with her and vulnerable to COVID-19. Her employer called her up recently and asked her to physically return to work or to take a leave. As a parent and a care provider to a vulnerable person, she's not comfortable with physically returning to work. Service Canada won't give Krystal a straight answer as to whether going on leave and collecting CERB would count as refusing a reasonable job offer. With Bill C-17 looming in the background, Krystal is worried about jail time and fines if she does right by her child and her father by applying for CERB. Can Krystal reasonably refuse to go back to work and collect CERB, or will she be considered a fraudster? That's my question for the minister that is specific to Krystal's case. As well, what is the minister doing to provide clear direction to Canadians and to Service Canada agents so that people can get a clear answer before making their decision about returning to work? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I want to thank the honourable member for his important question. We recognize that Canadian workers will face various different situations, including those who are ineligible for the Canada emergency support benefit. We'll continue to work with workers to make sure they're able to be supported throughout this pandemic. The fact of the matter is that every province has workplace health and safety regulations that must be supported. We understand that workers have the right not to work in unsafe situations. We also understand that many Canadians do want to go back to work; and in fact many have. We will make sure that we support Canadians throughout this recovery process. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member has 47 seconds left, and that includes the answer. Mr. Daniel Blaikie: Madam Chair, that answer is really not good enough, because the problem here is that Krystal needs to know whether she can continue receiving CERB or not. That's a federal government decision, and she needs to know whether the federal government is going to accuse her of fraud and put her in jail or assess fines against her if she refuses to go back to work because she wants to take care of her child and her father. What is the minister's answer to that? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister has 20 seconds to respond. Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that if a Canadian has to take care of a loved one due to circumstances surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, they are indeed eligible to receive the CERB and remain receiving that benefit. Ms. Laurel Collins (Victoria, NDP): As we deal with the global pandemic, we cannot lose sight of the ongoing climate emergency. Canada has missed every single climate target it set, and we need to break the cycle of empty promises. Canadians want their government to be accountable, and environmental groups such as Ecojustice, CAN-Rac, Environmental Defence and West Coast Environmental Law, as well as the government's own climate institute, are all calling for legally binding climate targets. When will the government put its climate targets into law with legally binding milestones so we never miss another target again? Hon. Navdeep Bains (MississaugaMalton, Lib.): Madam Chair, I thank my honourable colleague for her question. I totally agree with her when it comes to the environment. It is a priority not only for us as a government, but it should be a priority for all Canadians. That is why we have put measures in place to put a price on pollution through carbon pricing. That is why we have a comprehensive plan that also includes significant investments in clean technology, which will help reduce our carbon footprint. I am confident that these measures will enable us to not only meet but exceed our 2030 target and also allow us to achieve our net-zero 2050 target. Ms. Laurel Collins: That didn't answer my question. I asked when. Empty promises won't get us any closer to meeting our climate targets. Can the minister tell us when his government will introduce climate accountability laws? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I think the fundamental issue here is having a plan when it comes to the environment. I'm confident that the measures that we have takenputting a price on pollution, investing in clean technology, and other key measures to reduce our carbon footprint, including the investment in infrastructureunderpin a plan The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to the honourable member for Victoria. Ms. Laurel Collins: This government is not meeting its targets, but it is meeting with oil and gas lobbyists. The pandemic has made us reflect on our priorities. Are we going to choose a just recovery with good, sustainable jobs for Canadian workers, or are we going to keep subsidizing oil and gas companies to the tune of billions, subsidies that we know are ending up in the pockets of CEOs and shareholders? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will have a brief answer from the minister. Hon. Navdeep Bains: Again, Madam Chair, this is the fundamental difference between us and the NDP. We fundamentally believe that the entire economy needs to work together, including the energy sector, to enable us to achieve those 2030 and 2050 targets. We are going to work together to support our workers, including in the energy sector, to reduce our carbon footprint. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Now we will go to the honourable member for SaskatoonGrasswood, Mr. Waugh. Mr. Kevin Waugh (SaskatoonGrasswood, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. When I was last here in May, I was on my way back to Saskatoon from Toronto, and there was actually someone on my flight who tested positive for COVID-19. I was never informed of it by the airline. I found out two weeks later. The report was in the news media. Why hasn't the government put rules in place requiring airlines to reach out to individuals like me who may have been exposed to COVID on their flights? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, it's hard to speculate on what happened from such a vague description of his experience, but I will say that we have every confidence in local public health, which is doing the hard and heavy lifting of contact tracing and working very closely with all kinds of different sectors, including airline sectors, to make sure that close contacts of people who have tested positive for COVID-19 are found, are traced and are isolated. I assume that the member took appropriate precautions on the flight and I hope that he continues to do so. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, it was reported that the individual on my plane who had COVID was actually connecting in Toronto from an international flight. The Prime Minister announced last week that they would begin mandating temperature checks for those bound for Canada in July. Will international travellers be tested when they land in Canada, or will they be relying on the tests that take place in other countries? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, this is a very important question, because the protection and safety of all Canadiansin particular, Canadian travellersis a high priority for our government. We've been working very closely with the airlines. At the current time, we are putting temperature screening in place. That will initially be done primarily by the airlines that are in the best position to do it at this point in time. We are also now going to be including CATSA, the people who do the security screening, so that when people enter the airport, they will also be screened. We believe that is going to be the most effective measure to keep all travellers safe. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, last week five of the largest professional sports leagues in North America put out a statement of support for my private member's bill, the safe and regulated sports betting act. Given the struggles that clubs and leagues are facing due to COVID-19, including having no fans at all in the stands for the foreseeable future, the legalization of sports betting would be a welcome opportunity not only to engage fans but to generate much-needed revenue. Will the government commit now to supporting the sports and gaming industries by supporting my private member's bill, Bill C-218? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, I've had the opportunity on many occasions to speak to members of Parliament and also to mayors and councillors and people living in border communities where there are casinos. They've raised this issue a number of times. We've listened very carefully to the concerns that have been expressed by them. I would like to advise the member that I look forward to the opportunity for a careful examination of his bill. We are at all times concerned about maintaining the integrity of the gaming industry within our community. That's the best way to protect Canadians. At the same time, we will examine his bill with all of the necessary attention to make sure it's given full consideration. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, it's the first time in history that we've had the five professional leagues in this country joining together for this bill. Newspapers rely, as we all know, on advertising for a significant portion of their revenue. This includes the usual flyers as well as in-paper ads. I've heard major concerns from a number of newspapers in this country about competition they're receiving today from Canada Post, which is offering massive free postage services. In fact, I have one of their ads here, which says that the first 6,000 pieces of postage are 100% free. If the government is genuine about wanting to ensure that newspapers and journals can succeed in this country, why are you allowing Canada Post to use its monopoly power to actually threaten local newspapers in this country? Hon. Steven Guilbeault (Minister of Canadian Heritage): Thank you, Madame Chair, and I thank the member opposite for his question. As you well know, a healthy news and media sector in Canada is a priority for our government, which is why we have put in place a number of measures before COVID-19 and during COVID-19, and we will continue to be there for them after this crisis has gone by. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Before we go on, we will be taking a break to do a bit of a changeover. I also want to remind members to address their questions and comments to the chair. We will go now to the honourable member for BruceGreyOwen Sound, Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff (BruceGreyOwen Sound, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Mr. Blair stated yesterday here in the House that the AR-15 has been used in mass killings in Canada on many occasions. Mr. Blair, please provide just one specific instance in which an AR-15 was used in a mass killing in Canada. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I remind the member to address questions and comments to the chair. The honourable minister may respond. Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I think this is an excellent opportunity to point out to the member opposite how important it is to actually listen to what was said. If you go back and review that tape, and I would invite you to do so, you'll see that I said the AR-15 and other weapons like themreferring of course to military-style assault weaponshave been used in mass killings, and I actually cited a number of examples. Madam Chair, I think it would be very useful if the member's questions were based on facts. Mr. Alex Ruff: I can remind Mr. Blair that I actually have watched the video a couple of times, and he specifically states that the AR-15 was used in mass killings in Canada, yet he has yet to provide one. My additional question is to Mr. Blair. Out of the recently banned firearms on May 1, how many have been or are still currently in use by the Canadian Armed Forces? Hon. Bill Blair: That's an excellent question, Madam Chair, because it's very important to provide Canadians with clarity. We have prohibited these firearms for non-law enforcement and non-military use. The military uses weapons that were actually designed for soldiers to use in combat to shoot other soldiers. That's the appropriate use of such weapons, Madam Chair. They're not things to be played with in civilian society. Mr. Alex Ruff: As a soldier for 25 years, I'll remind Mr. Blair that none of the currently prohibited firearms would be used in the Canadian Armed Forces. I asked him a question on whether any of them is being or ever has been used in the Canadian Armed Forces. Are any of the recently banned firearms still in use, or have they ever been in use, in any military in the world? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, I think it's important to also recognize that the basic origin, the provenance of the weapons that we have prohibited, was in their original design. They were designed for military use for various military forces around the world. As I've said previously, they were designed for soldiers to use in combat to kill other soldiers. They're very efficient in their design for killing people. They have no purpose in Canadian society. Mr. Alex Ruff: As someone who has used many military-style firearms and who is actually involved in helping define what we purchase in the military, I would use none of the ones that are currently prohibited. I have a question, Chair, for Minister MacAulay. Can he please confirm whether Veterans Affairs has a plan to address the claims backlog, yes or no? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (Minister of Veterans Affairs): Madam Chair, I appreciate my honourable colleague's question, and yes, we've indicated that it's a major priority. That's why I'm so pleased that the supplementary estimates contained just under $90 million to address hiring more staff, improving the process and making sure that we attack the backlog in an appropriate manner. Mr. Alex Ruff: Madame Chair, does that plan exist in written form? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Well, Madam Chair, I can assure you that it's in the supplementary estimates, and of course, this money is The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We'll go back to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff: The question is about the plan, not how much money has been allocated. I am asking for the written plan on how to address the backlog. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Madam Chair, I can tell my honourable colleague that the money is in the supplementary estimates, and with the money we're able to attack this problem in an appropriate manner, and that's what is important for our veterans. Mr. Alex Ruff: The deputy minister committed on March 10 that a written plan would be provided to the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs within a month and made public. Did the deputy minister or the department provide the minister that plan within a month? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Madame Chair, I'm sure my honourable colleague wants an appropriate plan and he would be fully aware this just under $90 million would make a big difference in the plan to attack the backlog. We The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We'll go back to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff: Thank you, Chair. Therefore, my question is, if the deputy minister in the department provided him with an appropriate plan or a written plan, why is he questioning how appropriate that plan is? I have complete confidence in the deputy minister's ability to produce a written plan. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister may give a brief answer, please. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I can assure my honourable colleague that with the appropriate funding, we will address the backlog in Veterans Affairs. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Parry SoundMuskoka, Mr. Aitchison. Mr. Scott Aitchison: Thank you, Madam Chair. My question is about summer camps again. Three weeks ago, I asked this government if the finance minister would meet with the beleaguered summer camp sector. Summer camps, which are a social and economic mainstay in Parry SoundMuskoka and all of northern Ontario, have been crippled by the global pandemic. It's costing millions of jobs, and some camps are actually in danger of folding. Aside from a brief follow-up conversation over the phone with the junior minister, there has still been no action from this government. When will the Minister of Finance meet with summer camps to find a solution? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I recognize the honourable member's important question and his focus on summer camps. We recognize the importance of looking at that and paying attention to the needs of that community. We will continue to engage with them, as we have, to ensure and find ways in which we can get their feedback and find ways in which we can support them. That work is ongoing, and I assure the honourable member that our focus is on the kids and on ensuring that they have access to summer camps for this year. Mr. Scott Aitchison: I don't know why you need to find ways to get feedback. The summer camps association has given lots of feedback and my office has given lots of feedback, so I don't see what's confusing about this. However, I've become accustomed to not really getting answers to questions, so I will go to the next one. The Ontario government's regional reopening plan permits cruise boats to resume on Georgian Bay, yet the federal government is refusing to allow these vessels to operate until July 1. Therefore, small businesses such as the Island Queen cruiser in Parry Sound, which has only a very few precious weeks to operate in the first place, is losing yet another two weeks because of federal inaction. This not only hurts the cruise boat industry but also hurts tourism and small businesses all through our area. Will the Minister of Transport take a regional approach himself by lifting the federal ban on Georgian Bay, just like the Province of Ontario has done? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister may reply. Is there a response? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, there is. I apologize for the confusion. Let me respond, if I may, on behalf of the Minister of Transport. There have been a number of very important discussions with the provinces, in particular with the Province of Ontario, around provisions regarding pleasure craft. There are certain restrictions that will come to an end on June 30. We're working very closely with our provincial counterparts to address this issue, but we want to ensure that it will be done safely. Mr. Scott Aitchison: Madam Chair, I actually gave the minister a heads-up that I would be asking that question. He sent me an email today saying he was not going to be able to be in the House, and it's great of him to do that. He said that whoever was going to fill in for him would have an answer, but again, that was not really an answer. The next issue I would like to bring this government's attention to is the deplorable state of rural Internet service in Parry SoundMuskoka. Quite simply, there are too many gaps in service, and what is available is generally way too expensive. We have families trying to work and teach their kids from home on unreliable and outrageously expensive Internet service, and we have too many small businesses that either cannot access or afford reliable Internet services. Today Greg Rickford, the Ontario energy minister, and Laurie Scott, Ontario Minister of Infrastructure, announced $2. 3 million for seven northern Ontario broadband projects. Minister, will when your government get serious and become a reliable partner for the Government of Ontario and the private sector to deliver this crucial modern-day infrastructure to rural Canadians? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I remind the member that he needs to address the questions and comments to the chair. The honourable minister may reply. Hon. Maryam Monsef (Minister for Women and Gender Equality and Rural Economic Development): Madam Chair, in the best of times, life without access to high-speed Internet is hard. During a pandemic, the challenges are that much more pronounced. Our government's unprecedented investments are already connecting a million more Canadian households to this essential service, but until we achieve universal access our work is not done. We will work with our partners, including provinces across the country, to connect every Canadian household to high-quality Internet access that is affordable and reliable. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member has 30 seconds. Mr. Scott Aitchison: I think I can squeeze something in here, then. I'm wondering, then, Madam Chair, since the Province of Ontario has used the Northern Ontario Heritage Corporation Fund to make this announcement, what about using FedNor to make the same kind of announcement, and partner with the province? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister has a brief answer. Hon. Mlanie Joly: Obviously we believe in the importance of northern Ontario; that's why we nearly doubled the budget of FedNor. We will continue to invest in businesses and people all around Parry Sound, Muskoka and northern Ontario. If my colleague has specific projects in mind, please come and see me and let's have a conversation. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for Montmagny-L'Islet-KamouraskaRivire-du-Loup, Mr. Gnreux, has the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux (MontmagnyL'IsletKamouraskaRivire-du-Loup, CPC): Thank you, MadamChair. I will continue along the same lines as my colleague. During this pandemic, we are realizing the extent to which reliable high-speed Internet service is needed for Canada's economy. There are still places where telework is not possible today because of the lack of adequate coverage. However, since2015, the government has committed to addressing the situation through three new programs. Benot Pilotto, who is the mayor of Saint-Onsime-d'Ixworth, in my riding, wrote to me a few days ago. That is why I am asking you what concrete results the government plans to achieve for our rural areas by the end of the year. Hon. Maryam Monsef: At the best of times, life without high-speed Internet access is difficult. During a pandemic, the difficulties are even greater. Our government's unprecedented investments are already connecting an additional one million Canadian households to this essential service. However, until we achieve universal access, our job is not done. We are working The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Gnreux, you have the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, I am simply asking the minister to tell me when the mayor of Saint-Onsime-d'Ixworth will be able to tell his residents when the Internet will be available in his municipality. It is not complicated. What does the government plan to do so that rural municipalities across Canada can have access to the Internet as soon as possible? What is its plan? Hon. Maryam Monsef: We are working with partners across the country to ensure that every Canadian household is connected to a high-quality, accessible and affordable high-speed Internet service. Madam Chair, I assure my colleagues that we share the same goal, and we will work with all our partners across the country to ensure every Canadian household has access The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Gnreux, you have the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, I am still not getting a specific answer. According to the government's plan, when will rural Canadian businesses and households be connected? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I would ask the honourable minister to provide a brief answer. Hon. Maryam Monsef: Madam Chair, those plans are under way, and we will have more to share in the coming days. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: It seems that the Minister of Rural Economic Development plans to announce a new plan this week. Can she tell us how this program will differ from the Connect to Innovate program, which is already in place? Can the minister tell us whether her program will solve the problem of the 25square kilometre hexagonal zones, which unfortunately make many projects ineligible for the CRTC's broadband fund? Hon. Maryam Monsef: Madam Chair, I'm pleased to share with my colleague that the model he's referring to, the hexagon model, is no more. Our maps are much more precise now to ensure that we do not leave Canadians behind. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, this year, the Canada summer jobs program is a real fiasco. I think all my colleagues will agree with me. On May13,100jobs were announced in my riding; on May20,16jobs were announced; on May27,13jobs were announced; on June3,12jobs were announced; and on June10, only one job was announced. As we speak, an amount of $100,000 is still to be confirmed in my riding. Can we have an announcement, once and for all? Let's stop the piecemeal announcements and finally confirm the remaining jobs today so that our organizations can have young people before the summer starts on the weekend. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable minister. Hon. Ahmed Hussen: MadamChair, I thank the honourable member for his question. We recognize the important role that the Canada summer jobs program is playing in supporting employers and young workers in communities right across the country. Our government is working very hard to help employers adapt to the realities of the COVID-19 pandemic, and at the same time is supporting young Canadians as they begin to look for summer employment. We've introduced flexibilities into the program to ensure that more young workers have opportunities to get employed. The honourable member also has to understand that we're in the COVID-19 pandemic, and as such it will take some time for businesses to equip themselves to hire students. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for NanaimoLadysmith, Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly (NanaimoLadysmith, GP): Thank you, Madam Chair. In the first five months of this year, 554 B. C. residents died from opioid overdoses. They were teachers, construction workers, business owners, family members, neighbours and friends. Addiction is a health and social issue, but criminalization creates stigma, so people hide their drug use and die alone. Access to a safe supply of drugs and safe injection sites saves lives and puts addicts in daily contact with people who can help them. Will this government end the war on drugs by decriminalizing them, providing a safe supply and reallocating resources from policing addicts to providing treatment for them? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, I think it's really important we make sure that when we speak about people who use substances, we remove stigmatizing language like the word addict. We can stand together, as this government has, with people who use substances and their families to ensure a range of options for people who are struggling with addiction, who are using substances in a way that is harming their health and their communities. As you know, we have restored harm reduction to the Canadian drugs and substances strategy. We've made it easier for people to access safe supplies of substances. We've increased access to treatment and the variety of treatment through federal transfers to provinces and territories. Madam Chair, we're working with communities to make sure there are more community-based approaches to treating The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, the Geneva Convention considers both tear gas and pepper spray to be chemical weapons and prohibits their use in war, yet our police forces use these weapons on Canadian civilians. These weapons are indiscriminate and can affect peaceful protestors and innocent bystanders. Will the government prohibit the use of these weapons and require police to use de-escalation techniques to keep legal protests peaceful? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, the right to peaceful protest in this country is a constitutionally protected right. We want to ensure it's always respected. At the same time, Madam Chair, we recognize that the use of even less than lethal force can have significant impacts on people's safety. This is a highly regulated substance in Canada. It's prohibited for non-police use, and for the police it is and should be highly regulated. The RCMP have advised me they have not used tear gas in nine years. We'll continue to monitor it to ensure that peaceful protest is always respected. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, in 2012 the RCMP spent $14 million on 18 armoured personnel carriers. One's parked at the Nanaimo detachment. I can't imagine why we have weapons of war like this for policing civilians. Will the government rein in the RCMP budget and end wasteful spending on militarizing our civilian police forces? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, it's a very important tradition that our Canadian police are not militarized. At the same time, we've seen a number of tragedies when police have responded to situations in which people were armed with weapons designed for soldiers to kill soldiers, and they've been used to kill police officers. The militarization of our society, so strongly promoted by some, is the direct consequence of the militarization of the police. As we remove these weapons from our society and prohibit them, we'll make it safer for everyone and we can then move away from such a model of policing. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, the government spent $4. 5 billion to buy an old, leaky pipeline. Since 1961, there have been 82 reported spills from the Trans Mountain pipeline. Over 1. 5 million litres of crude oil has spilled into the surrounding environment. This weekend, the Trans Mountain pipeline leaked again, dumping 190,000 litres of oil. How much is this spill going to cost Canadian taxpayers to clean up? How much contingency funding has been budgeted to repair the environmental destruction from spills? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I want to thank the honourable colleague for his question. He full well knows that the acquisition that we made with regard to the TMX initiative is a reflection of the fact that we want this initiative to move forward in a sustainable manner and in a manner that protects the environment. I'll continue to work with my colleagues to endeavour to make sure that we have the appropriate processes in place to protect the environment and at the same time create good-quality, middle-class jobs for Canadians. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for RosemontLa PetitePatrie, Mr. Boulerice, has the floor. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice (RosemontLa Petite-Patrie, NDP): Thank you, MadamChair. The Black Lives Matter movement is right to discuss systemic racism in our societies. In Montreal, the city and the police department have recognized this, and measures will be put in place. The Liberal government, once again, is all talk and no walk. Although it spends $10million a day, we see no attempt to reform or change the RCMP. If the Prime Minister really wants to act, why is he delaying the action plan in response to the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls? Hon. Bill Blair: Let me assure this House and the member opposite that we're not dragging our feet. This is an important issue. Indigenous people, black Canadians and other racialized people are far too often experiencing systemic racism and disparate outcomes through the criminal justice system. It's incumbent upon all of us who work within the criminal justice system to take the steps and actions necessary to produce more equitable outcomes. All police services, including the RCMP, must be committed to ensuring that the people they're sworn to serve and protect are always treated with dignity and respect. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: MadamChair, why are the Liberals taking indigenous children to court to challenge the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal ruling in their favour? Hon. Marc Miller (Minister of Indigenous Services): Madam Chair, as the honourable member knows full well, a number of cases are pending, and we are currently negotiating with the parties. We are making progress, and I would be delighted to tell the member and the House about it in response to a later question. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: We've been asking questions about it for months, and as I see it, we should keep doing so. The Prime Minister's new pipeline, which taxpayers were forced to buy with their hard-earned money, has leaked. Some 190,000litres of oil spilled, and we can't even make the company pay for it because the Liberals bought the pipeline. Trans-Mountain, KeystoneXL and the resumption of gas exploration and development off the coast of Newfoundland and Labradorare these the projects the Liberals had in mind for their green recovery? Hon. Navdeep Bains: I'd like to thank the honourable member for his question. Our priority was to protect the health and safety of Canadians throughout the pandemic, especially when it comes to the environment. That's why environmental and climate change laws aimed at protecting the environment, human health and conservation will remain in force. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: Across Quebec, the cultural community is going through a harrowing time. Unions, associations, artists and creators have all taken part in public demonstrations recently to condemn the lack of a specific plan for the living arts, performing arts and festival sector. What is the government waiting for? Hon. Steven Guilbeault: I'd like to thank the member for his question. However, I strongly disagree with him. We haven't waited to develop a plan for the arts and culture sector. We listened to the community and we tailored our supports, as they were announced. We have an emergency plan for the arts and culture sector. We were asked to adapt the CERB to take royalties into account, and we did. We were asked to extend the CERB, and we did. We are fully aware that the recovery will take longer in the arts and culture sector. We have been there, we are there and we will be there for the arts and culture sector. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: Well, that wasn't at all what the artists and creators who were out demonstrating in the streets a few days ago thought. They were protesting on the weekend. The CERB extension announced by the government only brings us to September, but the cultural community is expecting the worst in the fall. What is the government's long-term plan to support creators and their entire teams? Hon. Steven Guilbeault: I'm not so sure those who were protesting last week had issues with our government, but we'd certainly be happy to speak with them. As for a long-term plan, we are currently consulting arts and culture stakeholders to contemplate together how the government can help the sector in response to the ongoing crisis. We are working on finding solutions, but until we have long-term solutions, we have seen to it that our artists and organizations have access to funding until September. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for BeauportLimoilou, Mrs. Vignola, has the floor. Mrs. Julie Vignola (BeauportLimoilou, BQ): Madam Chair, I will be sharing my time with the member for Montcalm. According to the latest news, Seaspan Shipyards will be spending an additional $1. 5billion to build two ships. Why? Because the ships were ordered in 2011 and still haven't been delivered. Davie built the Asterix without going over budget because it delivered the ship on time. Davie is currently the top shipyard, representing 50% of Canada's shipbuilding capacity. Why isn't Davie being awarded its fair share of contracts? Hon. Anita Anand (Minister of Public Services and Procurement): I'd like to thank the member for her question. Davie is certainly a strong and trusted partner that works very hard to help our government get results for Canadians. Building a new class of ships is highly complex, and it's not unusual for cost estimates to change throughout the procurement project. It's important to make sure additional funding is available for the joint support ships project to ensure the navy's vessels are delivered. Mrs. Julie Vignola: We are talking about $1. 5billion, here. In the beginning, eight years ago, the project was supposed to cost $2. 6billion. There can't be much missing when the cost overrun is double the initial estimate. Why haven't the ships been delivered yet? Why is Davie still not seen as a trusted partner? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Minister, please keep your answer brief. Hon. Anita Anand: Once again, I would point out that building a new class of ships is highly complex, and it's not unusual for the cost estimate to change for a procurement project as large as this one. I know that Davie works very hard, and we also believe it is an outstanding partner. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): It is now over to the honourable member for Montcalm, Mr. Thriault. Mr. Luc Thriault (Montcalm, BQ): Madam Chair, in Quebec, 12,000people have begun their training to work in residential and long-term care centres. They will be ready for duty in mid-September. In the meantime, we need the support of the army, which is helping us save lives. The dedication of the members of the armed forces is paramount, and I want to extend my heartfelt thanks. The government extended their mission until June26, which is only 10days away. What does the army have to do right now that is more important than helping our caregivers save lives? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, I'm glad my fellow member recognizes the fundamental role the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces have played and continue to play in residential and long-term care centres and many other areas in support of our seniors. We are in talks with the Quebec government. The discussions around providing continued assistance to Quebec are quite positive and productive. That assistance can take many forms, including the Red Cross. We will be there for our seniors, Madam Chair. Mr. Luc Thriault: We are short 12,000people, so if the Red Cross wants to help us, all the better. We'll take all the help we can get. Barely 800members of the military are still in Quebec. I repeat my question: What does the army have to do 10days from now that is more important if it's not to help caregivers save lives? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, all the members of the military are still in Quebec. They have done absolutely incredible work and are continuing to do so. The people at the Canadian Red Cross are well-trained paid workers who can perform the same work in partnership with the members of the armed forces, who can stay in Quebec as well. Right now, we are working with the Quebec government and discussing how we can keep the measure in place until September15. Mr. Luc Thriault: Madam Chair, our nurses and orderlies are exhausted. They're at the end of their ropes. Now is the time to thank them, not the time to turn our backs on them. It's not the time for dilly-dallying or discussions. It's the time to tell them that we will be there to help them until the end. I will repeat my question. What does the army have to do that is more important than helping caregivers save the lives of those who built Quebec? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The Leader of the Government in the House of Commons is asked to keep his answer brief. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, the Government of Canada is there and will continue to be there to help the people who built Quebec. The Government of Canada will work with the Quebec government to make that happen. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for Red DeerMountain View, Mr. Dreeshen. Mr. Earl Dreeshen (Red DeerMountain View, CPC): Thank you so much. Madam Chair, on May 14 I asked the Minister of Agriculture when the Liberal government would put aside its usual campaign rhetoric and recognize the very detrimental impact the carbon tax is having on farmers across this country. Minister Bibeau proudly noted that according to their data, the average cost of the carbon tax per farm across Canada is $210 to $819. We know that these numbers are completely unfounded and are not based on any factual evidence. The fact is that the Liberal government's own Parliamentary Budget Officer has estimated that at $25 per tonne, the cost for an 855-acre crop farm in Alberta is well over $6,000. The office came up with that using the government's statistics from the 2016 agricultural census. Madam Chair, the evidence is right in front of the minister. When will this Liberal government come clean with Canadians and recognize the disastrous impact the carbon tax is having on Canada's critical agriculture and agri-food sector? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food): Madam Chair, our pollution pricing policy is designed to grow a clean economy. To support this sector, we have put in place the following measures. Emissions from livestock and crop production are not priced. Farm fuels and fuels from cardlock facilities are exempt, and there is a partial rebate for propane and natural gas used in commercial greenhouses. Our government has been very open and transparent about our pollution pricing plan. We will do a review of our pollution pricing system in 2020, focused on competitiveness issues in trade-exposed industries such as agriculture. It is also important to remember that this is about tackling climate change and that 100% of the revenues stay in the province. We will continue to support our farmers and food processors as they provide an essential service across Canada. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Madam Chair, Minister Bibeau keeps talking about wanting to protect Canadians'environment. Well, the truth is that Canada's farmers, ranchers and processors have for years demonstrated their ability to deliver meaningful reductions in emissions and to safeguard the environment through the adoption of new technologies, education and innovative management practices, but the government ignores these efforts. Will the minister at the very least admit to Canadians that Canadian farmers are unable to pass on the cost of the carbon tax to consumers and instead have to absorb those extra costs out of their own pockets? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Madam Chair, allow me to explain again our government's position on pollution pricing. The price and method were developed so we could build an increasingly clean economy. We put a number of measures in place to help the agriculture sector. Emissions from animal and plant production aren't taxed. Farm fuels and fuels delivered to off-farm points-of-sale are also Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you, Madam Chair. I do have another question. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I am watching the time, Mr. Dreeshan. You have a couple more seconds. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you. Madam Chair, Minister Bibeau has repeatedly asked stakeholders to send her data about the impacts of the carbon tax on farmers, so this is exactly what they have been doing. The Atlantic Grains Council, the Grain Farmers of Ontario, Producteurs de grains du Qubec and the Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association issued a joint statement at the beginning of this year in which they estimated that the cumulative indirect inflation of carbon tax on farm costs will be $14. 50 an acre this year, with that cost escalating by more than double by 2022 to almost $30 an acre. These are huge numbers. Why does the Liberal government continue to ignore the facts presented to it and continue to misrepresent the truth to Canadians? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Madame Chair, I can assure you that we have paid close attention to all the information that has been provided to us and that our calculation was also based on this information provided by provinces and different stakeholders. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Our government has been very open and transparent about our pollution pricing plan. The department used data from stakeholders and provinces Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you very much, Madam Chair Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: as well as the 2019 agricultural tax data to estimate the average cost of pollution pricing associated with grain drying at up to 0. 4% of overall operating costs. It is important to remember that we have put in place many special provisions Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Madam Chair Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: like exempting farm fuel and providing other financial supports for farmers. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Dreeshen, I am watching the time, and the minister is allowed to answer for the same amount of time that you used to ask the question. Therefore, I would hope that we would allow her to finish. She has finished, and unfortunately the time is up. The committee now stands adjourned until tomorrow at noon.

According to Bill Blair, gun violence in any of the communities was unacceptable, and it was important that governments and communities took steps to prevent guns from getting into the hands of criminals, especially during the special period of the pandemic outbreak. In terms of the gun smuggling, he also said that in order to thoroughly ban the violence, they had to keep an extremely strong attitude and carry out strict laws over the gun issue.

tr-sq-1254

tr-sq-1254_0

Summarize the inquiries towards Service Canada and their cooperation with Quebec. The Chair (Hon. Anthony Rota (NipissingTimiskaming, Lib.) ): I call this meeting to order. Welcome to the 23rd meeting of the House of Commons Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic. A reminder to all members that in order to avoid issues with sound, members participating in person should not also be connected to the video conference. For those of you who are joining via video conference, I will remind you that when speaking you should be on the same channel as the language you are speaking, and please use your headsets. As usual, please direct your remarks through the chair. As I understand, there are no ministerial announcements today. We will now proceed to presenting petitions. I remind members that any petition presented during a meeting of this special committee must have already been certified by the clerk of petitions. For members participating in person, I ask that they please come and drop their signed certificates off at the table once the petition is presented. I would ask members to be very brief and concise, and to summarize the exact content of the petition. We will continue. The first person presenting a petition today is Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May (SaanichGulf Islands, GP): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I present two petitions this morning. The residents of SaanichGulf Islands are calling on the government to simplify the process for protection of marine protected areas. It's a multi-layered communication process. The marine protected area first proposed in the 1970s for the southern Strait of Georgia, now called the Salish Sea, has been awaiting designation for so long that it was originally endorsed by Jacques Cousteau. That gives us a sense for why petitioners are calling for a simplified and more rapid process. The second petition is from petitioners who are very concerned about our obligations under the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and our commitments under the Truth and Reconciliation Commission calls to action. They specifically reference the RCMP violation of UNDRIP in its actions on Wet'suwet'en territory and ask the government to commit to actually living the principles embodied in UNDRIP. The Chair: We will now go to Mr. Hardie. Mr. Ken Hardie (FleetwoodPort Kells, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am presenting a petition on behalf of the one in a million Canadians who suffer severe and adverse effects from vaccinations. GuillainBarre syndrome is very debilitating, and this petition seeks the setting up of a no-fault accident or compensation system to help offset the loss of work, the loss of wages and the loss of quality of life that many of these people suffer. I'm pleased to present this petition pursuant to Standing Order 36. The Chair: Mr. Trudel, you have the floor. Mr. Denis Trudel (LongueuilSaint-Hubert, BQ): Mr. Chair, culture is the soul of a people. Over the past 20years or so, culture, especially music, has never been as accessible as it is now. Paradoxically, creators'incomes have never been so low. The advent of digital technology has completely overturned the system for distributing the wealth generated by creators for the benefit of various Web stakeholders, many of whom are billionaires. This petition addresses these problems and proposes realistic solutions. The first is to set a minimum royalty model for streaming platforms for artists. The second is to update the existing private copying system. The third is for Internet and cell phone providers who sell their services as direct access to culture to share their profits with artists. The fourth is that the GAFAMs have to pay taxes on their services. Six thousand people have already signed the first version of this petition, launched last month by musician JordanOfficer and supported by singer BarbaraSecours. As an artist, I am proud to present this petition today because the issues it raises are fundamental to the survival of Quebec culture. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood ParkFort Saskatchewan, CPC): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I have four petitions to present today. I will be as brief as you suggested, although I will observe that if some members are going on longer during petitions than they normally do, it might be because the government has taken away so many of the tools that opposition members normally have for raising important issues in the House. The first petition deals with the issue of euthanasia and long-term care. The petitioners are concerned that instead of focusing on improving medically assisted life, something that we know is a major issue in light of recent revelations, the government has put so much time and legislative energy into efforts to continually further expand euthanasia in Canada and remove vital safeguards. The second petition speaks to the ongoing conversations happening in Canada around systemic discrimination and systemic racism. I think we do need to reflect on systemic discrimination. This petition deals specifically with Bill 21 in Quebec and raises concerns. The reality of the way that bill applies is that people from certain backgrounds who wish to practise their faith are not able to fully participate in Canadian society if they are employed in the public service. This petition asks the government to provide a response on that issue, something it hasn't done in response to past petitions on this. The third petition deals with the issue of firearms. The petitioners want to see the government take a strong response in dealing with illegal guns and gun smuggling. The petition notes that the vast majority of firearms-related crimes in Canada involves illegal guns. At the same time, the petitioners are concerned that the government has the wrong focusthat is, harassing law-abiding firearms ownerswithout putting in place substantial measures to deal with illegal guns. The petitioners want to see the reversal of the order in council from May 1 and strong measures to deal with illegal firearms. The fourth and final petition deals with Bill S-204, a bill that would make it a criminal offence for a Canadian to go abroad and receive an organ from a person who has not consented to giving that organ. It would also create a mechanism by which someone could be deemed inadmissible to Canada if they were involved in organ harvesting and trafficking. The petitioners are supportive of Bill S-204 and of similar bills in previous parliaments and would like to see us pass that bill as soon as possible. The Chair: Presenting petitions, Mr. Lamoureux. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Winnipeg North, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. It is with pleasure that I table another petition by the residents of Winnipeg North. These residents have signed a petition asking the Government of Canada, and in fact all members of Parliament, to put a high priority on assisting our poorest seniors. The increases to the GIS by $200, and $300 to the OAS, have been well received. They just want to highlight how important it is to support our seniors, in particular the poorest of our seniors. The Chair: For members present in the Chamber, a reminder that they are asked to bring their petitions to the table. We'll now proceed to statements by members. We'll go to Ms. Atwin for the first one. Mrs. Jenica Atwin (Fredericton, GP): Thank you, Mr. Chair. June 21 is National Indigenous Peoples Day, a day of acknowledgement and a day of celebration of the beautiful diversity of indigenous peoples across Turtle Island. I wish to recognize the leadership of Chief Shelley Sabattis of the Welamukotuk First Nation in Oromocto, New Brunswick. Each year she and her council, volunteers and staff go above and beyond to show appreciation for their members and to demonstrate pride and culture while promoting well-being. We gather in an event where all are welcome to take part, from traditional hand drum-making with elders to moose meat and tacos. This year we will celebrate a bit differently, but we will still stay connected, virtually and in spirit, to the vast network of indigenous peoples and allies. We need each other now more than ever. May we come together in song and stories and in solidarity. We will remember those who are not among us. I hope all of Canada will join us in observing National Indigenous Peoples Day. Mawiyapasuwok: let us come together. Nit liech. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Beech. Mr. Terry Beech (Burnaby NorthSeymour, Lib.): Mr. Chair, COVID-19 is an unprecedented challenge for all communities across Canada, but as we do our part to flatten the curve, I often think about those who suit up every morning to serve on the front lines of our health care system. My mother is a home care worker and my sister is a nurse. Even before the crisis, they would often share the hardships they faced on a day-to-day basis. It's a tough job at the best of times. In a pandemic, these jobs are life-threatening. I think we can all agree that these workers deserve more than our good wishes. They deserve a raise. That is why we have worked with the provinces to implement pandemic pay. In British Columbia more than 250,000 front-line workers are eligible for this program. That works out to a pay increase of about $4 an hour. It's a small show of our appreciation for their difficult and priceless contribution to our country. Share this message and say thanks to our front-line workers, participate in the 7 p. m. cheer, and order a pizza for your local nurses. It's the least we can do. The Chair: We'll now go on to Mr. Shipley. Mr. Doug Shipley (BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. We've been living in difficult times. Slowly, we are getting back to some resemblance of normalcy, although unfortunately not soon enough for some of our great summer festivals. It will not be normal in BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte this summer without the iconic Boots and Hearts weekend music festival, Kempenfest, Oro World's Fair, the Elmvale Fall Fair, or the Midhurst Autumnfest. Canada Day celebrations have been cancelled, but we can still celebrate the great nation we call home. Because of the lack of Canada Day celebrations, I've created Happy Canada Day lawn signs that are available through my constituency office, free to all residents of BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte. I'm also hosting a drive-through party on Canada Day at the Royal Canadian Legion on St. Vincent Street in Barrie. All are welcome to attend. There will be cupcakes for all. Please drop by the legion between 11 a. m. and 2 p. m. , and we can celebrate Canada Day safely together. Thank you and have a great summer. The Chair: Now we'll go on to Ms. Young. Ms. Kate Young (London West, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Among the countless ordinary Canadians who have stepped up to do extraordinary work during COVID-19, I wish to draw attention to our teachers. Teachers have always had a special place in my heart. My father was a teacher, and my daughter-in-law, Kelly Webb, is one now. I'm certain that my colleagues can all easily remember a teacher in their past who played an important role in helping them achieve their potential. I remember my grade 12 English teacher, Vince Weaver, at Westminster Secondary School in London. He made me realize that I could do so much more than I believed. Across the country, as schools closed, teachers did not stop their work. Some took their classes online. Others found innovative ways to continue engaging with their students. This is not the school year anyone imagined, and what the next one will look like is unclear, but our teachers in London West and across Canada have shown that no matter what, they will be there to help our next generation shine. The Chair: Before proceeding to the next presenter, I just want to remind the honourable members in the chamber that I realize that the six-foot limit makes it harder to whisper to each other, but we're hearing a bit of rumble, so I just want you to try to whisper at your best. Mr. Bergeron, you have the floor. Mr. Stphane Bergeron (Montarville, BQ): Mr. Chair, on July1st, we will be celebrating one of the most important events for the riding of Montarville: the 175thanniversary of the city of Saint-Bruno-de-Montarville. The theme Proud of our traditions will be the focus of this celebration for the people of Montarville. This is a good illustration of the rich history of this municipality nestled in the western foothills of Mont-Saint-Bruno. The seigneury of Montarville was granted in1710 to the illustrious former governor of Trois-Rivires, PierreBoucher. The parish of Saint-Bruno, which took root there and in which a village grew, became a municipal corporation in1845. To this day, it is one of the most prosperous localities, with a strong sense of belonging, a very dynamic community life and jealously preserved natural environments. A whole program had been drawn up for the celebration, but the current health crisis has taken over some of the planned activities, which has in no way diminished the pride and festive spirit of the people of Montarville. On July1st, we will have a good reason to be proud, in spite of everything. Happy 175thanniversary to Saint-Bruno-de-Montarville. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Maloney. Mr. James Maloney (EtobicokeLakeshore, Lib.): Mr. Chair, thank you for allowing me to take a moment to highlight an initiative that I started early on during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Heroes of EtobicokeLakeshore is an opportunity for citizens in my riding to recognize the contributions of those in their community who make life a bit easier. I'm pleased with the number of nominations I received that honour everyone from front-line workers to businesses that are innovating in these difficult times to volunteers who are finding new ways to reach out. I think of Daniel Lauzon who set up Food for Now, a mobile service that helps take care of the homeless. I think of Toni Varone, who helped his business clients by forgiving their rents, or young Lucas, who wanted to thank his teachers. I've been moved and inspired by the countless stories of generosity, strength, resiliency, kindness, incredible character and creativity. I want to thank all the heroes, as well as the people who nominated them. Keep them coming. Stay safe, everyone, and I wish you happy Canada Day early. The Chair: We'll now move on to Ms. Wong. Hon. Alice Wong (Richmond Centre, CPC): Mr. Chair, it gives me great pleasure to thank a local Richmond-based charity, the Social Diversity for Children Foundation, SDC, for its hard work both in raising funds for the purchase of personal protective equipment and in distributing this PPE to long-term care facilities and individual seniors'homes in the lower mainland of B. C. The COVID-19 relief fund is supported by a dozen other non-profits, businesses and community groups. Over the past two months, SDC has been to 32 seniors homes and senior-related organizations. In total, it has delivered masks to 7,000 care workers, staff and seniors. It is amazing to have witnessed how the younger generation have gotten involved in caring for the elderly at this very challenging time. The Chair: We'll now go to Ms. Damoff. Ms. Pam Damoff (Oakville NorthBurlington, Lib.): Mr. Chair, June is ALS Awareness Month, and 79 years after Lou Gehrig died from ALS little has changed. There's still no cure, and those with ALS typically die within five years of diagnosis. On June 21, Canadians will gather virtually to raise funds for ALS Canada in the Walk to End ALS. In Halton, normally we meet each year at Bronte Creek Provincial Park on the May long weekend to raise funds for ALS Canada. This year I will virtually join Tim's Titans, a team formed to honour Tim Robertson, my friend who died in 2016 after living with ALS for 13 years. I have a T-shirt, with a picture of Lou Gehrig, that says, Great Player. . . Lousy Disease and Tim's Titans. . . Great Team! ALS. . . Still a Lousy Disease. Join me on June 21 for the virtual Walk to End ALS to raise funds to support patients and their families and for ALS research. The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Khera. Ms. Kamal Khera (Brampton West, Lib.): Mr. Chair, on Saturday our community stood and marched in solidarity against anti-black racism. The peaceful protests that we're seeing across the country and around the world were not triggered by an isolated incident. They are fuelled by decades of ineffective action against something that is so insidious and deeply entrenched in our history, systems and institutions. For us, that is the racial inequality faced by Canada's indigenous and black communities. Anti-black racism is real. It exists right here in Canada, in our communities, including in Brampton. It exists when racialized students at McCrimmon Middle School are called McCriminals. It exists when a shocking report exposes the Peel District School Board's failure to work fairly with the black community. It exists when D'Andre Campbell, who was fighting mental illness, loses his life at the hands of the police. It is clear that we need reform. We need to dismantle the systems that allow this privilege and oppression to take form, and address the unconscious bias plaguing our institutions. We'll need to be bold, and the time to do that is now. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd (Sturgeon RiverParkland, CPC): Mr. Chair, a few months ago I rose in the House on the eve of our closure due to COVID-19. I told Canadians we must not give in to fear, that we would carry on and get through this crisis stronger than ever. Today, in this city and across Canada, Canadians are enjoying a beer on their favourite patios. Businesses are reopening, jobs are returning and our lives are starting to feel a bit normal again. Canadians pulled together, and because of that we did not see the devastating death toll that many had predicted. Life may be returning to normal, but unfortunately, here in this chamber of democracy, the people's voices continue to be shut down. There is no good reason for Parliament to be suspended today. In the words of my grandfather, it's time for the Liberals to get with the program and bring back the House. The Chair: We will now proceed with Ms. Jones. Ms. Yvonne Jones (Labrador, Lib.): Mr. Chair, from in-person learning to virtual classrooms, COVID-19 has drastically changed the lives of students across the country, especially those in post-secondary education who are worried about covering costs like tuition or rent this coming fall. Our government recognized that students should not have to worry or put their futures on pause during this difficult time. That's why last month the federal government introduced the Canada emergency student benefit. If you're a high school student headed to a post-secondary school, or a current post-secondary student or a recent graduate, you can receive the Canada emergency student benefit every four weeks and have the financial support that you need to save for school. We also doubled Canada student grants and loans, enhanced the student loan program, increased supports for indigenous post-secondary education and introduced the Canada student service grant for those who wish to pursue it. Our government is here to help all students get the support they need to pursue their future goals successfully. I wish them all the very best, and I wish all of you, my colleagues and those across Canada, a very happy National Indigenous Peoples Day, which is coming up on June 21. The Chair: I want to remind the honourable members to keep to their 60 seconds so that we don't go over the time. I'm sure it would be a lot easier for everyone if we stuck to that limit. We will now go to Mr. Aitchison. Mr. Scott Aitchison (Parry SoundMuskoka, CPC): Mr. Chair, I rise today to once again implore the government to do something about the horrible lack of access to and crazy cost of rural Internet service. Right now, too many areas of my riding have no access to rural Internet service at all, and those who can get service are paying through the nose. I've even heard constituents say that during this pandemic, they are having to choose between feeding their kids and educating them. Over the last few weeks, Conservatives have been consulting with rural Canadians, and the results are in. My constituents are tired of fancy political promises. They are frustrated beyond belief by the new challenges created by this pandemic. They are absolutely fed up with having their pleas ignored. All we want is affordable and reliable Internet service. Is that too much to ask of the government? The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. MacGregor. Mr. Alistair MacGregor (CowichanMalahatLangford, NDP): Mr. Chair, these last few months have been incredibly challenging for the residents of CowichanMalahatLangford, who have been forced to deal with the economic and social consequences of COVID-19. The pandemic has laid bare the inadequacies of our social safety net, the weakness in our supply chains and the dependence of our society on essential workers, who often work long hours for low wages, putting themselves and their families at risk. We've also been forced to confront the systemic inequality, poverty and racism that continue to hold so many people back from achieving their full potential. I will not dishonour the sacrifice that so many have made during this time by allowing us to go back to the status quo that got us here in the first place. I will not apologize for demanding that the most vulnerable in our society get the supports and opportunities they need to live with dignity, and I will not relent from pushing my political colleagues to summon the courage necessary to implement policies that lead to environmental, economic and social justice. The Chair: I now give the floor to Mr. Blaney. Hon. Steven Blaney (BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, CPC): Mr. Chair, here is a beautiful story, the story of a woman from Bellechasse, a courageous young mother from Saint-Malachie, Marie-ChristineGoupil. With three children, including the eldest daughter with a disability, and realizing that her daughter with a disability had special clothing needs, she decided to go into business to meet the needs of other parents who, like her, were facing their child's clothing challenges. Last week, she presented her Handy clothing collection on the show Dans l'il du dragon. It was a very emotional moment for the audience and the dragons. They were so touched that they decided to give her the amount she wanted without diluting her shares. The video of her presentation has already been viewed over 1million times on social networks. Marie-ChristineGoupil has discovered a passion for entrepreneurship and has moved and inspired many people with her passionate and courageous attitude. Congratulations, Ms. Goupil, your example makes us proud. The Chair: Mr. Blanchet, you have the floor. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet (BeloeilChambly, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I lend my voice to the Chief of the Assembly of First Nations of Quebec-Labrador, GhislainPicard, whose message is as follows: There have been no fewer than 14reports and conclusions of commissions of inquiry since1967 highlighting major problems in relations between law enforcement agencies and indigenous people. Each time, the conclusions have been overwhelming and highlight a disturbing reality. The justice system has failed indigenous people. Are you going to respond, as you too often do, by moving on to the next one, or are you going to do what we expect you to do, which is to recognize that the justice system discriminates against indigenous people and that we have no less right to security than the rest of the population? In three months, police interventions have claimed more victims among our members than the pandemic. But it is not enough to simply take a knee and denounce racism. It's about standing up and taking action. Those are the words of GhislainPicard. The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Harder. Ms. Rachael Harder (Lethbridge, CPC): Over the last few months, Canada's democracy has been disregarded and an autocracy has been resurrected in its place. By refusing to hold regular parliamentary sittings, Mr. Trudeau is sending a strong message to the Canadian public that he alone is the one who matters. In 2014, he professed that Canadians want their Members of Parliament to be effective voices for their communities in Ottawa, and not merely mouthpieces for an all-too-powerful Prime Minister. As it stands, however, he has shut down Parliament. Effectively, he has stripped us, the opposition, of our privileges and our powers. Sadly, Mr. Trudeau has become the all-too-powerful Prime Minister that he once warned against. A government that does not allow for effective opposition is not functioning in the best interest of Canadians; it is operating in the best interest of itself and, even more so, the interest of the Prime Minister. Canadians deserve to flourish in a democracy, not merely survive under the autocracy that this Prime Minister has created. The Chair: We'll now go on to Ms. Zahid. Mrs. Salma Zahid (Scarborough Centre, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I would like to recognize the work of Agincourt Community Services Association and its tireless executive director, Lee Soda, who have been serving our community during the COVID-19 pandemic. Under more pressure than ever, their staff and volunteers continue to serve a community whose need was great even before the crisis. Their food bank helps over 4,000 people weekly. They have opened outdoor washrooms and hand-washing stations for vulnerable communities and are delivering groceries and other essentials to vulnerable seniors. ACSA is a bridge between those who can help and those who need help, and they are just one example of how our community has come together to meet this challenge. There are restaurants and businesses donating meals to front-line workers, residents answering the call to stock the food bank shelves and neighbours looking in on the vulnerable and isolated. I am so proud of our community's spirit. Scarborough is strong. The Chair: We'll now proceed to the questioning of ministers. Please note that we will suspend the proceedings twice in order to allow employees who provide support for the sitting to replace each other safely. The first question goes to the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Chair, for months Conservatives have been pointing out flaws in Liberal government programs that are preventing Canadians from getting the help they need. The Prime Minister has refused to make these very technical changes to get more help to Canadians who need it. For example, on the wage subsidy, more than two-thirds of the money allocated for that program has lapsed because businesses don't qualify. I have a simple question. Will the Prime Minister change the program to allow companies who have made acquisitions to access the wage subsidy to keep more people working? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Papineau, Lib.): Mr. Chair, from the very beginning we knew that as we rolled out measures, we would need to improve them and tweak them, and that's exactly what we've been doing over the past three months. We needed to make measures happen quickly for Canadians, and we did that. But we continued to improve them, to make additions and amendments so that more people could get the help they needed, including with the proposed legislation last week that expanded the reach of the wage subsidy to more businesses. Unfortunately, the Conservatives didn't even want us to debate that particular piece of legislation. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Actually, Mr. Chair, it was the Liberals who said no to the motion to allow this Parliament to sit to debate that motion, and even in that legislation they refused to allow businesses who have made acquisitions to access the program. Now, when we look at the rent relief program, it is so difficult to apply for it that many landlords are refusing to bother, leaving even more small businesses to fall through the cracks. In fact, of the $3 billion allocated to the rent relief program, only $39 million has been paid out. That's less than 2%. Now, the Prime Minister is still using talking points from April. It's now June and he has refused to fix these programs and has successfully talked out the calendar on the days that the House of Commons could meet to discuss these programs. When will he make these changes to get more help to Canadians who need it? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, throughout this pandemic, we have constantly been updating and expanding our various programs. We recognize, in conversations with the premiers, how important it is to make sure that we're working together, the provinces and the federal government, on issues like rent subsidies where commercial rent is indeed a provincial jurisdiction. Many provinces have moved forward with the eviction bans that are necessary to go along with this, and we'll continue to work with provinces to make sure that we're getting Canadians the help they need. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Mr. Chair, Canadians cannot wait. He has run down the clock on parliamentary sittings and he still refuses to make these changes to get more help to Canadians. Today, we learned that Telus has installed Huawei technology in downtown Ottawa. There are over 80 sites across the national capital region with Huawei technology installed. Some of these sites are very near sensitive government institutions, like government departments, the National Research Council, RCMP headquarters and the Bank of Canada. How long has the Prime Minister known that Huawei technology has been installed in the Ottawa area? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, first off, on the issue of Parliament, it has been meeting four times a week over the past many weeks, and members of the opposition have been able to continue to ask questions on COVID-19 and a broad range of subjects. Moreover, every two weeks the finance department puts forward at the finance committee the full transparent measures that we've taken, so that parliamentarians can study them. We are continuing to work in this crisis. At the same time Mr. Ziad Aboultaif (Edmonton Manning, CPC): Answer the question. The Chair: I'm sorry? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: in regard to Huawei technology there are strict rules for companies to follow and we assume they will all follow those. The Chair: We'll pause for a second and stop the clock. I want to remind the honourable members who are joining us virtually that heckling really does disrupt the whole session. Your face does come up and we do see who it is, so I just want to make sure that you're aware of that. Now we'll go back to Mr. Scheer. We have a minute and 10 seconds left. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister is bragging about accountability and transparency. Will he table an economic update before the House rises? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, throughout this unprecedented pandemic, we have been open and transparent about all of the measures we've put forward. We've updated the finance committee The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer: That's a long way of saying no, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister has pursued a policy of appeasement in pursuit of a personal vanity product at the UN. In the process, he's cozied up to dictators and human rights violators. He's abandoned Israel and committed funding to UNRWA, an organization whose schools have been used as storage facilities for Hamas rockets against Israeli civilians, and whose facilities have served as breeding grounds for racism and anti-Semitism. He has apologized for the Iranian regime when it shot down a plane full of Canadian citizens, and he refuses to list the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist entity. What's the point of having a seat at the table if you have to sell out Canadian principles to get there? The Chair: The Right Honourable Prime Minister. Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, we see that the Conservatives have kept with the Harper approach to international diplomacy. The failed presence of Canada on the world stage was an embarrassment for many Canadians for many years. That's why, when we took office five years ago, we demonstrated the kind of leadership on values that Canadians expected. We will continue to work around the world to defend multilateralism. The Chair: We have a point of order. Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May: This being a committee, we can have a point of order during what would have been question period. I am not sitting that far away from the Prime Minister, and I'm sorry, but Andrew Scheer used to be the Speaker of the House and should show better decorum. The Chair: We have a point of order from Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, on the same point of order, it is disgusting for the leader of the Green Party to use decorum as an excuse to interrupt the Leader of the Opposition in the middle of critical lines of questioning. The leader of the Green Party knows the rules of the House and shouldn't be abusing them to advance a partisan agenda. The Chair: We're getting into debate. I do want to point out that the time had run out. We're now moving on to the next line of questions. On a point of order, Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer: I appreciate the honourable leader of the Green Party, Elizabeth May, for that reminder. When I was Speaker I always appreciated her help and advice about how to improve decorum in here. I just want to say to the member, and to all members, that the reason that I cannot control myself is that the Prime Minister used the word embarrassment in answering a foreign affairs question, and it just made me think of the India trip. The Chair: I believe we're getting into debate and arguments. Mr. Blanchet, you have the floor. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: Mr. Chair, while the Greens and the Conservatives are saying that they'll be waiting outside after the meeting, I will ask a question. The Prime Minister has extended the Canada emergency response benefit, and that's good news, but it's not enough. Last week in the House, the government said it was urgent to fight fraud. For us, it was also urgent to adjust the CERB to the needs of the tourism, arts and agriculture sectors. Farmers are going to be seriously under-resourced. So what happened to the urgency of reforming the CERB? Why is the government refusing to talk to the opposition parties? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, I am very pleased to hear the hon. member finally align himself with the positions of the Liberal Party. Unfortunately, the Bloc is a week late. It should have let us debate these concerns in the House last week. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: It seems to me that the word alignment here is a fantasy. We have unequivocally proposed to extend the debate to reach an agreement, which brings me to my second question. Last week, the issue of assistance to people with disabilities was also a pressing concern, and it's even more so a week later. The Bloc proposed to extend the discussions and split the government's bill in two to help people with disabilities. Why is the government refusing this assistance to people with disabilities, when it could have been debated with the opposition in a civilized and proper way in a Parliament in which it has a minority? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: That was exactly what we wanted, but unanimous consent of the Chamber was required to debate this matter, and the Conservative Party of Canada voted against it. Unfortunately, we are going to have to find a different way to help people with disabilities. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: If the idea is so good and wonderful, why not start over and open the dialogue now? What's stopping the Prime Minister from being a rallying point and inviting us to take to each other and resolve the problem, rather than saying that he is going to pack up his toys and go home? The people with disabilities are the ones who will pay the price. Where was the Prime Minister on October21,2019? He received a minority mandate from Quebeckers and Canadians. Why is he behaving like something between a prime minister with a majority and a monarch by divine right? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: I've heard the Conservative Party and the Bloc Qubcois throw their accusations around. They don't point out that the House of Commons did indeed give its consent to extend the mandate of the Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic until the end of June. Three parties agreed, which was the right thing to do in the context of this minority government. We've been working with the other parties. However, as they did not get the results they wanted, they complained. Unfortunately, they too are part of a minority Parliament and must respect the voice of the majority of parliamentarians, just as we do. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: I might have been tempted, but that's unlikely to happen because the Prime Minister isn't me, he's him. It's therefore up to him to bring people together, open a dialogue and recall Parliament. All we were asking for was the opportunity to talk for an hour or two. However, suddenly he doesn't want to play anymore. It's not working anymore, and there's something a bit strange about that. In addition, the government wants to buy the right to interfere in provincial and Quebec jurisdictions for $14billion. However, Quebec and a number of provinces are refusing to allow it to interfere in their jurisdictions and are asking that this money be paid to them unconditionally. Is the Prime Minister trying to take advantage of the crisis or is he trying to create a constitutional crisis? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, the safety of Canadians is the responsibility of all levels of government. That's why we have proposed a $14billion agreement to ensure that all Canadians across the country experience a safe re-opening of the economy. This is a proposal that we are working on with the provinces because we know that there are needs across the country, including early childhood centres, screening and support for municipalities. The federal government wants to be there to help the provinces. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh (Burnaby South, NDP): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Indigenous leaders have expressed a lack of confidence in the RCMP commissioner's ability to tackle full-scale systemic racism, but the Prime Minister has expressed his confidence in the commissioner. What's that based on? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, over the past two years, Commissioner Lucki has made significant strides forward on an issue where there is still much more to do. We know that systemic racism exists in all of our institutions across this country The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: This is the same RCMP commissioner who just recently said that they couldn't explain what systemic racism was. Now the Prime Minister says that he has confidence, when indigenous leaders express their lack of confidence. Why does the Prime Minister believe that the RCMP commissioner can tackle systemic racism in the RCMP? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, systemic racism is something that touches every corner of our country, every corner of our institutions. It requires people to understand and move forward in coordinated ways with partners. The commissioner is committed to doing that, alongside members of our government. We will do that together and work with indigenous communities and black The Chair: Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, recent events have made it abundantly clear that to tackle the systemic racism at the level of the RCMP, we need a full-scale overhaul of the RCMP. Is the Prime Minister committed to a full-scale overhaul of the RCMP to root out systemic racism? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: As I've said many times, Mr. Chair, I am committed to addressing systemic racism in this country and taking significant, bold actions to reduce the amount of discrimination that indigenous peoples, that racialized Canadians face on a daily basis. We have much work to do, but we will do it together. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, Black Lives Matter has been calling for governments to defund the police. What it's saying is that we need to be better at where we spend our money, investing in communities and not policing. Will the Prime Minister commit to a review of the RCMP budget to allocate resources to community services and not to policing? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, over the past years we have been investing more directly and more money in community organizations, in the black community, and working with indigenous partners on the path to reconciliation. We have been investing in the kinds of community-based programs and solutions that are part of the solution. We know there is much more to do, and we will continue to look at all of our expenditures to make sure we're doing the right things. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, over the past few years, while the Prime Minister has been in office, the RCMP budget has increased by 31%. More money is going towards policing. In recent events we've seen people who needed a health care response to a health care crisis been killed by the RCMP. Does the Prime Minister believe that we need to be investing in a health care response instead of a police response for people who are faced with a crisis? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, the member opposite well knows that it's not an either-or. We need to make sure that our systems across the board, from our police systems to our judicial systems, to our health care systems, to our community systems, are actually addressing the systemic discrimination issues that are embedded within them That is exactly what we are going to continue to do in the coming years. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, with regard to the CERB extension, can the Prime Minister guarantee that everyone who is receiving CERB payments now will continue to do so without any gaps throughout the summer? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, I am happy to highlight that many Canadians who were on the CERB are now returning to work. Many more who are on the CERB now will be returning to work in the coming weeks. We know that as the economy gets back to work, people will want to The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Can the Prime Minister assure people who need it that they will continue to receive the CERB over the summer, yes or no? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: We are very pleased to point out that we are going to extend the Canada emergency response benefit for at least another eight weeks, because a lot of people are going to need it. Even if they want to work, there aren't enough jobs for everyone. So we'll be there for them, as we have been from the beginning. The Chair: We're going to pause and suspend proceedings just for a few moments to allow our support staff to substitute for one another in a healthy and safe way. We'll now proceed with Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod (KamloopsThompsonCariboo, CPC): Mr. Chair, it was really a surprise in the middle of a pandemic to see the Prime Minister at his first campaign stop last week in Ottawa. Certainly the game plan has become very transparent. He has a daily report show and he wants to sideline Parliament, dominate the news cycle and keep everyone in the dark about the state of the economy. According to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, there is no reason that he cannot provide the fiscal update during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the PBO has published a number of reports himself. Why won't the Prime Minister provide a fiscal update so we can all understand the state of our economy, or is that just not part of his campaign playbook? Hon. Mona Fortier (Minister of Middle Class Prosperity and Associate Minister of Finance): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Canada's economy is in a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We've been clear about that. We will continue to be open and transparent about the actions that we are taking to support families, businesses, workers, our health care system and our economy. This includes biweekly reports to Parliament on the full cost and status of our economic measures. Once it is possible to provide a clear economic projection, we will provide an update. We are in this together, and we are prepared to do whatever is necessary to support Canadians. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: Chair, Canada's economy was in trouble prior to the COVID, with some of the worst numbers since 2009. Government revenues in March dropped by 7. 2%, and it's shameful and, quite frankly, it's outrageous that they refuse to provide Parliament and Canadians with an economic update. Households during this challenging time know how much money is coming in and they know how much money is going out. The picture is not pretty, but they know what the picture is. Can the finance minister at least reveal the projected revenue decline in quarters one and two? Hon. Mona Fortier: The Canadian economy is going through a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We've known this for three months. We've continued to be open and transparent about the measures we've put in place for Canadians, workers and businesses. In fact, we have reported biweekly to Parliament on the total cost and status of our plan's measures. As soon as it's possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide a comprehensive update to Canadians The Chair: We go back to Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: Other governments have managed to provide updates for their citizens and carry out their responsibilities, but of course this government has sidelined Parliament with simply a question-but-no-answer period. Let's try something else. The forestry industry was in crisis even before the pandemic, with mills closing down and thousands of jobs lost. Eight weeks ago, Minister Freeland said, I have had many discussions with leaders in our forestry sector and the provinces about what we can do to support the industry today. Meanwhile, we've had support going to the arts and we've had support going to fisheries, just to name a few, but arguably for the industry that was having some of the most numerous challenges, it has been radio silence. That was eight weeks ago today. Can the government at least commit to releasing an updated softwood lumber transition plan before we rise? Hon. Seamus O'Regan (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Chair, we remain committed, of course, to the forestry industry and seeing it through this pandemic and this very uncertain time. The expanding market opportunities program, for instance, has helped Canada's forestry sector diversify, create jobs and open new markets. We've had new construction projects that are active today, using Canadian wood in key markets like Korea, Japan, China and the United States. Tomorrow this House will vote on our government's investment of $20. 97 million for this program. It's part of our budget 2019 commitment to invest $251 million over three years, and I hope the opposition will support us in that. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: It was stated in a major newspaper this morning that this government is like a sexy sports carvroom, vroom, vroombut with a history of breakdowns and major repairs. I think that might describe what has been happening. For forestry, it has been eight weeks and there has been nothing. There is another area that Deputy Prime Minister Freeland did talk about. We were talking about the U. S. softwood lumber duties that are being held in the United States. It's billions of dollars being held with the U. S. treasury. In April, she acknowledged that these duties are a real issue for the softwood lumber industry. What's been done since that time? Hon. David Lametti (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada): Mr. Chair, Canada's forestry industry supports good middle-class jobs in communities across our country. The sector is also an essential link in the medical equipment supply chain, and we thank them for all the work they're doing. We're aware of the immense pressures faced by this sector, especially at this time, and Deputy Prime Minister Freeland and others are taking that seriously and working through this issue. As our government has said repeatedly, we firmly believe that the U. S. duties on Canadian softwood lumber are unfair and unwarranted, and we will pursue all means in order to The Chair: Before continuing, I want to remind honourable members who are at home to make sure that the boom on their headsets is down. It just makes a better pickup. We heard everything, but it was a little distant. That's for everyone's benefit. We're now going to continue with Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell (Louis-Saint-Laurent, CPC): Mr. Chair, before I ask my question, I'd like to pay tribute to the Minister of Justice, particularly to his versatility. Today, he talked about forests. Yesterday, the Minister of Justice talked about Davie and indigenous affairs. Really, this minister is very versatile. My question is directly for the Minister of Finance. I like Mr. Lametti very much, but I'd like Mr. Morneau to answer my question. Yesterday, in a Senate parliamentary committee, the Minister of Finance half-opened the door to an economic update. Based on what he said, it seems that, as we speak, a committee of the Department of Finance is working on an economic update. Could Mr. Morneau tell Canadians when he is going to table this economic update? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, as we know, the Canadian economy is going through a period of extraordinary uncertainty. As soon as it's possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide a full update to Canadians. Right now, we can say that we have supported workers, businesses and Canadians with the emergency measures we have put in place. We will continue to do so, because we need to be sure that Canadians can get through this crisis. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I thought it was too good to be true. The Minister of Finance is opening the door, and the Minister of Small Business is closing it. We don't know when the economic update will take place, yet all across Canada, provinces are doing economic updates. Could Mr. Morneau explain to Canadians why he is unable to give one? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, since the beginning of the crisis, we have implemented the economic action plan to respond to COVID-19, and we've provided immediate assistance to Canadians, businesses and workers. Over 2. 5million jobs were protected by the Canada emergency wage subsidy. In addition, 8. 4million Canadians The Chair: We are returning to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, next Friday, the Quebec minister of finance, EricGirard, will give an economic update. If EricGirard can give one for Quebec, why can't BillMorneau give one for Canada? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, once again, we have been open and transparent from the outset. We have devoted our energy to support Canadians, workers and businesses. We will continue to do so. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I cannot judge the quality of the work done by the provinces, but what I do know is that Quebec, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland have also made efforts to support their residents economically. Those provinces are able to table economic updates. Yesterday, Saskatchewan even tabled a budget. Why is Bill Morneau unable to table an economic update for all Canadians? Hon. Mona Fortier: Let me repeat for my hon. colleague that we are going through extraordinarily uncertain times. We have continued to be open and transparent. We have reported biweekly to Parliament on the total cost and status of the measures in our economic response plan. Once again, as soon as clear economic projections can be provided, we will provide an update The Chair: Mr. Deltell has the floor. Mr. Grard Deltell: The minister talks about the total cost of the government's economic expenditures. So I ask the question: so far, over the past three months, how much has the pandemic cost Canadians? Hon. Mona Fortier: As I said earlier, it is important to note that we have put forward measures, including the wage subsidy, which have helped more than 2. 5million The Chair: Mr. Deltell has the floor. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I have been trying for four minutes to get anything remotely resembling an answer, and I'm getting absolutely nothing. I am not asking questions for myself; I am asking questions for Canadians. Why are the government and the Minister of Finance, Bill Morneau, not able to table an economic update when some provinces are able to? Hon. Mona Fortier: Once again, I would like to remind my hon. colleague that we have provided interest-free loans to businesses. More than 669,000loans have been approved. We have continued to support businesses and Canadians during this time The Chair: Mr. Deltell, you have time for a very brief question. Mr. Grard Deltell: The only thing that distinguishes the provinces that table economic updates and the current government is political will. Why does Bill Morneau not have the political will to tell Canadians the truth? Hon. Mona Fortier: Once again, we have been open and transparent. As soon as it is possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide Canadians with a full update. The Chair: We will now continue with Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya (MarkhamUnionville, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. COVID-19 has sparked and spurred anti-Asian racism. These are not just racist comments online; Asian Canadians have been attacked. What is the government doing to combat anti-Asian racism? Hon. Bardish Chagger (Minister of Diversity and Inclusion and Youth): Mr. Chair, since our government took office in 2015, we have been making investments and working with communities. The difference between our government and the previous government is that we will actually consult with Canadians, including black Canadians, including Asian Canadians, to respond to the challenges, including with an anti-racism secretariat and an anti-racism strategy. It will take all of us. I appreciate the member's question, so that we can also work together. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, one business owner I know in Markham has operated for 20 years. Now she's looking at over $9,000 in rent due on June 24. COVID-19 has crippled her sales and she's going to go out of business. Her landlord has no interest in the Canada emergency commercial rent assistance program. How can the government say this program is working? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, this program was made possible by working with the provinces, and we will continue to encourage landlords and tenants to work together to make sure they have relief for this very difficult time in which they're living. We're continuing to monitor the CECRA program and we will make it possible for businesses to have access to the program. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, the government business rent relief program has been a total disaster. Even the government's own numbers show it is a failure. As of June 8, less than 2% of the $3 billion budgeted has been spent. What is it going to take for the government to admit that the program is a disaster and needs changes? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we know our government has been working closely with the provinces and territories to deliver the Canada emergency commercial rent assistance. Although the tenant-landlord relationship is ultimately the responsibility of the provinces and territories, our government has stepped up to provide support through the tools we have and through CMHC so that small businesses can get the rent relief they need. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, according to the government, there are around 1. 1 million small businesses in Canada. At committee, we were told only around 5,500 of them are receiving COVID-19 rent relief. That number is shameful. When will the Liberal government wake up and make the changes? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we welcome the steps some provinces and territories have taken to further protect commercial tenants. We will continue to monitor this program closely and ensure that Canada's small businesses are supported during this challenging time. We will continue to monitor to see The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, there was no answer. When can the government make these changes? Hon. Mary Ng (Minister of Small Business, Export Promotion and International Trade): Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable colleague that we are doing everything and will continue to do everything to help small businesses in our country. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, on May 27 the CBSA seized 65 small handguns at Pearson airport, the largest firearms seizure on record. It is clear that smuggled handguns are the weapon of choice for criminals. Why is the Prime Minister focusing on an ineffective municipal ban? Hon. Bill Blair (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness): Mr. Chair, I would point out that gun violence in any of our communities is unacceptable, and it's important that governments and communities take steps to prevent guns from getting into the hands of criminals. That's why we do important work at our border to keep guns from being smuggled into our country, but it also necessitates additional work. I don't think you can talk about gun violence without talking about stronger gun control. That's why our government has taken a very strong position and will strengthen gun control to keep Canadians safe. The Chair: Mr. Saroya, you may have a 10-second question, if that's possible, please. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, COVID-19 has not stopped gun violence in the GTA. My constituents are concerned about shootings minutes away from their homes. We know the Liberals'gun ban won't change anything, but a focus on smuggled guns and criminals will. When will they make that change? Hon. Bill Blair: Mr. Chair, stronger gun control laws are an effective tool, and that's been told to us by police leadership and communities across the country. We're also making investments in borders and law enforcement. Most importantly, we're making investments in communities and in kids to keep communities safe. I look forward to the member's strong support of those measures when we bring them forward. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback (Prince Albert, CPC): Mr. Chair, the U. S. and the U. K. began their second round of free trade negotiations yesterday. Does the government intend to have a trade agreement in place before the U. K. tariffs come into effect on January 1? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, the U. K. is a strong partner of Canada, as is the European Union, and we're looking forward to continuing that strong relationship The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Thank you, Mr. Chair. With respect to the negotiations with the U. K. , when will the minister publish her goals and objectives for this agreement? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, we're going to continue to work to ensure that any future agreement is going to be based on the best interests of Canadians, and we will The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Can the minister confirm whether they've entered into negotiations with the U. K. at this point? Hon. Mary Ng: Our government is analyzing the most-favoured-nation tariff regimes schedule the U. K. has put out. I want to assure Canadians The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Mr. Chair, during the CUSMA negotiations, a deal was struck between the Liberal Party and the NDP that the government would notify this House 90 days before it starts any negotiations on any trade agreement. When will the minister notify this House? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that we will absolutely be sharing information. Right now, we are analyzing the most-favoured-nation tariff regimes schedule put out by the U. K. Mr. Randy Hoback: Mr. Chair, any meaningful attempts to reform the WTO needs buy-in from the United States. I think all countries agree on that. Has the minister discussed a WTO reform with the USTR, the United States trade representative? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, the Ottawa Group is a consensus-based group, and any decisions will be taken together. Of course, any meaningful reform must include the U. S. The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Has the U. S. been invited to the Ottawa Group meetings? Hon. Mary Ng: The Ottawa Group is a consensus-based group limited to WTO members who are committed to bringing forward ideas and proposals The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Just as with any other trade agreement, the minister has committed to this House that she will publish the list of goals and responsibilities for the negotiations. When will she publish the list for the Ottawa Group? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I'm thrilled that we had an excellent meeting of the Ottawa Group yesterday where, as a group, we agreed to take concrete action. Mr. Randy Hoback: Will the minister be releasing a list of Canada's objectives we would like to see the new WTO's director-general pursue prior to the upcoming DG election? Hon. Mary Ng: We published an action statement from the Ottawa Group yesterday. I would encourage the member opposite to have a look. I'm certainly happy to send it to him. Mr. Randy Hoback: Going back to economic prosperity, we know that the U. S. has been having talks with other countries around the world. Has Canada yet been invited to this group? Hon. Mary Ng: I'm pleased to continue to pursue the objectives of trade diversification. I would remind the member that we have access to a billion and a half customers through our very robust Mr. Randy Hoback: A billion and a half customers is fine if you have a functioning WTO, but if you don't have a functioning WTO, then a billion and a half customers may not be fully accessible to our suppliers, manufacturers and agriculture producers. Can the minister confirm that she's in discussions with the U. S. in joining this economic prosperity group? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that nothing is more important than standing up and helping create markets for our Canadian businesses and to help our small businesses get more export-ready so that they can grow into the international marketplace. This is work that we've committed to do, and we will keep working on it, particularly The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Yesterday Saskatchewan presented a budget. Not only did they present the budget, but they'll also actually debate the budget and pass the budget in Parliament. There's full accountability. Why won't this government do the same? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons): Mr. Chair, the House is sitting in this hybrid format so that people can participate in the House on the screens. I'm sure my colleague is happy to see that his own colleagues are able to ask questions and participate. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Williamson. Mr. John Williamson (New Brunswick Southwest, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will say that this is no substitute for Parliament, but I appreciate the opportunity. New Brunswick families and businesses are rapidly making adjustments to manage and live with the coronavirus pandemic. Businesses here are opening and services are being offered. Families are preparing for summer and even planning ahead for a new school year in September. We have a lot of work ahead of us. One notable absence is Service Canada. When does the government plan on opening its service counters to assist Canadians again? Hon. Ahmed Hussen (Minister of Families, Children and Social Development): Mr. Chair, our government is committed to ensuring that Canadians continue to have access to the benefits that they rely on through Service Canada. We have redeployed over 3,000 additional staff to ensure that Canadians continue to have access to their benefits. We've established a 1,500-agent call centre to make sure that people can get access to the phone lines to get the help they need. Mr. John Williamson: Service Canada is about more than providing COVID-19 information and benefits. Provincial governments are working hard to adjust to Canada's new normal by opening up businesses and front-line government services. When will we see Service Canada play its role and open its service counters in our communities? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Mr. Chair, we're currently working with our world-class public health experts to determine how best to reopen the Service Canada network for the public. Make no mistake: Our Service Canada employees have gone above and beyond to ensure that Canadians continue to have access to the services that they rely on and the benefits that they need. Mr. John Williamson: Please don't hide behind health experts when the Prime Minister is appearing in the middle of large protests, yet is afraid to bring back the Parliament of Canada to do its business. In fact, the New Brunswick legislature is open for regular business. Bills are being studied, opposition input is being heard and MLAs are voting on legislation, not rubber-stamping government bills. By comparison, our Parliament is stuck in pretending it cannot function like other law-making assemblies. Canadians are in the dark about our country's finances. When will the government table an economic update so taxpayers understand what was spent, what is owed by our kids and grandchildren, and what the government's fiscal footing looks like? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, nobody's hiding. Nobody's doing anything like that. The only reason my colleague is able to ask a question and I'm able to answer his question is that he's right there on the screen. We have this hybrid format that cares for MPs across the country, not only the ones sitting in the House. Mr. John Williamson: This is no substitute for Parliament. I will ask my question again. When will the government table an economic update so that taxpayers understand what was spent, what is owed by our kids and grandchildren, and what the government's fiscal footing looks like in today's environment? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, I thank my honourable colleague for his question. Canada's economy is still in a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We have been open and transparent about the measures we have been providing to support families, businesses and workers. Even our health care The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Williamson. Mr. John Williamson: Except you have not. The Auditor General is underfunded. We have no idea about the total of government spending. Again I will ask when the government will table an economic update so that we can have an understanding of what the government's fiscal footing looks like. Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we have included biweekly reports to Parliament on the full cost and status of our economic response plan measures since the beginning. I have said, and I will continue to say, that when it is possible to provide a clear economic projection, we will provide an update. Mr. John Williamson: What is the full cost to date of the government's COVID-19 relief measures, as the minister just claimed the government has provided to Parliament? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we have provided support for workers, and 2. 5 million Canadians have been helped through the Canadian wage subsidy. We have provided businesses with some loans, and 669,000 businesses have applied for these loans. Even for the CERB, we have over eight million Canadians who have applied. The Chair: We will now continue with Mr. Bergeron. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: Mr. Chair, as the leader of the Bloc Qubcois mentioned a few moments ago, the government promised $14billion to Quebec and the provinces, but in targeted transfers. That is very little compared to the considerable expenses incurred to deal with the current crisis. But Quebec and the provinces don't just want this money to be transferred unconditionally, they also want a real discussion on a permanent increase in health care transfers. PremierLegault was rightly concerned about the feds'interference into provincial jurisdictions. The federal government, which does not manage any hospitals or long-term care centres, must stop playing armchair quarterback and transfer the money to the only governments with jurisdiction over health, that is, Quebec and the provinces. Will it do so without delay and without nitpicking? The Honourable Patty Hajdu (Minister of Health): Mr. Chair, we know that the Government of Quebec is working hard to ensure the safety of Quebeckers and we are here to support them. As part of this co-operation, we have developed health and safety recommendations for workplaces, we have purchased medical equipment for workers and we have supported the province in developing its reopening program. We are continuing this important partnership to ensure the safety of Quebeckers and all Canadians. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: The co-operation is so effective that the money is staying in the federal government's coffers. In fact, when the federal government wants to impose conditions, it always takes longer. We see it with housing, for which Quebec has not received a dime of the $1. 4billion it is owed. We have also seen it with infrastructure funds, particularly for public transit, water systems and water treatment. The health crisis is now. The needs are now. The much needed reopening of our economy is now. Will the government finally transfer the money without messing around or quibbling? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I am pleased to confirm to my colleague that there is no messing around, no quibbling, nothing of the kind. There is co-operation between two levels of government. It is natural to have discussions with all the provinces and with Quebec. I myself am taking part in some discussions and several of my colleagues are taking part in others. There is a clear willingness on the part of the federal government to co-operate with Quebec and all the provinces. That is what we are doing and that is perhaps what the Bloc Qubcois does not like. It likes bickering, but for the time being, there is none. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: We don't want to bicker, we want the money to be paid out. It is not complicated, for heaven's sake! We do not want a blank cheque. Right now, the money remains in the federal government's coffers. There is $1. 4billion that should be paid to Quebec for social housing and is sitting in the federal government's coffers. We are waiting for money for water treatment and water systems, but it is sitting in the federal government's coffers. It's almost July. We are wasting precious months for construction. What is the government waiting for to pay out the money so that we can get our economy rolling? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: The federal government is a very active partner. We are discussing and working with Quebec on infrastructure projects. We are continuing our discussions and negotiations on the housing agreement. Nothing is at a standstill. We are discussing and co-operating for the well-being of all Quebeckers. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: MadamChair, things are definitely at a standstill, because the money is owed and has not been paid out. Months are going by while construction is not taking place. We need to reopen the economy. We need more flexibility in the gas tax program and Quebec's contribution to allow municipalities to undertake work on city halls, community centres and fire stations. We need the federal government to contribute to funding public transit operations, which have become a real financial drain because of the drop in ridership. What is the federal government waiting for to provide real help instead of just talking? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: When it comes to just talking, the Bloc Qubcois has a lot of experience, I admit. We, in the government, are working and co-operating. We are not waiting with our arms folded, we are discussing a series of issues with Quebec. We do more than discuss, we work and we co-operate. We are working on projects, not only in infrastructure, but in a number of other areas. Just think of the co-operation of our armed forces in the CHSLDs, for example. We are here for Quebeckers. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Your time has run out, Mr. Bergeron. We'll go now to Ms. Khalid, from MississaugaErin Mills. Ms. Iqra Khalid (MississaugaErin Mills, Lib.): Madam Chair, I'll be splitting my time with the member for GlengarryPrescottRussell. During a consultation with the business community in Mississauga, the concerns of businesses, big and small, included the need for stable, affordable and safe child care. With the lack of such child care spaces, an economic recovery plan post-COVID cannot be effective until and unless we make sure that people are able to get back to work. I've heard from parents across Mississauga that they're being forced to stay home because of inadequate child care and that they have to choose between putting food on the table and keeping family safe. More and more employers are realizing that good employees are unable to contribute to their business growth because of this challenge. Now more than ever, we need to find long-term sustainable solutions for Canadians who face challenges with regard to child care. I ask our Minister of Families, Children and Social Development this: What is our strategy to tackle this ever-growing need for a national child care plan? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I thank the honourable member for her question and for her important advocacy and work on this important issue. We understand that child care is important to our economic recovery and our social infrastructure. We know the pressure that COVID-19 has placed on families, especially parents. That is why we're committed to continuing to work with provinces and territories to renew our agreements on early learning and child care, and to provide, at the earliest opportunity, $400 million in support. In addition to that, the Prime Minister has already indicated that child care will be part of the $14-billion pledge to provinces and territories to assist them with respect to COVID-19 recovery efforts. Over the next decade, we will continue to invest $7. 5 billion, and together we have achieved the goal of over 40,000 affordable child care spaces. We are also committed to continuing to create over 250,000 before-school and after-school child care spaces for kids under the age of 10. We will continue to work with our partners in the provinces and territories to ensure that Canadians can continue to have access to safe, quality and affordable child care. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for GlengarryPrescottRussell has the floor. Mr. Francis Drouin (GlengarryPrescottRussell, Lib.): MadamChair, small businesses play a fundamental role in the Canadian economy. In an article in LaPresse, the Minister of Economic Development warned us that the economic crisis caused by severe lockdown measures could have more serious consequences in small municipalities than in large cities. Based on discussions with the chambers of commerce in my riding, it is clear that federal government assistance will be essential for the reopening of the economy, specifically for the rural economy. In fact, I would like to acknowledge the work of the Prescott-Russell community development corporation, under the leadership of John Candie. After announcing almost $57million to help SMEs adopt e-commerce, how does the minister plan to help SMEs and the business community in our rural areas? Hon. Mlanie Joly (Minister of Economic Development and Official Languages): MadamChair, I also thank my colleague from GlengarryPrescottRussell for his important question. Yes, our regions are important and the entrepreneurs in those regions are creative and daring. They take risks, but they are currently facing huge challenges. So we are here for them. We understand their anxiety and we want to help them. That is why we have decided to invest heavily in rural economic development. It is also why we have doubled the budget of CFDCs and Community Futures organizations across the country. In southern Ontario we have reinvested over $260million in the regional economic development agency FedDev. In the great riding of GlengarryPrescottRussell, which I am particularly fond of and where there is a very good member of Parliament, there is an additional $1million for entrepreneurs in the region. We have been, we are and we will be at your side. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for GlengarryPrescottRussell has 36seconds left. No? Then we'll go to the honourable member for ElmwoodTranscona. Mr. Daniel Blaikie (ElmwoodTranscona, NDP): Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with the member for Victoria. Madam Chair, Krystal is a community worker in Winnipeg. She has been working from home since late March, taking care of her child, who is out of school, and caring for her father, who is living with her and vulnerable to COVID-19. Her employer called her up recently and asked her to physically return to work or to take a leave. As a parent and a care provider to a vulnerable person, she's not comfortable with physically returning to work. Service Canada won't give Krystal a straight answer as to whether going on leave and collecting CERB would count as refusing a reasonable job offer. With Bill C-17 looming in the background, Krystal is worried about jail time and fines if she does right by her child and her father by applying for CERB. Can Krystal reasonably refuse to go back to work and collect CERB, or will she be considered a fraudster? That's my question for the minister that is specific to Krystal's case. As well, what is the minister doing to provide clear direction to Canadians and to Service Canada agents so that people can get a clear answer before making their decision about returning to work? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I want to thank the honourable member for his important question. We recognize that Canadian workers will face various different situations, including those who are ineligible for the Canada emergency support benefit. We'll continue to work with workers to make sure they're able to be supported throughout this pandemic. The fact of the matter is that every province has workplace health and safety regulations that must be supported. We understand that workers have the right not to work in unsafe situations. We also understand that many Canadians do want to go back to work; and in fact many have. We will make sure that we support Canadians throughout this recovery process. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member has 47 seconds left, and that includes the answer. Mr. Daniel Blaikie: Madam Chair, that answer is really not good enough, because the problem here is that Krystal needs to know whether she can continue receiving CERB or not. That's a federal government decision, and she needs to know whether the federal government is going to accuse her of fraud and put her in jail or assess fines against her if she refuses to go back to work because she wants to take care of her child and her father. What is the minister's answer to that? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister has 20 seconds to respond. Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that if a Canadian has to take care of a loved one due to circumstances surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, they are indeed eligible to receive the CERB and remain receiving that benefit. Ms. Laurel Collins (Victoria, NDP): As we deal with the global pandemic, we cannot lose sight of the ongoing climate emergency. Canada has missed every single climate target it set, and we need to break the cycle of empty promises. Canadians want their government to be accountable, and environmental groups such as Ecojustice, CAN-Rac, Environmental Defence and West Coast Environmental Law, as well as the government's own climate institute, are all calling for legally binding climate targets. When will the government put its climate targets into law with legally binding milestones so we never miss another target again? Hon. Navdeep Bains (MississaugaMalton, Lib.): Madam Chair, I thank my honourable colleague for her question. I totally agree with her when it comes to the environment. It is a priority not only for us as a government, but it should be a priority for all Canadians. That is why we have put measures in place to put a price on pollution through carbon pricing. That is why we have a comprehensive plan that also includes significant investments in clean technology, which will help reduce our carbon footprint. I am confident that these measures will enable us to not only meet but exceed our 2030 target and also allow us to achieve our net-zero 2050 target. Ms. Laurel Collins: That didn't answer my question. I asked when. Empty promises won't get us any closer to meeting our climate targets. Can the minister tell us when his government will introduce climate accountability laws? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I think the fundamental issue here is having a plan when it comes to the environment. I'm confident that the measures that we have takenputting a price on pollution, investing in clean technology, and other key measures to reduce our carbon footprint, including the investment in infrastructureunderpin a plan The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to the honourable member for Victoria. Ms. Laurel Collins: This government is not meeting its targets, but it is meeting with oil and gas lobbyists. The pandemic has made us reflect on our priorities. Are we going to choose a just recovery with good, sustainable jobs for Canadian workers, or are we going to keep subsidizing oil and gas companies to the tune of billions, subsidies that we know are ending up in the pockets of CEOs and shareholders? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will have a brief answer from the minister. Hon. Navdeep Bains: Again, Madam Chair, this is the fundamental difference between us and the NDP. We fundamentally believe that the entire economy needs to work together, including the energy sector, to enable us to achieve those 2030 and 2050 targets. We are going to work together to support our workers, including in the energy sector, to reduce our carbon footprint. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Now we will go to the honourable member for SaskatoonGrasswood, Mr. Waugh. Mr. Kevin Waugh (SaskatoonGrasswood, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. When I was last here in May, I was on my way back to Saskatoon from Toronto, and there was actually someone on my flight who tested positive for COVID-19. I was never informed of it by the airline. I found out two weeks later. The report was in the news media. Why hasn't the government put rules in place requiring airlines to reach out to individuals like me who may have been exposed to COVID on their flights? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, it's hard to speculate on what happened from such a vague description of his experience, but I will say that we have every confidence in local public health, which is doing the hard and heavy lifting of contact tracing and working very closely with all kinds of different sectors, including airline sectors, to make sure that close contacts of people who have tested positive for COVID-19 are found, are traced and are isolated. I assume that the member took appropriate precautions on the flight and I hope that he continues to do so. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, it was reported that the individual on my plane who had COVID was actually connecting in Toronto from an international flight. The Prime Minister announced last week that they would begin mandating temperature checks for those bound for Canada in July. Will international travellers be tested when they land in Canada, or will they be relying on the tests that take place in other countries? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, this is a very important question, because the protection and safety of all Canadiansin particular, Canadian travellersis a high priority for our government. We've been working very closely with the airlines. At the current time, we are putting temperature screening in place. That will initially be done primarily by the airlines that are in the best position to do it at this point in time. We are also now going to be including CATSA, the people who do the security screening, so that when people enter the airport, they will also be screened. We believe that is going to be the most effective measure to keep all travellers safe. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, last week five of the largest professional sports leagues in North America put out a statement of support for my private member's bill, the safe and regulated sports betting act. Given the struggles that clubs and leagues are facing due to COVID-19, including having no fans at all in the stands for the foreseeable future, the legalization of sports betting would be a welcome opportunity not only to engage fans but to generate much-needed revenue. Will the government commit now to supporting the sports and gaming industries by supporting my private member's bill, Bill C-218? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, I've had the opportunity on many occasions to speak to members of Parliament and also to mayors and councillors and people living in border communities where there are casinos. They've raised this issue a number of times. We've listened very carefully to the concerns that have been expressed by them. I would like to advise the member that I look forward to the opportunity for a careful examination of his bill. We are at all times concerned about maintaining the integrity of the gaming industry within our community. That's the best way to protect Canadians. At the same time, we will examine his bill with all of the necessary attention to make sure it's given full consideration. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, it's the first time in history that we've had the five professional leagues in this country joining together for this bill. Newspapers rely, as we all know, on advertising for a significant portion of their revenue. This includes the usual flyers as well as in-paper ads. I've heard major concerns from a number of newspapers in this country about competition they're receiving today from Canada Post, which is offering massive free postage services. In fact, I have one of their ads here, which says that the first 6,000 pieces of postage are 100% free. If the government is genuine about wanting to ensure that newspapers and journals can succeed in this country, why are you allowing Canada Post to use its monopoly power to actually threaten local newspapers in this country? Hon. Steven Guilbeault (Minister of Canadian Heritage): Thank you, Madame Chair, and I thank the member opposite for his question. As you well know, a healthy news and media sector in Canada is a priority for our government, which is why we have put in place a number of measures before COVID-19 and during COVID-19, and we will continue to be there for them after this crisis has gone by. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Before we go on, we will be taking a break to do a bit of a changeover. I also want to remind members to address their questions and comments to the chair. We will go now to the honourable member for BruceGreyOwen Sound, Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff (BruceGreyOwen Sound, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Mr. Blair stated yesterday here in the House that the AR-15 has been used in mass killings in Canada on many occasions. Mr. Blair, please provide just one specific instance in which an AR-15 was used in a mass killing in Canada. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I remind the member to address questions and comments to the chair. The honourable minister may respond. Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I think this is an excellent opportunity to point out to the member opposite how important it is to actually listen to what was said. If you go back and review that tape, and I would invite you to do so, you'll see that I said the AR-15 and other weapons like themreferring of course to military-style assault weaponshave been used in mass killings, and I actually cited a number of examples. Madam Chair, I think it would be very useful if the member's questions were based on facts. Mr. Alex Ruff: I can remind Mr. Blair that I actually have watched the video a couple of times, and he specifically states that the AR-15 was used in mass killings in Canada, yet he has yet to provide one. My additional question is to Mr. Blair. Out of the recently banned firearms on May 1, how many have been or are still currently in use by the Canadian Armed Forces? Hon. Bill Blair: That's an excellent question, Madam Chair, because it's very important to provide Canadians with clarity. We have prohibited these firearms for non-law enforcement and non-military use. The military uses weapons that were actually designed for soldiers to use in combat to shoot other soldiers. That's the appropriate use of such weapons, Madam Chair. They're not things to be played with in civilian society. Mr. Alex Ruff: As a soldier for 25 years, I'll remind Mr. Blair that none of the currently prohibited firearms would be used in the Canadian Armed Forces. I asked him a question on whether any of them is being or ever has been used in the Canadian Armed Forces. Are any of the recently banned firearms still in use, or have they ever been in use, in any military in the world? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, I think it's important to also recognize that the basic origin, the provenance of the weapons that we have prohibited, was in their original design. They were designed for military use for various military forces around the world. As I've said previously, they were designed for soldiers to use in combat to kill other soldiers. They're very efficient in their design for killing people. They have no purpose in Canadian society. Mr. Alex Ruff: As someone who has used many military-style firearms and who is actually involved in helping define what we purchase in the military, I would use none of the ones that are currently prohibited. I have a question, Chair, for Minister MacAulay. Can he please confirm whether Veterans Affairs has a plan to address the claims backlog, yes or no? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (Minister of Veterans Affairs): Madam Chair, I appreciate my honourable colleague's question, and yes, we've indicated that it's a major priority. That's why I'm so pleased that the supplementary estimates contained just under $90 million to address hiring more staff, improving the process and making sure that we attack the backlog in an appropriate manner. Mr. Alex Ruff: Madame Chair, does that plan exist in written form? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Well, Madam Chair, I can assure you that it's in the supplementary estimates, and of course, this money is The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We'll go back to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff: The question is about the plan, not how much money has been allocated. I am asking for the written plan on how to address the backlog. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Madam Chair, I can tell my honourable colleague that the money is in the supplementary estimates, and with the money we're able to attack this problem in an appropriate manner, and that's what is important for our veterans. Mr. Alex Ruff: The deputy minister committed on March 10 that a written plan would be provided to the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs within a month and made public. Did the deputy minister or the department provide the minister that plan within a month? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Madame Chair, I'm sure my honourable colleague wants an appropriate plan and he would be fully aware this just under $90 million would make a big difference in the plan to attack the backlog. We The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We'll go back to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff: Thank you, Chair. Therefore, my question is, if the deputy minister in the department provided him with an appropriate plan or a written plan, why is he questioning how appropriate that plan is? I have complete confidence in the deputy minister's ability to produce a written plan. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister may give a brief answer, please. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I can assure my honourable colleague that with the appropriate funding, we will address the backlog in Veterans Affairs. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Parry SoundMuskoka, Mr. Aitchison. Mr. Scott Aitchison: Thank you, Madam Chair. My question is about summer camps again. Three weeks ago, I asked this government if the finance minister would meet with the beleaguered summer camp sector. Summer camps, which are a social and economic mainstay in Parry SoundMuskoka and all of northern Ontario, have been crippled by the global pandemic. It's costing millions of jobs, and some camps are actually in danger of folding. Aside from a brief follow-up conversation over the phone with the junior minister, there has still been no action from this government. When will the Minister of Finance meet with summer camps to find a solution? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I recognize the honourable member's important question and his focus on summer camps. We recognize the importance of looking at that and paying attention to the needs of that community. We will continue to engage with them, as we have, to ensure and find ways in which we can get their feedback and find ways in which we can support them. That work is ongoing, and I assure the honourable member that our focus is on the kids and on ensuring that they have access to summer camps for this year. Mr. Scott Aitchison: I don't know why you need to find ways to get feedback. The summer camps association has given lots of feedback and my office has given lots of feedback, so I don't see what's confusing about this. However, I've become accustomed to not really getting answers to questions, so I will go to the next one. The Ontario government's regional reopening plan permits cruise boats to resume on Georgian Bay, yet the federal government is refusing to allow these vessels to operate until July 1. Therefore, small businesses such as the Island Queen cruiser in Parry Sound, which has only a very few precious weeks to operate in the first place, is losing yet another two weeks because of federal inaction. This not only hurts the cruise boat industry but also hurts tourism and small businesses all through our area. Will the Minister of Transport take a regional approach himself by lifting the federal ban on Georgian Bay, just like the Province of Ontario has done? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister may reply. Is there a response? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, there is. I apologize for the confusion. Let me respond, if I may, on behalf of the Minister of Transport. There have been a number of very important discussions with the provinces, in particular with the Province of Ontario, around provisions regarding pleasure craft. There are certain restrictions that will come to an end on June 30. We're working very closely with our provincial counterparts to address this issue, but we want to ensure that it will be done safely. Mr. Scott Aitchison: Madam Chair, I actually gave the minister a heads-up that I would be asking that question. He sent me an email today saying he was not going to be able to be in the House, and it's great of him to do that. He said that whoever was going to fill in for him would have an answer, but again, that was not really an answer. The next issue I would like to bring this government's attention to is the deplorable state of rural Internet service in Parry SoundMuskoka. Quite simply, there are too many gaps in service, and what is available is generally way too expensive. We have families trying to work and teach their kids from home on unreliable and outrageously expensive Internet service, and we have too many small businesses that either cannot access or afford reliable Internet services. Today Greg Rickford, the Ontario energy minister, and Laurie Scott, Ontario Minister of Infrastructure, announced $2. 3 million for seven northern Ontario broadband projects. Minister, will when your government get serious and become a reliable partner for the Government of Ontario and the private sector to deliver this crucial modern-day infrastructure to rural Canadians? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I remind the member that he needs to address the questions and comments to the chair. The honourable minister may reply. Hon. Maryam Monsef (Minister for Women and Gender Equality and Rural Economic Development): Madam Chair, in the best of times, life without access to high-speed Internet is hard. During a pandemic, the challenges are that much more pronounced. Our government's unprecedented investments are already connecting a million more Canadian households to this essential service, but until we achieve universal access our work is not done. We will work with our partners, including provinces across the country, to connect every Canadian household to high-quality Internet access that is affordable and reliable. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member has 30 seconds. Mr. Scott Aitchison: I think I can squeeze something in here, then. I'm wondering, then, Madam Chair, since the Province of Ontario has used the Northern Ontario Heritage Corporation Fund to make this announcement, what about using FedNor to make the same kind of announcement, and partner with the province? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister has a brief answer. Hon. Mlanie Joly: Obviously we believe in the importance of northern Ontario; that's why we nearly doubled the budget of FedNor. We will continue to invest in businesses and people all around Parry Sound, Muskoka and northern Ontario. If my colleague has specific projects in mind, please come and see me and let's have a conversation. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for Montmagny-L'Islet-KamouraskaRivire-du-Loup, Mr. Gnreux, has the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux (MontmagnyL'IsletKamouraskaRivire-du-Loup, CPC): Thank you, MadamChair. I will continue along the same lines as my colleague. During this pandemic, we are realizing the extent to which reliable high-speed Internet service is needed for Canada's economy. There are still places where telework is not possible today because of the lack of adequate coverage. However, since2015, the government has committed to addressing the situation through three new programs. Benot Pilotto, who is the mayor of Saint-Onsime-d'Ixworth, in my riding, wrote to me a few days ago. That is why I am asking you what concrete results the government plans to achieve for our rural areas by the end of the year. Hon. Maryam Monsef: At the best of times, life without high-speed Internet access is difficult. During a pandemic, the difficulties are even greater. Our government's unprecedented investments are already connecting an additional one million Canadian households to this essential service. However, until we achieve universal access, our job is not done. We are working The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Gnreux, you have the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, I am simply asking the minister to tell me when the mayor of Saint-Onsime-d'Ixworth will be able to tell his residents when the Internet will be available in his municipality. It is not complicated. What does the government plan to do so that rural municipalities across Canada can have access to the Internet as soon as possible? What is its plan? Hon. Maryam Monsef: We are working with partners across the country to ensure that every Canadian household is connected to a high-quality, accessible and affordable high-speed Internet service. Madam Chair, I assure my colleagues that we share the same goal, and we will work with all our partners across the country to ensure every Canadian household has access The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Gnreux, you have the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, I am still not getting a specific answer. According to the government's plan, when will rural Canadian businesses and households be connected? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I would ask the honourable minister to provide a brief answer. Hon. Maryam Monsef: Madam Chair, those plans are under way, and we will have more to share in the coming days. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: It seems that the Minister of Rural Economic Development plans to announce a new plan this week. Can she tell us how this program will differ from the Connect to Innovate program, which is already in place? Can the minister tell us whether her program will solve the problem of the 25square kilometre hexagonal zones, which unfortunately make many projects ineligible for the CRTC's broadband fund? Hon. Maryam Monsef: Madam Chair, I'm pleased to share with my colleague that the model he's referring to, the hexagon model, is no more. Our maps are much more precise now to ensure that we do not leave Canadians behind. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, this year, the Canada summer jobs program is a real fiasco. I think all my colleagues will agree with me. On May13,100jobs were announced in my riding; on May20,16jobs were announced; on May27,13jobs were announced; on June3,12jobs were announced; and on June10, only one job was announced. As we speak, an amount of $100,000 is still to be confirmed in my riding. Can we have an announcement, once and for all? Let's stop the piecemeal announcements and finally confirm the remaining jobs today so that our organizations can have young people before the summer starts on the weekend. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable minister. Hon. Ahmed Hussen: MadamChair, I thank the honourable member for his question. We recognize the important role that the Canada summer jobs program is playing in supporting employers and young workers in communities right across the country. Our government is working very hard to help employers adapt to the realities of the COVID-19 pandemic, and at the same time is supporting young Canadians as they begin to look for summer employment. We've introduced flexibilities into the program to ensure that more young workers have opportunities to get employed. The honourable member also has to understand that we're in the COVID-19 pandemic, and as such it will take some time for businesses to equip themselves to hire students. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for NanaimoLadysmith, Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly (NanaimoLadysmith, GP): Thank you, Madam Chair. In the first five months of this year, 554 B. C. residents died from opioid overdoses. They were teachers, construction workers, business owners, family members, neighbours and friends. Addiction is a health and social issue, but criminalization creates stigma, so people hide their drug use and die alone. Access to a safe supply of drugs and safe injection sites saves lives and puts addicts in daily contact with people who can help them. Will this government end the war on drugs by decriminalizing them, providing a safe supply and reallocating resources from policing addicts to providing treatment for them? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, I think it's really important we make sure that when we speak about people who use substances, we remove stigmatizing language like the word addict. We can stand together, as this government has, with people who use substances and their families to ensure a range of options for people who are struggling with addiction, who are using substances in a way that is harming their health and their communities. As you know, we have restored harm reduction to the Canadian drugs and substances strategy. We've made it easier for people to access safe supplies of substances. We've increased access to treatment and the variety of treatment through federal transfers to provinces and territories. Madam Chair, we're working with communities to make sure there are more community-based approaches to treating The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, the Geneva Convention considers both tear gas and pepper spray to be chemical weapons and prohibits their use in war, yet our police forces use these weapons on Canadian civilians. These weapons are indiscriminate and can affect peaceful protestors and innocent bystanders. Will the government prohibit the use of these weapons and require police to use de-escalation techniques to keep legal protests peaceful? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, the right to peaceful protest in this country is a constitutionally protected right. We want to ensure it's always respected. At the same time, Madam Chair, we recognize that the use of even less than lethal force can have significant impacts on people's safety. This is a highly regulated substance in Canada. It's prohibited for non-police use, and for the police it is and should be highly regulated. The RCMP have advised me they have not used tear gas in nine years. We'll continue to monitor it to ensure that peaceful protest is always respected. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, in 2012 the RCMP spent $14 million on 18 armoured personnel carriers. One's parked at the Nanaimo detachment. I can't imagine why we have weapons of war like this for policing civilians. Will the government rein in the RCMP budget and end wasteful spending on militarizing our civilian police forces? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, it's a very important tradition that our Canadian police are not militarized. At the same time, we've seen a number of tragedies when police have responded to situations in which people were armed with weapons designed for soldiers to kill soldiers, and they've been used to kill police officers. The militarization of our society, so strongly promoted by some, is the direct consequence of the militarization of the police. As we remove these weapons from our society and prohibit them, we'll make it safer for everyone and we can then move away from such a model of policing. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, the government spent $4. 5 billion to buy an old, leaky pipeline. Since 1961, there have been 82 reported spills from the Trans Mountain pipeline. Over 1. 5 million litres of crude oil has spilled into the surrounding environment. This weekend, the Trans Mountain pipeline leaked again, dumping 190,000 litres of oil. How much is this spill going to cost Canadian taxpayers to clean up? How much contingency funding has been budgeted to repair the environmental destruction from spills? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I want to thank the honourable colleague for his question. He full well knows that the acquisition that we made with regard to the TMX initiative is a reflection of the fact that we want this initiative to move forward in a sustainable manner and in a manner that protects the environment. I'll continue to work with my colleagues to endeavour to make sure that we have the appropriate processes in place to protect the environment and at the same time create good-quality, middle-class jobs for Canadians. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for RosemontLa PetitePatrie, Mr. Boulerice, has the floor. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice (RosemontLa Petite-Patrie, NDP): Thank you, MadamChair. The Black Lives Matter movement is right to discuss systemic racism in our societies. In Montreal, the city and the police department have recognized this, and measures will be put in place. The Liberal government, once again, is all talk and no walk. Although it spends $10million a day, we see no attempt to reform or change the RCMP. If the Prime Minister really wants to act, why is he delaying the action plan in response to the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls? Hon. Bill Blair: Let me assure this House and the member opposite that we're not dragging our feet. This is an important issue. Indigenous people, black Canadians and other racialized people are far too often experiencing systemic racism and disparate outcomes through the criminal justice system. It's incumbent upon all of us who work within the criminal justice system to take the steps and actions necessary to produce more equitable outcomes. All police services, including the RCMP, must be committed to ensuring that the people they're sworn to serve and protect are always treated with dignity and respect. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: MadamChair, why are the Liberals taking indigenous children to court to challenge the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal ruling in their favour? Hon. Marc Miller (Minister of Indigenous Services): Madam Chair, as the honourable member knows full well, a number of cases are pending, and we are currently negotiating with the parties. We are making progress, and I would be delighted to tell the member and the House about it in response to a later question. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: We've been asking questions about it for months, and as I see it, we should keep doing so. The Prime Minister's new pipeline, which taxpayers were forced to buy with their hard-earned money, has leaked. Some 190,000litres of oil spilled, and we can't even make the company pay for it because the Liberals bought the pipeline. Trans-Mountain, KeystoneXL and the resumption of gas exploration and development off the coast of Newfoundland and Labradorare these the projects the Liberals had in mind for their green recovery? Hon. Navdeep Bains: I'd like to thank the honourable member for his question. Our priority was to protect the health and safety of Canadians throughout the pandemic, especially when it comes to the environment. That's why environmental and climate change laws aimed at protecting the environment, human health and conservation will remain in force. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: Across Quebec, the cultural community is going through a harrowing time. Unions, associations, artists and creators have all taken part in public demonstrations recently to condemn the lack of a specific plan for the living arts, performing arts and festival sector. What is the government waiting for? Hon. Steven Guilbeault: I'd like to thank the member for his question. However, I strongly disagree with him. We haven't waited to develop a plan for the arts and culture sector. We listened to the community and we tailored our supports, as they were announced. We have an emergency plan for the arts and culture sector. We were asked to adapt the CERB to take royalties into account, and we did. We were asked to extend the CERB, and we did. We are fully aware that the recovery will take longer in the arts and culture sector. We have been there, we are there and we will be there for the arts and culture sector. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: Well, that wasn't at all what the artists and creators who were out demonstrating in the streets a few days ago thought. They were protesting on the weekend. The CERB extension announced by the government only brings us to September, but the cultural community is expecting the worst in the fall. What is the government's long-term plan to support creators and their entire teams? Hon. Steven Guilbeault: I'm not so sure those who were protesting last week had issues with our government, but we'd certainly be happy to speak with them. As for a long-term plan, we are currently consulting arts and culture stakeholders to contemplate together how the government can help the sector in response to the ongoing crisis. We are working on finding solutions, but until we have long-term solutions, we have seen to it that our artists and organizations have access to funding until September. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for BeauportLimoilou, Mrs. Vignola, has the floor. Mrs. Julie Vignola (BeauportLimoilou, BQ): Madam Chair, I will be sharing my time with the member for Montcalm. According to the latest news, Seaspan Shipyards will be spending an additional $1. 5billion to build two ships. Why? Because the ships were ordered in 2011 and still haven't been delivered. Davie built the Asterix without going over budget because it delivered the ship on time. Davie is currently the top shipyard, representing 50% of Canada's shipbuilding capacity. Why isn't Davie being awarded its fair share of contracts? Hon. Anita Anand (Minister of Public Services and Procurement): I'd like to thank the member for her question. Davie is certainly a strong and trusted partner that works very hard to help our government get results for Canadians. Building a new class of ships is highly complex, and it's not unusual for cost estimates to change throughout the procurement project. It's important to make sure additional funding is available for the joint support ships project to ensure the navy's vessels are delivered. Mrs. Julie Vignola: We are talking about $1. 5billion, here. In the beginning, eight years ago, the project was supposed to cost $2. 6billion. There can't be much missing when the cost overrun is double the initial estimate. Why haven't the ships been delivered yet? Why is Davie still not seen as a trusted partner? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Minister, please keep your answer brief. Hon. Anita Anand: Once again, I would point out that building a new class of ships is highly complex, and it's not unusual for the cost estimate to change for a procurement project as large as this one. I know that Davie works very hard, and we also believe it is an outstanding partner. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): It is now over to the honourable member for Montcalm, Mr. Thriault. Mr. Luc Thriault (Montcalm, BQ): Madam Chair, in Quebec, 12,000people have begun their training to work in residential and long-term care centres. They will be ready for duty in mid-September. In the meantime, we need the support of the army, which is helping us save lives. The dedication of the members of the armed forces is paramount, and I want to extend my heartfelt thanks. The government extended their mission until June26, which is only 10days away. What does the army have to do right now that is more important than helping our caregivers save lives? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, I'm glad my fellow member recognizes the fundamental role the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces have played and continue to play in residential and long-term care centres and many other areas in support of our seniors. We are in talks with the Quebec government. The discussions around providing continued assistance to Quebec are quite positive and productive. That assistance can take many forms, including the Red Cross. We will be there for our seniors, Madam Chair. Mr. Luc Thriault: We are short 12,000people, so if the Red Cross wants to help us, all the better. We'll take all the help we can get. Barely 800members of the military are still in Quebec. I repeat my question: What does the army have to do 10days from now that is more important if it's not to help caregivers save lives? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, all the members of the military are still in Quebec. They have done absolutely incredible work and are continuing to do so. The people at the Canadian Red Cross are well-trained paid workers who can perform the same work in partnership with the members of the armed forces, who can stay in Quebec as well. Right now, we are working with the Quebec government and discussing how we can keep the measure in place until September15. Mr. Luc Thriault: Madam Chair, our nurses and orderlies are exhausted. They're at the end of their ropes. Now is the time to thank them, not the time to turn our backs on them. It's not the time for dilly-dallying or discussions. It's the time to tell them that we will be there to help them until the end. I will repeat my question. What does the army have to do that is more important than helping caregivers save the lives of those who built Quebec? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The Leader of the Government in the House of Commons is asked to keep his answer brief. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, the Government of Canada is there and will continue to be there to help the people who built Quebec. The Government of Canada will work with the Quebec government to make that happen. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for Red DeerMountain View, Mr. Dreeshen. Mr. Earl Dreeshen (Red DeerMountain View, CPC): Thank you so much. Madam Chair, on May 14 I asked the Minister of Agriculture when the Liberal government would put aside its usual campaign rhetoric and recognize the very detrimental impact the carbon tax is having on farmers across this country. Minister Bibeau proudly noted that according to their data, the average cost of the carbon tax per farm across Canada is $210 to $819. We know that these numbers are completely unfounded and are not based on any factual evidence. The fact is that the Liberal government's own Parliamentary Budget Officer has estimated that at $25 per tonne, the cost for an 855-acre crop farm in Alberta is well over $6,000. The office came up with that using the government's statistics from the 2016 agricultural census. Madam Chair, the evidence is right in front of the minister. When will this Liberal government come clean with Canadians and recognize the disastrous impact the carbon tax is having on Canada's critical agriculture and agri-food sector? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food): Madam Chair, our pollution pricing policy is designed to grow a clean economy. To support this sector, we have put in place the following measures. Emissions from livestock and crop production are not priced. Farm fuels and fuels from cardlock facilities are exempt, and there is a partial rebate for propane and natural gas used in commercial greenhouses. Our government has been very open and transparent about our pollution pricing plan. We will do a review of our pollution pricing system in 2020, focused on competitiveness issues in trade-exposed industries such as agriculture. It is also important to remember that this is about tackling climate change and that 100% of the revenues stay in the province. We will continue to support our farmers and food processors as they provide an essential service across Canada. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Madam Chair, Minister Bibeau keeps talking about wanting to protect Canadians'environment. Well, the truth is that Canada's farmers, ranchers and processors have for years demonstrated their ability to deliver meaningful reductions in emissions and to safeguard the environment through the adoption of new technologies, education and innovative management practices, but the government ignores these efforts. Will the minister at the very least admit to Canadians that Canadian farmers are unable to pass on the cost of the carbon tax to consumers and instead have to absorb those extra costs out of their own pockets? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Madam Chair, allow me to explain again our government's position on pollution pricing. The price and method were developed so we could build an increasingly clean economy. We put a number of measures in place to help the agriculture sector. Emissions from animal and plant production aren't taxed. Farm fuels and fuels delivered to off-farm points-of-sale are also Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you, Madam Chair. I do have another question. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I am watching the time, Mr. Dreeshan. You have a couple more seconds. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you. Madam Chair, Minister Bibeau has repeatedly asked stakeholders to send her data about the impacts of the carbon tax on farmers, so this is exactly what they have been doing. The Atlantic Grains Council, the Grain Farmers of Ontario, Producteurs de grains du Qubec and the Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association issued a joint statement at the beginning of this year in which they estimated that the cumulative indirect inflation of carbon tax on farm costs will be $14. 50 an acre this year, with that cost escalating by more than double by 2022 to almost $30 an acre. These are huge numbers. Why does the Liberal government continue to ignore the facts presented to it and continue to misrepresent the truth to Canadians? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Madame Chair, I can assure you that we have paid close attention to all the information that has been provided to us and that our calculation was also based on this information provided by provinces and different stakeholders. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Our government has been very open and transparent about our pollution pricing plan. The department used data from stakeholders and provinces Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you very much, Madam Chair Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: as well as the 2019 agricultural tax data to estimate the average cost of pollution pricing associated with grain drying at up to 0. 4% of overall operating costs. It is important to remember that we have put in place many special provisions Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Madam Chair Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: like exempting farm fuel and providing other financial supports for farmers. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Dreeshen, I am watching the time, and the minister is allowed to answer for the same amount of time that you used to ask the question. Therefore, I would hope that we would allow her to finish. She has finished, and unfortunately the time is up. The committee now stands adjourned until tomorrow at noon.

As John Williamson, the member from New Brunswick Southwest mentioned, what Service Canada had done was far from enough. Service Canada should be responsible for helping their people to adjust to the post-pandemic situation more quickly and recovering the national economy. The government members tried to persuade him that the government was doing a lot to make the revenue condition clear to the public, and their support fund was already prepared. Also in terms of the support fund, Bergeron went on to ask for a closer cooperation between Canadian government and Quebec to guarantee the regional development and stability during the pandemic.

tr-sq-1255

tr-sq-1255_0

Why did John Williamson disagree with the government when putting forward inquiries towards Service Canada? The Chair (Hon. Anthony Rota (NipissingTimiskaming, Lib.) ): I call this meeting to order. Welcome to the 23rd meeting of the House of Commons Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic. A reminder to all members that in order to avoid issues with sound, members participating in person should not also be connected to the video conference. For those of you who are joining via video conference, I will remind you that when speaking you should be on the same channel as the language you are speaking, and please use your headsets. As usual, please direct your remarks through the chair. As I understand, there are no ministerial announcements today. We will now proceed to presenting petitions. I remind members that any petition presented during a meeting of this special committee must have already been certified by the clerk of petitions. For members participating in person, I ask that they please come and drop their signed certificates off at the table once the petition is presented. I would ask members to be very brief and concise, and to summarize the exact content of the petition. We will continue. The first person presenting a petition today is Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May (SaanichGulf Islands, GP): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I present two petitions this morning. The residents of SaanichGulf Islands are calling on the government to simplify the process for protection of marine protected areas. It's a multi-layered communication process. The marine protected area first proposed in the 1970s for the southern Strait of Georgia, now called the Salish Sea, has been awaiting designation for so long that it was originally endorsed by Jacques Cousteau. That gives us a sense for why petitioners are calling for a simplified and more rapid process. The second petition is from petitioners who are very concerned about our obligations under the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and our commitments under the Truth and Reconciliation Commission calls to action. They specifically reference the RCMP violation of UNDRIP in its actions on Wet'suwet'en territory and ask the government to commit to actually living the principles embodied in UNDRIP. The Chair: We will now go to Mr. Hardie. Mr. Ken Hardie (FleetwoodPort Kells, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am presenting a petition on behalf of the one in a million Canadians who suffer severe and adverse effects from vaccinations. GuillainBarre syndrome is very debilitating, and this petition seeks the setting up of a no-fault accident or compensation system to help offset the loss of work, the loss of wages and the loss of quality of life that many of these people suffer. I'm pleased to present this petition pursuant to Standing Order 36. The Chair: Mr. Trudel, you have the floor. Mr. Denis Trudel (LongueuilSaint-Hubert, BQ): Mr. Chair, culture is the soul of a people. Over the past 20years or so, culture, especially music, has never been as accessible as it is now. Paradoxically, creators'incomes have never been so low. The advent of digital technology has completely overturned the system for distributing the wealth generated by creators for the benefit of various Web stakeholders, many of whom are billionaires. This petition addresses these problems and proposes realistic solutions. The first is to set a minimum royalty model for streaming platforms for artists. The second is to update the existing private copying system. The third is for Internet and cell phone providers who sell their services as direct access to culture to share their profits with artists. The fourth is that the GAFAMs have to pay taxes on their services. Six thousand people have already signed the first version of this petition, launched last month by musician JordanOfficer and supported by singer BarbaraSecours. As an artist, I am proud to present this petition today because the issues it raises are fundamental to the survival of Quebec culture. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood ParkFort Saskatchewan, CPC): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I have four petitions to present today. I will be as brief as you suggested, although I will observe that if some members are going on longer during petitions than they normally do, it might be because the government has taken away so many of the tools that opposition members normally have for raising important issues in the House. The first petition deals with the issue of euthanasia and long-term care. The petitioners are concerned that instead of focusing on improving medically assisted life, something that we know is a major issue in light of recent revelations, the government has put so much time and legislative energy into efforts to continually further expand euthanasia in Canada and remove vital safeguards. The second petition speaks to the ongoing conversations happening in Canada around systemic discrimination and systemic racism. I think we do need to reflect on systemic discrimination. This petition deals specifically with Bill 21 in Quebec and raises concerns. The reality of the way that bill applies is that people from certain backgrounds who wish to practise their faith are not able to fully participate in Canadian society if they are employed in the public service. This petition asks the government to provide a response on that issue, something it hasn't done in response to past petitions on this. The third petition deals with the issue of firearms. The petitioners want to see the government take a strong response in dealing with illegal guns and gun smuggling. The petition notes that the vast majority of firearms-related crimes in Canada involves illegal guns. At the same time, the petitioners are concerned that the government has the wrong focusthat is, harassing law-abiding firearms ownerswithout putting in place substantial measures to deal with illegal guns. The petitioners want to see the reversal of the order in council from May 1 and strong measures to deal with illegal firearms. The fourth and final petition deals with Bill S-204, a bill that would make it a criminal offence for a Canadian to go abroad and receive an organ from a person who has not consented to giving that organ. It would also create a mechanism by which someone could be deemed inadmissible to Canada if they were involved in organ harvesting and trafficking. The petitioners are supportive of Bill S-204 and of similar bills in previous parliaments and would like to see us pass that bill as soon as possible. The Chair: Presenting petitions, Mr. Lamoureux. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Winnipeg North, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. It is with pleasure that I table another petition by the residents of Winnipeg North. These residents have signed a petition asking the Government of Canada, and in fact all members of Parliament, to put a high priority on assisting our poorest seniors. The increases to the GIS by $200, and $300 to the OAS, have been well received. They just want to highlight how important it is to support our seniors, in particular the poorest of our seniors. The Chair: For members present in the Chamber, a reminder that they are asked to bring their petitions to the table. We'll now proceed to statements by members. We'll go to Ms. Atwin for the first one. Mrs. Jenica Atwin (Fredericton, GP): Thank you, Mr. Chair. June 21 is National Indigenous Peoples Day, a day of acknowledgement and a day of celebration of the beautiful diversity of indigenous peoples across Turtle Island. I wish to recognize the leadership of Chief Shelley Sabattis of the Welamukotuk First Nation in Oromocto, New Brunswick. Each year she and her council, volunteers and staff go above and beyond to show appreciation for their members and to demonstrate pride and culture while promoting well-being. We gather in an event where all are welcome to take part, from traditional hand drum-making with elders to moose meat and tacos. This year we will celebrate a bit differently, but we will still stay connected, virtually and in spirit, to the vast network of indigenous peoples and allies. We need each other now more than ever. May we come together in song and stories and in solidarity. We will remember those who are not among us. I hope all of Canada will join us in observing National Indigenous Peoples Day. Mawiyapasuwok: let us come together. Nit liech. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Beech. Mr. Terry Beech (Burnaby NorthSeymour, Lib.): Mr. Chair, COVID-19 is an unprecedented challenge for all communities across Canada, but as we do our part to flatten the curve, I often think about those who suit up every morning to serve on the front lines of our health care system. My mother is a home care worker and my sister is a nurse. Even before the crisis, they would often share the hardships they faced on a day-to-day basis. It's a tough job at the best of times. In a pandemic, these jobs are life-threatening. I think we can all agree that these workers deserve more than our good wishes. They deserve a raise. That is why we have worked with the provinces to implement pandemic pay. In British Columbia more than 250,000 front-line workers are eligible for this program. That works out to a pay increase of about $4 an hour. It's a small show of our appreciation for their difficult and priceless contribution to our country. Share this message and say thanks to our front-line workers, participate in the 7 p. m. cheer, and order a pizza for your local nurses. It's the least we can do. The Chair: We'll now go on to Mr. Shipley. Mr. Doug Shipley (BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. We've been living in difficult times. Slowly, we are getting back to some resemblance of normalcy, although unfortunately not soon enough for some of our great summer festivals. It will not be normal in BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte this summer without the iconic Boots and Hearts weekend music festival, Kempenfest, Oro World's Fair, the Elmvale Fall Fair, or the Midhurst Autumnfest. Canada Day celebrations have been cancelled, but we can still celebrate the great nation we call home. Because of the lack of Canada Day celebrations, I've created Happy Canada Day lawn signs that are available through my constituency office, free to all residents of BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte. I'm also hosting a drive-through party on Canada Day at the Royal Canadian Legion on St. Vincent Street in Barrie. All are welcome to attend. There will be cupcakes for all. Please drop by the legion between 11 a. m. and 2 p. m. , and we can celebrate Canada Day safely together. Thank you and have a great summer. The Chair: Now we'll go on to Ms. Young. Ms. Kate Young (London West, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Among the countless ordinary Canadians who have stepped up to do extraordinary work during COVID-19, I wish to draw attention to our teachers. Teachers have always had a special place in my heart. My father was a teacher, and my daughter-in-law, Kelly Webb, is one now. I'm certain that my colleagues can all easily remember a teacher in their past who played an important role in helping them achieve their potential. I remember my grade 12 English teacher, Vince Weaver, at Westminster Secondary School in London. He made me realize that I could do so much more than I believed. Across the country, as schools closed, teachers did not stop their work. Some took their classes online. Others found innovative ways to continue engaging with their students. This is not the school year anyone imagined, and what the next one will look like is unclear, but our teachers in London West and across Canada have shown that no matter what, they will be there to help our next generation shine. The Chair: Before proceeding to the next presenter, I just want to remind the honourable members in the chamber that I realize that the six-foot limit makes it harder to whisper to each other, but we're hearing a bit of rumble, so I just want you to try to whisper at your best. Mr. Bergeron, you have the floor. Mr. Stphane Bergeron (Montarville, BQ): Mr. Chair, on July1st, we will be celebrating one of the most important events for the riding of Montarville: the 175thanniversary of the city of Saint-Bruno-de-Montarville. The theme Proud of our traditions will be the focus of this celebration for the people of Montarville. This is a good illustration of the rich history of this municipality nestled in the western foothills of Mont-Saint-Bruno. The seigneury of Montarville was granted in1710 to the illustrious former governor of Trois-Rivires, PierreBoucher. The parish of Saint-Bruno, which took root there and in which a village grew, became a municipal corporation in1845. To this day, it is one of the most prosperous localities, with a strong sense of belonging, a very dynamic community life and jealously preserved natural environments. A whole program had been drawn up for the celebration, but the current health crisis has taken over some of the planned activities, which has in no way diminished the pride and festive spirit of the people of Montarville. On July1st, we will have a good reason to be proud, in spite of everything. Happy 175thanniversary to Saint-Bruno-de-Montarville. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Maloney. Mr. James Maloney (EtobicokeLakeshore, Lib.): Mr. Chair, thank you for allowing me to take a moment to highlight an initiative that I started early on during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Heroes of EtobicokeLakeshore is an opportunity for citizens in my riding to recognize the contributions of those in their community who make life a bit easier. I'm pleased with the number of nominations I received that honour everyone from front-line workers to businesses that are innovating in these difficult times to volunteers who are finding new ways to reach out. I think of Daniel Lauzon who set up Food for Now, a mobile service that helps take care of the homeless. I think of Toni Varone, who helped his business clients by forgiving their rents, or young Lucas, who wanted to thank his teachers. I've been moved and inspired by the countless stories of generosity, strength, resiliency, kindness, incredible character and creativity. I want to thank all the heroes, as well as the people who nominated them. Keep them coming. Stay safe, everyone, and I wish you happy Canada Day early. The Chair: We'll now move on to Ms. Wong. Hon. Alice Wong (Richmond Centre, CPC): Mr. Chair, it gives me great pleasure to thank a local Richmond-based charity, the Social Diversity for Children Foundation, SDC, for its hard work both in raising funds for the purchase of personal protective equipment and in distributing this PPE to long-term care facilities and individual seniors'homes in the lower mainland of B. C. The COVID-19 relief fund is supported by a dozen other non-profits, businesses and community groups. Over the past two months, SDC has been to 32 seniors homes and senior-related organizations. In total, it has delivered masks to 7,000 care workers, staff and seniors. It is amazing to have witnessed how the younger generation have gotten involved in caring for the elderly at this very challenging time. The Chair: We'll now go to Ms. Damoff. Ms. Pam Damoff (Oakville NorthBurlington, Lib.): Mr. Chair, June is ALS Awareness Month, and 79 years after Lou Gehrig died from ALS little has changed. There's still no cure, and those with ALS typically die within five years of diagnosis. On June 21, Canadians will gather virtually to raise funds for ALS Canada in the Walk to End ALS. In Halton, normally we meet each year at Bronte Creek Provincial Park on the May long weekend to raise funds for ALS Canada. This year I will virtually join Tim's Titans, a team formed to honour Tim Robertson, my friend who died in 2016 after living with ALS for 13 years. I have a T-shirt, with a picture of Lou Gehrig, that says, Great Player. . . Lousy Disease and Tim's Titans. . . Great Team! ALS. . . Still a Lousy Disease. Join me on June 21 for the virtual Walk to End ALS to raise funds to support patients and their families and for ALS research. The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Khera. Ms. Kamal Khera (Brampton West, Lib.): Mr. Chair, on Saturday our community stood and marched in solidarity against anti-black racism. The peaceful protests that we're seeing across the country and around the world were not triggered by an isolated incident. They are fuelled by decades of ineffective action against something that is so insidious and deeply entrenched in our history, systems and institutions. For us, that is the racial inequality faced by Canada's indigenous and black communities. Anti-black racism is real. It exists right here in Canada, in our communities, including in Brampton. It exists when racialized students at McCrimmon Middle School are called McCriminals. It exists when a shocking report exposes the Peel District School Board's failure to work fairly with the black community. It exists when D'Andre Campbell, who was fighting mental illness, loses his life at the hands of the police. It is clear that we need reform. We need to dismantle the systems that allow this privilege and oppression to take form, and address the unconscious bias plaguing our institutions. We'll need to be bold, and the time to do that is now. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd (Sturgeon RiverParkland, CPC): Mr. Chair, a few months ago I rose in the House on the eve of our closure due to COVID-19. I told Canadians we must not give in to fear, that we would carry on and get through this crisis stronger than ever. Today, in this city and across Canada, Canadians are enjoying a beer on their favourite patios. Businesses are reopening, jobs are returning and our lives are starting to feel a bit normal again. Canadians pulled together, and because of that we did not see the devastating death toll that many had predicted. Life may be returning to normal, but unfortunately, here in this chamber of democracy, the people's voices continue to be shut down. There is no good reason for Parliament to be suspended today. In the words of my grandfather, it's time for the Liberals to get with the program and bring back the House. The Chair: We will now proceed with Ms. Jones. Ms. Yvonne Jones (Labrador, Lib.): Mr. Chair, from in-person learning to virtual classrooms, COVID-19 has drastically changed the lives of students across the country, especially those in post-secondary education who are worried about covering costs like tuition or rent this coming fall. Our government recognized that students should not have to worry or put their futures on pause during this difficult time. That's why last month the federal government introduced the Canada emergency student benefit. If you're a high school student headed to a post-secondary school, or a current post-secondary student or a recent graduate, you can receive the Canada emergency student benefit every four weeks and have the financial support that you need to save for school. We also doubled Canada student grants and loans, enhanced the student loan program, increased supports for indigenous post-secondary education and introduced the Canada student service grant for those who wish to pursue it. Our government is here to help all students get the support they need to pursue their future goals successfully. I wish them all the very best, and I wish all of you, my colleagues and those across Canada, a very happy National Indigenous Peoples Day, which is coming up on June 21. The Chair: I want to remind the honourable members to keep to their 60 seconds so that we don't go over the time. I'm sure it would be a lot easier for everyone if we stuck to that limit. We will now go to Mr. Aitchison. Mr. Scott Aitchison (Parry SoundMuskoka, CPC): Mr. Chair, I rise today to once again implore the government to do something about the horrible lack of access to and crazy cost of rural Internet service. Right now, too many areas of my riding have no access to rural Internet service at all, and those who can get service are paying through the nose. I've even heard constituents say that during this pandemic, they are having to choose between feeding their kids and educating them. Over the last few weeks, Conservatives have been consulting with rural Canadians, and the results are in. My constituents are tired of fancy political promises. They are frustrated beyond belief by the new challenges created by this pandemic. They are absolutely fed up with having their pleas ignored. All we want is affordable and reliable Internet service. Is that too much to ask of the government? The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. MacGregor. Mr. Alistair MacGregor (CowichanMalahatLangford, NDP): Mr. Chair, these last few months have been incredibly challenging for the residents of CowichanMalahatLangford, who have been forced to deal with the economic and social consequences of COVID-19. The pandemic has laid bare the inadequacies of our social safety net, the weakness in our supply chains and the dependence of our society on essential workers, who often work long hours for low wages, putting themselves and their families at risk. We've also been forced to confront the systemic inequality, poverty and racism that continue to hold so many people back from achieving their full potential. I will not dishonour the sacrifice that so many have made during this time by allowing us to go back to the status quo that got us here in the first place. I will not apologize for demanding that the most vulnerable in our society get the supports and opportunities they need to live with dignity, and I will not relent from pushing my political colleagues to summon the courage necessary to implement policies that lead to environmental, economic and social justice. The Chair: I now give the floor to Mr. Blaney. Hon. Steven Blaney (BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, CPC): Mr. Chair, here is a beautiful story, the story of a woman from Bellechasse, a courageous young mother from Saint-Malachie, Marie-ChristineGoupil. With three children, including the eldest daughter with a disability, and realizing that her daughter with a disability had special clothing needs, she decided to go into business to meet the needs of other parents who, like her, were facing their child's clothing challenges. Last week, she presented her Handy clothing collection on the show Dans l'il du dragon. It was a very emotional moment for the audience and the dragons. They were so touched that they decided to give her the amount she wanted without diluting her shares. The video of her presentation has already been viewed over 1million times on social networks. Marie-ChristineGoupil has discovered a passion for entrepreneurship and has moved and inspired many people with her passionate and courageous attitude. Congratulations, Ms. Goupil, your example makes us proud. The Chair: Mr. Blanchet, you have the floor. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet (BeloeilChambly, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I lend my voice to the Chief of the Assembly of First Nations of Quebec-Labrador, GhislainPicard, whose message is as follows: There have been no fewer than 14reports and conclusions of commissions of inquiry since1967 highlighting major problems in relations between law enforcement agencies and indigenous people. Each time, the conclusions have been overwhelming and highlight a disturbing reality. The justice system has failed indigenous people. Are you going to respond, as you too often do, by moving on to the next one, or are you going to do what we expect you to do, which is to recognize that the justice system discriminates against indigenous people and that we have no less right to security than the rest of the population? In three months, police interventions have claimed more victims among our members than the pandemic. But it is not enough to simply take a knee and denounce racism. It's about standing up and taking action. Those are the words of GhislainPicard. The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Harder. Ms. Rachael Harder (Lethbridge, CPC): Over the last few months, Canada's democracy has been disregarded and an autocracy has been resurrected in its place. By refusing to hold regular parliamentary sittings, Mr. Trudeau is sending a strong message to the Canadian public that he alone is the one who matters. In 2014, he professed that Canadians want their Members of Parliament to be effective voices for their communities in Ottawa, and not merely mouthpieces for an all-too-powerful Prime Minister. As it stands, however, he has shut down Parliament. Effectively, he has stripped us, the opposition, of our privileges and our powers. Sadly, Mr. Trudeau has become the all-too-powerful Prime Minister that he once warned against. A government that does not allow for effective opposition is not functioning in the best interest of Canadians; it is operating in the best interest of itself and, even more so, the interest of the Prime Minister. Canadians deserve to flourish in a democracy, not merely survive under the autocracy that this Prime Minister has created. The Chair: We'll now go on to Ms. Zahid. Mrs. Salma Zahid (Scarborough Centre, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I would like to recognize the work of Agincourt Community Services Association and its tireless executive director, Lee Soda, who have been serving our community during the COVID-19 pandemic. Under more pressure than ever, their staff and volunteers continue to serve a community whose need was great even before the crisis. Their food bank helps over 4,000 people weekly. They have opened outdoor washrooms and hand-washing stations for vulnerable communities and are delivering groceries and other essentials to vulnerable seniors. ACSA is a bridge between those who can help and those who need help, and they are just one example of how our community has come together to meet this challenge. There are restaurants and businesses donating meals to front-line workers, residents answering the call to stock the food bank shelves and neighbours looking in on the vulnerable and isolated. I am so proud of our community's spirit. Scarborough is strong. The Chair: We'll now proceed to the questioning of ministers. Please note that we will suspend the proceedings twice in order to allow employees who provide support for the sitting to replace each other safely. The first question goes to the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Chair, for months Conservatives have been pointing out flaws in Liberal government programs that are preventing Canadians from getting the help they need. The Prime Minister has refused to make these very technical changes to get more help to Canadians who need it. For example, on the wage subsidy, more than two-thirds of the money allocated for that program has lapsed because businesses don't qualify. I have a simple question. Will the Prime Minister change the program to allow companies who have made acquisitions to access the wage subsidy to keep more people working? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Papineau, Lib.): Mr. Chair, from the very beginning we knew that as we rolled out measures, we would need to improve them and tweak them, and that's exactly what we've been doing over the past three months. We needed to make measures happen quickly for Canadians, and we did that. But we continued to improve them, to make additions and amendments so that more people could get the help they needed, including with the proposed legislation last week that expanded the reach of the wage subsidy to more businesses. Unfortunately, the Conservatives didn't even want us to debate that particular piece of legislation. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Actually, Mr. Chair, it was the Liberals who said no to the motion to allow this Parliament to sit to debate that motion, and even in that legislation they refused to allow businesses who have made acquisitions to access the program. Now, when we look at the rent relief program, it is so difficult to apply for it that many landlords are refusing to bother, leaving even more small businesses to fall through the cracks. In fact, of the $3 billion allocated to the rent relief program, only $39 million has been paid out. That's less than 2%. Now, the Prime Minister is still using talking points from April. It's now June and he has refused to fix these programs and has successfully talked out the calendar on the days that the House of Commons could meet to discuss these programs. When will he make these changes to get more help to Canadians who need it? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, throughout this pandemic, we have constantly been updating and expanding our various programs. We recognize, in conversations with the premiers, how important it is to make sure that we're working together, the provinces and the federal government, on issues like rent subsidies where commercial rent is indeed a provincial jurisdiction. Many provinces have moved forward with the eviction bans that are necessary to go along with this, and we'll continue to work with provinces to make sure that we're getting Canadians the help they need. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Mr. Chair, Canadians cannot wait. He has run down the clock on parliamentary sittings and he still refuses to make these changes to get more help to Canadians. Today, we learned that Telus has installed Huawei technology in downtown Ottawa. There are over 80 sites across the national capital region with Huawei technology installed. Some of these sites are very near sensitive government institutions, like government departments, the National Research Council, RCMP headquarters and the Bank of Canada. How long has the Prime Minister known that Huawei technology has been installed in the Ottawa area? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, first off, on the issue of Parliament, it has been meeting four times a week over the past many weeks, and members of the opposition have been able to continue to ask questions on COVID-19 and a broad range of subjects. Moreover, every two weeks the finance department puts forward at the finance committee the full transparent measures that we've taken, so that parliamentarians can study them. We are continuing to work in this crisis. At the same time Mr. Ziad Aboultaif (Edmonton Manning, CPC): Answer the question. The Chair: I'm sorry? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: in regard to Huawei technology there are strict rules for companies to follow and we assume they will all follow those. The Chair: We'll pause for a second and stop the clock. I want to remind the honourable members who are joining us virtually that heckling really does disrupt the whole session. Your face does come up and we do see who it is, so I just want to make sure that you're aware of that. Now we'll go back to Mr. Scheer. We have a minute and 10 seconds left. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister is bragging about accountability and transparency. Will he table an economic update before the House rises? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, throughout this unprecedented pandemic, we have been open and transparent about all of the measures we've put forward. We've updated the finance committee The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer: That's a long way of saying no, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister has pursued a policy of appeasement in pursuit of a personal vanity product at the UN. In the process, he's cozied up to dictators and human rights violators. He's abandoned Israel and committed funding to UNRWA, an organization whose schools have been used as storage facilities for Hamas rockets against Israeli civilians, and whose facilities have served as breeding grounds for racism and anti-Semitism. He has apologized for the Iranian regime when it shot down a plane full of Canadian citizens, and he refuses to list the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist entity. What's the point of having a seat at the table if you have to sell out Canadian principles to get there? The Chair: The Right Honourable Prime Minister. Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, we see that the Conservatives have kept with the Harper approach to international diplomacy. The failed presence of Canada on the world stage was an embarrassment for many Canadians for many years. That's why, when we took office five years ago, we demonstrated the kind of leadership on values that Canadians expected. We will continue to work around the world to defend multilateralism. The Chair: We have a point of order. Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May: This being a committee, we can have a point of order during what would have been question period. I am not sitting that far away from the Prime Minister, and I'm sorry, but Andrew Scheer used to be the Speaker of the House and should show better decorum. The Chair: We have a point of order from Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, on the same point of order, it is disgusting for the leader of the Green Party to use decorum as an excuse to interrupt the Leader of the Opposition in the middle of critical lines of questioning. The leader of the Green Party knows the rules of the House and shouldn't be abusing them to advance a partisan agenda. The Chair: We're getting into debate. I do want to point out that the time had run out. We're now moving on to the next line of questions. On a point of order, Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer: I appreciate the honourable leader of the Green Party, Elizabeth May, for that reminder. When I was Speaker I always appreciated her help and advice about how to improve decorum in here. I just want to say to the member, and to all members, that the reason that I cannot control myself is that the Prime Minister used the word embarrassment in answering a foreign affairs question, and it just made me think of the India trip. The Chair: I believe we're getting into debate and arguments. Mr. Blanchet, you have the floor. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: Mr. Chair, while the Greens and the Conservatives are saying that they'll be waiting outside after the meeting, I will ask a question. The Prime Minister has extended the Canada emergency response benefit, and that's good news, but it's not enough. Last week in the House, the government said it was urgent to fight fraud. For us, it was also urgent to adjust the CERB to the needs of the tourism, arts and agriculture sectors. Farmers are going to be seriously under-resourced. So what happened to the urgency of reforming the CERB? Why is the government refusing to talk to the opposition parties? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, I am very pleased to hear the hon. member finally align himself with the positions of the Liberal Party. Unfortunately, the Bloc is a week late. It should have let us debate these concerns in the House last week. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: It seems to me that the word alignment here is a fantasy. We have unequivocally proposed to extend the debate to reach an agreement, which brings me to my second question. Last week, the issue of assistance to people with disabilities was also a pressing concern, and it's even more so a week later. The Bloc proposed to extend the discussions and split the government's bill in two to help people with disabilities. Why is the government refusing this assistance to people with disabilities, when it could have been debated with the opposition in a civilized and proper way in a Parliament in which it has a minority? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: That was exactly what we wanted, but unanimous consent of the Chamber was required to debate this matter, and the Conservative Party of Canada voted against it. Unfortunately, we are going to have to find a different way to help people with disabilities. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: If the idea is so good and wonderful, why not start over and open the dialogue now? What's stopping the Prime Minister from being a rallying point and inviting us to take to each other and resolve the problem, rather than saying that he is going to pack up his toys and go home? The people with disabilities are the ones who will pay the price. Where was the Prime Minister on October21,2019? He received a minority mandate from Quebeckers and Canadians. Why is he behaving like something between a prime minister with a majority and a monarch by divine right? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: I've heard the Conservative Party and the Bloc Qubcois throw their accusations around. They don't point out that the House of Commons did indeed give its consent to extend the mandate of the Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic until the end of June. Three parties agreed, which was the right thing to do in the context of this minority government. We've been working with the other parties. However, as they did not get the results they wanted, they complained. Unfortunately, they too are part of a minority Parliament and must respect the voice of the majority of parliamentarians, just as we do. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: I might have been tempted, but that's unlikely to happen because the Prime Minister isn't me, he's him. It's therefore up to him to bring people together, open a dialogue and recall Parliament. All we were asking for was the opportunity to talk for an hour or two. However, suddenly he doesn't want to play anymore. It's not working anymore, and there's something a bit strange about that. In addition, the government wants to buy the right to interfere in provincial and Quebec jurisdictions for $14billion. However, Quebec and a number of provinces are refusing to allow it to interfere in their jurisdictions and are asking that this money be paid to them unconditionally. Is the Prime Minister trying to take advantage of the crisis or is he trying to create a constitutional crisis? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, the safety of Canadians is the responsibility of all levels of government. That's why we have proposed a $14billion agreement to ensure that all Canadians across the country experience a safe re-opening of the economy. This is a proposal that we are working on with the provinces because we know that there are needs across the country, including early childhood centres, screening and support for municipalities. The federal government wants to be there to help the provinces. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh (Burnaby South, NDP): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Indigenous leaders have expressed a lack of confidence in the RCMP commissioner's ability to tackle full-scale systemic racism, but the Prime Minister has expressed his confidence in the commissioner. What's that based on? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, over the past two years, Commissioner Lucki has made significant strides forward on an issue where there is still much more to do. We know that systemic racism exists in all of our institutions across this country The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: This is the same RCMP commissioner who just recently said that they couldn't explain what systemic racism was. Now the Prime Minister says that he has confidence, when indigenous leaders express their lack of confidence. Why does the Prime Minister believe that the RCMP commissioner can tackle systemic racism in the RCMP? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, systemic racism is something that touches every corner of our country, every corner of our institutions. It requires people to understand and move forward in coordinated ways with partners. The commissioner is committed to doing that, alongside members of our government. We will do that together and work with indigenous communities and black The Chair: Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, recent events have made it abundantly clear that to tackle the systemic racism at the level of the RCMP, we need a full-scale overhaul of the RCMP. Is the Prime Minister committed to a full-scale overhaul of the RCMP to root out systemic racism? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: As I've said many times, Mr. Chair, I am committed to addressing systemic racism in this country and taking significant, bold actions to reduce the amount of discrimination that indigenous peoples, that racialized Canadians face on a daily basis. We have much work to do, but we will do it together. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, Black Lives Matter has been calling for governments to defund the police. What it's saying is that we need to be better at where we spend our money, investing in communities and not policing. Will the Prime Minister commit to a review of the RCMP budget to allocate resources to community services and not to policing? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, over the past years we have been investing more directly and more money in community organizations, in the black community, and working with indigenous partners on the path to reconciliation. We have been investing in the kinds of community-based programs and solutions that are part of the solution. We know there is much more to do, and we will continue to look at all of our expenditures to make sure we're doing the right things. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, over the past few years, while the Prime Minister has been in office, the RCMP budget has increased by 31%. More money is going towards policing. In recent events we've seen people who needed a health care response to a health care crisis been killed by the RCMP. Does the Prime Minister believe that we need to be investing in a health care response instead of a police response for people who are faced with a crisis? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, the member opposite well knows that it's not an either-or. We need to make sure that our systems across the board, from our police systems to our judicial systems, to our health care systems, to our community systems, are actually addressing the systemic discrimination issues that are embedded within them That is exactly what we are going to continue to do in the coming years. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, with regard to the CERB extension, can the Prime Minister guarantee that everyone who is receiving CERB payments now will continue to do so without any gaps throughout the summer? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, I am happy to highlight that many Canadians who were on the CERB are now returning to work. Many more who are on the CERB now will be returning to work in the coming weeks. We know that as the economy gets back to work, people will want to The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Can the Prime Minister assure people who need it that they will continue to receive the CERB over the summer, yes or no? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: We are very pleased to point out that we are going to extend the Canada emergency response benefit for at least another eight weeks, because a lot of people are going to need it. Even if they want to work, there aren't enough jobs for everyone. So we'll be there for them, as we have been from the beginning. The Chair: We're going to pause and suspend proceedings just for a few moments to allow our support staff to substitute for one another in a healthy and safe way. We'll now proceed with Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod (KamloopsThompsonCariboo, CPC): Mr. Chair, it was really a surprise in the middle of a pandemic to see the Prime Minister at his first campaign stop last week in Ottawa. Certainly the game plan has become very transparent. He has a daily report show and he wants to sideline Parliament, dominate the news cycle and keep everyone in the dark about the state of the economy. According to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, there is no reason that he cannot provide the fiscal update during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the PBO has published a number of reports himself. Why won't the Prime Minister provide a fiscal update so we can all understand the state of our economy, or is that just not part of his campaign playbook? Hon. Mona Fortier (Minister of Middle Class Prosperity and Associate Minister of Finance): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Canada's economy is in a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We've been clear about that. We will continue to be open and transparent about the actions that we are taking to support families, businesses, workers, our health care system and our economy. This includes biweekly reports to Parliament on the full cost and status of our economic measures. Once it is possible to provide a clear economic projection, we will provide an update. We are in this together, and we are prepared to do whatever is necessary to support Canadians. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: Chair, Canada's economy was in trouble prior to the COVID, with some of the worst numbers since 2009. Government revenues in March dropped by 7. 2%, and it's shameful and, quite frankly, it's outrageous that they refuse to provide Parliament and Canadians with an economic update. Households during this challenging time know how much money is coming in and they know how much money is going out. The picture is not pretty, but they know what the picture is. Can the finance minister at least reveal the projected revenue decline in quarters one and two? Hon. Mona Fortier: The Canadian economy is going through a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We've known this for three months. We've continued to be open and transparent about the measures we've put in place for Canadians, workers and businesses. In fact, we have reported biweekly to Parliament on the total cost and status of our plan's measures. As soon as it's possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide a comprehensive update to Canadians The Chair: We go back to Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: Other governments have managed to provide updates for their citizens and carry out their responsibilities, but of course this government has sidelined Parliament with simply a question-but-no-answer period. Let's try something else. The forestry industry was in crisis even before the pandemic, with mills closing down and thousands of jobs lost. Eight weeks ago, Minister Freeland said, I have had many discussions with leaders in our forestry sector and the provinces about what we can do to support the industry today. Meanwhile, we've had support going to the arts and we've had support going to fisheries, just to name a few, but arguably for the industry that was having some of the most numerous challenges, it has been radio silence. That was eight weeks ago today. Can the government at least commit to releasing an updated softwood lumber transition plan before we rise? Hon. Seamus O'Regan (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Chair, we remain committed, of course, to the forestry industry and seeing it through this pandemic and this very uncertain time. The expanding market opportunities program, for instance, has helped Canada's forestry sector diversify, create jobs and open new markets. We've had new construction projects that are active today, using Canadian wood in key markets like Korea, Japan, China and the United States. Tomorrow this House will vote on our government's investment of $20. 97 million for this program. It's part of our budget 2019 commitment to invest $251 million over three years, and I hope the opposition will support us in that. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: It was stated in a major newspaper this morning that this government is like a sexy sports carvroom, vroom, vroombut with a history of breakdowns and major repairs. I think that might describe what has been happening. For forestry, it has been eight weeks and there has been nothing. There is another area that Deputy Prime Minister Freeland did talk about. We were talking about the U. S. softwood lumber duties that are being held in the United States. It's billions of dollars being held with the U. S. treasury. In April, she acknowledged that these duties are a real issue for the softwood lumber industry. What's been done since that time? Hon. David Lametti (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada): Mr. Chair, Canada's forestry industry supports good middle-class jobs in communities across our country. The sector is also an essential link in the medical equipment supply chain, and we thank them for all the work they're doing. We're aware of the immense pressures faced by this sector, especially at this time, and Deputy Prime Minister Freeland and others are taking that seriously and working through this issue. As our government has said repeatedly, we firmly believe that the U. S. duties on Canadian softwood lumber are unfair and unwarranted, and we will pursue all means in order to The Chair: Before continuing, I want to remind honourable members who are at home to make sure that the boom on their headsets is down. It just makes a better pickup. We heard everything, but it was a little distant. That's for everyone's benefit. We're now going to continue with Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell (Louis-Saint-Laurent, CPC): Mr. Chair, before I ask my question, I'd like to pay tribute to the Minister of Justice, particularly to his versatility. Today, he talked about forests. Yesterday, the Minister of Justice talked about Davie and indigenous affairs. Really, this minister is very versatile. My question is directly for the Minister of Finance. I like Mr. Lametti very much, but I'd like Mr. Morneau to answer my question. Yesterday, in a Senate parliamentary committee, the Minister of Finance half-opened the door to an economic update. Based on what he said, it seems that, as we speak, a committee of the Department of Finance is working on an economic update. Could Mr. Morneau tell Canadians when he is going to table this economic update? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, as we know, the Canadian economy is going through a period of extraordinary uncertainty. As soon as it's possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide a full update to Canadians. Right now, we can say that we have supported workers, businesses and Canadians with the emergency measures we have put in place. We will continue to do so, because we need to be sure that Canadians can get through this crisis. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I thought it was too good to be true. The Minister of Finance is opening the door, and the Minister of Small Business is closing it. We don't know when the economic update will take place, yet all across Canada, provinces are doing economic updates. Could Mr. Morneau explain to Canadians why he is unable to give one? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, since the beginning of the crisis, we have implemented the economic action plan to respond to COVID-19, and we've provided immediate assistance to Canadians, businesses and workers. Over 2. 5million jobs were protected by the Canada emergency wage subsidy. In addition, 8. 4million Canadians The Chair: We are returning to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, next Friday, the Quebec minister of finance, EricGirard, will give an economic update. If EricGirard can give one for Quebec, why can't BillMorneau give one for Canada? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, once again, we have been open and transparent from the outset. We have devoted our energy to support Canadians, workers and businesses. We will continue to do so. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I cannot judge the quality of the work done by the provinces, but what I do know is that Quebec, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland have also made efforts to support their residents economically. Those provinces are able to table economic updates. Yesterday, Saskatchewan even tabled a budget. Why is Bill Morneau unable to table an economic update for all Canadians? Hon. Mona Fortier: Let me repeat for my hon. colleague that we are going through extraordinarily uncertain times. We have continued to be open and transparent. We have reported biweekly to Parliament on the total cost and status of the measures in our economic response plan. Once again, as soon as clear economic projections can be provided, we will provide an update The Chair: Mr. Deltell has the floor. Mr. Grard Deltell: The minister talks about the total cost of the government's economic expenditures. So I ask the question: so far, over the past three months, how much has the pandemic cost Canadians? Hon. Mona Fortier: As I said earlier, it is important to note that we have put forward measures, including the wage subsidy, which have helped more than 2. 5million The Chair: Mr. Deltell has the floor. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I have been trying for four minutes to get anything remotely resembling an answer, and I'm getting absolutely nothing. I am not asking questions for myself; I am asking questions for Canadians. Why are the government and the Minister of Finance, Bill Morneau, not able to table an economic update when some provinces are able to? Hon. Mona Fortier: Once again, I would like to remind my hon. colleague that we have provided interest-free loans to businesses. More than 669,000loans have been approved. We have continued to support businesses and Canadians during this time The Chair: Mr. Deltell, you have time for a very brief question. Mr. Grard Deltell: The only thing that distinguishes the provinces that table economic updates and the current government is political will. Why does Bill Morneau not have the political will to tell Canadians the truth? Hon. Mona Fortier: Once again, we have been open and transparent. As soon as it is possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide Canadians with a full update. The Chair: We will now continue with Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya (MarkhamUnionville, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. COVID-19 has sparked and spurred anti-Asian racism. These are not just racist comments online; Asian Canadians have been attacked. What is the government doing to combat anti-Asian racism? Hon. Bardish Chagger (Minister of Diversity and Inclusion and Youth): Mr. Chair, since our government took office in 2015, we have been making investments and working with communities. The difference between our government and the previous government is that we will actually consult with Canadians, including black Canadians, including Asian Canadians, to respond to the challenges, including with an anti-racism secretariat and an anti-racism strategy. It will take all of us. I appreciate the member's question, so that we can also work together. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, one business owner I know in Markham has operated for 20 years. Now she's looking at over $9,000 in rent due on June 24. COVID-19 has crippled her sales and she's going to go out of business. Her landlord has no interest in the Canada emergency commercial rent assistance program. How can the government say this program is working? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, this program was made possible by working with the provinces, and we will continue to encourage landlords and tenants to work together to make sure they have relief for this very difficult time in which they're living. We're continuing to monitor the CECRA program and we will make it possible for businesses to have access to the program. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, the government business rent relief program has been a total disaster. Even the government's own numbers show it is a failure. As of June 8, less than 2% of the $3 billion budgeted has been spent. What is it going to take for the government to admit that the program is a disaster and needs changes? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we know our government has been working closely with the provinces and territories to deliver the Canada emergency commercial rent assistance. Although the tenant-landlord relationship is ultimately the responsibility of the provinces and territories, our government has stepped up to provide support through the tools we have and through CMHC so that small businesses can get the rent relief they need. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, according to the government, there are around 1. 1 million small businesses in Canada. At committee, we were told only around 5,500 of them are receiving COVID-19 rent relief. That number is shameful. When will the Liberal government wake up and make the changes? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we welcome the steps some provinces and territories have taken to further protect commercial tenants. We will continue to monitor this program closely and ensure that Canada's small businesses are supported during this challenging time. We will continue to monitor to see The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, there was no answer. When can the government make these changes? Hon. Mary Ng (Minister of Small Business, Export Promotion and International Trade): Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable colleague that we are doing everything and will continue to do everything to help small businesses in our country. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, on May 27 the CBSA seized 65 small handguns at Pearson airport, the largest firearms seizure on record. It is clear that smuggled handguns are the weapon of choice for criminals. Why is the Prime Minister focusing on an ineffective municipal ban? Hon. Bill Blair (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness): Mr. Chair, I would point out that gun violence in any of our communities is unacceptable, and it's important that governments and communities take steps to prevent guns from getting into the hands of criminals. That's why we do important work at our border to keep guns from being smuggled into our country, but it also necessitates additional work. I don't think you can talk about gun violence without talking about stronger gun control. That's why our government has taken a very strong position and will strengthen gun control to keep Canadians safe. The Chair: Mr. Saroya, you may have a 10-second question, if that's possible, please. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, COVID-19 has not stopped gun violence in the GTA. My constituents are concerned about shootings minutes away from their homes. We know the Liberals'gun ban won't change anything, but a focus on smuggled guns and criminals will. When will they make that change? Hon. Bill Blair: Mr. Chair, stronger gun control laws are an effective tool, and that's been told to us by police leadership and communities across the country. We're also making investments in borders and law enforcement. Most importantly, we're making investments in communities and in kids to keep communities safe. I look forward to the member's strong support of those measures when we bring them forward. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback (Prince Albert, CPC): Mr. Chair, the U. S. and the U. K. began their second round of free trade negotiations yesterday. Does the government intend to have a trade agreement in place before the U. K. tariffs come into effect on January 1? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, the U. K. is a strong partner of Canada, as is the European Union, and we're looking forward to continuing that strong relationship The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Thank you, Mr. Chair. With respect to the negotiations with the U. K. , when will the minister publish her goals and objectives for this agreement? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, we're going to continue to work to ensure that any future agreement is going to be based on the best interests of Canadians, and we will The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Can the minister confirm whether they've entered into negotiations with the U. K. at this point? Hon. Mary Ng: Our government is analyzing the most-favoured-nation tariff regimes schedule the U. K. has put out. I want to assure Canadians The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Mr. Chair, during the CUSMA negotiations, a deal was struck between the Liberal Party and the NDP that the government would notify this House 90 days before it starts any negotiations on any trade agreement. When will the minister notify this House? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that we will absolutely be sharing information. Right now, we are analyzing the most-favoured-nation tariff regimes schedule put out by the U. K. Mr. Randy Hoback: Mr. Chair, any meaningful attempts to reform the WTO needs buy-in from the United States. I think all countries agree on that. Has the minister discussed a WTO reform with the USTR, the United States trade representative? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, the Ottawa Group is a consensus-based group, and any decisions will be taken together. Of course, any meaningful reform must include the U. S. The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Has the U. S. been invited to the Ottawa Group meetings? Hon. Mary Ng: The Ottawa Group is a consensus-based group limited to WTO members who are committed to bringing forward ideas and proposals The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Just as with any other trade agreement, the minister has committed to this House that she will publish the list of goals and responsibilities for the negotiations. When will she publish the list for the Ottawa Group? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I'm thrilled that we had an excellent meeting of the Ottawa Group yesterday where, as a group, we agreed to take concrete action. Mr. Randy Hoback: Will the minister be releasing a list of Canada's objectives we would like to see the new WTO's director-general pursue prior to the upcoming DG election? Hon. Mary Ng: We published an action statement from the Ottawa Group yesterday. I would encourage the member opposite to have a look. I'm certainly happy to send it to him. Mr. Randy Hoback: Going back to economic prosperity, we know that the U. S. has been having talks with other countries around the world. Has Canada yet been invited to this group? Hon. Mary Ng: I'm pleased to continue to pursue the objectives of trade diversification. I would remind the member that we have access to a billion and a half customers through our very robust Mr. Randy Hoback: A billion and a half customers is fine if you have a functioning WTO, but if you don't have a functioning WTO, then a billion and a half customers may not be fully accessible to our suppliers, manufacturers and agriculture producers. Can the minister confirm that she's in discussions with the U. S. in joining this economic prosperity group? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that nothing is more important than standing up and helping create markets for our Canadian businesses and to help our small businesses get more export-ready so that they can grow into the international marketplace. This is work that we've committed to do, and we will keep working on it, particularly The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Yesterday Saskatchewan presented a budget. Not only did they present the budget, but they'll also actually debate the budget and pass the budget in Parliament. There's full accountability. Why won't this government do the same? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons): Mr. Chair, the House is sitting in this hybrid format so that people can participate in the House on the screens. I'm sure my colleague is happy to see that his own colleagues are able to ask questions and participate. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Williamson. Mr. John Williamson (New Brunswick Southwest, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will say that this is no substitute for Parliament, but I appreciate the opportunity. New Brunswick families and businesses are rapidly making adjustments to manage and live with the coronavirus pandemic. Businesses here are opening and services are being offered. Families are preparing for summer and even planning ahead for a new school year in September. We have a lot of work ahead of us. One notable absence is Service Canada. When does the government plan on opening its service counters to assist Canadians again? Hon. Ahmed Hussen (Minister of Families, Children and Social Development): Mr. Chair, our government is committed to ensuring that Canadians continue to have access to the benefits that they rely on through Service Canada. We have redeployed over 3,000 additional staff to ensure that Canadians continue to have access to their benefits. We've established a 1,500-agent call centre to make sure that people can get access to the phone lines to get the help they need. Mr. John Williamson: Service Canada is about more than providing COVID-19 information and benefits. Provincial governments are working hard to adjust to Canada's new normal by opening up businesses and front-line government services. When will we see Service Canada play its role and open its service counters in our communities? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Mr. Chair, we're currently working with our world-class public health experts to determine how best to reopen the Service Canada network for the public. Make no mistake: Our Service Canada employees have gone above and beyond to ensure that Canadians continue to have access to the services that they rely on and the benefits that they need. Mr. John Williamson: Please don't hide behind health experts when the Prime Minister is appearing in the middle of large protests, yet is afraid to bring back the Parliament of Canada to do its business. In fact, the New Brunswick legislature is open for regular business. Bills are being studied, opposition input is being heard and MLAs are voting on legislation, not rubber-stamping government bills. By comparison, our Parliament is stuck in pretending it cannot function like other law-making assemblies. Canadians are in the dark about our country's finances. When will the government table an economic update so taxpayers understand what was spent, what is owed by our kids and grandchildren, and what the government's fiscal footing looks like? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, nobody's hiding. Nobody's doing anything like that. The only reason my colleague is able to ask a question and I'm able to answer his question is that he's right there on the screen. We have this hybrid format that cares for MPs across the country, not only the ones sitting in the House. Mr. John Williamson: This is no substitute for Parliament. I will ask my question again. When will the government table an economic update so that taxpayers understand what was spent, what is owed by our kids and grandchildren, and what the government's fiscal footing looks like in today's environment? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, I thank my honourable colleague for his question. Canada's economy is still in a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We have been open and transparent about the measures we have been providing to support families, businesses and workers. Even our health care The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Williamson. Mr. John Williamson: Except you have not. The Auditor General is underfunded. We have no idea about the total of government spending. Again I will ask when the government will table an economic update so that we can have an understanding of what the government's fiscal footing looks like. Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we have included biweekly reports to Parliament on the full cost and status of our economic response plan measures since the beginning. I have said, and I will continue to say, that when it is possible to provide a clear economic projection, we will provide an update. Mr. John Williamson: What is the full cost to date of the government's COVID-19 relief measures, as the minister just claimed the government has provided to Parliament? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we have provided support for workers, and 2. 5 million Canadians have been helped through the Canadian wage subsidy. We have provided businesses with some loans, and 669,000 businesses have applied for these loans. Even for the CERB, we have over eight million Canadians who have applied. The Chair: We will now continue with Mr. Bergeron. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: Mr. Chair, as the leader of the Bloc Qubcois mentioned a few moments ago, the government promised $14billion to Quebec and the provinces, but in targeted transfers. That is very little compared to the considerable expenses incurred to deal with the current crisis. But Quebec and the provinces don't just want this money to be transferred unconditionally, they also want a real discussion on a permanent increase in health care transfers. PremierLegault was rightly concerned about the feds'interference into provincial jurisdictions. The federal government, which does not manage any hospitals or long-term care centres, must stop playing armchair quarterback and transfer the money to the only governments with jurisdiction over health, that is, Quebec and the provinces. Will it do so without delay and without nitpicking? The Honourable Patty Hajdu (Minister of Health): Mr. Chair, we know that the Government of Quebec is working hard to ensure the safety of Quebeckers and we are here to support them. As part of this co-operation, we have developed health and safety recommendations for workplaces, we have purchased medical equipment for workers and we have supported the province in developing its reopening program. We are continuing this important partnership to ensure the safety of Quebeckers and all Canadians. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: The co-operation is so effective that the money is staying in the federal government's coffers. In fact, when the federal government wants to impose conditions, it always takes longer. We see it with housing, for which Quebec has not received a dime of the $1. 4billion it is owed. We have also seen it with infrastructure funds, particularly for public transit, water systems and water treatment. The health crisis is now. The needs are now. The much needed reopening of our economy is now. Will the government finally transfer the money without messing around or quibbling? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I am pleased to confirm to my colleague that there is no messing around, no quibbling, nothing of the kind. There is co-operation between two levels of government. It is natural to have discussions with all the provinces and with Quebec. I myself am taking part in some discussions and several of my colleagues are taking part in others. There is a clear willingness on the part of the federal government to co-operate with Quebec and all the provinces. That is what we are doing and that is perhaps what the Bloc Qubcois does not like. It likes bickering, but for the time being, there is none. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: We don't want to bicker, we want the money to be paid out. It is not complicated, for heaven's sake! We do not want a blank cheque. Right now, the money remains in the federal government's coffers. There is $1. 4billion that should be paid to Quebec for social housing and is sitting in the federal government's coffers. We are waiting for money for water treatment and water systems, but it is sitting in the federal government's coffers. It's almost July. We are wasting precious months for construction. What is the government waiting for to pay out the money so that we can get our economy rolling? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: The federal government is a very active partner. We are discussing and working with Quebec on infrastructure projects. We are continuing our discussions and negotiations on the housing agreement. Nothing is at a standstill. We are discussing and co-operating for the well-being of all Quebeckers. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: MadamChair, things are definitely at a standstill, because the money is owed and has not been paid out. Months are going by while construction is not taking place. We need to reopen the economy. We need more flexibility in the gas tax program and Quebec's contribution to allow municipalities to undertake work on city halls, community centres and fire stations. We need the federal government to contribute to funding public transit operations, which have become a real financial drain because of the drop in ridership. What is the federal government waiting for to provide real help instead of just talking? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: When it comes to just talking, the Bloc Qubcois has a lot of experience, I admit. We, in the government, are working and co-operating. We are not waiting with our arms folded, we are discussing a series of issues with Quebec. We do more than discuss, we work and we co-operate. We are working on projects, not only in infrastructure, but in a number of other areas. Just think of the co-operation of our armed forces in the CHSLDs, for example. We are here for Quebeckers. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Your time has run out, Mr. Bergeron. We'll go now to Ms. Khalid, from MississaugaErin Mills. Ms. Iqra Khalid (MississaugaErin Mills, Lib.): Madam Chair, I'll be splitting my time with the member for GlengarryPrescottRussell. During a consultation with the business community in Mississauga, the concerns of businesses, big and small, included the need for stable, affordable and safe child care. With the lack of such child care spaces, an economic recovery plan post-COVID cannot be effective until and unless we make sure that people are able to get back to work. I've heard from parents across Mississauga that they're being forced to stay home because of inadequate child care and that they have to choose between putting food on the table and keeping family safe. More and more employers are realizing that good employees are unable to contribute to their business growth because of this challenge. Now more than ever, we need to find long-term sustainable solutions for Canadians who face challenges with regard to child care. I ask our Minister of Families, Children and Social Development this: What is our strategy to tackle this ever-growing need for a national child care plan? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I thank the honourable member for her question and for her important advocacy and work on this important issue. We understand that child care is important to our economic recovery and our social infrastructure. We know the pressure that COVID-19 has placed on families, especially parents. That is why we're committed to continuing to work with provinces and territories to renew our agreements on early learning and child care, and to provide, at the earliest opportunity, $400 million in support. In addition to that, the Prime Minister has already indicated that child care will be part of the $14-billion pledge to provinces and territories to assist them with respect to COVID-19 recovery efforts. Over the next decade, we will continue to invest $7. 5 billion, and together we have achieved the goal of over 40,000 affordable child care spaces. We are also committed to continuing to create over 250,000 before-school and after-school child care spaces for kids under the age of 10. We will continue to work with our partners in the provinces and territories to ensure that Canadians can continue to have access to safe, quality and affordable child care. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for GlengarryPrescottRussell has the floor. Mr. Francis Drouin (GlengarryPrescottRussell, Lib.): MadamChair, small businesses play a fundamental role in the Canadian economy. In an article in LaPresse, the Minister of Economic Development warned us that the economic crisis caused by severe lockdown measures could have more serious consequences in small municipalities than in large cities. Based on discussions with the chambers of commerce in my riding, it is clear that federal government assistance will be essential for the reopening of the economy, specifically for the rural economy. In fact, I would like to acknowledge the work of the Prescott-Russell community development corporation, under the leadership of John Candie. After announcing almost $57million to help SMEs adopt e-commerce, how does the minister plan to help SMEs and the business community in our rural areas? Hon. Mlanie Joly (Minister of Economic Development and Official Languages): MadamChair, I also thank my colleague from GlengarryPrescottRussell for his important question. Yes, our regions are important and the entrepreneurs in those regions are creative and daring. They take risks, but they are currently facing huge challenges. So we are here for them. We understand their anxiety and we want to help them. That is why we have decided to invest heavily in rural economic development. It is also why we have doubled the budget of CFDCs and Community Futures organizations across the country. In southern Ontario we have reinvested over $260million in the regional economic development agency FedDev. In the great riding of GlengarryPrescottRussell, which I am particularly fond of and where there is a very good member of Parliament, there is an additional $1million for entrepreneurs in the region. We have been, we are and we will be at your side. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for GlengarryPrescottRussell has 36seconds left. No? Then we'll go to the honourable member for ElmwoodTranscona. Mr. Daniel Blaikie (ElmwoodTranscona, NDP): Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with the member for Victoria. Madam Chair, Krystal is a community worker in Winnipeg. She has been working from home since late March, taking care of her child, who is out of school, and caring for her father, who is living with her and vulnerable to COVID-19. Her employer called her up recently and asked her to physically return to work or to take a leave. As a parent and a care provider to a vulnerable person, she's not comfortable with physically returning to work. Service Canada won't give Krystal a straight answer as to whether going on leave and collecting CERB would count as refusing a reasonable job offer. With Bill C-17 looming in the background, Krystal is worried about jail time and fines if she does right by her child and her father by applying for CERB. Can Krystal reasonably refuse to go back to work and collect CERB, or will she be considered a fraudster? That's my question for the minister that is specific to Krystal's case. As well, what is the minister doing to provide clear direction to Canadians and to Service Canada agents so that people can get a clear answer before making their decision about returning to work? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I want to thank the honourable member for his important question. We recognize that Canadian workers will face various different situations, including those who are ineligible for the Canada emergency support benefit. We'll continue to work with workers to make sure they're able to be supported throughout this pandemic. The fact of the matter is that every province has workplace health and safety regulations that must be supported. We understand that workers have the right not to work in unsafe situations. We also understand that many Canadians do want to go back to work; and in fact many have. We will make sure that we support Canadians throughout this recovery process. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member has 47 seconds left, and that includes the answer. Mr. Daniel Blaikie: Madam Chair, that answer is really not good enough, because the problem here is that Krystal needs to know whether she can continue receiving CERB or not. That's a federal government decision, and she needs to know whether the federal government is going to accuse her of fraud and put her in jail or assess fines against her if she refuses to go back to work because she wants to take care of her child and her father. What is the minister's answer to that? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister has 20 seconds to respond. Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that if a Canadian has to take care of a loved one due to circumstances surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, they are indeed eligible to receive the CERB and remain receiving that benefit. Ms. Laurel Collins (Victoria, NDP): As we deal with the global pandemic, we cannot lose sight of the ongoing climate emergency. Canada has missed every single climate target it set, and we need to break the cycle of empty promises. Canadians want their government to be accountable, and environmental groups such as Ecojustice, CAN-Rac, Environmental Defence and West Coast Environmental Law, as well as the government's own climate institute, are all calling for legally binding climate targets. When will the government put its climate targets into law with legally binding milestones so we never miss another target again? Hon. Navdeep Bains (MississaugaMalton, Lib.): Madam Chair, I thank my honourable colleague for her question. I totally agree with her when it comes to the environment. It is a priority not only for us as a government, but it should be a priority for all Canadians. That is why we have put measures in place to put a price on pollution through carbon pricing. That is why we have a comprehensive plan that also includes significant investments in clean technology, which will help reduce our carbon footprint. I am confident that these measures will enable us to not only meet but exceed our 2030 target and also allow us to achieve our net-zero 2050 target. Ms. Laurel Collins: That didn't answer my question. I asked when. Empty promises won't get us any closer to meeting our climate targets. Can the minister tell us when his government will introduce climate accountability laws? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I think the fundamental issue here is having a plan when it comes to the environment. I'm confident that the measures that we have takenputting a price on pollution, investing in clean technology, and other key measures to reduce our carbon footprint, including the investment in infrastructureunderpin a plan The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to the honourable member for Victoria. Ms. Laurel Collins: This government is not meeting its targets, but it is meeting with oil and gas lobbyists. The pandemic has made us reflect on our priorities. Are we going to choose a just recovery with good, sustainable jobs for Canadian workers, or are we going to keep subsidizing oil and gas companies to the tune of billions, subsidies that we know are ending up in the pockets of CEOs and shareholders? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will have a brief answer from the minister. Hon. Navdeep Bains: Again, Madam Chair, this is the fundamental difference between us and the NDP. We fundamentally believe that the entire economy needs to work together, including the energy sector, to enable us to achieve those 2030 and 2050 targets. We are going to work together to support our workers, including in the energy sector, to reduce our carbon footprint. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Now we will go to the honourable member for SaskatoonGrasswood, Mr. Waugh. Mr. Kevin Waugh (SaskatoonGrasswood, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. When I was last here in May, I was on my way back to Saskatoon from Toronto, and there was actually someone on my flight who tested positive for COVID-19. I was never informed of it by the airline. I found out two weeks later. The report was in the news media. Why hasn't the government put rules in place requiring airlines to reach out to individuals like me who may have been exposed to COVID on their flights? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, it's hard to speculate on what happened from such a vague description of his experience, but I will say that we have every confidence in local public health, which is doing the hard and heavy lifting of contact tracing and working very closely with all kinds of different sectors, including airline sectors, to make sure that close contacts of people who have tested positive for COVID-19 are found, are traced and are isolated. I assume that the member took appropriate precautions on the flight and I hope that he continues to do so. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, it was reported that the individual on my plane who had COVID was actually connecting in Toronto from an international flight. The Prime Minister announced last week that they would begin mandating temperature checks for those bound for Canada in July. Will international travellers be tested when they land in Canada, or will they be relying on the tests that take place in other countries? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, this is a very important question, because the protection and safety of all Canadiansin particular, Canadian travellersis a high priority for our government. We've been working very closely with the airlines. At the current time, we are putting temperature screening in place. That will initially be done primarily by the airlines that are in the best position to do it at this point in time. We are also now going to be including CATSA, the people who do the security screening, so that when people enter the airport, they will also be screened. We believe that is going to be the most effective measure to keep all travellers safe. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, last week five of the largest professional sports leagues in North America put out a statement of support for my private member's bill, the safe and regulated sports betting act. Given the struggles that clubs and leagues are facing due to COVID-19, including having no fans at all in the stands for the foreseeable future, the legalization of sports betting would be a welcome opportunity not only to engage fans but to generate much-needed revenue. Will the government commit now to supporting the sports and gaming industries by supporting my private member's bill, Bill C-218? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, I've had the opportunity on many occasions to speak to members of Parliament and also to mayors and councillors and people living in border communities where there are casinos. They've raised this issue a number of times. We've listened very carefully to the concerns that have been expressed by them. I would like to advise the member that I look forward to the opportunity for a careful examination of his bill. We are at all times concerned about maintaining the integrity of the gaming industry within our community. That's the best way to protect Canadians. At the same time, we will examine his bill with all of the necessary attention to make sure it's given full consideration. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, it's the first time in history that we've had the five professional leagues in this country joining together for this bill. Newspapers rely, as we all know, on advertising for a significant portion of their revenue. This includes the usual flyers as well as in-paper ads. I've heard major concerns from a number of newspapers in this country about competition they're receiving today from Canada Post, which is offering massive free postage services. In fact, I have one of their ads here, which says that the first 6,000 pieces of postage are 100% free. If the government is genuine about wanting to ensure that newspapers and journals can succeed in this country, why are you allowing Canada Post to use its monopoly power to actually threaten local newspapers in this country? Hon. Steven Guilbeault (Minister of Canadian Heritage): Thank you, Madame Chair, and I thank the member opposite for his question. As you well know, a healthy news and media sector in Canada is a priority for our government, which is why we have put in place a number of measures before COVID-19 and during COVID-19, and we will continue to be there for them after this crisis has gone by. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Before we go on, we will be taking a break to do a bit of a changeover. I also want to remind members to address their questions and comments to the chair. We will go now to the honourable member for BruceGreyOwen Sound, Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff (BruceGreyOwen Sound, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Mr. Blair stated yesterday here in the House that the AR-15 has been used in mass killings in Canada on many occasions. Mr. Blair, please provide just one specific instance in which an AR-15 was used in a mass killing in Canada. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I remind the member to address questions and comments to the chair. The honourable minister may respond. Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I think this is an excellent opportunity to point out to the member opposite how important it is to actually listen to what was said. If you go back and review that tape, and I would invite you to do so, you'll see that I said the AR-15 and other weapons like themreferring of course to military-style assault weaponshave been used in mass killings, and I actually cited a number of examples. Madam Chair, I think it would be very useful if the member's questions were based on facts. Mr. Alex Ruff: I can remind Mr. Blair that I actually have watched the video a couple of times, and he specifically states that the AR-15 was used in mass killings in Canada, yet he has yet to provide one. My additional question is to Mr. Blair. Out of the recently banned firearms on May 1, how many have been or are still currently in use by the Canadian Armed Forces? Hon. Bill Blair: That's an excellent question, Madam Chair, because it's very important to provide Canadians with clarity. We have prohibited these firearms for non-law enforcement and non-military use. The military uses weapons that were actually designed for soldiers to use in combat to shoot other soldiers. That's the appropriate use of such weapons, Madam Chair. They're not things to be played with in civilian society. Mr. Alex Ruff: As a soldier for 25 years, I'll remind Mr. Blair that none of the currently prohibited firearms would be used in the Canadian Armed Forces. I asked him a question on whether any of them is being or ever has been used in the Canadian Armed Forces. Are any of the recently banned firearms still in use, or have they ever been in use, in any military in the world? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, I think it's important to also recognize that the basic origin, the provenance of the weapons that we have prohibited, was in their original design. They were designed for military use for various military forces around the world. As I've said previously, they were designed for soldiers to use in combat to kill other soldiers. They're very efficient in their design for killing people. They have no purpose in Canadian society. Mr. Alex Ruff: As someone who has used many military-style firearms and who is actually involved in helping define what we purchase in the military, I would use none of the ones that are currently prohibited. I have a question, Chair, for Minister MacAulay. Can he please confirm whether Veterans Affairs has a plan to address the claims backlog, yes or no? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (Minister of Veterans Affairs): Madam Chair, I appreciate my honourable colleague's question, and yes, we've indicated that it's a major priority. That's why I'm so pleased that the supplementary estimates contained just under $90 million to address hiring more staff, improving the process and making sure that we attack the backlog in an appropriate manner. Mr. Alex Ruff: Madame Chair, does that plan exist in written form? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Well, Madam Chair, I can assure you that it's in the supplementary estimates, and of course, this money is The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We'll go back to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff: The question is about the plan, not how much money has been allocated. I am asking for the written plan on how to address the backlog. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Madam Chair, I can tell my honourable colleague that the money is in the supplementary estimates, and with the money we're able to attack this problem in an appropriate manner, and that's what is important for our veterans. Mr. Alex Ruff: The deputy minister committed on March 10 that a written plan would be provided to the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs within a month and made public. Did the deputy minister or the department provide the minister that plan within a month? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Madame Chair, I'm sure my honourable colleague wants an appropriate plan and he would be fully aware this just under $90 million would make a big difference in the plan to attack the backlog. We The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We'll go back to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff: Thank you, Chair. Therefore, my question is, if the deputy minister in the department provided him with an appropriate plan or a written plan, why is he questioning how appropriate that plan is? I have complete confidence in the deputy minister's ability to produce a written plan. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister may give a brief answer, please. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I can assure my honourable colleague that with the appropriate funding, we will address the backlog in Veterans Affairs. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Parry SoundMuskoka, Mr. Aitchison. Mr. Scott Aitchison: Thank you, Madam Chair. My question is about summer camps again. Three weeks ago, I asked this government if the finance minister would meet with the beleaguered summer camp sector. Summer camps, which are a social and economic mainstay in Parry SoundMuskoka and all of northern Ontario, have been crippled by the global pandemic. It's costing millions of jobs, and some camps are actually in danger of folding. Aside from a brief follow-up conversation over the phone with the junior minister, there has still been no action from this government. When will the Minister of Finance meet with summer camps to find a solution? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I recognize the honourable member's important question and his focus on summer camps. We recognize the importance of looking at that and paying attention to the needs of that community. We will continue to engage with them, as we have, to ensure and find ways in which we can get their feedback and find ways in which we can support them. That work is ongoing, and I assure the honourable member that our focus is on the kids and on ensuring that they have access to summer camps for this year. Mr. Scott Aitchison: I don't know why you need to find ways to get feedback. The summer camps association has given lots of feedback and my office has given lots of feedback, so I don't see what's confusing about this. However, I've become accustomed to not really getting answers to questions, so I will go to the next one. The Ontario government's regional reopening plan permits cruise boats to resume on Georgian Bay, yet the federal government is refusing to allow these vessels to operate until July 1. Therefore, small businesses such as the Island Queen cruiser in Parry Sound, which has only a very few precious weeks to operate in the first place, is losing yet another two weeks because of federal inaction. This not only hurts the cruise boat industry but also hurts tourism and small businesses all through our area. Will the Minister of Transport take a regional approach himself by lifting the federal ban on Georgian Bay, just like the Province of Ontario has done? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister may reply. Is there a response? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, there is. I apologize for the confusion. Let me respond, if I may, on behalf of the Minister of Transport. There have been a number of very important discussions with the provinces, in particular with the Province of Ontario, around provisions regarding pleasure craft. There are certain restrictions that will come to an end on June 30. We're working very closely with our provincial counterparts to address this issue, but we want to ensure that it will be done safely. Mr. Scott Aitchison: Madam Chair, I actually gave the minister a heads-up that I would be asking that question. He sent me an email today saying he was not going to be able to be in the House, and it's great of him to do that. He said that whoever was going to fill in for him would have an answer, but again, that was not really an answer. The next issue I would like to bring this government's attention to is the deplorable state of rural Internet service in Parry SoundMuskoka. Quite simply, there are too many gaps in service, and what is available is generally way too expensive. We have families trying to work and teach their kids from home on unreliable and outrageously expensive Internet service, and we have too many small businesses that either cannot access or afford reliable Internet services. Today Greg Rickford, the Ontario energy minister, and Laurie Scott, Ontario Minister of Infrastructure, announced $2. 3 million for seven northern Ontario broadband projects. Minister, will when your government get serious and become a reliable partner for the Government of Ontario and the private sector to deliver this crucial modern-day infrastructure to rural Canadians? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I remind the member that he needs to address the questions and comments to the chair. The honourable minister may reply. Hon. Maryam Monsef (Minister for Women and Gender Equality and Rural Economic Development): Madam Chair, in the best of times, life without access to high-speed Internet is hard. During a pandemic, the challenges are that much more pronounced. Our government's unprecedented investments are already connecting a million more Canadian households to this essential service, but until we achieve universal access our work is not done. We will work with our partners, including provinces across the country, to connect every Canadian household to high-quality Internet access that is affordable and reliable. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member has 30 seconds. Mr. Scott Aitchison: I think I can squeeze something in here, then. I'm wondering, then, Madam Chair, since the Province of Ontario has used the Northern Ontario Heritage Corporation Fund to make this announcement, what about using FedNor to make the same kind of announcement, and partner with the province? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister has a brief answer. Hon. Mlanie Joly: Obviously we believe in the importance of northern Ontario; that's why we nearly doubled the budget of FedNor. We will continue to invest in businesses and people all around Parry Sound, Muskoka and northern Ontario. If my colleague has specific projects in mind, please come and see me and let's have a conversation. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for Montmagny-L'Islet-KamouraskaRivire-du-Loup, Mr. Gnreux, has the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux (MontmagnyL'IsletKamouraskaRivire-du-Loup, CPC): Thank you, MadamChair. I will continue along the same lines as my colleague. During this pandemic, we are realizing the extent to which reliable high-speed Internet service is needed for Canada's economy. There are still places where telework is not possible today because of the lack of adequate coverage. However, since2015, the government has committed to addressing the situation through three new programs. Benot Pilotto, who is the mayor of Saint-Onsime-d'Ixworth, in my riding, wrote to me a few days ago. That is why I am asking you what concrete results the government plans to achieve for our rural areas by the end of the year. Hon. Maryam Monsef: At the best of times, life without high-speed Internet access is difficult. During a pandemic, the difficulties are even greater. Our government's unprecedented investments are already connecting an additional one million Canadian households to this essential service. However, until we achieve universal access, our job is not done. We are working The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Gnreux, you have the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, I am simply asking the minister to tell me when the mayor of Saint-Onsime-d'Ixworth will be able to tell his residents when the Internet will be available in his municipality. It is not complicated. What does the government plan to do so that rural municipalities across Canada can have access to the Internet as soon as possible? What is its plan? Hon. Maryam Monsef: We are working with partners across the country to ensure that every Canadian household is connected to a high-quality, accessible and affordable high-speed Internet service. Madam Chair, I assure my colleagues that we share the same goal, and we will work with all our partners across the country to ensure every Canadian household has access The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Gnreux, you have the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, I am still not getting a specific answer. According to the government's plan, when will rural Canadian businesses and households be connected? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I would ask the honourable minister to provide a brief answer. Hon. Maryam Monsef: Madam Chair, those plans are under way, and we will have more to share in the coming days. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: It seems that the Minister of Rural Economic Development plans to announce a new plan this week. Can she tell us how this program will differ from the Connect to Innovate program, which is already in place? Can the minister tell us whether her program will solve the problem of the 25square kilometre hexagonal zones, which unfortunately make many projects ineligible for the CRTC's broadband fund? Hon. Maryam Monsef: Madam Chair, I'm pleased to share with my colleague that the model he's referring to, the hexagon model, is no more. Our maps are much more precise now to ensure that we do not leave Canadians behind. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, this year, the Canada summer jobs program is a real fiasco. I think all my colleagues will agree with me. On May13,100jobs were announced in my riding; on May20,16jobs were announced; on May27,13jobs were announced; on June3,12jobs were announced; and on June10, only one job was announced. As we speak, an amount of $100,000 is still to be confirmed in my riding. Can we have an announcement, once and for all? Let's stop the piecemeal announcements and finally confirm the remaining jobs today so that our organizations can have young people before the summer starts on the weekend. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable minister. Hon. Ahmed Hussen: MadamChair, I thank the honourable member for his question. We recognize the important role that the Canada summer jobs program is playing in supporting employers and young workers in communities right across the country. Our government is working very hard to help employers adapt to the realities of the COVID-19 pandemic, and at the same time is supporting young Canadians as they begin to look for summer employment. We've introduced flexibilities into the program to ensure that more young workers have opportunities to get employed. The honourable member also has to understand that we're in the COVID-19 pandemic, and as such it will take some time for businesses to equip themselves to hire students. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for NanaimoLadysmith, Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly (NanaimoLadysmith, GP): Thank you, Madam Chair. In the first five months of this year, 554 B. C. residents died from opioid overdoses. They were teachers, construction workers, business owners, family members, neighbours and friends. Addiction is a health and social issue, but criminalization creates stigma, so people hide their drug use and die alone. Access to a safe supply of drugs and safe injection sites saves lives and puts addicts in daily contact with people who can help them. Will this government end the war on drugs by decriminalizing them, providing a safe supply and reallocating resources from policing addicts to providing treatment for them? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, I think it's really important we make sure that when we speak about people who use substances, we remove stigmatizing language like the word addict. We can stand together, as this government has, with people who use substances and their families to ensure a range of options for people who are struggling with addiction, who are using substances in a way that is harming their health and their communities. As you know, we have restored harm reduction to the Canadian drugs and substances strategy. We've made it easier for people to access safe supplies of substances. We've increased access to treatment and the variety of treatment through federal transfers to provinces and territories. Madam Chair, we're working with communities to make sure there are more community-based approaches to treating The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, the Geneva Convention considers both tear gas and pepper spray to be chemical weapons and prohibits their use in war, yet our police forces use these weapons on Canadian civilians. These weapons are indiscriminate and can affect peaceful protestors and innocent bystanders. Will the government prohibit the use of these weapons and require police to use de-escalation techniques to keep legal protests peaceful? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, the right to peaceful protest in this country is a constitutionally protected right. We want to ensure it's always respected. At the same time, Madam Chair, we recognize that the use of even less than lethal force can have significant impacts on people's safety. This is a highly regulated substance in Canada. It's prohibited for non-police use, and for the police it is and should be highly regulated. The RCMP have advised me they have not used tear gas in nine years. We'll continue to monitor it to ensure that peaceful protest is always respected. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, in 2012 the RCMP spent $14 million on 18 armoured personnel carriers. One's parked at the Nanaimo detachment. I can't imagine why we have weapons of war like this for policing civilians. Will the government rein in the RCMP budget and end wasteful spending on militarizing our civilian police forces? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, it's a very important tradition that our Canadian police are not militarized. At the same time, we've seen a number of tragedies when police have responded to situations in which people were armed with weapons designed for soldiers to kill soldiers, and they've been used to kill police officers. The militarization of our society, so strongly promoted by some, is the direct consequence of the militarization of the police. As we remove these weapons from our society and prohibit them, we'll make it safer for everyone and we can then move away from such a model of policing. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, the government spent $4. 5 billion to buy an old, leaky pipeline. Since 1961, there have been 82 reported spills from the Trans Mountain pipeline. Over 1. 5 million litres of crude oil has spilled into the surrounding environment. This weekend, the Trans Mountain pipeline leaked again, dumping 190,000 litres of oil. How much is this spill going to cost Canadian taxpayers to clean up? How much contingency funding has been budgeted to repair the environmental destruction from spills? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I want to thank the honourable colleague for his question. He full well knows that the acquisition that we made with regard to the TMX initiative is a reflection of the fact that we want this initiative to move forward in a sustainable manner and in a manner that protects the environment. I'll continue to work with my colleagues to endeavour to make sure that we have the appropriate processes in place to protect the environment and at the same time create good-quality, middle-class jobs for Canadians. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for RosemontLa PetitePatrie, Mr. Boulerice, has the floor. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice (RosemontLa Petite-Patrie, NDP): Thank you, MadamChair. The Black Lives Matter movement is right to discuss systemic racism in our societies. In Montreal, the city and the police department have recognized this, and measures will be put in place. The Liberal government, once again, is all talk and no walk. Although it spends $10million a day, we see no attempt to reform or change the RCMP. If the Prime Minister really wants to act, why is he delaying the action plan in response to the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls? Hon. Bill Blair: Let me assure this House and the member opposite that we're not dragging our feet. This is an important issue. Indigenous people, black Canadians and other racialized people are far too often experiencing systemic racism and disparate outcomes through the criminal justice system. It's incumbent upon all of us who work within the criminal justice system to take the steps and actions necessary to produce more equitable outcomes. All police services, including the RCMP, must be committed to ensuring that the people they're sworn to serve and protect are always treated with dignity and respect. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: MadamChair, why are the Liberals taking indigenous children to court to challenge the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal ruling in their favour? Hon. Marc Miller (Minister of Indigenous Services): Madam Chair, as the honourable member knows full well, a number of cases are pending, and we are currently negotiating with the parties. We are making progress, and I would be delighted to tell the member and the House about it in response to a later question. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: We've been asking questions about it for months, and as I see it, we should keep doing so. The Prime Minister's new pipeline, which taxpayers were forced to buy with their hard-earned money, has leaked. Some 190,000litres of oil spilled, and we can't even make the company pay for it because the Liberals bought the pipeline. Trans-Mountain, KeystoneXL and the resumption of gas exploration and development off the coast of Newfoundland and Labradorare these the projects the Liberals had in mind for their green recovery? Hon. Navdeep Bains: I'd like to thank the honourable member for his question. Our priority was to protect the health and safety of Canadians throughout the pandemic, especially when it comes to the environment. That's why environmental and climate change laws aimed at protecting the environment, human health and conservation will remain in force. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: Across Quebec, the cultural community is going through a harrowing time. Unions, associations, artists and creators have all taken part in public demonstrations recently to condemn the lack of a specific plan for the living arts, performing arts and festival sector. What is the government waiting for? Hon. Steven Guilbeault: I'd like to thank the member for his question. However, I strongly disagree with him. We haven't waited to develop a plan for the arts and culture sector. We listened to the community and we tailored our supports, as they were announced. We have an emergency plan for the arts and culture sector. We were asked to adapt the CERB to take royalties into account, and we did. We were asked to extend the CERB, and we did. We are fully aware that the recovery will take longer in the arts and culture sector. We have been there, we are there and we will be there for the arts and culture sector. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: Well, that wasn't at all what the artists and creators who were out demonstrating in the streets a few days ago thought. They were protesting on the weekend. The CERB extension announced by the government only brings us to September, but the cultural community is expecting the worst in the fall. What is the government's long-term plan to support creators and their entire teams? Hon. Steven Guilbeault: I'm not so sure those who were protesting last week had issues with our government, but we'd certainly be happy to speak with them. As for a long-term plan, we are currently consulting arts and culture stakeholders to contemplate together how the government can help the sector in response to the ongoing crisis. We are working on finding solutions, but until we have long-term solutions, we have seen to it that our artists and organizations have access to funding until September. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for BeauportLimoilou, Mrs. Vignola, has the floor. Mrs. Julie Vignola (BeauportLimoilou, BQ): Madam Chair, I will be sharing my time with the member for Montcalm. According to the latest news, Seaspan Shipyards will be spending an additional $1. 5billion to build two ships. Why? Because the ships were ordered in 2011 and still haven't been delivered. Davie built the Asterix without going over budget because it delivered the ship on time. Davie is currently the top shipyard, representing 50% of Canada's shipbuilding capacity. Why isn't Davie being awarded its fair share of contracts? Hon. Anita Anand (Minister of Public Services and Procurement): I'd like to thank the member for her question. Davie is certainly a strong and trusted partner that works very hard to help our government get results for Canadians. Building a new class of ships is highly complex, and it's not unusual for cost estimates to change throughout the procurement project. It's important to make sure additional funding is available for the joint support ships project to ensure the navy's vessels are delivered. Mrs. Julie Vignola: We are talking about $1. 5billion, here. In the beginning, eight years ago, the project was supposed to cost $2. 6billion. There can't be much missing when the cost overrun is double the initial estimate. Why haven't the ships been delivered yet? Why is Davie still not seen as a trusted partner? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Minister, please keep your answer brief. Hon. Anita Anand: Once again, I would point out that building a new class of ships is highly complex, and it's not unusual for the cost estimate to change for a procurement project as large as this one. I know that Davie works very hard, and we also believe it is an outstanding partner. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): It is now over to the honourable member for Montcalm, Mr. Thriault. Mr. Luc Thriault (Montcalm, BQ): Madam Chair, in Quebec, 12,000people have begun their training to work in residential and long-term care centres. They will be ready for duty in mid-September. In the meantime, we need the support of the army, which is helping us save lives. The dedication of the members of the armed forces is paramount, and I want to extend my heartfelt thanks. The government extended their mission until June26, which is only 10days away. What does the army have to do right now that is more important than helping our caregivers save lives? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, I'm glad my fellow member recognizes the fundamental role the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces have played and continue to play in residential and long-term care centres and many other areas in support of our seniors. We are in talks with the Quebec government. The discussions around providing continued assistance to Quebec are quite positive and productive. That assistance can take many forms, including the Red Cross. We will be there for our seniors, Madam Chair. Mr. Luc Thriault: We are short 12,000people, so if the Red Cross wants to help us, all the better. We'll take all the help we can get. Barely 800members of the military are still in Quebec. I repeat my question: What does the army have to do 10days from now that is more important if it's not to help caregivers save lives? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, all the members of the military are still in Quebec. They have done absolutely incredible work and are continuing to do so. The people at the Canadian Red Cross are well-trained paid workers who can perform the same work in partnership with the members of the armed forces, who can stay in Quebec as well. Right now, we are working with the Quebec government and discussing how we can keep the measure in place until September15. Mr. Luc Thriault: Madam Chair, our nurses and orderlies are exhausted. They're at the end of their ropes. Now is the time to thank them, not the time to turn our backs on them. It's not the time for dilly-dallying or discussions. It's the time to tell them that we will be there to help them until the end. I will repeat my question. What does the army have to do that is more important than helping caregivers save the lives of those who built Quebec? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The Leader of the Government in the House of Commons is asked to keep his answer brief. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, the Government of Canada is there and will continue to be there to help the people who built Quebec. The Government of Canada will work with the Quebec government to make that happen. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for Red DeerMountain View, Mr. Dreeshen. Mr. Earl Dreeshen (Red DeerMountain View, CPC): Thank you so much. Madam Chair, on May 14 I asked the Minister of Agriculture when the Liberal government would put aside its usual campaign rhetoric and recognize the very detrimental impact the carbon tax is having on farmers across this country. Minister Bibeau proudly noted that according to their data, the average cost of the carbon tax per farm across Canada is $210 to $819. We know that these numbers are completely unfounded and are not based on any factual evidence. The fact is that the Liberal government's own Parliamentary Budget Officer has estimated that at $25 per tonne, the cost for an 855-acre crop farm in Alberta is well over $6,000. The office came up with that using the government's statistics from the 2016 agricultural census. Madam Chair, the evidence is right in front of the minister. When will this Liberal government come clean with Canadians and recognize the disastrous impact the carbon tax is having on Canada's critical agriculture and agri-food sector? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food): Madam Chair, our pollution pricing policy is designed to grow a clean economy. To support this sector, we have put in place the following measures. Emissions from livestock and crop production are not priced. Farm fuels and fuels from cardlock facilities are exempt, and there is a partial rebate for propane and natural gas used in commercial greenhouses. Our government has been very open and transparent about our pollution pricing plan. We will do a review of our pollution pricing system in 2020, focused on competitiveness issues in trade-exposed industries such as agriculture. It is also important to remember that this is about tackling climate change and that 100% of the revenues stay in the province. We will continue to support our farmers and food processors as they provide an essential service across Canada. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Madam Chair, Minister Bibeau keeps talking about wanting to protect Canadians'environment. Well, the truth is that Canada's farmers, ranchers and processors have for years demonstrated their ability to deliver meaningful reductions in emissions and to safeguard the environment through the adoption of new technologies, education and innovative management practices, but the government ignores these efforts. Will the minister at the very least admit to Canadians that Canadian farmers are unable to pass on the cost of the carbon tax to consumers and instead have to absorb those extra costs out of their own pockets? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Madam Chair, allow me to explain again our government's position on pollution pricing. The price and method were developed so we could build an increasingly clean economy. We put a number of measures in place to help the agriculture sector. Emissions from animal and plant production aren't taxed. Farm fuels and fuels delivered to off-farm points-of-sale are also Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you, Madam Chair. I do have another question. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I am watching the time, Mr. Dreeshan. You have a couple more seconds. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you. Madam Chair, Minister Bibeau has repeatedly asked stakeholders to send her data about the impacts of the carbon tax on farmers, so this is exactly what they have been doing. The Atlantic Grains Council, the Grain Farmers of Ontario, Producteurs de grains du Qubec and the Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association issued a joint statement at the beginning of this year in which they estimated that the cumulative indirect inflation of carbon tax on farm costs will be $14. 50 an acre this year, with that cost escalating by more than double by 2022 to almost $30 an acre. These are huge numbers. Why does the Liberal government continue to ignore the facts presented to it and continue to misrepresent the truth to Canadians? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Madame Chair, I can assure you that we have paid close attention to all the information that has been provided to us and that our calculation was also based on this information provided by provinces and different stakeholders. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Our government has been very open and transparent about our pollution pricing plan. The department used data from stakeholders and provinces Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you very much, Madam Chair Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: as well as the 2019 agricultural tax data to estimate the average cost of pollution pricing associated with grain drying at up to 0. 4% of overall operating costs. It is important to remember that we have put in place many special provisions Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Madam Chair Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: like exempting farm fuel and providing other financial supports for farmers. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Dreeshen, I am watching the time, and the minister is allowed to answer for the same amount of time that you used to ask the question. Therefore, I would hope that we would allow her to finish. She has finished, and unfortunately the time is up. The committee now stands adjourned until tomorrow at noon.

Since there was a lot of absence in public service during the pandemic outbreak, John Williamson thought the Service Canada should be to blame for their irresponsibility. Mona Fortier justified themselves by illustrating that the government was always supporting the families, the industries, and the workers by offering support funds. However, what the public would like to see was complete and exact statistics of the financial support from the government, but not always claiming that" they were doing hard" .

tr-sq-1256

tr-sq-1256_0

What did Bergeron think of the cooperation between two levels of government when discussing the inquiries towards Service Canada and their cooperation with Quebec? The Chair (Hon. Anthony Rota (NipissingTimiskaming, Lib.) ): I call this meeting to order. Welcome to the 23rd meeting of the House of Commons Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic. A reminder to all members that in order to avoid issues with sound, members participating in person should not also be connected to the video conference. For those of you who are joining via video conference, I will remind you that when speaking you should be on the same channel as the language you are speaking, and please use your headsets. As usual, please direct your remarks through the chair. As I understand, there are no ministerial announcements today. We will now proceed to presenting petitions. I remind members that any petition presented during a meeting of this special committee must have already been certified by the clerk of petitions. For members participating in person, I ask that they please come and drop their signed certificates off at the table once the petition is presented. I would ask members to be very brief and concise, and to summarize the exact content of the petition. We will continue. The first person presenting a petition today is Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May (SaanichGulf Islands, GP): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I present two petitions this morning. The residents of SaanichGulf Islands are calling on the government to simplify the process for protection of marine protected areas. It's a multi-layered communication process. The marine protected area first proposed in the 1970s for the southern Strait of Georgia, now called the Salish Sea, has been awaiting designation for so long that it was originally endorsed by Jacques Cousteau. That gives us a sense for why petitioners are calling for a simplified and more rapid process. The second petition is from petitioners who are very concerned about our obligations under the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and our commitments under the Truth and Reconciliation Commission calls to action. They specifically reference the RCMP violation of UNDRIP in its actions on Wet'suwet'en territory and ask the government to commit to actually living the principles embodied in UNDRIP. The Chair: We will now go to Mr. Hardie. Mr. Ken Hardie (FleetwoodPort Kells, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am presenting a petition on behalf of the one in a million Canadians who suffer severe and adverse effects from vaccinations. GuillainBarre syndrome is very debilitating, and this petition seeks the setting up of a no-fault accident or compensation system to help offset the loss of work, the loss of wages and the loss of quality of life that many of these people suffer. I'm pleased to present this petition pursuant to Standing Order 36. The Chair: Mr. Trudel, you have the floor. Mr. Denis Trudel (LongueuilSaint-Hubert, BQ): Mr. Chair, culture is the soul of a people. Over the past 20years or so, culture, especially music, has never been as accessible as it is now. Paradoxically, creators'incomes have never been so low. The advent of digital technology has completely overturned the system for distributing the wealth generated by creators for the benefit of various Web stakeholders, many of whom are billionaires. This petition addresses these problems and proposes realistic solutions. The first is to set a minimum royalty model for streaming platforms for artists. The second is to update the existing private copying system. The third is for Internet and cell phone providers who sell their services as direct access to culture to share their profits with artists. The fourth is that the GAFAMs have to pay taxes on their services. Six thousand people have already signed the first version of this petition, launched last month by musician JordanOfficer and supported by singer BarbaraSecours. As an artist, I am proud to present this petition today because the issues it raises are fundamental to the survival of Quebec culture. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood ParkFort Saskatchewan, CPC): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I have four petitions to present today. I will be as brief as you suggested, although I will observe that if some members are going on longer during petitions than they normally do, it might be because the government has taken away so many of the tools that opposition members normally have for raising important issues in the House. The first petition deals with the issue of euthanasia and long-term care. The petitioners are concerned that instead of focusing on improving medically assisted life, something that we know is a major issue in light of recent revelations, the government has put so much time and legislative energy into efforts to continually further expand euthanasia in Canada and remove vital safeguards. The second petition speaks to the ongoing conversations happening in Canada around systemic discrimination and systemic racism. I think we do need to reflect on systemic discrimination. This petition deals specifically with Bill 21 in Quebec and raises concerns. The reality of the way that bill applies is that people from certain backgrounds who wish to practise their faith are not able to fully participate in Canadian society if they are employed in the public service. This petition asks the government to provide a response on that issue, something it hasn't done in response to past petitions on this. The third petition deals with the issue of firearms. The petitioners want to see the government take a strong response in dealing with illegal guns and gun smuggling. The petition notes that the vast majority of firearms-related crimes in Canada involves illegal guns. At the same time, the petitioners are concerned that the government has the wrong focusthat is, harassing law-abiding firearms ownerswithout putting in place substantial measures to deal with illegal guns. The petitioners want to see the reversal of the order in council from May 1 and strong measures to deal with illegal firearms. The fourth and final petition deals with Bill S-204, a bill that would make it a criminal offence for a Canadian to go abroad and receive an organ from a person who has not consented to giving that organ. It would also create a mechanism by which someone could be deemed inadmissible to Canada if they were involved in organ harvesting and trafficking. The petitioners are supportive of Bill S-204 and of similar bills in previous parliaments and would like to see us pass that bill as soon as possible. The Chair: Presenting petitions, Mr. Lamoureux. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Winnipeg North, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. It is with pleasure that I table another petition by the residents of Winnipeg North. These residents have signed a petition asking the Government of Canada, and in fact all members of Parliament, to put a high priority on assisting our poorest seniors. The increases to the GIS by $200, and $300 to the OAS, have been well received. They just want to highlight how important it is to support our seniors, in particular the poorest of our seniors. The Chair: For members present in the Chamber, a reminder that they are asked to bring their petitions to the table. We'll now proceed to statements by members. We'll go to Ms. Atwin for the first one. Mrs. Jenica Atwin (Fredericton, GP): Thank you, Mr. Chair. June 21 is National Indigenous Peoples Day, a day of acknowledgement and a day of celebration of the beautiful diversity of indigenous peoples across Turtle Island. I wish to recognize the leadership of Chief Shelley Sabattis of the Welamukotuk First Nation in Oromocto, New Brunswick. Each year she and her council, volunteers and staff go above and beyond to show appreciation for their members and to demonstrate pride and culture while promoting well-being. We gather in an event where all are welcome to take part, from traditional hand drum-making with elders to moose meat and tacos. This year we will celebrate a bit differently, but we will still stay connected, virtually and in spirit, to the vast network of indigenous peoples and allies. We need each other now more than ever. May we come together in song and stories and in solidarity. We will remember those who are not among us. I hope all of Canada will join us in observing National Indigenous Peoples Day. Mawiyapasuwok: let us come together. Nit liech. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Beech. Mr. Terry Beech (Burnaby NorthSeymour, Lib.): Mr. Chair, COVID-19 is an unprecedented challenge for all communities across Canada, but as we do our part to flatten the curve, I often think about those who suit up every morning to serve on the front lines of our health care system. My mother is a home care worker and my sister is a nurse. Even before the crisis, they would often share the hardships they faced on a day-to-day basis. It's a tough job at the best of times. In a pandemic, these jobs are life-threatening. I think we can all agree that these workers deserve more than our good wishes. They deserve a raise. That is why we have worked with the provinces to implement pandemic pay. In British Columbia more than 250,000 front-line workers are eligible for this program. That works out to a pay increase of about $4 an hour. It's a small show of our appreciation for their difficult and priceless contribution to our country. Share this message and say thanks to our front-line workers, participate in the 7 p. m. cheer, and order a pizza for your local nurses. It's the least we can do. The Chair: We'll now go on to Mr. Shipley. Mr. Doug Shipley (BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. We've been living in difficult times. Slowly, we are getting back to some resemblance of normalcy, although unfortunately not soon enough for some of our great summer festivals. It will not be normal in BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte this summer without the iconic Boots and Hearts weekend music festival, Kempenfest, Oro World's Fair, the Elmvale Fall Fair, or the Midhurst Autumnfest. Canada Day celebrations have been cancelled, but we can still celebrate the great nation we call home. Because of the lack of Canada Day celebrations, I've created Happy Canada Day lawn signs that are available through my constituency office, free to all residents of BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte. I'm also hosting a drive-through party on Canada Day at the Royal Canadian Legion on St. Vincent Street in Barrie. All are welcome to attend. There will be cupcakes for all. Please drop by the legion between 11 a. m. and 2 p. m. , and we can celebrate Canada Day safely together. Thank you and have a great summer. The Chair: Now we'll go on to Ms. Young. Ms. Kate Young (London West, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Among the countless ordinary Canadians who have stepped up to do extraordinary work during COVID-19, I wish to draw attention to our teachers. Teachers have always had a special place in my heart. My father was a teacher, and my daughter-in-law, Kelly Webb, is one now. I'm certain that my colleagues can all easily remember a teacher in their past who played an important role in helping them achieve their potential. I remember my grade 12 English teacher, Vince Weaver, at Westminster Secondary School in London. He made me realize that I could do so much more than I believed. Across the country, as schools closed, teachers did not stop their work. Some took their classes online. Others found innovative ways to continue engaging with their students. This is not the school year anyone imagined, and what the next one will look like is unclear, but our teachers in London West and across Canada have shown that no matter what, they will be there to help our next generation shine. The Chair: Before proceeding to the next presenter, I just want to remind the honourable members in the chamber that I realize that the six-foot limit makes it harder to whisper to each other, but we're hearing a bit of rumble, so I just want you to try to whisper at your best. Mr. Bergeron, you have the floor. Mr. Stphane Bergeron (Montarville, BQ): Mr. Chair, on July1st, we will be celebrating one of the most important events for the riding of Montarville: the 175thanniversary of the city of Saint-Bruno-de-Montarville. The theme Proud of our traditions will be the focus of this celebration for the people of Montarville. This is a good illustration of the rich history of this municipality nestled in the western foothills of Mont-Saint-Bruno. The seigneury of Montarville was granted in1710 to the illustrious former governor of Trois-Rivires, PierreBoucher. The parish of Saint-Bruno, which took root there and in which a village grew, became a municipal corporation in1845. To this day, it is one of the most prosperous localities, with a strong sense of belonging, a very dynamic community life and jealously preserved natural environments. A whole program had been drawn up for the celebration, but the current health crisis has taken over some of the planned activities, which has in no way diminished the pride and festive spirit of the people of Montarville. On July1st, we will have a good reason to be proud, in spite of everything. Happy 175thanniversary to Saint-Bruno-de-Montarville. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Maloney. Mr. James Maloney (EtobicokeLakeshore, Lib.): Mr. Chair, thank you for allowing me to take a moment to highlight an initiative that I started early on during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Heroes of EtobicokeLakeshore is an opportunity for citizens in my riding to recognize the contributions of those in their community who make life a bit easier. I'm pleased with the number of nominations I received that honour everyone from front-line workers to businesses that are innovating in these difficult times to volunteers who are finding new ways to reach out. I think of Daniel Lauzon who set up Food for Now, a mobile service that helps take care of the homeless. I think of Toni Varone, who helped his business clients by forgiving their rents, or young Lucas, who wanted to thank his teachers. I've been moved and inspired by the countless stories of generosity, strength, resiliency, kindness, incredible character and creativity. I want to thank all the heroes, as well as the people who nominated them. Keep them coming. Stay safe, everyone, and I wish you happy Canada Day early. The Chair: We'll now move on to Ms. Wong. Hon. Alice Wong (Richmond Centre, CPC): Mr. Chair, it gives me great pleasure to thank a local Richmond-based charity, the Social Diversity for Children Foundation, SDC, for its hard work both in raising funds for the purchase of personal protective equipment and in distributing this PPE to long-term care facilities and individual seniors'homes in the lower mainland of B. C. The COVID-19 relief fund is supported by a dozen other non-profits, businesses and community groups. Over the past two months, SDC has been to 32 seniors homes and senior-related organizations. In total, it has delivered masks to 7,000 care workers, staff and seniors. It is amazing to have witnessed how the younger generation have gotten involved in caring for the elderly at this very challenging time. The Chair: We'll now go to Ms. Damoff. Ms. Pam Damoff (Oakville NorthBurlington, Lib.): Mr. Chair, June is ALS Awareness Month, and 79 years after Lou Gehrig died from ALS little has changed. There's still no cure, and those with ALS typically die within five years of diagnosis. On June 21, Canadians will gather virtually to raise funds for ALS Canada in the Walk to End ALS. In Halton, normally we meet each year at Bronte Creek Provincial Park on the May long weekend to raise funds for ALS Canada. This year I will virtually join Tim's Titans, a team formed to honour Tim Robertson, my friend who died in 2016 after living with ALS for 13 years. I have a T-shirt, with a picture of Lou Gehrig, that says, Great Player. . . Lousy Disease and Tim's Titans. . . Great Team! ALS. . . Still a Lousy Disease. Join me on June 21 for the virtual Walk to End ALS to raise funds to support patients and their families and for ALS research. The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Khera. Ms. Kamal Khera (Brampton West, Lib.): Mr. Chair, on Saturday our community stood and marched in solidarity against anti-black racism. The peaceful protests that we're seeing across the country and around the world were not triggered by an isolated incident. They are fuelled by decades of ineffective action against something that is so insidious and deeply entrenched in our history, systems and institutions. For us, that is the racial inequality faced by Canada's indigenous and black communities. Anti-black racism is real. It exists right here in Canada, in our communities, including in Brampton. It exists when racialized students at McCrimmon Middle School are called McCriminals. It exists when a shocking report exposes the Peel District School Board's failure to work fairly with the black community. It exists when D'Andre Campbell, who was fighting mental illness, loses his life at the hands of the police. It is clear that we need reform. We need to dismantle the systems that allow this privilege and oppression to take form, and address the unconscious bias plaguing our institutions. We'll need to be bold, and the time to do that is now. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd (Sturgeon RiverParkland, CPC): Mr. Chair, a few months ago I rose in the House on the eve of our closure due to COVID-19. I told Canadians we must not give in to fear, that we would carry on and get through this crisis stronger than ever. Today, in this city and across Canada, Canadians are enjoying a beer on their favourite patios. Businesses are reopening, jobs are returning and our lives are starting to feel a bit normal again. Canadians pulled together, and because of that we did not see the devastating death toll that many had predicted. Life may be returning to normal, but unfortunately, here in this chamber of democracy, the people's voices continue to be shut down. There is no good reason for Parliament to be suspended today. In the words of my grandfather, it's time for the Liberals to get with the program and bring back the House. The Chair: We will now proceed with Ms. Jones. Ms. Yvonne Jones (Labrador, Lib.): Mr. Chair, from in-person learning to virtual classrooms, COVID-19 has drastically changed the lives of students across the country, especially those in post-secondary education who are worried about covering costs like tuition or rent this coming fall. Our government recognized that students should not have to worry or put their futures on pause during this difficult time. That's why last month the federal government introduced the Canada emergency student benefit. If you're a high school student headed to a post-secondary school, or a current post-secondary student or a recent graduate, you can receive the Canada emergency student benefit every four weeks and have the financial support that you need to save for school. We also doubled Canada student grants and loans, enhanced the student loan program, increased supports for indigenous post-secondary education and introduced the Canada student service grant for those who wish to pursue it. Our government is here to help all students get the support they need to pursue their future goals successfully. I wish them all the very best, and I wish all of you, my colleagues and those across Canada, a very happy National Indigenous Peoples Day, which is coming up on June 21. The Chair: I want to remind the honourable members to keep to their 60 seconds so that we don't go over the time. I'm sure it would be a lot easier for everyone if we stuck to that limit. We will now go to Mr. Aitchison. Mr. Scott Aitchison (Parry SoundMuskoka, CPC): Mr. Chair, I rise today to once again implore the government to do something about the horrible lack of access to and crazy cost of rural Internet service. Right now, too many areas of my riding have no access to rural Internet service at all, and those who can get service are paying through the nose. I've even heard constituents say that during this pandemic, they are having to choose between feeding their kids and educating them. Over the last few weeks, Conservatives have been consulting with rural Canadians, and the results are in. My constituents are tired of fancy political promises. They are frustrated beyond belief by the new challenges created by this pandemic. They are absolutely fed up with having their pleas ignored. All we want is affordable and reliable Internet service. Is that too much to ask of the government? The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. MacGregor. Mr. Alistair MacGregor (CowichanMalahatLangford, NDP): Mr. Chair, these last few months have been incredibly challenging for the residents of CowichanMalahatLangford, who have been forced to deal with the economic and social consequences of COVID-19. The pandemic has laid bare the inadequacies of our social safety net, the weakness in our supply chains and the dependence of our society on essential workers, who often work long hours for low wages, putting themselves and their families at risk. We've also been forced to confront the systemic inequality, poverty and racism that continue to hold so many people back from achieving their full potential. I will not dishonour the sacrifice that so many have made during this time by allowing us to go back to the status quo that got us here in the first place. I will not apologize for demanding that the most vulnerable in our society get the supports and opportunities they need to live with dignity, and I will not relent from pushing my political colleagues to summon the courage necessary to implement policies that lead to environmental, economic and social justice. The Chair: I now give the floor to Mr. Blaney. Hon. Steven Blaney (BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, CPC): Mr. Chair, here is a beautiful story, the story of a woman from Bellechasse, a courageous young mother from Saint-Malachie, Marie-ChristineGoupil. With three children, including the eldest daughter with a disability, and realizing that her daughter with a disability had special clothing needs, she decided to go into business to meet the needs of other parents who, like her, were facing their child's clothing challenges. Last week, she presented her Handy clothing collection on the show Dans l'il du dragon. It was a very emotional moment for the audience and the dragons. They were so touched that they decided to give her the amount she wanted without diluting her shares. The video of her presentation has already been viewed over 1million times on social networks. Marie-ChristineGoupil has discovered a passion for entrepreneurship and has moved and inspired many people with her passionate and courageous attitude. Congratulations, Ms. Goupil, your example makes us proud. The Chair: Mr. Blanchet, you have the floor. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet (BeloeilChambly, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I lend my voice to the Chief of the Assembly of First Nations of Quebec-Labrador, GhislainPicard, whose message is as follows: There have been no fewer than 14reports and conclusions of commissions of inquiry since1967 highlighting major problems in relations between law enforcement agencies and indigenous people. Each time, the conclusions have been overwhelming and highlight a disturbing reality. The justice system has failed indigenous people. Are you going to respond, as you too often do, by moving on to the next one, or are you going to do what we expect you to do, which is to recognize that the justice system discriminates against indigenous people and that we have no less right to security than the rest of the population? In three months, police interventions have claimed more victims among our members than the pandemic. But it is not enough to simply take a knee and denounce racism. It's about standing up and taking action. Those are the words of GhislainPicard. The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Harder. Ms. Rachael Harder (Lethbridge, CPC): Over the last few months, Canada's democracy has been disregarded and an autocracy has been resurrected in its place. By refusing to hold regular parliamentary sittings, Mr. Trudeau is sending a strong message to the Canadian public that he alone is the one who matters. In 2014, he professed that Canadians want their Members of Parliament to be effective voices for their communities in Ottawa, and not merely mouthpieces for an all-too-powerful Prime Minister. As it stands, however, he has shut down Parliament. Effectively, he has stripped us, the opposition, of our privileges and our powers. Sadly, Mr. Trudeau has become the all-too-powerful Prime Minister that he once warned against. A government that does not allow for effective opposition is not functioning in the best interest of Canadians; it is operating in the best interest of itself and, even more so, the interest of the Prime Minister. Canadians deserve to flourish in a democracy, not merely survive under the autocracy that this Prime Minister has created. The Chair: We'll now go on to Ms. Zahid. Mrs. Salma Zahid (Scarborough Centre, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I would like to recognize the work of Agincourt Community Services Association and its tireless executive director, Lee Soda, who have been serving our community during the COVID-19 pandemic. Under more pressure than ever, their staff and volunteers continue to serve a community whose need was great even before the crisis. Their food bank helps over 4,000 people weekly. They have opened outdoor washrooms and hand-washing stations for vulnerable communities and are delivering groceries and other essentials to vulnerable seniors. ACSA is a bridge between those who can help and those who need help, and they are just one example of how our community has come together to meet this challenge. There are restaurants and businesses donating meals to front-line workers, residents answering the call to stock the food bank shelves and neighbours looking in on the vulnerable and isolated. I am so proud of our community's spirit. Scarborough is strong. The Chair: We'll now proceed to the questioning of ministers. Please note that we will suspend the proceedings twice in order to allow employees who provide support for the sitting to replace each other safely. The first question goes to the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Chair, for months Conservatives have been pointing out flaws in Liberal government programs that are preventing Canadians from getting the help they need. The Prime Minister has refused to make these very technical changes to get more help to Canadians who need it. For example, on the wage subsidy, more than two-thirds of the money allocated for that program has lapsed because businesses don't qualify. I have a simple question. Will the Prime Minister change the program to allow companies who have made acquisitions to access the wage subsidy to keep more people working? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Papineau, Lib.): Mr. Chair, from the very beginning we knew that as we rolled out measures, we would need to improve them and tweak them, and that's exactly what we've been doing over the past three months. We needed to make measures happen quickly for Canadians, and we did that. But we continued to improve them, to make additions and amendments so that more people could get the help they needed, including with the proposed legislation last week that expanded the reach of the wage subsidy to more businesses. Unfortunately, the Conservatives didn't even want us to debate that particular piece of legislation. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Actually, Mr. Chair, it was the Liberals who said no to the motion to allow this Parliament to sit to debate that motion, and even in that legislation they refused to allow businesses who have made acquisitions to access the program. Now, when we look at the rent relief program, it is so difficult to apply for it that many landlords are refusing to bother, leaving even more small businesses to fall through the cracks. In fact, of the $3 billion allocated to the rent relief program, only $39 million has been paid out. That's less than 2%. Now, the Prime Minister is still using talking points from April. It's now June and he has refused to fix these programs and has successfully talked out the calendar on the days that the House of Commons could meet to discuss these programs. When will he make these changes to get more help to Canadians who need it? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, throughout this pandemic, we have constantly been updating and expanding our various programs. We recognize, in conversations with the premiers, how important it is to make sure that we're working together, the provinces and the federal government, on issues like rent subsidies where commercial rent is indeed a provincial jurisdiction. Many provinces have moved forward with the eviction bans that are necessary to go along with this, and we'll continue to work with provinces to make sure that we're getting Canadians the help they need. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Mr. Chair, Canadians cannot wait. He has run down the clock on parliamentary sittings and he still refuses to make these changes to get more help to Canadians. Today, we learned that Telus has installed Huawei technology in downtown Ottawa. There are over 80 sites across the national capital region with Huawei technology installed. Some of these sites are very near sensitive government institutions, like government departments, the National Research Council, RCMP headquarters and the Bank of Canada. How long has the Prime Minister known that Huawei technology has been installed in the Ottawa area? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, first off, on the issue of Parliament, it has been meeting four times a week over the past many weeks, and members of the opposition have been able to continue to ask questions on COVID-19 and a broad range of subjects. Moreover, every two weeks the finance department puts forward at the finance committee the full transparent measures that we've taken, so that parliamentarians can study them. We are continuing to work in this crisis. At the same time Mr. Ziad Aboultaif (Edmonton Manning, CPC): Answer the question. The Chair: I'm sorry? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: in regard to Huawei technology there are strict rules for companies to follow and we assume they will all follow those. The Chair: We'll pause for a second and stop the clock. I want to remind the honourable members who are joining us virtually that heckling really does disrupt the whole session. Your face does come up and we do see who it is, so I just want to make sure that you're aware of that. Now we'll go back to Mr. Scheer. We have a minute and 10 seconds left. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister is bragging about accountability and transparency. Will he table an economic update before the House rises? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, throughout this unprecedented pandemic, we have been open and transparent about all of the measures we've put forward. We've updated the finance committee The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer: That's a long way of saying no, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister has pursued a policy of appeasement in pursuit of a personal vanity product at the UN. In the process, he's cozied up to dictators and human rights violators. He's abandoned Israel and committed funding to UNRWA, an organization whose schools have been used as storage facilities for Hamas rockets against Israeli civilians, and whose facilities have served as breeding grounds for racism and anti-Semitism. He has apologized for the Iranian regime when it shot down a plane full of Canadian citizens, and he refuses to list the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist entity. What's the point of having a seat at the table if you have to sell out Canadian principles to get there? The Chair: The Right Honourable Prime Minister. Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, we see that the Conservatives have kept with the Harper approach to international diplomacy. The failed presence of Canada on the world stage was an embarrassment for many Canadians for many years. That's why, when we took office five years ago, we demonstrated the kind of leadership on values that Canadians expected. We will continue to work around the world to defend multilateralism. The Chair: We have a point of order. Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May: This being a committee, we can have a point of order during what would have been question period. I am not sitting that far away from the Prime Minister, and I'm sorry, but Andrew Scheer used to be the Speaker of the House and should show better decorum. The Chair: We have a point of order from Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, on the same point of order, it is disgusting for the leader of the Green Party to use decorum as an excuse to interrupt the Leader of the Opposition in the middle of critical lines of questioning. The leader of the Green Party knows the rules of the House and shouldn't be abusing them to advance a partisan agenda. The Chair: We're getting into debate. I do want to point out that the time had run out. We're now moving on to the next line of questions. On a point of order, Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer: I appreciate the honourable leader of the Green Party, Elizabeth May, for that reminder. When I was Speaker I always appreciated her help and advice about how to improve decorum in here. I just want to say to the member, and to all members, that the reason that I cannot control myself is that the Prime Minister used the word embarrassment in answering a foreign affairs question, and it just made me think of the India trip. The Chair: I believe we're getting into debate and arguments. Mr. Blanchet, you have the floor. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: Mr. Chair, while the Greens and the Conservatives are saying that they'll be waiting outside after the meeting, I will ask a question. The Prime Minister has extended the Canada emergency response benefit, and that's good news, but it's not enough. Last week in the House, the government said it was urgent to fight fraud. For us, it was also urgent to adjust the CERB to the needs of the tourism, arts and agriculture sectors. Farmers are going to be seriously under-resourced. So what happened to the urgency of reforming the CERB? Why is the government refusing to talk to the opposition parties? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, I am very pleased to hear the hon. member finally align himself with the positions of the Liberal Party. Unfortunately, the Bloc is a week late. It should have let us debate these concerns in the House last week. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: It seems to me that the word alignment here is a fantasy. We have unequivocally proposed to extend the debate to reach an agreement, which brings me to my second question. Last week, the issue of assistance to people with disabilities was also a pressing concern, and it's even more so a week later. The Bloc proposed to extend the discussions and split the government's bill in two to help people with disabilities. Why is the government refusing this assistance to people with disabilities, when it could have been debated with the opposition in a civilized and proper way in a Parliament in which it has a minority? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: That was exactly what we wanted, but unanimous consent of the Chamber was required to debate this matter, and the Conservative Party of Canada voted against it. Unfortunately, we are going to have to find a different way to help people with disabilities. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: If the idea is so good and wonderful, why not start over and open the dialogue now? What's stopping the Prime Minister from being a rallying point and inviting us to take to each other and resolve the problem, rather than saying that he is going to pack up his toys and go home? The people with disabilities are the ones who will pay the price. Where was the Prime Minister on October21,2019? He received a minority mandate from Quebeckers and Canadians. Why is he behaving like something between a prime minister with a majority and a monarch by divine right? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: I've heard the Conservative Party and the Bloc Qubcois throw their accusations around. They don't point out that the House of Commons did indeed give its consent to extend the mandate of the Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic until the end of June. Three parties agreed, which was the right thing to do in the context of this minority government. We've been working with the other parties. However, as they did not get the results they wanted, they complained. Unfortunately, they too are part of a minority Parliament and must respect the voice of the majority of parliamentarians, just as we do. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: I might have been tempted, but that's unlikely to happen because the Prime Minister isn't me, he's him. It's therefore up to him to bring people together, open a dialogue and recall Parliament. All we were asking for was the opportunity to talk for an hour or two. However, suddenly he doesn't want to play anymore. It's not working anymore, and there's something a bit strange about that. In addition, the government wants to buy the right to interfere in provincial and Quebec jurisdictions for $14billion. However, Quebec and a number of provinces are refusing to allow it to interfere in their jurisdictions and are asking that this money be paid to them unconditionally. Is the Prime Minister trying to take advantage of the crisis or is he trying to create a constitutional crisis? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, the safety of Canadians is the responsibility of all levels of government. That's why we have proposed a $14billion agreement to ensure that all Canadians across the country experience a safe re-opening of the economy. This is a proposal that we are working on with the provinces because we know that there are needs across the country, including early childhood centres, screening and support for municipalities. The federal government wants to be there to help the provinces. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh (Burnaby South, NDP): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Indigenous leaders have expressed a lack of confidence in the RCMP commissioner's ability to tackle full-scale systemic racism, but the Prime Minister has expressed his confidence in the commissioner. What's that based on? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, over the past two years, Commissioner Lucki has made significant strides forward on an issue where there is still much more to do. We know that systemic racism exists in all of our institutions across this country The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: This is the same RCMP commissioner who just recently said that they couldn't explain what systemic racism was. Now the Prime Minister says that he has confidence, when indigenous leaders express their lack of confidence. Why does the Prime Minister believe that the RCMP commissioner can tackle systemic racism in the RCMP? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, systemic racism is something that touches every corner of our country, every corner of our institutions. It requires people to understand and move forward in coordinated ways with partners. The commissioner is committed to doing that, alongside members of our government. We will do that together and work with indigenous communities and black The Chair: Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, recent events have made it abundantly clear that to tackle the systemic racism at the level of the RCMP, we need a full-scale overhaul of the RCMP. Is the Prime Minister committed to a full-scale overhaul of the RCMP to root out systemic racism? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: As I've said many times, Mr. Chair, I am committed to addressing systemic racism in this country and taking significant, bold actions to reduce the amount of discrimination that indigenous peoples, that racialized Canadians face on a daily basis. We have much work to do, but we will do it together. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, Black Lives Matter has been calling for governments to defund the police. What it's saying is that we need to be better at where we spend our money, investing in communities and not policing. Will the Prime Minister commit to a review of the RCMP budget to allocate resources to community services and not to policing? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, over the past years we have been investing more directly and more money in community organizations, in the black community, and working with indigenous partners on the path to reconciliation. We have been investing in the kinds of community-based programs and solutions that are part of the solution. We know there is much more to do, and we will continue to look at all of our expenditures to make sure we're doing the right things. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, over the past few years, while the Prime Minister has been in office, the RCMP budget has increased by 31%. More money is going towards policing. In recent events we've seen people who needed a health care response to a health care crisis been killed by the RCMP. Does the Prime Minister believe that we need to be investing in a health care response instead of a police response for people who are faced with a crisis? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, the member opposite well knows that it's not an either-or. We need to make sure that our systems across the board, from our police systems to our judicial systems, to our health care systems, to our community systems, are actually addressing the systemic discrimination issues that are embedded within them That is exactly what we are going to continue to do in the coming years. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, with regard to the CERB extension, can the Prime Minister guarantee that everyone who is receiving CERB payments now will continue to do so without any gaps throughout the summer? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, I am happy to highlight that many Canadians who were on the CERB are now returning to work. Many more who are on the CERB now will be returning to work in the coming weeks. We know that as the economy gets back to work, people will want to The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Can the Prime Minister assure people who need it that they will continue to receive the CERB over the summer, yes or no? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: We are very pleased to point out that we are going to extend the Canada emergency response benefit for at least another eight weeks, because a lot of people are going to need it. Even if they want to work, there aren't enough jobs for everyone. So we'll be there for them, as we have been from the beginning. The Chair: We're going to pause and suspend proceedings just for a few moments to allow our support staff to substitute for one another in a healthy and safe way. We'll now proceed with Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod (KamloopsThompsonCariboo, CPC): Mr. Chair, it was really a surprise in the middle of a pandemic to see the Prime Minister at his first campaign stop last week in Ottawa. Certainly the game plan has become very transparent. He has a daily report show and he wants to sideline Parliament, dominate the news cycle and keep everyone in the dark about the state of the economy. According to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, there is no reason that he cannot provide the fiscal update during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the PBO has published a number of reports himself. Why won't the Prime Minister provide a fiscal update so we can all understand the state of our economy, or is that just not part of his campaign playbook? Hon. Mona Fortier (Minister of Middle Class Prosperity and Associate Minister of Finance): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Canada's economy is in a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We've been clear about that. We will continue to be open and transparent about the actions that we are taking to support families, businesses, workers, our health care system and our economy. This includes biweekly reports to Parliament on the full cost and status of our economic measures. Once it is possible to provide a clear economic projection, we will provide an update. We are in this together, and we are prepared to do whatever is necessary to support Canadians. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: Chair, Canada's economy was in trouble prior to the COVID, with some of the worst numbers since 2009. Government revenues in March dropped by 7. 2%, and it's shameful and, quite frankly, it's outrageous that they refuse to provide Parliament and Canadians with an economic update. Households during this challenging time know how much money is coming in and they know how much money is going out. The picture is not pretty, but they know what the picture is. Can the finance minister at least reveal the projected revenue decline in quarters one and two? Hon. Mona Fortier: The Canadian economy is going through a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We've known this for three months. We've continued to be open and transparent about the measures we've put in place for Canadians, workers and businesses. In fact, we have reported biweekly to Parliament on the total cost and status of our plan's measures. As soon as it's possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide a comprehensive update to Canadians The Chair: We go back to Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: Other governments have managed to provide updates for their citizens and carry out their responsibilities, but of course this government has sidelined Parliament with simply a question-but-no-answer period. Let's try something else. The forestry industry was in crisis even before the pandemic, with mills closing down and thousands of jobs lost. Eight weeks ago, Minister Freeland said, I have had many discussions with leaders in our forestry sector and the provinces about what we can do to support the industry today. Meanwhile, we've had support going to the arts and we've had support going to fisheries, just to name a few, but arguably for the industry that was having some of the most numerous challenges, it has been radio silence. That was eight weeks ago today. Can the government at least commit to releasing an updated softwood lumber transition plan before we rise? Hon. Seamus O'Regan (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Chair, we remain committed, of course, to the forestry industry and seeing it through this pandemic and this very uncertain time. The expanding market opportunities program, for instance, has helped Canada's forestry sector diversify, create jobs and open new markets. We've had new construction projects that are active today, using Canadian wood in key markets like Korea, Japan, China and the United States. Tomorrow this House will vote on our government's investment of $20. 97 million for this program. It's part of our budget 2019 commitment to invest $251 million over three years, and I hope the opposition will support us in that. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: It was stated in a major newspaper this morning that this government is like a sexy sports carvroom, vroom, vroombut with a history of breakdowns and major repairs. I think that might describe what has been happening. For forestry, it has been eight weeks and there has been nothing. There is another area that Deputy Prime Minister Freeland did talk about. We were talking about the U. S. softwood lumber duties that are being held in the United States. It's billions of dollars being held with the U. S. treasury. In April, she acknowledged that these duties are a real issue for the softwood lumber industry. What's been done since that time? Hon. David Lametti (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada): Mr. Chair, Canada's forestry industry supports good middle-class jobs in communities across our country. The sector is also an essential link in the medical equipment supply chain, and we thank them for all the work they're doing. We're aware of the immense pressures faced by this sector, especially at this time, and Deputy Prime Minister Freeland and others are taking that seriously and working through this issue. As our government has said repeatedly, we firmly believe that the U. S. duties on Canadian softwood lumber are unfair and unwarranted, and we will pursue all means in order to The Chair: Before continuing, I want to remind honourable members who are at home to make sure that the boom on their headsets is down. It just makes a better pickup. We heard everything, but it was a little distant. That's for everyone's benefit. We're now going to continue with Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell (Louis-Saint-Laurent, CPC): Mr. Chair, before I ask my question, I'd like to pay tribute to the Minister of Justice, particularly to his versatility. Today, he talked about forests. Yesterday, the Minister of Justice talked about Davie and indigenous affairs. Really, this minister is very versatile. My question is directly for the Minister of Finance. I like Mr. Lametti very much, but I'd like Mr. Morneau to answer my question. Yesterday, in a Senate parliamentary committee, the Minister of Finance half-opened the door to an economic update. Based on what he said, it seems that, as we speak, a committee of the Department of Finance is working on an economic update. Could Mr. Morneau tell Canadians when he is going to table this economic update? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, as we know, the Canadian economy is going through a period of extraordinary uncertainty. As soon as it's possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide a full update to Canadians. Right now, we can say that we have supported workers, businesses and Canadians with the emergency measures we have put in place. We will continue to do so, because we need to be sure that Canadians can get through this crisis. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I thought it was too good to be true. The Minister of Finance is opening the door, and the Minister of Small Business is closing it. We don't know when the economic update will take place, yet all across Canada, provinces are doing economic updates. Could Mr. Morneau explain to Canadians why he is unable to give one? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, since the beginning of the crisis, we have implemented the economic action plan to respond to COVID-19, and we've provided immediate assistance to Canadians, businesses and workers. Over 2. 5million jobs were protected by the Canada emergency wage subsidy. In addition, 8. 4million Canadians The Chair: We are returning to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, next Friday, the Quebec minister of finance, EricGirard, will give an economic update. If EricGirard can give one for Quebec, why can't BillMorneau give one for Canada? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, once again, we have been open and transparent from the outset. We have devoted our energy to support Canadians, workers and businesses. We will continue to do so. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I cannot judge the quality of the work done by the provinces, but what I do know is that Quebec, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland have also made efforts to support their residents economically. Those provinces are able to table economic updates. Yesterday, Saskatchewan even tabled a budget. Why is Bill Morneau unable to table an economic update for all Canadians? Hon. Mona Fortier: Let me repeat for my hon. colleague that we are going through extraordinarily uncertain times. We have continued to be open and transparent. We have reported biweekly to Parliament on the total cost and status of the measures in our economic response plan. Once again, as soon as clear economic projections can be provided, we will provide an update The Chair: Mr. Deltell has the floor. Mr. Grard Deltell: The minister talks about the total cost of the government's economic expenditures. So I ask the question: so far, over the past three months, how much has the pandemic cost Canadians? Hon. Mona Fortier: As I said earlier, it is important to note that we have put forward measures, including the wage subsidy, which have helped more than 2. 5million The Chair: Mr. Deltell has the floor. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I have been trying for four minutes to get anything remotely resembling an answer, and I'm getting absolutely nothing. I am not asking questions for myself; I am asking questions for Canadians. Why are the government and the Minister of Finance, Bill Morneau, not able to table an economic update when some provinces are able to? Hon. Mona Fortier: Once again, I would like to remind my hon. colleague that we have provided interest-free loans to businesses. More than 669,000loans have been approved. We have continued to support businesses and Canadians during this time The Chair: Mr. Deltell, you have time for a very brief question. Mr. Grard Deltell: The only thing that distinguishes the provinces that table economic updates and the current government is political will. Why does Bill Morneau not have the political will to tell Canadians the truth? Hon. Mona Fortier: Once again, we have been open and transparent. As soon as it is possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide Canadians with a full update. The Chair: We will now continue with Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya (MarkhamUnionville, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. COVID-19 has sparked and spurred anti-Asian racism. These are not just racist comments online; Asian Canadians have been attacked. What is the government doing to combat anti-Asian racism? Hon. Bardish Chagger (Minister of Diversity and Inclusion and Youth): Mr. Chair, since our government took office in 2015, we have been making investments and working with communities. The difference between our government and the previous government is that we will actually consult with Canadians, including black Canadians, including Asian Canadians, to respond to the challenges, including with an anti-racism secretariat and an anti-racism strategy. It will take all of us. I appreciate the member's question, so that we can also work together. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, one business owner I know in Markham has operated for 20 years. Now she's looking at over $9,000 in rent due on June 24. COVID-19 has crippled her sales and she's going to go out of business. Her landlord has no interest in the Canada emergency commercial rent assistance program. How can the government say this program is working? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, this program was made possible by working with the provinces, and we will continue to encourage landlords and tenants to work together to make sure they have relief for this very difficult time in which they're living. We're continuing to monitor the CECRA program and we will make it possible for businesses to have access to the program. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, the government business rent relief program has been a total disaster. Even the government's own numbers show it is a failure. As of June 8, less than 2% of the $3 billion budgeted has been spent. What is it going to take for the government to admit that the program is a disaster and needs changes? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we know our government has been working closely with the provinces and territories to deliver the Canada emergency commercial rent assistance. Although the tenant-landlord relationship is ultimately the responsibility of the provinces and territories, our government has stepped up to provide support through the tools we have and through CMHC so that small businesses can get the rent relief they need. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, according to the government, there are around 1. 1 million small businesses in Canada. At committee, we were told only around 5,500 of them are receiving COVID-19 rent relief. That number is shameful. When will the Liberal government wake up and make the changes? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we welcome the steps some provinces and territories have taken to further protect commercial tenants. We will continue to monitor this program closely and ensure that Canada's small businesses are supported during this challenging time. We will continue to monitor to see The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, there was no answer. When can the government make these changes? Hon. Mary Ng (Minister of Small Business, Export Promotion and International Trade): Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable colleague that we are doing everything and will continue to do everything to help small businesses in our country. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, on May 27 the CBSA seized 65 small handguns at Pearson airport, the largest firearms seizure on record. It is clear that smuggled handguns are the weapon of choice for criminals. Why is the Prime Minister focusing on an ineffective municipal ban? Hon. Bill Blair (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness): Mr. Chair, I would point out that gun violence in any of our communities is unacceptable, and it's important that governments and communities take steps to prevent guns from getting into the hands of criminals. That's why we do important work at our border to keep guns from being smuggled into our country, but it also necessitates additional work. I don't think you can talk about gun violence without talking about stronger gun control. That's why our government has taken a very strong position and will strengthen gun control to keep Canadians safe. The Chair: Mr. Saroya, you may have a 10-second question, if that's possible, please. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, COVID-19 has not stopped gun violence in the GTA. My constituents are concerned about shootings minutes away from their homes. We know the Liberals'gun ban won't change anything, but a focus on smuggled guns and criminals will. When will they make that change? Hon. Bill Blair: Mr. Chair, stronger gun control laws are an effective tool, and that's been told to us by police leadership and communities across the country. We're also making investments in borders and law enforcement. Most importantly, we're making investments in communities and in kids to keep communities safe. I look forward to the member's strong support of those measures when we bring them forward. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback (Prince Albert, CPC): Mr. Chair, the U. S. and the U. K. began their second round of free trade negotiations yesterday. Does the government intend to have a trade agreement in place before the U. K. tariffs come into effect on January 1? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, the U. K. is a strong partner of Canada, as is the European Union, and we're looking forward to continuing that strong relationship The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Thank you, Mr. Chair. With respect to the negotiations with the U. K. , when will the minister publish her goals and objectives for this agreement? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, we're going to continue to work to ensure that any future agreement is going to be based on the best interests of Canadians, and we will The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Can the minister confirm whether they've entered into negotiations with the U. K. at this point? Hon. Mary Ng: Our government is analyzing the most-favoured-nation tariff regimes schedule the U. K. has put out. I want to assure Canadians The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Mr. Chair, during the CUSMA negotiations, a deal was struck between the Liberal Party and the NDP that the government would notify this House 90 days before it starts any negotiations on any trade agreement. When will the minister notify this House? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that we will absolutely be sharing information. Right now, we are analyzing the most-favoured-nation tariff regimes schedule put out by the U. K. Mr. Randy Hoback: Mr. Chair, any meaningful attempts to reform the WTO needs buy-in from the United States. I think all countries agree on that. Has the minister discussed a WTO reform with the USTR, the United States trade representative? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, the Ottawa Group is a consensus-based group, and any decisions will be taken together. Of course, any meaningful reform must include the U. S. The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Has the U. S. been invited to the Ottawa Group meetings? Hon. Mary Ng: The Ottawa Group is a consensus-based group limited to WTO members who are committed to bringing forward ideas and proposals The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Just as with any other trade agreement, the minister has committed to this House that she will publish the list of goals and responsibilities for the negotiations. When will she publish the list for the Ottawa Group? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I'm thrilled that we had an excellent meeting of the Ottawa Group yesterday where, as a group, we agreed to take concrete action. Mr. Randy Hoback: Will the minister be releasing a list of Canada's objectives we would like to see the new WTO's director-general pursue prior to the upcoming DG election? Hon. Mary Ng: We published an action statement from the Ottawa Group yesterday. I would encourage the member opposite to have a look. I'm certainly happy to send it to him. Mr. Randy Hoback: Going back to economic prosperity, we know that the U. S. has been having talks with other countries around the world. Has Canada yet been invited to this group? Hon. Mary Ng: I'm pleased to continue to pursue the objectives of trade diversification. I would remind the member that we have access to a billion and a half customers through our very robust Mr. Randy Hoback: A billion and a half customers is fine if you have a functioning WTO, but if you don't have a functioning WTO, then a billion and a half customers may not be fully accessible to our suppliers, manufacturers and agriculture producers. Can the minister confirm that she's in discussions with the U. S. in joining this economic prosperity group? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that nothing is more important than standing up and helping create markets for our Canadian businesses and to help our small businesses get more export-ready so that they can grow into the international marketplace. This is work that we've committed to do, and we will keep working on it, particularly The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Yesterday Saskatchewan presented a budget. Not only did they present the budget, but they'll also actually debate the budget and pass the budget in Parliament. There's full accountability. Why won't this government do the same? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons): Mr. Chair, the House is sitting in this hybrid format so that people can participate in the House on the screens. I'm sure my colleague is happy to see that his own colleagues are able to ask questions and participate. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Williamson. Mr. John Williamson (New Brunswick Southwest, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will say that this is no substitute for Parliament, but I appreciate the opportunity. New Brunswick families and businesses are rapidly making adjustments to manage and live with the coronavirus pandemic. Businesses here are opening and services are being offered. Families are preparing for summer and even planning ahead for a new school year in September. We have a lot of work ahead of us. One notable absence is Service Canada. When does the government plan on opening its service counters to assist Canadians again? Hon. Ahmed Hussen (Minister of Families, Children and Social Development): Mr. Chair, our government is committed to ensuring that Canadians continue to have access to the benefits that they rely on through Service Canada. We have redeployed over 3,000 additional staff to ensure that Canadians continue to have access to their benefits. We've established a 1,500-agent call centre to make sure that people can get access to the phone lines to get the help they need. Mr. John Williamson: Service Canada is about more than providing COVID-19 information and benefits. Provincial governments are working hard to adjust to Canada's new normal by opening up businesses and front-line government services. When will we see Service Canada play its role and open its service counters in our communities? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Mr. Chair, we're currently working with our world-class public health experts to determine how best to reopen the Service Canada network for the public. Make no mistake: Our Service Canada employees have gone above and beyond to ensure that Canadians continue to have access to the services that they rely on and the benefits that they need. Mr. John Williamson: Please don't hide behind health experts when the Prime Minister is appearing in the middle of large protests, yet is afraid to bring back the Parliament of Canada to do its business. In fact, the New Brunswick legislature is open for regular business. Bills are being studied, opposition input is being heard and MLAs are voting on legislation, not rubber-stamping government bills. By comparison, our Parliament is stuck in pretending it cannot function like other law-making assemblies. Canadians are in the dark about our country's finances. When will the government table an economic update so taxpayers understand what was spent, what is owed by our kids and grandchildren, and what the government's fiscal footing looks like? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, nobody's hiding. Nobody's doing anything like that. The only reason my colleague is able to ask a question and I'm able to answer his question is that he's right there on the screen. We have this hybrid format that cares for MPs across the country, not only the ones sitting in the House. Mr. John Williamson: This is no substitute for Parliament. I will ask my question again. When will the government table an economic update so that taxpayers understand what was spent, what is owed by our kids and grandchildren, and what the government's fiscal footing looks like in today's environment? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, I thank my honourable colleague for his question. Canada's economy is still in a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We have been open and transparent about the measures we have been providing to support families, businesses and workers. Even our health care The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Williamson. Mr. John Williamson: Except you have not. The Auditor General is underfunded. We have no idea about the total of government spending. Again I will ask when the government will table an economic update so that we can have an understanding of what the government's fiscal footing looks like. Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we have included biweekly reports to Parliament on the full cost and status of our economic response plan measures since the beginning. I have said, and I will continue to say, that when it is possible to provide a clear economic projection, we will provide an update. Mr. John Williamson: What is the full cost to date of the government's COVID-19 relief measures, as the minister just claimed the government has provided to Parliament? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we have provided support for workers, and 2. 5 million Canadians have been helped through the Canadian wage subsidy. We have provided businesses with some loans, and 669,000 businesses have applied for these loans. Even for the CERB, we have over eight million Canadians who have applied. The Chair: We will now continue with Mr. Bergeron. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: Mr. Chair, as the leader of the Bloc Qubcois mentioned a few moments ago, the government promised $14billion to Quebec and the provinces, but in targeted transfers. That is very little compared to the considerable expenses incurred to deal with the current crisis. But Quebec and the provinces don't just want this money to be transferred unconditionally, they also want a real discussion on a permanent increase in health care transfers. PremierLegault was rightly concerned about the feds'interference into provincial jurisdictions. The federal government, which does not manage any hospitals or long-term care centres, must stop playing armchair quarterback and transfer the money to the only governments with jurisdiction over health, that is, Quebec and the provinces. Will it do so without delay and without nitpicking? The Honourable Patty Hajdu (Minister of Health): Mr. Chair, we know that the Government of Quebec is working hard to ensure the safety of Quebeckers and we are here to support them. As part of this co-operation, we have developed health and safety recommendations for workplaces, we have purchased medical equipment for workers and we have supported the province in developing its reopening program. We are continuing this important partnership to ensure the safety of Quebeckers and all Canadians. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: The co-operation is so effective that the money is staying in the federal government's coffers. In fact, when the federal government wants to impose conditions, it always takes longer. We see it with housing, for which Quebec has not received a dime of the $1. 4billion it is owed. We have also seen it with infrastructure funds, particularly for public transit, water systems and water treatment. The health crisis is now. The needs are now. The much needed reopening of our economy is now. Will the government finally transfer the money without messing around or quibbling? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I am pleased to confirm to my colleague that there is no messing around, no quibbling, nothing of the kind. There is co-operation between two levels of government. It is natural to have discussions with all the provinces and with Quebec. I myself am taking part in some discussions and several of my colleagues are taking part in others. There is a clear willingness on the part of the federal government to co-operate with Quebec and all the provinces. That is what we are doing and that is perhaps what the Bloc Qubcois does not like. It likes bickering, but for the time being, there is none. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: We don't want to bicker, we want the money to be paid out. It is not complicated, for heaven's sake! We do not want a blank cheque. Right now, the money remains in the federal government's coffers. There is $1. 4billion that should be paid to Quebec for social housing and is sitting in the federal government's coffers. We are waiting for money for water treatment and water systems, but it is sitting in the federal government's coffers. It's almost July. We are wasting precious months for construction. What is the government waiting for to pay out the money so that we can get our economy rolling? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: The federal government is a very active partner. We are discussing and working with Quebec on infrastructure projects. We are continuing our discussions and negotiations on the housing agreement. Nothing is at a standstill. We are discussing and co-operating for the well-being of all Quebeckers. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: MadamChair, things are definitely at a standstill, because the money is owed and has not been paid out. Months are going by while construction is not taking place. We need to reopen the economy. We need more flexibility in the gas tax program and Quebec's contribution to allow municipalities to undertake work on city halls, community centres and fire stations. We need the federal government to contribute to funding public transit operations, which have become a real financial drain because of the drop in ridership. What is the federal government waiting for to provide real help instead of just talking? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: When it comes to just talking, the Bloc Qubcois has a lot of experience, I admit. We, in the government, are working and co-operating. We are not waiting with our arms folded, we are discussing a series of issues with Quebec. We do more than discuss, we work and we co-operate. We are working on projects, not only in infrastructure, but in a number of other areas. Just think of the co-operation of our armed forces in the CHSLDs, for example. We are here for Quebeckers. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Your time has run out, Mr. Bergeron. We'll go now to Ms. Khalid, from MississaugaErin Mills. Ms. Iqra Khalid (MississaugaErin Mills, Lib.): Madam Chair, I'll be splitting my time with the member for GlengarryPrescottRussell. During a consultation with the business community in Mississauga, the concerns of businesses, big and small, included the need for stable, affordable and safe child care. With the lack of such child care spaces, an economic recovery plan post-COVID cannot be effective until and unless we make sure that people are able to get back to work. I've heard from parents across Mississauga that they're being forced to stay home because of inadequate child care and that they have to choose between putting food on the table and keeping family safe. More and more employers are realizing that good employees are unable to contribute to their business growth because of this challenge. Now more than ever, we need to find long-term sustainable solutions for Canadians who face challenges with regard to child care. I ask our Minister of Families, Children and Social Development this: What is our strategy to tackle this ever-growing need for a national child care plan? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I thank the honourable member for her question and for her important advocacy and work on this important issue. We understand that child care is important to our economic recovery and our social infrastructure. We know the pressure that COVID-19 has placed on families, especially parents. That is why we're committed to continuing to work with provinces and territories to renew our agreements on early learning and child care, and to provide, at the earliest opportunity, $400 million in support. In addition to that, the Prime Minister has already indicated that child care will be part of the $14-billion pledge to provinces and territories to assist them with respect to COVID-19 recovery efforts. Over the next decade, we will continue to invest $7. 5 billion, and together we have achieved the goal of over 40,000 affordable child care spaces. We are also committed to continuing to create over 250,000 before-school and after-school child care spaces for kids under the age of 10. We will continue to work with our partners in the provinces and territories to ensure that Canadians can continue to have access to safe, quality and affordable child care. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for GlengarryPrescottRussell has the floor. Mr. Francis Drouin (GlengarryPrescottRussell, Lib.): MadamChair, small businesses play a fundamental role in the Canadian economy. In an article in LaPresse, the Minister of Economic Development warned us that the economic crisis caused by severe lockdown measures could have more serious consequences in small municipalities than in large cities. Based on discussions with the chambers of commerce in my riding, it is clear that federal government assistance will be essential for the reopening of the economy, specifically for the rural economy. In fact, I would like to acknowledge the work of the Prescott-Russell community development corporation, under the leadership of John Candie. After announcing almost $57million to help SMEs adopt e-commerce, how does the minister plan to help SMEs and the business community in our rural areas? Hon. Mlanie Joly (Minister of Economic Development and Official Languages): MadamChair, I also thank my colleague from GlengarryPrescottRussell for his important question. Yes, our regions are important and the entrepreneurs in those regions are creative and daring. They take risks, but they are currently facing huge challenges. So we are here for them. We understand their anxiety and we want to help them. That is why we have decided to invest heavily in rural economic development. It is also why we have doubled the budget of CFDCs and Community Futures organizations across the country. In southern Ontario we have reinvested over $260million in the regional economic development agency FedDev. In the great riding of GlengarryPrescottRussell, which I am particularly fond of and where there is a very good member of Parliament, there is an additional $1million for entrepreneurs in the region. We have been, we are and we will be at your side. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for GlengarryPrescottRussell has 36seconds left. No? Then we'll go to the honourable member for ElmwoodTranscona. Mr. Daniel Blaikie (ElmwoodTranscona, NDP): Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with the member for Victoria. Madam Chair, Krystal is a community worker in Winnipeg. She has been working from home since late March, taking care of her child, who is out of school, and caring for her father, who is living with her and vulnerable to COVID-19. Her employer called her up recently and asked her to physically return to work or to take a leave. As a parent and a care provider to a vulnerable person, she's not comfortable with physically returning to work. Service Canada won't give Krystal a straight answer as to whether going on leave and collecting CERB would count as refusing a reasonable job offer. With Bill C-17 looming in the background, Krystal is worried about jail time and fines if she does right by her child and her father by applying for CERB. Can Krystal reasonably refuse to go back to work and collect CERB, or will she be considered a fraudster? That's my question for the minister that is specific to Krystal's case. As well, what is the minister doing to provide clear direction to Canadians and to Service Canada agents so that people can get a clear answer before making their decision about returning to work? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I want to thank the honourable member for his important question. We recognize that Canadian workers will face various different situations, including those who are ineligible for the Canada emergency support benefit. We'll continue to work with workers to make sure they're able to be supported throughout this pandemic. The fact of the matter is that every province has workplace health and safety regulations that must be supported. We understand that workers have the right not to work in unsafe situations. We also understand that many Canadians do want to go back to work; and in fact many have. We will make sure that we support Canadians throughout this recovery process. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member has 47 seconds left, and that includes the answer. Mr. Daniel Blaikie: Madam Chair, that answer is really not good enough, because the problem here is that Krystal needs to know whether she can continue receiving CERB or not. That's a federal government decision, and she needs to know whether the federal government is going to accuse her of fraud and put her in jail or assess fines against her if she refuses to go back to work because she wants to take care of her child and her father. What is the minister's answer to that? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister has 20 seconds to respond. Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that if a Canadian has to take care of a loved one due to circumstances surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, they are indeed eligible to receive the CERB and remain receiving that benefit. Ms. Laurel Collins (Victoria, NDP): As we deal with the global pandemic, we cannot lose sight of the ongoing climate emergency. Canada has missed every single climate target it set, and we need to break the cycle of empty promises. Canadians want their government to be accountable, and environmental groups such as Ecojustice, CAN-Rac, Environmental Defence and West Coast Environmental Law, as well as the government's own climate institute, are all calling for legally binding climate targets. When will the government put its climate targets into law with legally binding milestones so we never miss another target again? Hon. Navdeep Bains (MississaugaMalton, Lib.): Madam Chair, I thank my honourable colleague for her question. I totally agree with her when it comes to the environment. It is a priority not only for us as a government, but it should be a priority for all Canadians. That is why we have put measures in place to put a price on pollution through carbon pricing. That is why we have a comprehensive plan that also includes significant investments in clean technology, which will help reduce our carbon footprint. I am confident that these measures will enable us to not only meet but exceed our 2030 target and also allow us to achieve our net-zero 2050 target. Ms. Laurel Collins: That didn't answer my question. I asked when. Empty promises won't get us any closer to meeting our climate targets. Can the minister tell us when his government will introduce climate accountability laws? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I think the fundamental issue here is having a plan when it comes to the environment. I'm confident that the measures that we have takenputting a price on pollution, investing in clean technology, and other key measures to reduce our carbon footprint, including the investment in infrastructureunderpin a plan The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to the honourable member for Victoria. Ms. Laurel Collins: This government is not meeting its targets, but it is meeting with oil and gas lobbyists. The pandemic has made us reflect on our priorities. Are we going to choose a just recovery with good, sustainable jobs for Canadian workers, or are we going to keep subsidizing oil and gas companies to the tune of billions, subsidies that we know are ending up in the pockets of CEOs and shareholders? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will have a brief answer from the minister. Hon. Navdeep Bains: Again, Madam Chair, this is the fundamental difference between us and the NDP. We fundamentally believe that the entire economy needs to work together, including the energy sector, to enable us to achieve those 2030 and 2050 targets. We are going to work together to support our workers, including in the energy sector, to reduce our carbon footprint. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Now we will go to the honourable member for SaskatoonGrasswood, Mr. Waugh. Mr. Kevin Waugh (SaskatoonGrasswood, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. When I was last here in May, I was on my way back to Saskatoon from Toronto, and there was actually someone on my flight who tested positive for COVID-19. I was never informed of it by the airline. I found out two weeks later. The report was in the news media. Why hasn't the government put rules in place requiring airlines to reach out to individuals like me who may have been exposed to COVID on their flights? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, it's hard to speculate on what happened from such a vague description of his experience, but I will say that we have every confidence in local public health, which is doing the hard and heavy lifting of contact tracing and working very closely with all kinds of different sectors, including airline sectors, to make sure that close contacts of people who have tested positive for COVID-19 are found, are traced and are isolated. I assume that the member took appropriate precautions on the flight and I hope that he continues to do so. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, it was reported that the individual on my plane who had COVID was actually connecting in Toronto from an international flight. The Prime Minister announced last week that they would begin mandating temperature checks for those bound for Canada in July. Will international travellers be tested when they land in Canada, or will they be relying on the tests that take place in other countries? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, this is a very important question, because the protection and safety of all Canadiansin particular, Canadian travellersis a high priority for our government. We've been working very closely with the airlines. At the current time, we are putting temperature screening in place. That will initially be done primarily by the airlines that are in the best position to do it at this point in time. We are also now going to be including CATSA, the people who do the security screening, so that when people enter the airport, they will also be screened. We believe that is going to be the most effective measure to keep all travellers safe. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, last week five of the largest professional sports leagues in North America put out a statement of support for my private member's bill, the safe and regulated sports betting act. Given the struggles that clubs and leagues are facing due to COVID-19, including having no fans at all in the stands for the foreseeable future, the legalization of sports betting would be a welcome opportunity not only to engage fans but to generate much-needed revenue. Will the government commit now to supporting the sports and gaming industries by supporting my private member's bill, Bill C-218? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, I've had the opportunity on many occasions to speak to members of Parliament and also to mayors and councillors and people living in border communities where there are casinos. They've raised this issue a number of times. We've listened very carefully to the concerns that have been expressed by them. I would like to advise the member that I look forward to the opportunity for a careful examination of his bill. We are at all times concerned about maintaining the integrity of the gaming industry within our community. That's the best way to protect Canadians. At the same time, we will examine his bill with all of the necessary attention to make sure it's given full consideration. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, it's the first time in history that we've had the five professional leagues in this country joining together for this bill. Newspapers rely, as we all know, on advertising for a significant portion of their revenue. This includes the usual flyers as well as in-paper ads. I've heard major concerns from a number of newspapers in this country about competition they're receiving today from Canada Post, which is offering massive free postage services. In fact, I have one of their ads here, which says that the first 6,000 pieces of postage are 100% free. If the government is genuine about wanting to ensure that newspapers and journals can succeed in this country, why are you allowing Canada Post to use its monopoly power to actually threaten local newspapers in this country? Hon. Steven Guilbeault (Minister of Canadian Heritage): Thank you, Madame Chair, and I thank the member opposite for his question. As you well know, a healthy news and media sector in Canada is a priority for our government, which is why we have put in place a number of measures before COVID-19 and during COVID-19, and we will continue to be there for them after this crisis has gone by. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Before we go on, we will be taking a break to do a bit of a changeover. I also want to remind members to address their questions and comments to the chair. We will go now to the honourable member for BruceGreyOwen Sound, Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff (BruceGreyOwen Sound, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Mr. Blair stated yesterday here in the House that the AR-15 has been used in mass killings in Canada on many occasions. Mr. Blair, please provide just one specific instance in which an AR-15 was used in a mass killing in Canada. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I remind the member to address questions and comments to the chair. The honourable minister may respond. Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I think this is an excellent opportunity to point out to the member opposite how important it is to actually listen to what was said. If you go back and review that tape, and I would invite you to do so, you'll see that I said the AR-15 and other weapons like themreferring of course to military-style assault weaponshave been used in mass killings, and I actually cited a number of examples. Madam Chair, I think it would be very useful if the member's questions were based on facts. Mr. Alex Ruff: I can remind Mr. Blair that I actually have watched the video a couple of times, and he specifically states that the AR-15 was used in mass killings in Canada, yet he has yet to provide one. My additional question is to Mr. Blair. Out of the recently banned firearms on May 1, how many have been or are still currently in use by the Canadian Armed Forces? Hon. Bill Blair: That's an excellent question, Madam Chair, because it's very important to provide Canadians with clarity. We have prohibited these firearms for non-law enforcement and non-military use. The military uses weapons that were actually designed for soldiers to use in combat to shoot other soldiers. That's the appropriate use of such weapons, Madam Chair. They're not things to be played with in civilian society. Mr. Alex Ruff: As a soldier for 25 years, I'll remind Mr. Blair that none of the currently prohibited firearms would be used in the Canadian Armed Forces. I asked him a question on whether any of them is being or ever has been used in the Canadian Armed Forces. Are any of the recently banned firearms still in use, or have they ever been in use, in any military in the world? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, I think it's important to also recognize that the basic origin, the provenance of the weapons that we have prohibited, was in their original design. They were designed for military use for various military forces around the world. As I've said previously, they were designed for soldiers to use in combat to kill other soldiers. They're very efficient in their design for killing people. They have no purpose in Canadian society. Mr. Alex Ruff: As someone who has used many military-style firearms and who is actually involved in helping define what we purchase in the military, I would use none of the ones that are currently prohibited. I have a question, Chair, for Minister MacAulay. Can he please confirm whether Veterans Affairs has a plan to address the claims backlog, yes or no? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (Minister of Veterans Affairs): Madam Chair, I appreciate my honourable colleague's question, and yes, we've indicated that it's a major priority. That's why I'm so pleased that the supplementary estimates contained just under $90 million to address hiring more staff, improving the process and making sure that we attack the backlog in an appropriate manner. Mr. Alex Ruff: Madame Chair, does that plan exist in written form? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Well, Madam Chair, I can assure you that it's in the supplementary estimates, and of course, this money is The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We'll go back to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff: The question is about the plan, not how much money has been allocated. I am asking for the written plan on how to address the backlog. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Madam Chair, I can tell my honourable colleague that the money is in the supplementary estimates, and with the money we're able to attack this problem in an appropriate manner, and that's what is important for our veterans. Mr. Alex Ruff: The deputy minister committed on March 10 that a written plan would be provided to the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs within a month and made public. Did the deputy minister or the department provide the minister that plan within a month? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Madame Chair, I'm sure my honourable colleague wants an appropriate plan and he would be fully aware this just under $90 million would make a big difference in the plan to attack the backlog. We The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We'll go back to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff: Thank you, Chair. Therefore, my question is, if the deputy minister in the department provided him with an appropriate plan or a written plan, why is he questioning how appropriate that plan is? I have complete confidence in the deputy minister's ability to produce a written plan. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister may give a brief answer, please. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I can assure my honourable colleague that with the appropriate funding, we will address the backlog in Veterans Affairs. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Parry SoundMuskoka, Mr. Aitchison. Mr. Scott Aitchison: Thank you, Madam Chair. My question is about summer camps again. Three weeks ago, I asked this government if the finance minister would meet with the beleaguered summer camp sector. Summer camps, which are a social and economic mainstay in Parry SoundMuskoka and all of northern Ontario, have been crippled by the global pandemic. It's costing millions of jobs, and some camps are actually in danger of folding. Aside from a brief follow-up conversation over the phone with the junior minister, there has still been no action from this government. When will the Minister of Finance meet with summer camps to find a solution? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I recognize the honourable member's important question and his focus on summer camps. We recognize the importance of looking at that and paying attention to the needs of that community. We will continue to engage with them, as we have, to ensure and find ways in which we can get their feedback and find ways in which we can support them. That work is ongoing, and I assure the honourable member that our focus is on the kids and on ensuring that they have access to summer camps for this year. Mr. Scott Aitchison: I don't know why you need to find ways to get feedback. The summer camps association has given lots of feedback and my office has given lots of feedback, so I don't see what's confusing about this. However, I've become accustomed to not really getting answers to questions, so I will go to the next one. The Ontario government's regional reopening plan permits cruise boats to resume on Georgian Bay, yet the federal government is refusing to allow these vessels to operate until July 1. Therefore, small businesses such as the Island Queen cruiser in Parry Sound, which has only a very few precious weeks to operate in the first place, is losing yet another two weeks because of federal inaction. This not only hurts the cruise boat industry but also hurts tourism and small businesses all through our area. Will the Minister of Transport take a regional approach himself by lifting the federal ban on Georgian Bay, just like the Province of Ontario has done? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister may reply. Is there a response? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, there is. I apologize for the confusion. Let me respond, if I may, on behalf of the Minister of Transport. There have been a number of very important discussions with the provinces, in particular with the Province of Ontario, around provisions regarding pleasure craft. There are certain restrictions that will come to an end on June 30. We're working very closely with our provincial counterparts to address this issue, but we want to ensure that it will be done safely. Mr. Scott Aitchison: Madam Chair, I actually gave the minister a heads-up that I would be asking that question. He sent me an email today saying he was not going to be able to be in the House, and it's great of him to do that. He said that whoever was going to fill in for him would have an answer, but again, that was not really an answer. The next issue I would like to bring this government's attention to is the deplorable state of rural Internet service in Parry SoundMuskoka. Quite simply, there are too many gaps in service, and what is available is generally way too expensive. We have families trying to work and teach their kids from home on unreliable and outrageously expensive Internet service, and we have too many small businesses that either cannot access or afford reliable Internet services. Today Greg Rickford, the Ontario energy minister, and Laurie Scott, Ontario Minister of Infrastructure, announced $2. 3 million for seven northern Ontario broadband projects. Minister, will when your government get serious and become a reliable partner for the Government of Ontario and the private sector to deliver this crucial modern-day infrastructure to rural Canadians? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I remind the member that he needs to address the questions and comments to the chair. The honourable minister may reply. Hon. Maryam Monsef (Minister for Women and Gender Equality and Rural Economic Development): Madam Chair, in the best of times, life without access to high-speed Internet is hard. During a pandemic, the challenges are that much more pronounced. Our government's unprecedented investments are already connecting a million more Canadian households to this essential service, but until we achieve universal access our work is not done. We will work with our partners, including provinces across the country, to connect every Canadian household to high-quality Internet access that is affordable and reliable. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member has 30 seconds. Mr. Scott Aitchison: I think I can squeeze something in here, then. I'm wondering, then, Madam Chair, since the Province of Ontario has used the Northern Ontario Heritage Corporation Fund to make this announcement, what about using FedNor to make the same kind of announcement, and partner with the province? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister has a brief answer. Hon. Mlanie Joly: Obviously we believe in the importance of northern Ontario; that's why we nearly doubled the budget of FedNor. We will continue to invest in businesses and people all around Parry Sound, Muskoka and northern Ontario. If my colleague has specific projects in mind, please come and see me and let's have a conversation. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for Montmagny-L'Islet-KamouraskaRivire-du-Loup, Mr. Gnreux, has the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux (MontmagnyL'IsletKamouraskaRivire-du-Loup, CPC): Thank you, MadamChair. I will continue along the same lines as my colleague. During this pandemic, we are realizing the extent to which reliable high-speed Internet service is needed for Canada's economy. There are still places where telework is not possible today because of the lack of adequate coverage. However, since2015, the government has committed to addressing the situation through three new programs. Benot Pilotto, who is the mayor of Saint-Onsime-d'Ixworth, in my riding, wrote to me a few days ago. That is why I am asking you what concrete results the government plans to achieve for our rural areas by the end of the year. Hon. Maryam Monsef: At the best of times, life without high-speed Internet access is difficult. During a pandemic, the difficulties are even greater. Our government's unprecedented investments are already connecting an additional one million Canadian households to this essential service. However, until we achieve universal access, our job is not done. We are working The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Gnreux, you have the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, I am simply asking the minister to tell me when the mayor of Saint-Onsime-d'Ixworth will be able to tell his residents when the Internet will be available in his municipality. It is not complicated. What does the government plan to do so that rural municipalities across Canada can have access to the Internet as soon as possible? What is its plan? Hon. Maryam Monsef: We are working with partners across the country to ensure that every Canadian household is connected to a high-quality, accessible and affordable high-speed Internet service. Madam Chair, I assure my colleagues that we share the same goal, and we will work with all our partners across the country to ensure every Canadian household has access The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Gnreux, you have the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, I am still not getting a specific answer. According to the government's plan, when will rural Canadian businesses and households be connected? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I would ask the honourable minister to provide a brief answer. Hon. Maryam Monsef: Madam Chair, those plans are under way, and we will have more to share in the coming days. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: It seems that the Minister of Rural Economic Development plans to announce a new plan this week. Can she tell us how this program will differ from the Connect to Innovate program, which is already in place? Can the minister tell us whether her program will solve the problem of the 25square kilometre hexagonal zones, which unfortunately make many projects ineligible for the CRTC's broadband fund? Hon. Maryam Monsef: Madam Chair, I'm pleased to share with my colleague that the model he's referring to, the hexagon model, is no more. Our maps are much more precise now to ensure that we do not leave Canadians behind. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, this year, the Canada summer jobs program is a real fiasco. I think all my colleagues will agree with me. On May13,100jobs were announced in my riding; on May20,16jobs were announced; on May27,13jobs were announced; on June3,12jobs were announced; and on June10, only one job was announced. As we speak, an amount of $100,000 is still to be confirmed in my riding. Can we have an announcement, once and for all? Let's stop the piecemeal announcements and finally confirm the remaining jobs today so that our organizations can have young people before the summer starts on the weekend. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable minister. Hon. Ahmed Hussen: MadamChair, I thank the honourable member for his question. We recognize the important role that the Canada summer jobs program is playing in supporting employers and young workers in communities right across the country. Our government is working very hard to help employers adapt to the realities of the COVID-19 pandemic, and at the same time is supporting young Canadians as they begin to look for summer employment. We've introduced flexibilities into the program to ensure that more young workers have opportunities to get employed. The honourable member also has to understand that we're in the COVID-19 pandemic, and as such it will take some time for businesses to equip themselves to hire students. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for NanaimoLadysmith, Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly (NanaimoLadysmith, GP): Thank you, Madam Chair. In the first five months of this year, 554 B. C. residents died from opioid overdoses. They were teachers, construction workers, business owners, family members, neighbours and friends. Addiction is a health and social issue, but criminalization creates stigma, so people hide their drug use and die alone. Access to a safe supply of drugs and safe injection sites saves lives and puts addicts in daily contact with people who can help them. Will this government end the war on drugs by decriminalizing them, providing a safe supply and reallocating resources from policing addicts to providing treatment for them? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, I think it's really important we make sure that when we speak about people who use substances, we remove stigmatizing language like the word addict. We can stand together, as this government has, with people who use substances and their families to ensure a range of options for people who are struggling with addiction, who are using substances in a way that is harming their health and their communities. As you know, we have restored harm reduction to the Canadian drugs and substances strategy. We've made it easier for people to access safe supplies of substances. We've increased access to treatment and the variety of treatment through federal transfers to provinces and territories. Madam Chair, we're working with communities to make sure there are more community-based approaches to treating The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, the Geneva Convention considers both tear gas and pepper spray to be chemical weapons and prohibits their use in war, yet our police forces use these weapons on Canadian civilians. These weapons are indiscriminate and can affect peaceful protestors and innocent bystanders. Will the government prohibit the use of these weapons and require police to use de-escalation techniques to keep legal protests peaceful? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, the right to peaceful protest in this country is a constitutionally protected right. We want to ensure it's always respected. At the same time, Madam Chair, we recognize that the use of even less than lethal force can have significant impacts on people's safety. This is a highly regulated substance in Canada. It's prohibited for non-police use, and for the police it is and should be highly regulated. The RCMP have advised me they have not used tear gas in nine years. We'll continue to monitor it to ensure that peaceful protest is always respected. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, in 2012 the RCMP spent $14 million on 18 armoured personnel carriers. One's parked at the Nanaimo detachment. I can't imagine why we have weapons of war like this for policing civilians. Will the government rein in the RCMP budget and end wasteful spending on militarizing our civilian police forces? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, it's a very important tradition that our Canadian police are not militarized. At the same time, we've seen a number of tragedies when police have responded to situations in which people were armed with weapons designed for soldiers to kill soldiers, and they've been used to kill police officers. The militarization of our society, so strongly promoted by some, is the direct consequence of the militarization of the police. As we remove these weapons from our society and prohibit them, we'll make it safer for everyone and we can then move away from such a model of policing. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, the government spent $4. 5 billion to buy an old, leaky pipeline. Since 1961, there have been 82 reported spills from the Trans Mountain pipeline. Over 1. 5 million litres of crude oil has spilled into the surrounding environment. This weekend, the Trans Mountain pipeline leaked again, dumping 190,000 litres of oil. How much is this spill going to cost Canadian taxpayers to clean up? How much contingency funding has been budgeted to repair the environmental destruction from spills? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I want to thank the honourable colleague for his question. He full well knows that the acquisition that we made with regard to the TMX initiative is a reflection of the fact that we want this initiative to move forward in a sustainable manner and in a manner that protects the environment. I'll continue to work with my colleagues to endeavour to make sure that we have the appropriate processes in place to protect the environment and at the same time create good-quality, middle-class jobs for Canadians. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for RosemontLa PetitePatrie, Mr. Boulerice, has the floor. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice (RosemontLa Petite-Patrie, NDP): Thank you, MadamChair. The Black Lives Matter movement is right to discuss systemic racism in our societies. In Montreal, the city and the police department have recognized this, and measures will be put in place. The Liberal government, once again, is all talk and no walk. Although it spends $10million a day, we see no attempt to reform or change the RCMP. If the Prime Minister really wants to act, why is he delaying the action plan in response to the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls? Hon. Bill Blair: Let me assure this House and the member opposite that we're not dragging our feet. This is an important issue. Indigenous people, black Canadians and other racialized people are far too often experiencing systemic racism and disparate outcomes through the criminal justice system. It's incumbent upon all of us who work within the criminal justice system to take the steps and actions necessary to produce more equitable outcomes. All police services, including the RCMP, must be committed to ensuring that the people they're sworn to serve and protect are always treated with dignity and respect. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: MadamChair, why are the Liberals taking indigenous children to court to challenge the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal ruling in their favour? Hon. Marc Miller (Minister of Indigenous Services): Madam Chair, as the honourable member knows full well, a number of cases are pending, and we are currently negotiating with the parties. We are making progress, and I would be delighted to tell the member and the House about it in response to a later question. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: We've been asking questions about it for months, and as I see it, we should keep doing so. The Prime Minister's new pipeline, which taxpayers were forced to buy with their hard-earned money, has leaked. Some 190,000litres of oil spilled, and we can't even make the company pay for it because the Liberals bought the pipeline. Trans-Mountain, KeystoneXL and the resumption of gas exploration and development off the coast of Newfoundland and Labradorare these the projects the Liberals had in mind for their green recovery? Hon. Navdeep Bains: I'd like to thank the honourable member for his question. Our priority was to protect the health and safety of Canadians throughout the pandemic, especially when it comes to the environment. That's why environmental and climate change laws aimed at protecting the environment, human health and conservation will remain in force. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: Across Quebec, the cultural community is going through a harrowing time. Unions, associations, artists and creators have all taken part in public demonstrations recently to condemn the lack of a specific plan for the living arts, performing arts and festival sector. What is the government waiting for? Hon. Steven Guilbeault: I'd like to thank the member for his question. However, I strongly disagree with him. We haven't waited to develop a plan for the arts and culture sector. We listened to the community and we tailored our supports, as they were announced. We have an emergency plan for the arts and culture sector. We were asked to adapt the CERB to take royalties into account, and we did. We were asked to extend the CERB, and we did. We are fully aware that the recovery will take longer in the arts and culture sector. We have been there, we are there and we will be there for the arts and culture sector. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: Well, that wasn't at all what the artists and creators who were out demonstrating in the streets a few days ago thought. They were protesting on the weekend. The CERB extension announced by the government only brings us to September, but the cultural community is expecting the worst in the fall. What is the government's long-term plan to support creators and their entire teams? Hon. Steven Guilbeault: I'm not so sure those who were protesting last week had issues with our government, but we'd certainly be happy to speak with them. As for a long-term plan, we are currently consulting arts and culture stakeholders to contemplate together how the government can help the sector in response to the ongoing crisis. We are working on finding solutions, but until we have long-term solutions, we have seen to it that our artists and organizations have access to funding until September. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for BeauportLimoilou, Mrs. Vignola, has the floor. Mrs. Julie Vignola (BeauportLimoilou, BQ): Madam Chair, I will be sharing my time with the member for Montcalm. According to the latest news, Seaspan Shipyards will be spending an additional $1. 5billion to build two ships. Why? Because the ships were ordered in 2011 and still haven't been delivered. Davie built the Asterix without going over budget because it delivered the ship on time. Davie is currently the top shipyard, representing 50% of Canada's shipbuilding capacity. Why isn't Davie being awarded its fair share of contracts? Hon. Anita Anand (Minister of Public Services and Procurement): I'd like to thank the member for her question. Davie is certainly a strong and trusted partner that works very hard to help our government get results for Canadians. Building a new class of ships is highly complex, and it's not unusual for cost estimates to change throughout the procurement project. It's important to make sure additional funding is available for the joint support ships project to ensure the navy's vessels are delivered. Mrs. Julie Vignola: We are talking about $1. 5billion, here. In the beginning, eight years ago, the project was supposed to cost $2. 6billion. There can't be much missing when the cost overrun is double the initial estimate. Why haven't the ships been delivered yet? Why is Davie still not seen as a trusted partner? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Minister, please keep your answer brief. Hon. Anita Anand: Once again, I would point out that building a new class of ships is highly complex, and it's not unusual for the cost estimate to change for a procurement project as large as this one. I know that Davie works very hard, and we also believe it is an outstanding partner. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): It is now over to the honourable member for Montcalm, Mr. Thriault. Mr. Luc Thriault (Montcalm, BQ): Madam Chair, in Quebec, 12,000people have begun their training to work in residential and long-term care centres. They will be ready for duty in mid-September. In the meantime, we need the support of the army, which is helping us save lives. The dedication of the members of the armed forces is paramount, and I want to extend my heartfelt thanks. The government extended their mission until June26, which is only 10days away. What does the army have to do right now that is more important than helping our caregivers save lives? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, I'm glad my fellow member recognizes the fundamental role the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces have played and continue to play in residential and long-term care centres and many other areas in support of our seniors. We are in talks with the Quebec government. The discussions around providing continued assistance to Quebec are quite positive and productive. That assistance can take many forms, including the Red Cross. We will be there for our seniors, Madam Chair. Mr. Luc Thriault: We are short 12,000people, so if the Red Cross wants to help us, all the better. We'll take all the help we can get. Barely 800members of the military are still in Quebec. I repeat my question: What does the army have to do 10days from now that is more important if it's not to help caregivers save lives? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, all the members of the military are still in Quebec. They have done absolutely incredible work and are continuing to do so. The people at the Canadian Red Cross are well-trained paid workers who can perform the same work in partnership with the members of the armed forces, who can stay in Quebec as well. Right now, we are working with the Quebec government and discussing how we can keep the measure in place until September15. Mr. Luc Thriault: Madam Chair, our nurses and orderlies are exhausted. They're at the end of their ropes. Now is the time to thank them, not the time to turn our backs on them. It's not the time for dilly-dallying or discussions. It's the time to tell them that we will be there to help them until the end. I will repeat my question. What does the army have to do that is more important than helping caregivers save the lives of those who built Quebec? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The Leader of the Government in the House of Commons is asked to keep his answer brief. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, the Government of Canada is there and will continue to be there to help the people who built Quebec. The Government of Canada will work with the Quebec government to make that happen. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for Red DeerMountain View, Mr. Dreeshen. Mr. Earl Dreeshen (Red DeerMountain View, CPC): Thank you so much. Madam Chair, on May 14 I asked the Minister of Agriculture when the Liberal government would put aside its usual campaign rhetoric and recognize the very detrimental impact the carbon tax is having on farmers across this country. Minister Bibeau proudly noted that according to their data, the average cost of the carbon tax per farm across Canada is $210 to $819. We know that these numbers are completely unfounded and are not based on any factual evidence. The fact is that the Liberal government's own Parliamentary Budget Officer has estimated that at $25 per tonne, the cost for an 855-acre crop farm in Alberta is well over $6,000. The office came up with that using the government's statistics from the 2016 agricultural census. Madam Chair, the evidence is right in front of the minister. When will this Liberal government come clean with Canadians and recognize the disastrous impact the carbon tax is having on Canada's critical agriculture and agri-food sector? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food): Madam Chair, our pollution pricing policy is designed to grow a clean economy. To support this sector, we have put in place the following measures. Emissions from livestock and crop production are not priced. Farm fuels and fuels from cardlock facilities are exempt, and there is a partial rebate for propane and natural gas used in commercial greenhouses. Our government has been very open and transparent about our pollution pricing plan. We will do a review of our pollution pricing system in 2020, focused on competitiveness issues in trade-exposed industries such as agriculture. It is also important to remember that this is about tackling climate change and that 100% of the revenues stay in the province. We will continue to support our farmers and food processors as they provide an essential service across Canada. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Madam Chair, Minister Bibeau keeps talking about wanting to protect Canadians'environment. Well, the truth is that Canada's farmers, ranchers and processors have for years demonstrated their ability to deliver meaningful reductions in emissions and to safeguard the environment through the adoption of new technologies, education and innovative management practices, but the government ignores these efforts. Will the minister at the very least admit to Canadians that Canadian farmers are unable to pass on the cost of the carbon tax to consumers and instead have to absorb those extra costs out of their own pockets? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Madam Chair, allow me to explain again our government's position on pollution pricing. The price and method were developed so we could build an increasingly clean economy. We put a number of measures in place to help the agriculture sector. Emissions from animal and plant production aren't taxed. Farm fuels and fuels delivered to off-farm points-of-sale are also Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you, Madam Chair. I do have another question. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I am watching the time, Mr. Dreeshan. You have a couple more seconds. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you. Madam Chair, Minister Bibeau has repeatedly asked stakeholders to send her data about the impacts of the carbon tax on farmers, so this is exactly what they have been doing. The Atlantic Grains Council, the Grain Farmers of Ontario, Producteurs de grains du Qubec and the Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association issued a joint statement at the beginning of this year in which they estimated that the cumulative indirect inflation of carbon tax on farm costs will be $14. 50 an acre this year, with that cost escalating by more than double by 2022 to almost $30 an acre. These are huge numbers. Why does the Liberal government continue to ignore the facts presented to it and continue to misrepresent the truth to Canadians? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Madame Chair, I can assure you that we have paid close attention to all the information that has been provided to us and that our calculation was also based on this information provided by provinces and different stakeholders. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Our government has been very open and transparent about our pollution pricing plan. The department used data from stakeholders and provinces Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you very much, Madam Chair Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: as well as the 2019 agricultural tax data to estimate the average cost of pollution pricing associated with grain drying at up to 0. 4% of overall operating costs. It is important to remember that we have put in place many special provisions Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Madam Chair Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: like exempting farm fuel and providing other financial supports for farmers. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Dreeshen, I am watching the time, and the minister is allowed to answer for the same amount of time that you used to ask the question. Therefore, I would hope that we would allow her to finish. She has finished, and unfortunately the time is up. The committee now stands adjourned until tomorrow at noon.

When it comes to the cooperation between two levels of government, Bergeron said that Canadian government once promised to offer $14 million to support Quebec and other provinces to go through the difficulty, but only in targeted transfers. Notwithstanding how promising it seemed, under the current situation, what they needed might be an unconditional transfer, especially towards the medical care system. Under the pressure of the people, the government had to reconsider their cooperation of the armed forces in the CHSLDs, as well as their support for Quebeckers.

tr-gq-1257

tr-gq-1257_0

Summarize the whole meeting. The Chair (Hon. Anthony Rota (NipissingTimiskaming, Lib.) ): I call this meeting to order. Welcome to the 23rd meeting of the House of Commons Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic. A reminder to all members that in order to avoid issues with sound, members participating in person should not also be connected to the video conference. For those of you who are joining via video conference, I will remind you that when speaking you should be on the same channel as the language you are speaking, and please use your headsets. As usual, please direct your remarks through the chair. As I understand, there are no ministerial announcements today. We will now proceed to presenting petitions. I remind members that any petition presented during a meeting of this special committee must have already been certified by the clerk of petitions. For members participating in person, I ask that they please come and drop their signed certificates off at the table once the petition is presented. I would ask members to be very brief and concise, and to summarize the exact content of the petition. We will continue. The first person presenting a petition today is Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May (SaanichGulf Islands, GP): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I present two petitions this morning. The residents of SaanichGulf Islands are calling on the government to simplify the process for protection of marine protected areas. It's a multi-layered communication process. The marine protected area first proposed in the 1970s for the southern Strait of Georgia, now called the Salish Sea, has been awaiting designation for so long that it was originally endorsed by Jacques Cousteau. That gives us a sense for why petitioners are calling for a simplified and more rapid process. The second petition is from petitioners who are very concerned about our obligations under the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and our commitments under the Truth and Reconciliation Commission calls to action. They specifically reference the RCMP violation of UNDRIP in its actions on Wet'suwet'en territory and ask the government to commit to actually living the principles embodied in UNDRIP. The Chair: We will now go to Mr. Hardie. Mr. Ken Hardie (FleetwoodPort Kells, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am presenting a petition on behalf of the one in a million Canadians who suffer severe and adverse effects from vaccinations. GuillainBarre syndrome is very debilitating, and this petition seeks the setting up of a no-fault accident or compensation system to help offset the loss of work, the loss of wages and the loss of quality of life that many of these people suffer. I'm pleased to present this petition pursuant to Standing Order 36. The Chair: Mr. Trudel, you have the floor. Mr. Denis Trudel (LongueuilSaint-Hubert, BQ): Mr. Chair, culture is the soul of a people. Over the past 20years or so, culture, especially music, has never been as accessible as it is now. Paradoxically, creators'incomes have never been so low. The advent of digital technology has completely overturned the system for distributing the wealth generated by creators for the benefit of various Web stakeholders, many of whom are billionaires. This petition addresses these problems and proposes realistic solutions. The first is to set a minimum royalty model for streaming platforms for artists. The second is to update the existing private copying system. The third is for Internet and cell phone providers who sell their services as direct access to culture to share their profits with artists. The fourth is that the GAFAMs have to pay taxes on their services. Six thousand people have already signed the first version of this petition, launched last month by musician JordanOfficer and supported by singer BarbaraSecours. As an artist, I am proud to present this petition today because the issues it raises are fundamental to the survival of Quebec culture. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood ParkFort Saskatchewan, CPC): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I have four petitions to present today. I will be as brief as you suggested, although I will observe that if some members are going on longer during petitions than they normally do, it might be because the government has taken away so many of the tools that opposition members normally have for raising important issues in the House. The first petition deals with the issue of euthanasia and long-term care. The petitioners are concerned that instead of focusing on improving medically assisted life, something that we know is a major issue in light of recent revelations, the government has put so much time and legislative energy into efforts to continually further expand euthanasia in Canada and remove vital safeguards. The second petition speaks to the ongoing conversations happening in Canada around systemic discrimination and systemic racism. I think we do need to reflect on systemic discrimination. This petition deals specifically with Bill 21 in Quebec and raises concerns. The reality of the way that bill applies is that people from certain backgrounds who wish to practise their faith are not able to fully participate in Canadian society if they are employed in the public service. This petition asks the government to provide a response on that issue, something it hasn't done in response to past petitions on this. The third petition deals with the issue of firearms. The petitioners want to see the government take a strong response in dealing with illegal guns and gun smuggling. The petition notes that the vast majority of firearms-related crimes in Canada involves illegal guns. At the same time, the petitioners are concerned that the government has the wrong focusthat is, harassing law-abiding firearms ownerswithout putting in place substantial measures to deal with illegal guns. The petitioners want to see the reversal of the order in council from May 1 and strong measures to deal with illegal firearms. The fourth and final petition deals with Bill S-204, a bill that would make it a criminal offence for a Canadian to go abroad and receive an organ from a person who has not consented to giving that organ. It would also create a mechanism by which someone could be deemed inadmissible to Canada if they were involved in organ harvesting and trafficking. The petitioners are supportive of Bill S-204 and of similar bills in previous parliaments and would like to see us pass that bill as soon as possible. The Chair: Presenting petitions, Mr. Lamoureux. Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Winnipeg North, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. It is with pleasure that I table another petition by the residents of Winnipeg North. These residents have signed a petition asking the Government of Canada, and in fact all members of Parliament, to put a high priority on assisting our poorest seniors. The increases to the GIS by $200, and $300 to the OAS, have been well received. They just want to highlight how important it is to support our seniors, in particular the poorest of our seniors. The Chair: For members present in the Chamber, a reminder that they are asked to bring their petitions to the table. We'll now proceed to statements by members. We'll go to Ms. Atwin for the first one. Mrs. Jenica Atwin (Fredericton, GP): Thank you, Mr. Chair. June 21 is National Indigenous Peoples Day, a day of acknowledgement and a day of celebration of the beautiful diversity of indigenous peoples across Turtle Island. I wish to recognize the leadership of Chief Shelley Sabattis of the Welamukotuk First Nation in Oromocto, New Brunswick. Each year she and her council, volunteers and staff go above and beyond to show appreciation for their members and to demonstrate pride and culture while promoting well-being. We gather in an event where all are welcome to take part, from traditional hand drum-making with elders to moose meat and tacos. This year we will celebrate a bit differently, but we will still stay connected, virtually and in spirit, to the vast network of indigenous peoples and allies. We need each other now more than ever. May we come together in song and stories and in solidarity. We will remember those who are not among us. I hope all of Canada will join us in observing National Indigenous Peoples Day. Mawiyapasuwok: let us come together. Nit liech. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Beech. Mr. Terry Beech (Burnaby NorthSeymour, Lib.): Mr. Chair, COVID-19 is an unprecedented challenge for all communities across Canada, but as we do our part to flatten the curve, I often think about those who suit up every morning to serve on the front lines of our health care system. My mother is a home care worker and my sister is a nurse. Even before the crisis, they would often share the hardships they faced on a day-to-day basis. It's a tough job at the best of times. In a pandemic, these jobs are life-threatening. I think we can all agree that these workers deserve more than our good wishes. They deserve a raise. That is why we have worked with the provinces to implement pandemic pay. In British Columbia more than 250,000 front-line workers are eligible for this program. That works out to a pay increase of about $4 an hour. It's a small show of our appreciation for their difficult and priceless contribution to our country. Share this message and say thanks to our front-line workers, participate in the 7 p. m. cheer, and order a pizza for your local nurses. It's the least we can do. The Chair: We'll now go on to Mr. Shipley. Mr. Doug Shipley (BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. We've been living in difficult times. Slowly, we are getting back to some resemblance of normalcy, although unfortunately not soon enough for some of our great summer festivals. It will not be normal in BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte this summer without the iconic Boots and Hearts weekend music festival, Kempenfest, Oro World's Fair, the Elmvale Fall Fair, or the Midhurst Autumnfest. Canada Day celebrations have been cancelled, but we can still celebrate the great nation we call home. Because of the lack of Canada Day celebrations, I've created Happy Canada Day lawn signs that are available through my constituency office, free to all residents of BarrieSpringwaterOro-Medonte. I'm also hosting a drive-through party on Canada Day at the Royal Canadian Legion on St. Vincent Street in Barrie. All are welcome to attend. There will be cupcakes for all. Please drop by the legion between 11 a. m. and 2 p. m. , and we can celebrate Canada Day safely together. Thank you and have a great summer. The Chair: Now we'll go on to Ms. Young. Ms. Kate Young (London West, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Among the countless ordinary Canadians who have stepped up to do extraordinary work during COVID-19, I wish to draw attention to our teachers. Teachers have always had a special place in my heart. My father was a teacher, and my daughter-in-law, Kelly Webb, is one now. I'm certain that my colleagues can all easily remember a teacher in their past who played an important role in helping them achieve their potential. I remember my grade 12 English teacher, Vince Weaver, at Westminster Secondary School in London. He made me realize that I could do so much more than I believed. Across the country, as schools closed, teachers did not stop their work. Some took their classes online. Others found innovative ways to continue engaging with their students. This is not the school year anyone imagined, and what the next one will look like is unclear, but our teachers in London West and across Canada have shown that no matter what, they will be there to help our next generation shine. The Chair: Before proceeding to the next presenter, I just want to remind the honourable members in the chamber that I realize that the six-foot limit makes it harder to whisper to each other, but we're hearing a bit of rumble, so I just want you to try to whisper at your best. Mr. Bergeron, you have the floor. Mr. Stphane Bergeron (Montarville, BQ): Mr. Chair, on July1st, we will be celebrating one of the most important events for the riding of Montarville: the 175thanniversary of the city of Saint-Bruno-de-Montarville. The theme Proud of our traditions will be the focus of this celebration for the people of Montarville. This is a good illustration of the rich history of this municipality nestled in the western foothills of Mont-Saint-Bruno. The seigneury of Montarville was granted in1710 to the illustrious former governor of Trois-Rivires, PierreBoucher. The parish of Saint-Bruno, which took root there and in which a village grew, became a municipal corporation in1845. To this day, it is one of the most prosperous localities, with a strong sense of belonging, a very dynamic community life and jealously preserved natural environments. A whole program had been drawn up for the celebration, but the current health crisis has taken over some of the planned activities, which has in no way diminished the pride and festive spirit of the people of Montarville. On July1st, we will have a good reason to be proud, in spite of everything. Happy 175thanniversary to Saint-Bruno-de-Montarville. The Chair: We'll now continue with Mr. Maloney. Mr. James Maloney (EtobicokeLakeshore, Lib.): Mr. Chair, thank you for allowing me to take a moment to highlight an initiative that I started early on during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Heroes of EtobicokeLakeshore is an opportunity for citizens in my riding to recognize the contributions of those in their community who make life a bit easier. I'm pleased with the number of nominations I received that honour everyone from front-line workers to businesses that are innovating in these difficult times to volunteers who are finding new ways to reach out. I think of Daniel Lauzon who set up Food for Now, a mobile service that helps take care of the homeless. I think of Toni Varone, who helped his business clients by forgiving their rents, or young Lucas, who wanted to thank his teachers. I've been moved and inspired by the countless stories of generosity, strength, resiliency, kindness, incredible character and creativity. I want to thank all the heroes, as well as the people who nominated them. Keep them coming. Stay safe, everyone, and I wish you happy Canada Day early. The Chair: We'll now move on to Ms. Wong. Hon. Alice Wong (Richmond Centre, CPC): Mr. Chair, it gives me great pleasure to thank a local Richmond-based charity, the Social Diversity for Children Foundation, SDC, for its hard work both in raising funds for the purchase of personal protective equipment and in distributing this PPE to long-term care facilities and individual seniors'homes in the lower mainland of B. C. The COVID-19 relief fund is supported by a dozen other non-profits, businesses and community groups. Over the past two months, SDC has been to 32 seniors homes and senior-related organizations. In total, it has delivered masks to 7,000 care workers, staff and seniors. It is amazing to have witnessed how the younger generation have gotten involved in caring for the elderly at this very challenging time. The Chair: We'll now go to Ms. Damoff. Ms. Pam Damoff (Oakville NorthBurlington, Lib.): Mr. Chair, June is ALS Awareness Month, and 79 years after Lou Gehrig died from ALS little has changed. There's still no cure, and those with ALS typically die within five years of diagnosis. On June 21, Canadians will gather virtually to raise funds for ALS Canada in the Walk to End ALS. In Halton, normally we meet each year at Bronte Creek Provincial Park on the May long weekend to raise funds for ALS Canada. This year I will virtually join Tim's Titans, a team formed to honour Tim Robertson, my friend who died in 2016 after living with ALS for 13 years. I have a T-shirt, with a picture of Lou Gehrig, that says, Great Player. . . Lousy Disease and Tim's Titans. . . Great Team! ALS. . . Still a Lousy Disease. Join me on June 21 for the virtual Walk to End ALS to raise funds to support patients and their families and for ALS research. The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Khera. Ms. Kamal Khera (Brampton West, Lib.): Mr. Chair, on Saturday our community stood and marched in solidarity against anti-black racism. The peaceful protests that we're seeing across the country and around the world were not triggered by an isolated incident. They are fuelled by decades of ineffective action against something that is so insidious and deeply entrenched in our history, systems and institutions. For us, that is the racial inequality faced by Canada's indigenous and black communities. Anti-black racism is real. It exists right here in Canada, in our communities, including in Brampton. It exists when racialized students at McCrimmon Middle School are called McCriminals. It exists when a shocking report exposes the Peel District School Board's failure to work fairly with the black community. It exists when D'Andre Campbell, who was fighting mental illness, loses his life at the hands of the police. It is clear that we need reform. We need to dismantle the systems that allow this privilege and oppression to take form, and address the unconscious bias plaguing our institutions. We'll need to be bold, and the time to do that is now. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Dane Lloyd (Sturgeon RiverParkland, CPC): Mr. Chair, a few months ago I rose in the House on the eve of our closure due to COVID-19. I told Canadians we must not give in to fear, that we would carry on and get through this crisis stronger than ever. Today, in this city and across Canada, Canadians are enjoying a beer on their favourite patios. Businesses are reopening, jobs are returning and our lives are starting to feel a bit normal again. Canadians pulled together, and because of that we did not see the devastating death toll that many had predicted. Life may be returning to normal, but unfortunately, here in this chamber of democracy, the people's voices continue to be shut down. There is no good reason for Parliament to be suspended today. In the words of my grandfather, it's time for the Liberals to get with the program and bring back the House. The Chair: We will now proceed with Ms. Jones. Ms. Yvonne Jones (Labrador, Lib.): Mr. Chair, from in-person learning to virtual classrooms, COVID-19 has drastically changed the lives of students across the country, especially those in post-secondary education who are worried about covering costs like tuition or rent this coming fall. Our government recognized that students should not have to worry or put their futures on pause during this difficult time. That's why last month the federal government introduced the Canada emergency student benefit. If you're a high school student headed to a post-secondary school, or a current post-secondary student or a recent graduate, you can receive the Canada emergency student benefit every four weeks and have the financial support that you need to save for school. We also doubled Canada student grants and loans, enhanced the student loan program, increased supports for indigenous post-secondary education and introduced the Canada student service grant for those who wish to pursue it. Our government is here to help all students get the support they need to pursue their future goals successfully. I wish them all the very best, and I wish all of you, my colleagues and those across Canada, a very happy National Indigenous Peoples Day, which is coming up on June 21. The Chair: I want to remind the honourable members to keep to their 60 seconds so that we don't go over the time. I'm sure it would be a lot easier for everyone if we stuck to that limit. We will now go to Mr. Aitchison. Mr. Scott Aitchison (Parry SoundMuskoka, CPC): Mr. Chair, I rise today to once again implore the government to do something about the horrible lack of access to and crazy cost of rural Internet service. Right now, too many areas of my riding have no access to rural Internet service at all, and those who can get service are paying through the nose. I've even heard constituents say that during this pandemic, they are having to choose between feeding their kids and educating them. Over the last few weeks, Conservatives have been consulting with rural Canadians, and the results are in. My constituents are tired of fancy political promises. They are frustrated beyond belief by the new challenges created by this pandemic. They are absolutely fed up with having their pleas ignored. All we want is affordable and reliable Internet service. Is that too much to ask of the government? The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. MacGregor. Mr. Alistair MacGregor (CowichanMalahatLangford, NDP): Mr. Chair, these last few months have been incredibly challenging for the residents of CowichanMalahatLangford, who have been forced to deal with the economic and social consequences of COVID-19. The pandemic has laid bare the inadequacies of our social safety net, the weakness in our supply chains and the dependence of our society on essential workers, who often work long hours for low wages, putting themselves and their families at risk. We've also been forced to confront the systemic inequality, poverty and racism that continue to hold so many people back from achieving their full potential. I will not dishonour the sacrifice that so many have made during this time by allowing us to go back to the status quo that got us here in the first place. I will not apologize for demanding that the most vulnerable in our society get the supports and opportunities they need to live with dignity, and I will not relent from pushing my political colleagues to summon the courage necessary to implement policies that lead to environmental, economic and social justice. The Chair: I now give the floor to Mr. Blaney. Hon. Steven Blaney (BellechasseLes EtcheminsLvis, CPC): Mr. Chair, here is a beautiful story, the story of a woman from Bellechasse, a courageous young mother from Saint-Malachie, Marie-ChristineGoupil. With three children, including the eldest daughter with a disability, and realizing that her daughter with a disability had special clothing needs, she decided to go into business to meet the needs of other parents who, like her, were facing their child's clothing challenges. Last week, she presented her Handy clothing collection on the show Dans l'il du dragon. It was a very emotional moment for the audience and the dragons. They were so touched that they decided to give her the amount she wanted without diluting her shares. The video of her presentation has already been viewed over 1million times on social networks. Marie-ChristineGoupil has discovered a passion for entrepreneurship and has moved and inspired many people with her passionate and courageous attitude. Congratulations, Ms. Goupil, your example makes us proud. The Chair: Mr. Blanchet, you have the floor. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet (BeloeilChambly, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I lend my voice to the Chief of the Assembly of First Nations of Quebec-Labrador, GhislainPicard, whose message is as follows: There have been no fewer than 14reports and conclusions of commissions of inquiry since1967 highlighting major problems in relations between law enforcement agencies and indigenous people. Each time, the conclusions have been overwhelming and highlight a disturbing reality. The justice system has failed indigenous people. Are you going to respond, as you too often do, by moving on to the next one, or are you going to do what we expect you to do, which is to recognize that the justice system discriminates against indigenous people and that we have no less right to security than the rest of the population? In three months, police interventions have claimed more victims among our members than the pandemic. But it is not enough to simply take a knee and denounce racism. It's about standing up and taking action. Those are the words of GhislainPicard. The Chair: We'll now continue with Ms. Harder. Ms. Rachael Harder (Lethbridge, CPC): Over the last few months, Canada's democracy has been disregarded and an autocracy has been resurrected in its place. By refusing to hold regular parliamentary sittings, Mr. Trudeau is sending a strong message to the Canadian public that he alone is the one who matters. In 2014, he professed that Canadians want their Members of Parliament to be effective voices for their communities in Ottawa, and not merely mouthpieces for an all-too-powerful Prime Minister. As it stands, however, he has shut down Parliament. Effectively, he has stripped us, the opposition, of our privileges and our powers. Sadly, Mr. Trudeau has become the all-too-powerful Prime Minister that he once warned against. A government that does not allow for effective opposition is not functioning in the best interest of Canadians; it is operating in the best interest of itself and, even more so, the interest of the Prime Minister. Canadians deserve to flourish in a democracy, not merely survive under the autocracy that this Prime Minister has created. The Chair: We'll now go on to Ms. Zahid. Mrs. Salma Zahid (Scarborough Centre, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I would like to recognize the work of Agincourt Community Services Association and its tireless executive director, Lee Soda, who have been serving our community during the COVID-19 pandemic. Under more pressure than ever, their staff and volunteers continue to serve a community whose need was great even before the crisis. Their food bank helps over 4,000 people weekly. They have opened outdoor washrooms and hand-washing stations for vulnerable communities and are delivering groceries and other essentials to vulnerable seniors. ACSA is a bridge between those who can help and those who need help, and they are just one example of how our community has come together to meet this challenge. There are restaurants and businesses donating meals to front-line workers, residents answering the call to stock the food bank shelves and neighbours looking in on the vulnerable and isolated. I am so proud of our community's spirit. Scarborough is strong. The Chair: We'll now proceed to the questioning of ministers. Please note that we will suspend the proceedings twice in order to allow employees who provide support for the sitting to replace each other safely. The first question goes to the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Chair, for months Conservatives have been pointing out flaws in Liberal government programs that are preventing Canadians from getting the help they need. The Prime Minister has refused to make these very technical changes to get more help to Canadians who need it. For example, on the wage subsidy, more than two-thirds of the money allocated for that program has lapsed because businesses don't qualify. I have a simple question. Will the Prime Minister change the program to allow companies who have made acquisitions to access the wage subsidy to keep more people working? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau (Papineau, Lib.): Mr. Chair, from the very beginning we knew that as we rolled out measures, we would need to improve them and tweak them, and that's exactly what we've been doing over the past three months. We needed to make measures happen quickly for Canadians, and we did that. But we continued to improve them, to make additions and amendments so that more people could get the help they needed, including with the proposed legislation last week that expanded the reach of the wage subsidy to more businesses. Unfortunately, the Conservatives didn't even want us to debate that particular piece of legislation. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Actually, Mr. Chair, it was the Liberals who said no to the motion to allow this Parliament to sit to debate that motion, and even in that legislation they refused to allow businesses who have made acquisitions to access the program. Now, when we look at the rent relief program, it is so difficult to apply for it that many landlords are refusing to bother, leaving even more small businesses to fall through the cracks. In fact, of the $3 billion allocated to the rent relief program, only $39 million has been paid out. That's less than 2%. Now, the Prime Minister is still using talking points from April. It's now June and he has refused to fix these programs and has successfully talked out the calendar on the days that the House of Commons could meet to discuss these programs. When will he make these changes to get more help to Canadians who need it? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, throughout this pandemic, we have constantly been updating and expanding our various programs. We recognize, in conversations with the premiers, how important it is to make sure that we're working together, the provinces and the federal government, on issues like rent subsidies where commercial rent is indeed a provincial jurisdiction. Many provinces have moved forward with the eviction bans that are necessary to go along with this, and we'll continue to work with provinces to make sure that we're getting Canadians the help they need. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Mr. Chair, Canadians cannot wait. He has run down the clock on parliamentary sittings and he still refuses to make these changes to get more help to Canadians. Today, we learned that Telus has installed Huawei technology in downtown Ottawa. There are over 80 sites across the national capital region with Huawei technology installed. Some of these sites are very near sensitive government institutions, like government departments, the National Research Council, RCMP headquarters and the Bank of Canada. How long has the Prime Minister known that Huawei technology has been installed in the Ottawa area? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, first off, on the issue of Parliament, it has been meeting four times a week over the past many weeks, and members of the opposition have been able to continue to ask questions on COVID-19 and a broad range of subjects. Moreover, every two weeks the finance department puts forward at the finance committee the full transparent measures that we've taken, so that parliamentarians can study them. We are continuing to work in this crisis. At the same time Mr. Ziad Aboultaif (Edmonton Manning, CPC): Answer the question. The Chair: I'm sorry? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: in regard to Huawei technology there are strict rules for companies to follow and we assume they will all follow those. The Chair: We'll pause for a second and stop the clock. I want to remind the honourable members who are joining us virtually that heckling really does disrupt the whole session. Your face does come up and we do see who it is, so I just want to make sure that you're aware of that. Now we'll go back to Mr. Scheer. We have a minute and 10 seconds left. Hon. Andrew Scheer: Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister is bragging about accountability and transparency. Will he table an economic update before the House rises? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, throughout this unprecedented pandemic, we have been open and transparent about all of the measures we've put forward. We've updated the finance committee The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer: That's a long way of saying no, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, the Prime Minister has pursued a policy of appeasement in pursuit of a personal vanity product at the UN. In the process, he's cozied up to dictators and human rights violators. He's abandoned Israel and committed funding to UNRWA, an organization whose schools have been used as storage facilities for Hamas rockets against Israeli civilians, and whose facilities have served as breeding grounds for racism and anti-Semitism. He has apologized for the Iranian regime when it shot down a plane full of Canadian citizens, and he refuses to list the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist entity. What's the point of having a seat at the table if you have to sell out Canadian principles to get there? The Chair: The Right Honourable Prime Minister. Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, we see that the Conservatives have kept with the Harper approach to international diplomacy. The failed presence of Canada on the world stage was an embarrassment for many Canadians for many years. That's why, when we took office five years ago, we demonstrated the kind of leadership on values that Canadians expected. We will continue to work around the world to defend multilateralism. The Chair: We have a point of order. Ms. May. Ms. Elizabeth May: This being a committee, we can have a point of order during what would have been question period. I am not sitting that far away from the Prime Minister, and I'm sorry, but Andrew Scheer used to be the Speaker of the House and should show better decorum. The Chair: We have a point of order from Mr. Genuis. Mr. Garnett Genuis: Mr. Chair, on the same point of order, it is disgusting for the leader of the Green Party to use decorum as an excuse to interrupt the Leader of the Opposition in the middle of critical lines of questioning. The leader of the Green Party knows the rules of the House and shouldn't be abusing them to advance a partisan agenda. The Chair: We're getting into debate. I do want to point out that the time had run out. We're now moving on to the next line of questions. On a point of order, Mr. Scheer. Hon. Andrew Scheer: I appreciate the honourable leader of the Green Party, Elizabeth May, for that reminder. When I was Speaker I always appreciated her help and advice about how to improve decorum in here. I just want to say to the member, and to all members, that the reason that I cannot control myself is that the Prime Minister used the word embarrassment in answering a foreign affairs question, and it just made me think of the India trip. The Chair: I believe we're getting into debate and arguments. Mr. Blanchet, you have the floor. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: Mr. Chair, while the Greens and the Conservatives are saying that they'll be waiting outside after the meeting, I will ask a question. The Prime Minister has extended the Canada emergency response benefit, and that's good news, but it's not enough. Last week in the House, the government said it was urgent to fight fraud. For us, it was also urgent to adjust the CERB to the needs of the tourism, arts and agriculture sectors. Farmers are going to be seriously under-resourced. So what happened to the urgency of reforming the CERB? Why is the government refusing to talk to the opposition parties? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, I am very pleased to hear the hon. member finally align himself with the positions of the Liberal Party. Unfortunately, the Bloc is a week late. It should have let us debate these concerns in the House last week. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: It seems to me that the word alignment here is a fantasy. We have unequivocally proposed to extend the debate to reach an agreement, which brings me to my second question. Last week, the issue of assistance to people with disabilities was also a pressing concern, and it's even more so a week later. The Bloc proposed to extend the discussions and split the government's bill in two to help people with disabilities. Why is the government refusing this assistance to people with disabilities, when it could have been debated with the opposition in a civilized and proper way in a Parliament in which it has a minority? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: That was exactly what we wanted, but unanimous consent of the Chamber was required to debate this matter, and the Conservative Party of Canada voted against it. Unfortunately, we are going to have to find a different way to help people with disabilities. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: If the idea is so good and wonderful, why not start over and open the dialogue now? What's stopping the Prime Minister from being a rallying point and inviting us to take to each other and resolve the problem, rather than saying that he is going to pack up his toys and go home? The people with disabilities are the ones who will pay the price. Where was the Prime Minister on October21,2019? He received a minority mandate from Quebeckers and Canadians. Why is he behaving like something between a prime minister with a majority and a monarch by divine right? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: I've heard the Conservative Party and the Bloc Qubcois throw their accusations around. They don't point out that the House of Commons did indeed give its consent to extend the mandate of the Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic until the end of June. Three parties agreed, which was the right thing to do in the context of this minority government. We've been working with the other parties. However, as they did not get the results they wanted, they complained. Unfortunately, they too are part of a minority Parliament and must respect the voice of the majority of parliamentarians, just as we do. Mr. Yves-Franois Blanchet: I might have been tempted, but that's unlikely to happen because the Prime Minister isn't me, he's him. It's therefore up to him to bring people together, open a dialogue and recall Parliament. All we were asking for was the opportunity to talk for an hour or two. However, suddenly he doesn't want to play anymore. It's not working anymore, and there's something a bit strange about that. In addition, the government wants to buy the right to interfere in provincial and Quebec jurisdictions for $14billion. However, Quebec and a number of provinces are refusing to allow it to interfere in their jurisdictions and are asking that this money be paid to them unconditionally. Is the Prime Minister trying to take advantage of the crisis or is he trying to create a constitutional crisis? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, the safety of Canadians is the responsibility of all levels of government. That's why we have proposed a $14billion agreement to ensure that all Canadians across the country experience a safe re-opening of the economy. This is a proposal that we are working on with the provinces because we know that there are needs across the country, including early childhood centres, screening and support for municipalities. The federal government wants to be there to help the provinces. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh (Burnaby South, NDP): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Indigenous leaders have expressed a lack of confidence in the RCMP commissioner's ability to tackle full-scale systemic racism, but the Prime Minister has expressed his confidence in the commissioner. What's that based on? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, over the past two years, Commissioner Lucki has made significant strides forward on an issue where there is still much more to do. We know that systemic racism exists in all of our institutions across this country The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: This is the same RCMP commissioner who just recently said that they couldn't explain what systemic racism was. Now the Prime Minister says that he has confidence, when indigenous leaders express their lack of confidence. Why does the Prime Minister believe that the RCMP commissioner can tackle systemic racism in the RCMP? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, systemic racism is something that touches every corner of our country, every corner of our institutions. It requires people to understand and move forward in coordinated ways with partners. The commissioner is committed to doing that, alongside members of our government. We will do that together and work with indigenous communities and black The Chair: Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, recent events have made it abundantly clear that to tackle the systemic racism at the level of the RCMP, we need a full-scale overhaul of the RCMP. Is the Prime Minister committed to a full-scale overhaul of the RCMP to root out systemic racism? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: As I've said many times, Mr. Chair, I am committed to addressing systemic racism in this country and taking significant, bold actions to reduce the amount of discrimination that indigenous peoples, that racialized Canadians face on a daily basis. We have much work to do, but we will do it together. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, Black Lives Matter has been calling for governments to defund the police. What it's saying is that we need to be better at where we spend our money, investing in communities and not policing. Will the Prime Minister commit to a review of the RCMP budget to allocate resources to community services and not to policing? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, over the past years we have been investing more directly and more money in community organizations, in the black community, and working with indigenous partners on the path to reconciliation. We have been investing in the kinds of community-based programs and solutions that are part of the solution. We know there is much more to do, and we will continue to look at all of our expenditures to make sure we're doing the right things. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, over the past few years, while the Prime Minister has been in office, the RCMP budget has increased by 31%. More money is going towards policing. In recent events we've seen people who needed a health care response to a health care crisis been killed by the RCMP. Does the Prime Minister believe that we need to be investing in a health care response instead of a police response for people who are faced with a crisis? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, the member opposite well knows that it's not an either-or. We need to make sure that our systems across the board, from our police systems to our judicial systems, to our health care systems, to our community systems, are actually addressing the systemic discrimination issues that are embedded within them That is exactly what we are going to continue to do in the coming years. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Mr. Chair, with regard to the CERB extension, can the Prime Minister guarantee that everyone who is receiving CERB payments now will continue to do so without any gaps throughout the summer? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: Mr. Chair, I am happy to highlight that many Canadians who were on the CERB are now returning to work. Many more who are on the CERB now will be returning to work in the coming weeks. We know that as the economy gets back to work, people will want to The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Jagmeet Singh: Can the Prime Minister assure people who need it that they will continue to receive the CERB over the summer, yes or no? Right Hon. Justin Trudeau: We are very pleased to point out that we are going to extend the Canada emergency response benefit for at least another eight weeks, because a lot of people are going to need it. Even if they want to work, there aren't enough jobs for everyone. So we'll be there for them, as we have been from the beginning. The Chair: We're going to pause and suspend proceedings just for a few moments to allow our support staff to substitute for one another in a healthy and safe way. We'll now proceed with Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod (KamloopsThompsonCariboo, CPC): Mr. Chair, it was really a surprise in the middle of a pandemic to see the Prime Minister at his first campaign stop last week in Ottawa. Certainly the game plan has become very transparent. He has a daily report show and he wants to sideline Parliament, dominate the news cycle and keep everyone in the dark about the state of the economy. According to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, there is no reason that he cannot provide the fiscal update during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the PBO has published a number of reports himself. Why won't the Prime Minister provide a fiscal update so we can all understand the state of our economy, or is that just not part of his campaign playbook? Hon. Mona Fortier (Minister of Middle Class Prosperity and Associate Minister of Finance): Thank you, Mr. Chair. Canada's economy is in a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We've been clear about that. We will continue to be open and transparent about the actions that we are taking to support families, businesses, workers, our health care system and our economy. This includes biweekly reports to Parliament on the full cost and status of our economic measures. Once it is possible to provide a clear economic projection, we will provide an update. We are in this together, and we are prepared to do whatever is necessary to support Canadians. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: Chair, Canada's economy was in trouble prior to the COVID, with some of the worst numbers since 2009. Government revenues in March dropped by 7. 2%, and it's shameful and, quite frankly, it's outrageous that they refuse to provide Parliament and Canadians with an economic update. Households during this challenging time know how much money is coming in and they know how much money is going out. The picture is not pretty, but they know what the picture is. Can the finance minister at least reveal the projected revenue decline in quarters one and two? Hon. Mona Fortier: The Canadian economy is going through a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We've known this for three months. We've continued to be open and transparent about the measures we've put in place for Canadians, workers and businesses. In fact, we have reported biweekly to Parliament on the total cost and status of our plan's measures. As soon as it's possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide a comprehensive update to Canadians The Chair: We go back to Ms. McLeod. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: Other governments have managed to provide updates for their citizens and carry out their responsibilities, but of course this government has sidelined Parliament with simply a question-but-no-answer period. Let's try something else. The forestry industry was in crisis even before the pandemic, with mills closing down and thousands of jobs lost. Eight weeks ago, Minister Freeland said, I have had many discussions with leaders in our forestry sector and the provinces about what we can do to support the industry today. Meanwhile, we've had support going to the arts and we've had support going to fisheries, just to name a few, but arguably for the industry that was having some of the most numerous challenges, it has been radio silence. That was eight weeks ago today. Can the government at least commit to releasing an updated softwood lumber transition plan before we rise? Hon. Seamus O'Regan (Minister of Natural Resources): Mr. Chair, we remain committed, of course, to the forestry industry and seeing it through this pandemic and this very uncertain time. The expanding market opportunities program, for instance, has helped Canada's forestry sector diversify, create jobs and open new markets. We've had new construction projects that are active today, using Canadian wood in key markets like Korea, Japan, China and the United States. Tomorrow this House will vote on our government's investment of $20. 97 million for this program. It's part of our budget 2019 commitment to invest $251 million over three years, and I hope the opposition will support us in that. Mrs. Cathy McLeod: It was stated in a major newspaper this morning that this government is like a sexy sports carvroom, vroom, vroombut with a history of breakdowns and major repairs. I think that might describe what has been happening. For forestry, it has been eight weeks and there has been nothing. There is another area that Deputy Prime Minister Freeland did talk about. We were talking about the U. S. softwood lumber duties that are being held in the United States. It's billions of dollars being held with the U. S. treasury. In April, she acknowledged that these duties are a real issue for the softwood lumber industry. What's been done since that time? Hon. David Lametti (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada): Mr. Chair, Canada's forestry industry supports good middle-class jobs in communities across our country. The sector is also an essential link in the medical equipment supply chain, and we thank them for all the work they're doing. We're aware of the immense pressures faced by this sector, especially at this time, and Deputy Prime Minister Freeland and others are taking that seriously and working through this issue. As our government has said repeatedly, we firmly believe that the U. S. duties on Canadian softwood lumber are unfair and unwarranted, and we will pursue all means in order to The Chair: Before continuing, I want to remind honourable members who are at home to make sure that the boom on their headsets is down. It just makes a better pickup. We heard everything, but it was a little distant. That's for everyone's benefit. We're now going to continue with Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell (Louis-Saint-Laurent, CPC): Mr. Chair, before I ask my question, I'd like to pay tribute to the Minister of Justice, particularly to his versatility. Today, he talked about forests. Yesterday, the Minister of Justice talked about Davie and indigenous affairs. Really, this minister is very versatile. My question is directly for the Minister of Finance. I like Mr. Lametti very much, but I'd like Mr. Morneau to answer my question. Yesterday, in a Senate parliamentary committee, the Minister of Finance half-opened the door to an economic update. Based on what he said, it seems that, as we speak, a committee of the Department of Finance is working on an economic update. Could Mr. Morneau tell Canadians when he is going to table this economic update? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, as we know, the Canadian economy is going through a period of extraordinary uncertainty. As soon as it's possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide a full update to Canadians. Right now, we can say that we have supported workers, businesses and Canadians with the emergency measures we have put in place. We will continue to do so, because we need to be sure that Canadians can get through this crisis. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I thought it was too good to be true. The Minister of Finance is opening the door, and the Minister of Small Business is closing it. We don't know when the economic update will take place, yet all across Canada, provinces are doing economic updates. Could Mr. Morneau explain to Canadians why he is unable to give one? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, since the beginning of the crisis, we have implemented the economic action plan to respond to COVID-19, and we've provided immediate assistance to Canadians, businesses and workers. Over 2. 5million jobs were protected by the Canada emergency wage subsidy. In addition, 8. 4million Canadians The Chair: We are returning to Mr. Deltell. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, next Friday, the Quebec minister of finance, EricGirard, will give an economic update. If EricGirard can give one for Quebec, why can't BillMorneau give one for Canada? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, once again, we have been open and transparent from the outset. We have devoted our energy to support Canadians, workers and businesses. We will continue to do so. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I cannot judge the quality of the work done by the provinces, but what I do know is that Quebec, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland have also made efforts to support their residents economically. Those provinces are able to table economic updates. Yesterday, Saskatchewan even tabled a budget. Why is Bill Morneau unable to table an economic update for all Canadians? Hon. Mona Fortier: Let me repeat for my hon. colleague that we are going through extraordinarily uncertain times. We have continued to be open and transparent. We have reported biweekly to Parliament on the total cost and status of the measures in our economic response plan. Once again, as soon as clear economic projections can be provided, we will provide an update The Chair: Mr. Deltell has the floor. Mr. Grard Deltell: The minister talks about the total cost of the government's economic expenditures. So I ask the question: so far, over the past three months, how much has the pandemic cost Canadians? Hon. Mona Fortier: As I said earlier, it is important to note that we have put forward measures, including the wage subsidy, which have helped more than 2. 5million The Chair: Mr. Deltell has the floor. Mr. Grard Deltell: Mr. Chair, I have been trying for four minutes to get anything remotely resembling an answer, and I'm getting absolutely nothing. I am not asking questions for myself; I am asking questions for Canadians. Why are the government and the Minister of Finance, Bill Morneau, not able to table an economic update when some provinces are able to? Hon. Mona Fortier: Once again, I would like to remind my hon. colleague that we have provided interest-free loans to businesses. More than 669,000loans have been approved. We have continued to support businesses and Canadians during this time The Chair: Mr. Deltell, you have time for a very brief question. Mr. Grard Deltell: The only thing that distinguishes the provinces that table economic updates and the current government is political will. Why does Bill Morneau not have the political will to tell Canadians the truth? Hon. Mona Fortier: Once again, we have been open and transparent. As soon as it is possible to provide clear economic projections, we will provide Canadians with a full update. The Chair: We will now continue with Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya (MarkhamUnionville, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. COVID-19 has sparked and spurred anti-Asian racism. These are not just racist comments online; Asian Canadians have been attacked. What is the government doing to combat anti-Asian racism? Hon. Bardish Chagger (Minister of Diversity and Inclusion and Youth): Mr. Chair, since our government took office in 2015, we have been making investments and working with communities. The difference between our government and the previous government is that we will actually consult with Canadians, including black Canadians, including Asian Canadians, to respond to the challenges, including with an anti-racism secretariat and an anti-racism strategy. It will take all of us. I appreciate the member's question, so that we can also work together. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, one business owner I know in Markham has operated for 20 years. Now she's looking at over $9,000 in rent due on June 24. COVID-19 has crippled her sales and she's going to go out of business. Her landlord has no interest in the Canada emergency commercial rent assistance program. How can the government say this program is working? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, this program was made possible by working with the provinces, and we will continue to encourage landlords and tenants to work together to make sure they have relief for this very difficult time in which they're living. We're continuing to monitor the CECRA program and we will make it possible for businesses to have access to the program. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, the government business rent relief program has been a total disaster. Even the government's own numbers show it is a failure. As of June 8, less than 2% of the $3 billion budgeted has been spent. What is it going to take for the government to admit that the program is a disaster and needs changes? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we know our government has been working closely with the provinces and territories to deliver the Canada emergency commercial rent assistance. Although the tenant-landlord relationship is ultimately the responsibility of the provinces and territories, our government has stepped up to provide support through the tools we have and through CMHC so that small businesses can get the rent relief they need. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, according to the government, there are around 1. 1 million small businesses in Canada. At committee, we were told only around 5,500 of them are receiving COVID-19 rent relief. That number is shameful. When will the Liberal government wake up and make the changes? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we welcome the steps some provinces and territories have taken to further protect commercial tenants. We will continue to monitor this program closely and ensure that Canada's small businesses are supported during this challenging time. We will continue to monitor to see The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Saroya. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, there was no answer. When can the government make these changes? Hon. Mary Ng (Minister of Small Business, Export Promotion and International Trade): Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable colleague that we are doing everything and will continue to do everything to help small businesses in our country. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, on May 27 the CBSA seized 65 small handguns at Pearson airport, the largest firearms seizure on record. It is clear that smuggled handguns are the weapon of choice for criminals. Why is the Prime Minister focusing on an ineffective municipal ban? Hon. Bill Blair (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness): Mr. Chair, I would point out that gun violence in any of our communities is unacceptable, and it's important that governments and communities take steps to prevent guns from getting into the hands of criminals. That's why we do important work at our border to keep guns from being smuggled into our country, but it also necessitates additional work. I don't think you can talk about gun violence without talking about stronger gun control. That's why our government has taken a very strong position and will strengthen gun control to keep Canadians safe. The Chair: Mr. Saroya, you may have a 10-second question, if that's possible, please. Mr. Bob Saroya: Mr. Chair, COVID-19 has not stopped gun violence in the GTA. My constituents are concerned about shootings minutes away from their homes. We know the Liberals'gun ban won't change anything, but a focus on smuggled guns and criminals will. When will they make that change? Hon. Bill Blair: Mr. Chair, stronger gun control laws are an effective tool, and that's been told to us by police leadership and communities across the country. We're also making investments in borders and law enforcement. Most importantly, we're making investments in communities and in kids to keep communities safe. I look forward to the member's strong support of those measures when we bring them forward. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback (Prince Albert, CPC): Mr. Chair, the U. S. and the U. K. began their second round of free trade negotiations yesterday. Does the government intend to have a trade agreement in place before the U. K. tariffs come into effect on January 1? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, the U. K. is a strong partner of Canada, as is the European Union, and we're looking forward to continuing that strong relationship The Chair: We'll now go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Thank you, Mr. Chair. With respect to the negotiations with the U. K. , when will the minister publish her goals and objectives for this agreement? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, we're going to continue to work to ensure that any future agreement is going to be based on the best interests of Canadians, and we will The Chair: We will go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Can the minister confirm whether they've entered into negotiations with the U. K. at this point? Hon. Mary Ng: Our government is analyzing the most-favoured-nation tariff regimes schedule the U. K. has put out. I want to assure Canadians The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Mr. Chair, during the CUSMA negotiations, a deal was struck between the Liberal Party and the NDP that the government would notify this House 90 days before it starts any negotiations on any trade agreement. When will the minister notify this House? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that we will absolutely be sharing information. Right now, we are analyzing the most-favoured-nation tariff regimes schedule put out by the U. K. Mr. Randy Hoback: Mr. Chair, any meaningful attempts to reform the WTO needs buy-in from the United States. I think all countries agree on that. Has the minister discussed a WTO reform with the USTR, the United States trade representative? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, the Ottawa Group is a consensus-based group, and any decisions will be taken together. Of course, any meaningful reform must include the U. S. The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Has the U. S. been invited to the Ottawa Group meetings? Hon. Mary Ng: The Ottawa Group is a consensus-based group limited to WTO members who are committed to bringing forward ideas and proposals The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Just as with any other trade agreement, the minister has committed to this House that she will publish the list of goals and responsibilities for the negotiations. When will she publish the list for the Ottawa Group? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I'm thrilled that we had an excellent meeting of the Ottawa Group yesterday where, as a group, we agreed to take concrete action. Mr. Randy Hoback: Will the minister be releasing a list of Canada's objectives we would like to see the new WTO's director-general pursue prior to the upcoming DG election? Hon. Mary Ng: We published an action statement from the Ottawa Group yesterday. I would encourage the member opposite to have a look. I'm certainly happy to send it to him. Mr. Randy Hoback: Going back to economic prosperity, we know that the U. S. has been having talks with other countries around the world. Has Canada yet been invited to this group? Hon. Mary Ng: I'm pleased to continue to pursue the objectives of trade diversification. I would remind the member that we have access to a billion and a half customers through our very robust Mr. Randy Hoback: A billion and a half customers is fine if you have a functioning WTO, but if you don't have a functioning WTO, then a billion and a half customers may not be fully accessible to our suppliers, manufacturers and agriculture producers. Can the minister confirm that she's in discussions with the U. S. in joining this economic prosperity group? Hon. Mary Ng: Mr. Chair, I want to assure the honourable member that nothing is more important than standing up and helping create markets for our Canadian businesses and to help our small businesses get more export-ready so that they can grow into the international marketplace. This is work that we've committed to do, and we will keep working on it, particularly The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Hoback. Mr. Randy Hoback: Yesterday Saskatchewan presented a budget. Not only did they present the budget, but they'll also actually debate the budget and pass the budget in Parliament. There's full accountability. Why won't this government do the same? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons): Mr. Chair, the House is sitting in this hybrid format so that people can participate in the House on the screens. I'm sure my colleague is happy to see that his own colleagues are able to ask questions and participate. The Chair: We'll now go to Mr. Williamson. Mr. John Williamson (New Brunswick Southwest, CPC): Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will say that this is no substitute for Parliament, but I appreciate the opportunity. New Brunswick families and businesses are rapidly making adjustments to manage and live with the coronavirus pandemic. Businesses here are opening and services are being offered. Families are preparing for summer and even planning ahead for a new school year in September. We have a lot of work ahead of us. One notable absence is Service Canada. When does the government plan on opening its service counters to assist Canadians again? Hon. Ahmed Hussen (Minister of Families, Children and Social Development): Mr. Chair, our government is committed to ensuring that Canadians continue to have access to the benefits that they rely on through Service Canada. We have redeployed over 3,000 additional staff to ensure that Canadians continue to have access to their benefits. We've established a 1,500-agent call centre to make sure that people can get access to the phone lines to get the help they need. Mr. John Williamson: Service Canada is about more than providing COVID-19 information and benefits. Provincial governments are working hard to adjust to Canada's new normal by opening up businesses and front-line government services. When will we see Service Canada play its role and open its service counters in our communities? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Mr. Chair, we're currently working with our world-class public health experts to determine how best to reopen the Service Canada network for the public. Make no mistake: Our Service Canada employees have gone above and beyond to ensure that Canadians continue to have access to the services that they rely on and the benefits that they need. Mr. John Williamson: Please don't hide behind health experts when the Prime Minister is appearing in the middle of large protests, yet is afraid to bring back the Parliament of Canada to do its business. In fact, the New Brunswick legislature is open for regular business. Bills are being studied, opposition input is being heard and MLAs are voting on legislation, not rubber-stamping government bills. By comparison, our Parliament is stuck in pretending it cannot function like other law-making assemblies. Canadians are in the dark about our country's finances. When will the government table an economic update so taxpayers understand what was spent, what is owed by our kids and grandchildren, and what the government's fiscal footing looks like? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Mr. Chair, nobody's hiding. Nobody's doing anything like that. The only reason my colleague is able to ask a question and I'm able to answer his question is that he's right there on the screen. We have this hybrid format that cares for MPs across the country, not only the ones sitting in the House. Mr. John Williamson: This is no substitute for Parliament. I will ask my question again. When will the government table an economic update so that taxpayers understand what was spent, what is owed by our kids and grandchildren, and what the government's fiscal footing looks like in today's environment? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, I thank my honourable colleague for his question. Canada's economy is still in a period of extraordinary uncertainty due to COVID-19. We have been open and transparent about the measures we have been providing to support families, businesses and workers. Even our health care The Chair: We'll go back to Mr. Williamson. Mr. John Williamson: Except you have not. The Auditor General is underfunded. We have no idea about the total of government spending. Again I will ask when the government will table an economic update so that we can have an understanding of what the government's fiscal footing looks like. Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we have included biweekly reports to Parliament on the full cost and status of our economic response plan measures since the beginning. I have said, and I will continue to say, that when it is possible to provide a clear economic projection, we will provide an update. Mr. John Williamson: What is the full cost to date of the government's COVID-19 relief measures, as the minister just claimed the government has provided to Parliament? Hon. Mona Fortier: Mr. Chair, we have provided support for workers, and 2. 5 million Canadians have been helped through the Canadian wage subsidy. We have provided businesses with some loans, and 669,000 businesses have applied for these loans. Even for the CERB, we have over eight million Canadians who have applied. The Chair: We will now continue with Mr. Bergeron. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: Mr. Chair, as the leader of the Bloc Qubcois mentioned a few moments ago, the government promised $14billion to Quebec and the provinces, but in targeted transfers. That is very little compared to the considerable expenses incurred to deal with the current crisis. But Quebec and the provinces don't just want this money to be transferred unconditionally, they also want a real discussion on a permanent increase in health care transfers. PremierLegault was rightly concerned about the feds'interference into provincial jurisdictions. The federal government, which does not manage any hospitals or long-term care centres, must stop playing armchair quarterback and transfer the money to the only governments with jurisdiction over health, that is, Quebec and the provinces. Will it do so without delay and without nitpicking? The Honourable Patty Hajdu (Minister of Health): Mr. Chair, we know that the Government of Quebec is working hard to ensure the safety of Quebeckers and we are here to support them. As part of this co-operation, we have developed health and safety recommendations for workplaces, we have purchased medical equipment for workers and we have supported the province in developing its reopening program. We are continuing this important partnership to ensure the safety of Quebeckers and all Canadians. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: The co-operation is so effective that the money is staying in the federal government's coffers. In fact, when the federal government wants to impose conditions, it always takes longer. We see it with housing, for which Quebec has not received a dime of the $1. 4billion it is owed. We have also seen it with infrastructure funds, particularly for public transit, water systems and water treatment. The health crisis is now. The needs are now. The much needed reopening of our economy is now. Will the government finally transfer the money without messing around or quibbling? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: I am pleased to confirm to my colleague that there is no messing around, no quibbling, nothing of the kind. There is co-operation between two levels of government. It is natural to have discussions with all the provinces and with Quebec. I myself am taking part in some discussions and several of my colleagues are taking part in others. There is a clear willingness on the part of the federal government to co-operate with Quebec and all the provinces. That is what we are doing and that is perhaps what the Bloc Qubcois does not like. It likes bickering, but for the time being, there is none. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: We don't want to bicker, we want the money to be paid out. It is not complicated, for heaven's sake! We do not want a blank cheque. Right now, the money remains in the federal government's coffers. There is $1. 4billion that should be paid to Quebec for social housing and is sitting in the federal government's coffers. We are waiting for money for water treatment and water systems, but it is sitting in the federal government's coffers. It's almost July. We are wasting precious months for construction. What is the government waiting for to pay out the money so that we can get our economy rolling? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: The federal government is a very active partner. We are discussing and working with Quebec on infrastructure projects. We are continuing our discussions and negotiations on the housing agreement. Nothing is at a standstill. We are discussing and co-operating for the well-being of all Quebeckers. Mr. Stphane Bergeron: MadamChair, things are definitely at a standstill, because the money is owed and has not been paid out. Months are going by while construction is not taking place. We need to reopen the economy. We need more flexibility in the gas tax program and Quebec's contribution to allow municipalities to undertake work on city halls, community centres and fire stations. We need the federal government to contribute to funding public transit operations, which have become a real financial drain because of the drop in ridership. What is the federal government waiting for to provide real help instead of just talking? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: When it comes to just talking, the Bloc Qubcois has a lot of experience, I admit. We, in the government, are working and co-operating. We are not waiting with our arms folded, we are discussing a series of issues with Quebec. We do more than discuss, we work and we co-operate. We are working on projects, not only in infrastructure, but in a number of other areas. Just think of the co-operation of our armed forces in the CHSLDs, for example. We are here for Quebeckers. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Your time has run out, Mr. Bergeron. We'll go now to Ms. Khalid, from MississaugaErin Mills. Ms. Iqra Khalid (MississaugaErin Mills, Lib.): Madam Chair, I'll be splitting my time with the member for GlengarryPrescottRussell. During a consultation with the business community in Mississauga, the concerns of businesses, big and small, included the need for stable, affordable and safe child care. With the lack of such child care spaces, an economic recovery plan post-COVID cannot be effective until and unless we make sure that people are able to get back to work. I've heard from parents across Mississauga that they're being forced to stay home because of inadequate child care and that they have to choose between putting food on the table and keeping family safe. More and more employers are realizing that good employees are unable to contribute to their business growth because of this challenge. Now more than ever, we need to find long-term sustainable solutions for Canadians who face challenges with regard to child care. I ask our Minister of Families, Children and Social Development this: What is our strategy to tackle this ever-growing need for a national child care plan? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I thank the honourable member for her question and for her important advocacy and work on this important issue. We understand that child care is important to our economic recovery and our social infrastructure. We know the pressure that COVID-19 has placed on families, especially parents. That is why we're committed to continuing to work with provinces and territories to renew our agreements on early learning and child care, and to provide, at the earliest opportunity, $400 million in support. In addition to that, the Prime Minister has already indicated that child care will be part of the $14-billion pledge to provinces and territories to assist them with respect to COVID-19 recovery efforts. Over the next decade, we will continue to invest $7. 5 billion, and together we have achieved the goal of over 40,000 affordable child care spaces. We are also committed to continuing to create over 250,000 before-school and after-school child care spaces for kids under the age of 10. We will continue to work with our partners in the provinces and territories to ensure that Canadians can continue to have access to safe, quality and affordable child care. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for GlengarryPrescottRussell has the floor. Mr. Francis Drouin (GlengarryPrescottRussell, Lib.): MadamChair, small businesses play a fundamental role in the Canadian economy. In an article in LaPresse, the Minister of Economic Development warned us that the economic crisis caused by severe lockdown measures could have more serious consequences in small municipalities than in large cities. Based on discussions with the chambers of commerce in my riding, it is clear that federal government assistance will be essential for the reopening of the economy, specifically for the rural economy. In fact, I would like to acknowledge the work of the Prescott-Russell community development corporation, under the leadership of John Candie. After announcing almost $57million to help SMEs adopt e-commerce, how does the minister plan to help SMEs and the business community in our rural areas? Hon. Mlanie Joly (Minister of Economic Development and Official Languages): MadamChair, I also thank my colleague from GlengarryPrescottRussell for his important question. Yes, our regions are important and the entrepreneurs in those regions are creative and daring. They take risks, but they are currently facing huge challenges. So we are here for them. We understand their anxiety and we want to help them. That is why we have decided to invest heavily in rural economic development. It is also why we have doubled the budget of CFDCs and Community Futures organizations across the country. In southern Ontario we have reinvested over $260million in the regional economic development agency FedDev. In the great riding of GlengarryPrescottRussell, which I am particularly fond of and where there is a very good member of Parliament, there is an additional $1million for entrepreneurs in the region. We have been, we are and we will be at your side. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for GlengarryPrescottRussell has 36seconds left. No? Then we'll go to the honourable member for ElmwoodTranscona. Mr. Daniel Blaikie (ElmwoodTranscona, NDP): Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I'll be splitting my time with the member for Victoria. Madam Chair, Krystal is a community worker in Winnipeg. She has been working from home since late March, taking care of her child, who is out of school, and caring for her father, who is living with her and vulnerable to COVID-19. Her employer called her up recently and asked her to physically return to work or to take a leave. As a parent and a care provider to a vulnerable person, she's not comfortable with physically returning to work. Service Canada won't give Krystal a straight answer as to whether going on leave and collecting CERB would count as refusing a reasonable job offer. With Bill C-17 looming in the background, Krystal is worried about jail time and fines if she does right by her child and her father by applying for CERB. Can Krystal reasonably refuse to go back to work and collect CERB, or will she be considered a fraudster? That's my question for the minister that is specific to Krystal's case. As well, what is the minister doing to provide clear direction to Canadians and to Service Canada agents so that people can get a clear answer before making their decision about returning to work? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I want to thank the honourable member for his important question. We recognize that Canadian workers will face various different situations, including those who are ineligible for the Canada emergency support benefit. We'll continue to work with workers to make sure they're able to be supported throughout this pandemic. The fact of the matter is that every province has workplace health and safety regulations that must be supported. We understand that workers have the right not to work in unsafe situations. We also understand that many Canadians do want to go back to work; and in fact many have. We will make sure that we support Canadians throughout this recovery process. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member has 47 seconds left, and that includes the answer. Mr. Daniel Blaikie: Madam Chair, that answer is really not good enough, because the problem here is that Krystal needs to know whether she can continue receiving CERB or not. That's a federal government decision, and she needs to know whether the federal government is going to accuse her of fraud and put her in jail or assess fines against her if she refuses to go back to work because she wants to take care of her child and her father. What is the minister's answer to that? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister has 20 seconds to respond. Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I can assure the honourable member that if a Canadian has to take care of a loved one due to circumstances surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, they are indeed eligible to receive the CERB and remain receiving that benefit. Ms. Laurel Collins (Victoria, NDP): As we deal with the global pandemic, we cannot lose sight of the ongoing climate emergency. Canada has missed every single climate target it set, and we need to break the cycle of empty promises. Canadians want their government to be accountable, and environmental groups such as Ecojustice, CAN-Rac, Environmental Defence and West Coast Environmental Law, as well as the government's own climate institute, are all calling for legally binding climate targets. When will the government put its climate targets into law with legally binding milestones so we never miss another target again? Hon. Navdeep Bains (MississaugaMalton, Lib.): Madam Chair, I thank my honourable colleague for her question. I totally agree with her when it comes to the environment. It is a priority not only for us as a government, but it should be a priority for all Canadians. That is why we have put measures in place to put a price on pollution through carbon pricing. That is why we have a comprehensive plan that also includes significant investments in clean technology, which will help reduce our carbon footprint. I am confident that these measures will enable us to not only meet but exceed our 2030 target and also allow us to achieve our net-zero 2050 target. Ms. Laurel Collins: That didn't answer my question. I asked when. Empty promises won't get us any closer to meeting our climate targets. Can the minister tell us when his government will introduce climate accountability laws? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I think the fundamental issue here is having a plan when it comes to the environment. I'm confident that the measures that we have takenputting a price on pollution, investing in clean technology, and other key measures to reduce our carbon footprint, including the investment in infrastructureunderpin a plan The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to the honourable member for Victoria. Ms. Laurel Collins: This government is not meeting its targets, but it is meeting with oil and gas lobbyists. The pandemic has made us reflect on our priorities. Are we going to choose a just recovery with good, sustainable jobs for Canadian workers, or are we going to keep subsidizing oil and gas companies to the tune of billions, subsidies that we know are ending up in the pockets of CEOs and shareholders? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will have a brief answer from the minister. Hon. Navdeep Bains: Again, Madam Chair, this is the fundamental difference between us and the NDP. We fundamentally believe that the entire economy needs to work together, including the energy sector, to enable us to achieve those 2030 and 2050 targets. We are going to work together to support our workers, including in the energy sector, to reduce our carbon footprint. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Now we will go to the honourable member for SaskatoonGrasswood, Mr. Waugh. Mr. Kevin Waugh (SaskatoonGrasswood, CPC): Thank you, Madam Chair. When I was last here in May, I was on my way back to Saskatoon from Toronto, and there was actually someone on my flight who tested positive for COVID-19. I was never informed of it by the airline. I found out two weeks later. The report was in the news media. Why hasn't the government put rules in place requiring airlines to reach out to individuals like me who may have been exposed to COVID on their flights? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, it's hard to speculate on what happened from such a vague description of his experience, but I will say that we have every confidence in local public health, which is doing the hard and heavy lifting of contact tracing and working very closely with all kinds of different sectors, including airline sectors, to make sure that close contacts of people who have tested positive for COVID-19 are found, are traced and are isolated. I assume that the member took appropriate precautions on the flight and I hope that he continues to do so. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, it was reported that the individual on my plane who had COVID was actually connecting in Toronto from an international flight. The Prime Minister announced last week that they would begin mandating temperature checks for those bound for Canada in July. Will international travellers be tested when they land in Canada, or will they be relying on the tests that take place in other countries? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, this is a very important question, because the protection and safety of all Canadiansin particular, Canadian travellersis a high priority for our government. We've been working very closely with the airlines. At the current time, we are putting temperature screening in place. That will initially be done primarily by the airlines that are in the best position to do it at this point in time. We are also now going to be including CATSA, the people who do the security screening, so that when people enter the airport, they will also be screened. We believe that is going to be the most effective measure to keep all travellers safe. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, last week five of the largest professional sports leagues in North America put out a statement of support for my private member's bill, the safe and regulated sports betting act. Given the struggles that clubs and leagues are facing due to COVID-19, including having no fans at all in the stands for the foreseeable future, the legalization of sports betting would be a welcome opportunity not only to engage fans but to generate much-needed revenue. Will the government commit now to supporting the sports and gaming industries by supporting my private member's bill, Bill C-218? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, I've had the opportunity on many occasions to speak to members of Parliament and also to mayors and councillors and people living in border communities where there are casinos. They've raised this issue a number of times. We've listened very carefully to the concerns that have been expressed by them. I would like to advise the member that I look forward to the opportunity for a careful examination of his bill. We are at all times concerned about maintaining the integrity of the gaming industry within our community. That's the best way to protect Canadians. At the same time, we will examine his bill with all of the necessary attention to make sure it's given full consideration. Mr. Kevin Waugh: Madam Chair, it's the first time in history that we've had the five professional leagues in this country joining together for this bill. Newspapers rely, as we all know, on advertising for a significant portion of their revenue. This includes the usual flyers as well as in-paper ads. I've heard major concerns from a number of newspapers in this country about competition they're receiving today from Canada Post, which is offering massive free postage services. In fact, I have one of their ads here, which says that the first 6,000 pieces of postage are 100% free. If the government is genuine about wanting to ensure that newspapers and journals can succeed in this country, why are you allowing Canada Post to use its monopoly power to actually threaten local newspapers in this country? Hon. Steven Guilbeault (Minister of Canadian Heritage): Thank you, Madame Chair, and I thank the member opposite for his question. As you well know, a healthy news and media sector in Canada is a priority for our government, which is why we have put in place a number of measures before COVID-19 and during COVID-19, and we will continue to be there for them after this crisis has gone by. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Before we go on, we will be taking a break to do a bit of a changeover. I also want to remind members to address their questions and comments to the chair. We will go now to the honourable member for BruceGreyOwen Sound, Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff (BruceGreyOwen Sound, CPC): Thank you, Chair. Mr. Blair stated yesterday here in the House that the AR-15 has been used in mass killings in Canada on many occasions. Mr. Blair, please provide just one specific instance in which an AR-15 was used in a mass killing in Canada. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I remind the member to address questions and comments to the chair. The honourable minister may respond. Hon. Bill Blair: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I think this is an excellent opportunity to point out to the member opposite how important it is to actually listen to what was said. If you go back and review that tape, and I would invite you to do so, you'll see that I said the AR-15 and other weapons like themreferring of course to military-style assault weaponshave been used in mass killings, and I actually cited a number of examples. Madam Chair, I think it would be very useful if the member's questions were based on facts. Mr. Alex Ruff: I can remind Mr. Blair that I actually have watched the video a couple of times, and he specifically states that the AR-15 was used in mass killings in Canada, yet he has yet to provide one. My additional question is to Mr. Blair. Out of the recently banned firearms on May 1, how many have been or are still currently in use by the Canadian Armed Forces? Hon. Bill Blair: That's an excellent question, Madam Chair, because it's very important to provide Canadians with clarity. We have prohibited these firearms for non-law enforcement and non-military use. The military uses weapons that were actually designed for soldiers to use in combat to shoot other soldiers. That's the appropriate use of such weapons, Madam Chair. They're not things to be played with in civilian society. Mr. Alex Ruff: As a soldier for 25 years, I'll remind Mr. Blair that none of the currently prohibited firearms would be used in the Canadian Armed Forces. I asked him a question on whether any of them is being or ever has been used in the Canadian Armed Forces. Are any of the recently banned firearms still in use, or have they ever been in use, in any military in the world? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, I think it's important to also recognize that the basic origin, the provenance of the weapons that we have prohibited, was in their original design. They were designed for military use for various military forces around the world. As I've said previously, they were designed for soldiers to use in combat to kill other soldiers. They're very efficient in their design for killing people. They have no purpose in Canadian society. Mr. Alex Ruff: As someone who has used many military-style firearms and who is actually involved in helping define what we purchase in the military, I would use none of the ones that are currently prohibited. I have a question, Chair, for Minister MacAulay. Can he please confirm whether Veterans Affairs has a plan to address the claims backlog, yes or no? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay (Minister of Veterans Affairs): Madam Chair, I appreciate my honourable colleague's question, and yes, we've indicated that it's a major priority. That's why I'm so pleased that the supplementary estimates contained just under $90 million to address hiring more staff, improving the process and making sure that we attack the backlog in an appropriate manner. Mr. Alex Ruff: Madame Chair, does that plan exist in written form? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Well, Madam Chair, I can assure you that it's in the supplementary estimates, and of course, this money is The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We'll go back to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff: The question is about the plan, not how much money has been allocated. I am asking for the written plan on how to address the backlog. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Madam Chair, I can tell my honourable colleague that the money is in the supplementary estimates, and with the money we're able to attack this problem in an appropriate manner, and that's what is important for our veterans. Mr. Alex Ruff: The deputy minister committed on March 10 that a written plan would be provided to the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs within a month and made public. Did the deputy minister or the department provide the minister that plan within a month? Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: Madame Chair, I'm sure my honourable colleague wants an appropriate plan and he would be fully aware this just under $90 million would make a big difference in the plan to attack the backlog. We The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We'll go back to Mr. Ruff. Mr. Alex Ruff: Thank you, Chair. Therefore, my question is, if the deputy minister in the department provided him with an appropriate plan or a written plan, why is he questioning how appropriate that plan is? I have complete confidence in the deputy minister's ability to produce a written plan. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister may give a brief answer, please. Hon. Lawrence MacAulay: I can assure my honourable colleague that with the appropriate funding, we will address the backlog in Veterans Affairs. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go now to the honourable member for Parry SoundMuskoka, Mr. Aitchison. Mr. Scott Aitchison: Thank you, Madam Chair. My question is about summer camps again. Three weeks ago, I asked this government if the finance minister would meet with the beleaguered summer camp sector. Summer camps, which are a social and economic mainstay in Parry SoundMuskoka and all of northern Ontario, have been crippled by the global pandemic. It's costing millions of jobs, and some camps are actually in danger of folding. Aside from a brief follow-up conversation over the phone with the junior minister, there has still been no action from this government. When will the Minister of Finance meet with summer camps to find a solution? Hon. Ahmed Hussen: Madam Chair, I recognize the honourable member's important question and his focus on summer camps. We recognize the importance of looking at that and paying attention to the needs of that community. We will continue to engage with them, as we have, to ensure and find ways in which we can get their feedback and find ways in which we can support them. That work is ongoing, and I assure the honourable member that our focus is on the kids and on ensuring that they have access to summer camps for this year. Mr. Scott Aitchison: I don't know why you need to find ways to get feedback. The summer camps association has given lots of feedback and my office has given lots of feedback, so I don't see what's confusing about this. However, I've become accustomed to not really getting answers to questions, so I will go to the next one. The Ontario government's regional reopening plan permits cruise boats to resume on Georgian Bay, yet the federal government is refusing to allow these vessels to operate until July 1. Therefore, small businesses such as the Island Queen cruiser in Parry Sound, which has only a very few precious weeks to operate in the first place, is losing yet another two weeks because of federal inaction. This not only hurts the cruise boat industry but also hurts tourism and small businesses all through our area. Will the Minister of Transport take a regional approach himself by lifting the federal ban on Georgian Bay, just like the Province of Ontario has done? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister may reply. Is there a response? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, there is. I apologize for the confusion. Let me respond, if I may, on behalf of the Minister of Transport. There have been a number of very important discussions with the provinces, in particular with the Province of Ontario, around provisions regarding pleasure craft. There are certain restrictions that will come to an end on June 30. We're working very closely with our provincial counterparts to address this issue, but we want to ensure that it will be done safely. Mr. Scott Aitchison: Madam Chair, I actually gave the minister a heads-up that I would be asking that question. He sent me an email today saying he was not going to be able to be in the House, and it's great of him to do that. He said that whoever was going to fill in for him would have an answer, but again, that was not really an answer. The next issue I would like to bring this government's attention to is the deplorable state of rural Internet service in Parry SoundMuskoka. Quite simply, there are too many gaps in service, and what is available is generally way too expensive. We have families trying to work and teach their kids from home on unreliable and outrageously expensive Internet service, and we have too many small businesses that either cannot access or afford reliable Internet services. Today Greg Rickford, the Ontario energy minister, and Laurie Scott, Ontario Minister of Infrastructure, announced $2. 3 million for seven northern Ontario broadband projects. Minister, will when your government get serious and become a reliable partner for the Government of Ontario and the private sector to deliver this crucial modern-day infrastructure to rural Canadians? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I remind the member that he needs to address the questions and comments to the chair. The honourable minister may reply. Hon. Maryam Monsef (Minister for Women and Gender Equality and Rural Economic Development): Madam Chair, in the best of times, life without access to high-speed Internet is hard. During a pandemic, the challenges are that much more pronounced. Our government's unprecedented investments are already connecting a million more Canadian households to this essential service, but until we achieve universal access our work is not done. We will work with our partners, including provinces across the country, to connect every Canadian household to high-quality Internet access that is affordable and reliable. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member has 30 seconds. Mr. Scott Aitchison: I think I can squeeze something in here, then. I'm wondering, then, Madam Chair, since the Province of Ontario has used the Northern Ontario Heritage Corporation Fund to make this announcement, what about using FedNor to make the same kind of announcement, and partner with the province? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable minister has a brief answer. Hon. Mlanie Joly: Obviously we believe in the importance of northern Ontario; that's why we nearly doubled the budget of FedNor. We will continue to invest in businesses and people all around Parry Sound, Muskoka and northern Ontario. If my colleague has specific projects in mind, please come and see me and let's have a conversation. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for Montmagny-L'Islet-KamouraskaRivire-du-Loup, Mr. Gnreux, has the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux (MontmagnyL'IsletKamouraskaRivire-du-Loup, CPC): Thank you, MadamChair. I will continue along the same lines as my colleague. During this pandemic, we are realizing the extent to which reliable high-speed Internet service is needed for Canada's economy. There are still places where telework is not possible today because of the lack of adequate coverage. However, since2015, the government has committed to addressing the situation through three new programs. Benot Pilotto, who is the mayor of Saint-Onsime-d'Ixworth, in my riding, wrote to me a few days ago. That is why I am asking you what concrete results the government plans to achieve for our rural areas by the end of the year. Hon. Maryam Monsef: At the best of times, life without high-speed Internet access is difficult. During a pandemic, the difficulties are even greater. Our government's unprecedented investments are already connecting an additional one million Canadian households to this essential service. However, until we achieve universal access, our job is not done. We are working The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Gnreux, you have the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, I am simply asking the minister to tell me when the mayor of Saint-Onsime-d'Ixworth will be able to tell his residents when the Internet will be available in his municipality. It is not complicated. What does the government plan to do so that rural municipalities across Canada can have access to the Internet as soon as possible? What is its plan? Hon. Maryam Monsef: We are working with partners across the country to ensure that every Canadian household is connected to a high-quality, accessible and affordable high-speed Internet service. Madam Chair, I assure my colleagues that we share the same goal, and we will work with all our partners across the country to ensure every Canadian household has access The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Gnreux, you have the floor. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, I am still not getting a specific answer. According to the government's plan, when will rural Canadian businesses and households be connected? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I would ask the honourable minister to provide a brief answer. Hon. Maryam Monsef: Madam Chair, those plans are under way, and we will have more to share in the coming days. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: It seems that the Minister of Rural Economic Development plans to announce a new plan this week. Can she tell us how this program will differ from the Connect to Innovate program, which is already in place? Can the minister tell us whether her program will solve the problem of the 25square kilometre hexagonal zones, which unfortunately make many projects ineligible for the CRTC's broadband fund? Hon. Maryam Monsef: Madam Chair, I'm pleased to share with my colleague that the model he's referring to, the hexagon model, is no more. Our maps are much more precise now to ensure that we do not leave Canadians behind. Mr. Bernard Gnreux: MadamChair, this year, the Canada summer jobs program is a real fiasco. I think all my colleagues will agree with me. On May13,100jobs were announced in my riding; on May20,16jobs were announced; on May27,13jobs were announced; on June3,12jobs were announced; and on June10, only one job was announced. As we speak, an amount of $100,000 is still to be confirmed in my riding. Can we have an announcement, once and for all? Let's stop the piecemeal announcements and finally confirm the remaining jobs today so that our organizations can have young people before the summer starts on the weekend. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable minister. Hon. Ahmed Hussen: MadamChair, I thank the honourable member for his question. We recognize the important role that the Canada summer jobs program is playing in supporting employers and young workers in communities right across the country. Our government is working very hard to help employers adapt to the realities of the COVID-19 pandemic, and at the same time is supporting young Canadians as they begin to look for summer employment. We've introduced flexibilities into the program to ensure that more young workers have opportunities to get employed. The honourable member also has to understand that we're in the COVID-19 pandemic, and as such it will take some time for businesses to equip themselves to hire students. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for NanaimoLadysmith, Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly (NanaimoLadysmith, GP): Thank you, Madam Chair. In the first five months of this year, 554 B. C. residents died from opioid overdoses. They were teachers, construction workers, business owners, family members, neighbours and friends. Addiction is a health and social issue, but criminalization creates stigma, so people hide their drug use and die alone. Access to a safe supply of drugs and safe injection sites saves lives and puts addicts in daily contact with people who can help them. Will this government end the war on drugs by decriminalizing them, providing a safe supply and reallocating resources from policing addicts to providing treatment for them? Hon. Patty Hajdu: Madam Chair, I think it's really important we make sure that when we speak about people who use substances, we remove stigmatizing language like the word addict. We can stand together, as this government has, with people who use substances and their families to ensure a range of options for people who are struggling with addiction, who are using substances in a way that is harming their health and their communities. As you know, we have restored harm reduction to the Canadian drugs and substances strategy. We've made it easier for people to access safe supplies of substances. We've increased access to treatment and the variety of treatment through federal transfers to provinces and territories. Madam Chair, we're working with communities to make sure there are more community-based approaches to treating The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go back to Mr. Manly. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, the Geneva Convention considers both tear gas and pepper spray to be chemical weapons and prohibits their use in war, yet our police forces use these weapons on Canadian civilians. These weapons are indiscriminate and can affect peaceful protestors and innocent bystanders. Will the government prohibit the use of these weapons and require police to use de-escalation techniques to keep legal protests peaceful? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, the right to peaceful protest in this country is a constitutionally protected right. We want to ensure it's always respected. At the same time, Madam Chair, we recognize that the use of even less than lethal force can have significant impacts on people's safety. This is a highly regulated substance in Canada. It's prohibited for non-police use, and for the police it is and should be highly regulated. The RCMP have advised me they have not used tear gas in nine years. We'll continue to monitor it to ensure that peaceful protest is always respected. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, in 2012 the RCMP spent $14 million on 18 armoured personnel carriers. One's parked at the Nanaimo detachment. I can't imagine why we have weapons of war like this for policing civilians. Will the government rein in the RCMP budget and end wasteful spending on militarizing our civilian police forces? Hon. Bill Blair: Madam Chair, it's a very important tradition that our Canadian police are not militarized. At the same time, we've seen a number of tragedies when police have responded to situations in which people were armed with weapons designed for soldiers to kill soldiers, and they've been used to kill police officers. The militarization of our society, so strongly promoted by some, is the direct consequence of the militarization of the police. As we remove these weapons from our society and prohibit them, we'll make it safer for everyone and we can then move away from such a model of policing. Mr. Paul Manly: Madam Chair, the government spent $4. 5 billion to buy an old, leaky pipeline. Since 1961, there have been 82 reported spills from the Trans Mountain pipeline. Over 1. 5 million litres of crude oil has spilled into the surrounding environment. This weekend, the Trans Mountain pipeline leaked again, dumping 190,000 litres of oil. How much is this spill going to cost Canadian taxpayers to clean up? How much contingency funding has been budgeted to repair the environmental destruction from spills? Hon. Navdeep Bains: Madam Chair, I want to thank the honourable colleague for his question. He full well knows that the acquisition that we made with regard to the TMX initiative is a reflection of the fact that we want this initiative to move forward in a sustainable manner and in a manner that protects the environment. I'll continue to work with my colleagues to endeavour to make sure that we have the appropriate processes in place to protect the environment and at the same time create good-quality, middle-class jobs for Canadians. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for RosemontLa PetitePatrie, Mr. Boulerice, has the floor. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice (RosemontLa Petite-Patrie, NDP): Thank you, MadamChair. The Black Lives Matter movement is right to discuss systemic racism in our societies. In Montreal, the city and the police department have recognized this, and measures will be put in place. The Liberal government, once again, is all talk and no walk. Although it spends $10million a day, we see no attempt to reform or change the RCMP. If the Prime Minister really wants to act, why is he delaying the action plan in response to the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls? Hon. Bill Blair: Let me assure this House and the member opposite that we're not dragging our feet. This is an important issue. Indigenous people, black Canadians and other racialized people are far too often experiencing systemic racism and disparate outcomes through the criminal justice system. It's incumbent upon all of us who work within the criminal justice system to take the steps and actions necessary to produce more equitable outcomes. All police services, including the RCMP, must be committed to ensuring that the people they're sworn to serve and protect are always treated with dignity and respect. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: MadamChair, why are the Liberals taking indigenous children to court to challenge the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal ruling in their favour? Hon. Marc Miller (Minister of Indigenous Services): Madam Chair, as the honourable member knows full well, a number of cases are pending, and we are currently negotiating with the parties. We are making progress, and I would be delighted to tell the member and the House about it in response to a later question. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: We've been asking questions about it for months, and as I see it, we should keep doing so. The Prime Minister's new pipeline, which taxpayers were forced to buy with their hard-earned money, has leaked. Some 190,000litres of oil spilled, and we can't even make the company pay for it because the Liberals bought the pipeline. Trans-Mountain, KeystoneXL and the resumption of gas exploration and development off the coast of Newfoundland and Labradorare these the projects the Liberals had in mind for their green recovery? Hon. Navdeep Bains: I'd like to thank the honourable member for his question. Our priority was to protect the health and safety of Canadians throughout the pandemic, especially when it comes to the environment. That's why environmental and climate change laws aimed at protecting the environment, human health and conservation will remain in force. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: Across Quebec, the cultural community is going through a harrowing time. Unions, associations, artists and creators have all taken part in public demonstrations recently to condemn the lack of a specific plan for the living arts, performing arts and festival sector. What is the government waiting for? Hon. Steven Guilbeault: I'd like to thank the member for his question. However, I strongly disagree with him. We haven't waited to develop a plan for the arts and culture sector. We listened to the community and we tailored our supports, as they were announced. We have an emergency plan for the arts and culture sector. We were asked to adapt the CERB to take royalties into account, and we did. We were asked to extend the CERB, and we did. We are fully aware that the recovery will take longer in the arts and culture sector. We have been there, we are there and we will be there for the arts and culture sector. Mr. Alexandre Boulerice: Well, that wasn't at all what the artists and creators who were out demonstrating in the streets a few days ago thought. They were protesting on the weekend. The CERB extension announced by the government only brings us to September, but the cultural community is expecting the worst in the fall. What is the government's long-term plan to support creators and their entire teams? Hon. Steven Guilbeault: I'm not so sure those who were protesting last week had issues with our government, but we'd certainly be happy to speak with them. As for a long-term plan, we are currently consulting arts and culture stakeholders to contemplate together how the government can help the sector in response to the ongoing crisis. We are working on finding solutions, but until we have long-term solutions, we have seen to it that our artists and organizations have access to funding until September. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The honourable member for BeauportLimoilou, Mrs. Vignola, has the floor. Mrs. Julie Vignola (BeauportLimoilou, BQ): Madam Chair, I will be sharing my time with the member for Montcalm. According to the latest news, Seaspan Shipyards will be spending an additional $1. 5billion to build two ships. Why? Because the ships were ordered in 2011 and still haven't been delivered. Davie built the Asterix without going over budget because it delivered the ship on time. Davie is currently the top shipyard, representing 50% of Canada's shipbuilding capacity. Why isn't Davie being awarded its fair share of contracts? Hon. Anita Anand (Minister of Public Services and Procurement): I'd like to thank the member for her question. Davie is certainly a strong and trusted partner that works very hard to help our government get results for Canadians. Building a new class of ships is highly complex, and it's not unusual for cost estimates to change throughout the procurement project. It's important to make sure additional funding is available for the joint support ships project to ensure the navy's vessels are delivered. Mrs. Julie Vignola: We are talking about $1. 5billion, here. In the beginning, eight years ago, the project was supposed to cost $2. 6billion. There can't be much missing when the cost overrun is double the initial estimate. Why haven't the ships been delivered yet? Why is Davie still not seen as a trusted partner? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Minister, please keep your answer brief. Hon. Anita Anand: Once again, I would point out that building a new class of ships is highly complex, and it's not unusual for the cost estimate to change for a procurement project as large as this one. I know that Davie works very hard, and we also believe it is an outstanding partner. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): It is now over to the honourable member for Montcalm, Mr. Thriault. Mr. Luc Thriault (Montcalm, BQ): Madam Chair, in Quebec, 12,000people have begun their training to work in residential and long-term care centres. They will be ready for duty in mid-September. In the meantime, we need the support of the army, which is helping us save lives. The dedication of the members of the armed forces is paramount, and I want to extend my heartfelt thanks. The government extended their mission until June26, which is only 10days away. What does the army have to do right now that is more important than helping our caregivers save lives? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, I'm glad my fellow member recognizes the fundamental role the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces have played and continue to play in residential and long-term care centres and many other areas in support of our seniors. We are in talks with the Quebec government. The discussions around providing continued assistance to Quebec are quite positive and productive. That assistance can take many forms, including the Red Cross. We will be there for our seniors, Madam Chair. Mr. Luc Thriault: We are short 12,000people, so if the Red Cross wants to help us, all the better. We'll take all the help we can get. Barely 800members of the military are still in Quebec. I repeat my question: What does the army have to do 10days from now that is more important if it's not to help caregivers save lives? Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, all the members of the military are still in Quebec. They have done absolutely incredible work and are continuing to do so. The people at the Canadian Red Cross are well-trained paid workers who can perform the same work in partnership with the members of the armed forces, who can stay in Quebec as well. Right now, we are working with the Quebec government and discussing how we can keep the measure in place until September15. Mr. Luc Thriault: Madam Chair, our nurses and orderlies are exhausted. They're at the end of their ropes. Now is the time to thank them, not the time to turn our backs on them. It's not the time for dilly-dallying or discussions. It's the time to tell them that we will be there to help them until the end. I will repeat my question. What does the army have to do that is more important than helping caregivers save the lives of those who built Quebec? The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The Leader of the Government in the House of Commons is asked to keep his answer brief. Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: Madam Chair, the Government of Canada is there and will continue to be there to help the people who built Quebec. The Government of Canada will work with the Quebec government to make that happen. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): We will go to the honourable member for Red DeerMountain View, Mr. Dreeshen. Mr. Earl Dreeshen (Red DeerMountain View, CPC): Thank you so much. Madam Chair, on May 14 I asked the Minister of Agriculture when the Liberal government would put aside its usual campaign rhetoric and recognize the very detrimental impact the carbon tax is having on farmers across this country. Minister Bibeau proudly noted that according to their data, the average cost of the carbon tax per farm across Canada is $210 to $819. We know that these numbers are completely unfounded and are not based on any factual evidence. The fact is that the Liberal government's own Parliamentary Budget Officer has estimated that at $25 per tonne, the cost for an 855-acre crop farm in Alberta is well over $6,000. The office came up with that using the government's statistics from the 2016 agricultural census. Madam Chair, the evidence is right in front of the minister. When will this Liberal government come clean with Canadians and recognize the disastrous impact the carbon tax is having on Canada's critical agriculture and agri-food sector? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau (Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food): Madam Chair, our pollution pricing policy is designed to grow a clean economy. To support this sector, we have put in place the following measures. Emissions from livestock and crop production are not priced. Farm fuels and fuels from cardlock facilities are exempt, and there is a partial rebate for propane and natural gas used in commercial greenhouses. Our government has been very open and transparent about our pollution pricing plan. We will do a review of our pollution pricing system in 2020, focused on competitiveness issues in trade-exposed industries such as agriculture. It is also important to remember that this is about tackling climate change and that 100% of the revenues stay in the province. We will continue to support our farmers and food processors as they provide an essential service across Canada. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Madam Chair, Minister Bibeau keeps talking about wanting to protect Canadians'environment. Well, the truth is that Canada's farmers, ranchers and processors have for years demonstrated their ability to deliver meaningful reductions in emissions and to safeguard the environment through the adoption of new technologies, education and innovative management practices, but the government ignores these efforts. Will the minister at the very least admit to Canadians that Canadian farmers are unable to pass on the cost of the carbon tax to consumers and instead have to absorb those extra costs out of their own pockets? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Madam Chair, allow me to explain again our government's position on pollution pricing. The price and method were developed so we could build an increasingly clean economy. We put a number of measures in place to help the agriculture sector. Emissions from animal and plant production aren't taxed. Farm fuels and fuels delivered to off-farm points-of-sale are also Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you, Madam Chair. I do have another question. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): I am watching the time, Mr. Dreeshan. You have a couple more seconds. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you. Madam Chair, Minister Bibeau has repeatedly asked stakeholders to send her data about the impacts of the carbon tax on farmers, so this is exactly what they have been doing. The Atlantic Grains Council, the Grain Farmers of Ontario, Producteurs de grains du Qubec and the Western Canadian Wheat Growers Association issued a joint statement at the beginning of this year in which they estimated that the cumulative indirect inflation of carbon tax on farm costs will be $14. 50 an acre this year, with that cost escalating by more than double by 2022 to almost $30 an acre. These are huge numbers. Why does the Liberal government continue to ignore the facts presented to it and continue to misrepresent the truth to Canadians? Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Madame Chair, I can assure you that we have paid close attention to all the information that has been provided to us and that our calculation was also based on this information provided by provinces and different stakeholders. Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: Our government has been very open and transparent about our pollution pricing plan. The department used data from stakeholders and provinces Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Thank you very much, Madam Chair Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: as well as the 2019 agricultural tax data to estimate the average cost of pollution pricing associated with grain drying at up to 0. 4% of overall operating costs. It is important to remember that we have put in place many special provisions Mr. Earl Dreeshen: Madam Chair Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau: like exempting farm fuel and providing other financial supports for farmers. The Acting Chair (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Mr. Dreeshen, I am watching the time, and the minister is allowed to answer for the same amount of time that you used to ask the question. Therefore, I would hope that we would allow her to finish. She has finished, and unfortunately the time is up. The committee now stands adjourned until tomorrow at noon.

The meeting was about the potential consequences of the COVID-19 in Canada. The members put forward several petitions to ask for further attention for the people in need, say, the children, the workers who would suffer unemployment, and the creators who made a living on artworks, and also many other stakeholders from all walks of life, trying to ensure the life quality of their people during such a harsh time. Some of the group members mentioned some social problems, including the economic depression, racial discrimination, social security, and the environmental pollution, to call for a maintenance of the wealthy and healthy community in Canada. Through the discussion, it could be found that fortunately, some of the problems had been dealt with extra funds and cooperation with other related organizations.