Parses captions for PM Trudeau's daily speeches and presents them in a more human readable format
Rosemary:
All right, that is the Prime Minister of Canada on this Thursday. The primary announcement today around a contact tracing app that is called COVID-19 shield. It is – it has been developed by volunteers who work at shopify. It is not a shopify app, but many of the people who have worked up this app and that the federal government has now chosen do in fact work for the company shopify, the Canadian company. I’ll bring in My colleagues, the host of “power & politics”, Vassy kapelos, and the cbc’s Catherine Cullen joining us today as well to talk more aboutthat. As I tweeted, the prime minister had a lot to say about the app. You could see that he was very into explaining it and had clearly been very interested in it himself, I would say, given all he had to say. and some of the things that maybe privacy concerns he tried to address very directly too, Vassy, around these kinds of things.
Vassy:
Yeah, and those prices concerns have been flagged even actually in early may before committee in the house of commons from the privacy commissioner in this country. He did try to address them and insisted that the data would be totally anonymous, that basically there’s no location services even. It will all be collected into a safe place, you know, a federal sort of data bank, and the way in which the app works is not so much to, like, track your location but basically you’ll get a notification if someone you have been near has tested positive, and then it will just tell you to give public health acall. It does rely on cooperation with public health authorities, and that’s why it looks like there’san agreement with Ontario to kind of start the roll out in that province, and then the Prime Minister said that he expects other provinces to continue. a couple of things – I mean, I’m by no means a technological expert, not even close to it. I did listen to some of what was – some of the testimony before the committee, and there were concerns in May that it was nearly impossible to some degree to make it completely anonymous. So I AM interested in learning more. I know that the Prime Minister insists that it will be anonymous, but that data is stored somewhere, and I think that there are still some concerns about it. He also did say that the government had consulted the privacy commissioner in the development of this. As of may, when the privacy commissioner – early may, I should say, when the privacy commissioner did testify before the committee in the house of commons, he had not, at that point. I think the day was May 6, been consulted yet on the development of the app. Obviously a lot of time has passed since then, so it will be interesting as well to hear his remarks on the efforts undertaken. It sounds like blackberry and shopify are both involved. To try and strengthen privacy, the sort of privacy constraints around this app. If I could, I also wanted to touch on some of the questions the Prime Minister got on the u. N. security council vote, because this is the first time that we heard from the Prime Minister since the outcome of that vote. Canada, of course, in the first round lost its bid for one of the two non-permanent seats, both norway and ireland were able to clinch their victories in round one. I found it very interesting to listen to him and also Minister champagne, the foreign affairs Minister yesterday, because theywere very similar in their response, and their response is basically we came late to the game and we’re just going to keep – and very much synthesizing it, but we’re goingto keep doing what we did over the past few years and during this campaign, and this doesn’t mean we’re going to disengage from the world. We still believe very much in multilateralism. What is lacking from those answers and highlighted, for example, yesterday by stephen lewis, Canada’s former ambassador to the u. N., is any kind of acknowledgement that Canada’s foreign policy as it exists right now, or some of theactions that the liberals have taken that might not measure up to their rhetoric, according to their critics, contributed in any way to this outcome. and I found it very interesting in both the case of Minister champagne and the prime ministerthat there was no acknowledgement that perhaps Canada had fallen short or some of its foreign policy is fallingshort and that there even will be a review of that going forward. Instead there was a lot of deference to sort of the technical parts of the campaign, which I’m not saying are to be dismissed. There is a case to be ahead for coming late to the game, most certainly, and the strengths of our competitors. But it is, I think, something tonote that right now it seems at least there isn’t a whole lot ofreflection being done about whatour own government’s contribution to that loss might have been.
Rosemary:
Yeah, that’s a fairpoint. Certainly not publicly, anyway, that they are talking in any in-depth way about whether thereare things that now need to be improved in light of the way thevote turned yesterday. Catherine, maybe I’ll get you toweigh in on some of the questions around the bloc quÉbÉcois and the NDP leader jagmeet singh, because we did hear from the bloc quÉbÉcois leader earlier this morning, saying that he did expect jagmeet singh to apologize for calling one of his M.P.s, Alan therrien, a racist.
and that is not going to happen. That is clear from speaking with members of the NDP and frankly anybody who watched jag meet singh’s press conference yesterday or heard any of the clips from it, his anger, his sadness, the emotion he felt about what he saw Alan therriendoing, not only the motion itself, but the physical motion, what he perceived as a dismissive gesture that Mr. Therrien made. Jag meet Singh is certainly not interested in any way in apologizing for what he said. I know there were some folks in the NDP who raised perhaps an eyebrow listening to Mr. Blanched this morning talk about the fact that he has been inundated with tweets calling him a racist, Mr. Blanched mentioned that they are majorityenglish tweets. Some of the people around jag meet Singh who have seen the racism that he experiences, I imagine both online and in person, are perhaps not overwhelmed with sympathy for Mr. Blanched at this moment. It was interesting to see how the Prime Minister handled all this, rosemary. When you think about what he did, I think it’s just over a week ago now, taking a knee on parliament hill at that anti-racism rally, I think it would have been difficult for him to dismiss jagmeet singh’s concerns, and that certainly wasn’t what he did today. He said, you know, we have to listen. This is an uncomfortable moment, things are changing and that’s going to require people to be uncomfortable. He didn’t go so far to say that he wholeheartedly supports jagmeet singh sin calling alain therrien a racist. The Prime Minister did say repeatedly that – he tried to put some blame on the bloc by saying that they are not acknowledging that systemic racism exists. In fact, that is not what bloc leader yves-franÇois blanchet issaying. He says he believes in systemic racism. Perhaps the definition that he is putting forward of that, thatit is essentially a vestige of many, many years ago that might still exist in some places, in some institutions, some people might not be satisfied with that, but he’s not denying its existence. I know from speaking with the NDP today, though, their focus, they don’t really want it to be primarily on the bloc today. They – jagmeet singh is going to be in the house of commons today. We’re told that is the plan, andthey plan to focus their attention on the liberals. When jagmeet singh talked about yesterday why he was so upset about this, he spoke about the context in which it was all happening, not just the gesture itself, but that we are at a time where we are seeing all of these painful examples of be it indigenous people, black people, people of colour, losing their hands at the lives of police andthe need for action. The NDP has been pushing the Prime Minister to do more than take a knee. The Prime Minister said today there are concrete things coming. The NDP is really I think going to focus in on ensuring that there is some of that action andthat we see it immediately, keeping their focus on the government and not another opposition party.
Rosemary:
Right, and trying to move it probably away from the personal experience of jag meet Singh and into the policy conversation around it. Okay, I’m going to come back to both of you if you don’t mind. Just quickly get some reaction to this announcement by the Prime Minister about this contact tracing app that is made in Canada. Claudia pop ea is a cybersecurityexpert with data risk Canada and author of the Canadian cyberfraud handbook. Good to see you. Thank you for making the time. I’m not sure how much you heard there from the Prime Minister, but he went into a lot of detail, I thought, about how the app will work and why he thinks it should allay some concerns for Canadians. So I just want to go through some of those things to get yourtake. First of all, the fact that it will not have geotaging of any sort, that it will, in fact, work through a Bluetooth operation. This is sort of what it would look like. I’m just showing people on theirscreen.
Right.
Rosemary:
How reassuring is that to you, the fact that you would only have to have your Bluetooth on to know that your phone has been near someone who was exposed to COVID-19?
So I think that’s the way to go. It sounds like most western countries are adopting this Bluetooth approach, and again, in thinking one or two steps ahead, we want to have the possibility of international roaming, so that would open up travel faster, and it would ensure that compatible contact tracing apps across borders are able to provide the same utility, the same information to users without having difference in the way that they enforce and protect privacy. So that’s great, because that’s a way to standardize on a way to not depend on location data. It’s really proximity and not location.
Rosemary:
Of course your Bluetooth would have to be on, would imagine, in order for it to work, so people would have to turn it on.
That’s right.
Rosemary:
The Prime Minister was quite insistent that there would be no personal informationheld, that there would be anonymous coding around the places where people had tested positive – or the people, the phones, I guess, that registered positive tests for COVID-19. How should people feel about that, the fact that that would be held by the federal government and that there would be no – any – according to the prime Minister, there would be no identifiers attached to that.
Well, if there are no identifiers attached, then identities are protected. It’s always worse – I mean, thedevil’s in the details. It’s always worth having an independent view of how the application is designed, how it’s been developed. Again, we depend on our privacy commissioners. We certainly respect their opinion, and certainly if privacy commissioners, especially the federal privacy commissioner, could endorse the application, it would really go a long way towards the trust level that the public can have in any app, any contact tracing app, not just this one, but perhaps the Alberta one as well. The bottom line is the public doesn’t have visibility into how this is implemented. They don’t have a technical understanding. They don’t have a clear understanding of privacy either, so it would really help if it were independently validated, and certainly if the privacy commissioner could weigh in on it.
Rosemary:
Yeah, so it does sound like he’s been consulted, so we’ll wait and see what his assessment is of it. There have been suggestions by the Canada research chair in information law and policy, for instance, that you need about 60% uptake in these apps for it to make any sort of difference. The Prime Minister said, listen, any level of uptake would be useful. I’m sure that’s true, but what do you think around that, around, first of all, whether there will be significant uptake, the fact that it’s a national – it will be at some point a national app. Will that help with the uptake and people’s buy-in?
I think we need to get away from the idea that we have to have all the data. So I agree with the Prime Minister. Any information is great to have. We are not trying to collect all the information and derive all sorts of trends from it. We’re trying to help people stay away from situations that would help spread this disease. So I think that’s great. If there’s a herd immunity level from the perspective of adopting the application, fine. But we shouldn’t necessarily consider it useless or think that it has less value simply because we have not reached 60% or even 20%. again, we’re in a society where we place an emphasis on opt-in rather than opt-out. We want to give people the choice, and that’s how we build trust.
Rosemary:
Well, it did seem to me, too, when the Prime Minister described it that the – even the level of opting in is pretty low, right? you just have to download it, and then if you test positive, obviously register that. But I remember talking to, for instance, the developers of the mi la app which ultimately the government chose not to go with, and it was extensive and there was artificial intelligence and it would tell you how healthy you were. It was really a lot, it seemed to me, that Canadians were going to have to buy in here. The fact that it’s really just download it and say if you’ve tested positive, do you think that will help allay some people’s concerns and perhaps encourage uptake?
Oh, absolutely. and I think that people with symptoms, if they go to health care organizations and the organizations say, look, you’re positive, please install this app, don’t worry if it’s deidentified and likely to be anonymous, just by ensuring that people who have tested positive want to let other people know that, you know, they may have gotten it from their own environment, I think that is a draw for others to install the app and have access to that information that they wouldn’t otherwise have. I think that makes a strong case for people adopting it, but first they have to be able to trust it.
Rosemary:
So what are your concerns, then? what are the things you’re going to want to hear more about moving forward. Obviously Ontario is giving a briefing at 1:00. It is the first province testing it out and they’ll have more information, but what would you like to know more about to be fully convinced?
Well, I’m on board with the recommendations of the privacy commissioners. I saw that a number of them have been put forward in the past fewdays, and specifically they’ve talked about the need to only store information for as long as absolutely necessary.
Rosemary:
Right.
The need to anonymise and deidentify information, the need to allow people to make their own decision as to whether they are going to be deploying this application. We’ve seen any number of governments around the world where this is forced upon the population, where nobody’s told what trends are being built and what data mining takes place. We’ve seen the use of artificial intelligence and big data being used around the world, and of course the p. R. movement towards just how beneficial this is. That’s not what we should be after. We should be after helping individuals and increasing public health while balancing and maximizing public trust.
Rosemary:
Thank you so much for giving us your quick and first assessment of how this might work and whether it’s safe, and we’ll stand by and hope to hear from the privacy commissioner through the day as well. Thank you so much, I appreciate it. Claude IOU poppa joined us today. Maybe I’ll just show you, if I can, one more time what this app would look like. As I said, we are going to hear more from the Ontario government at 1:00 about the pilot project essentially that will happen in this province. You can see there in the middle of your screen the alert you would get, much like a news alert, I suppose, that might popup on your phone that would tell you you have been exposed to this because your Bluetooth on your phone has been in vicinity of someone who has now tested positive for COVID-19, and then of course you would decide whether you need to take a test, I guess. So that’s what it would look like, a fairly basic amount of information. The Prime Minister also just really reiterating the point that he believes that this will keep information anonymous. So we’ll see what they have to say in Ontario at 1:00 about that, and we’ll see how it unfolds and what privacy commissioners, too, have to say in terms of how it would keep Canadians’ data protected.
earlier this month, as we await this next press conference and My colleagues stand by, the liberal government promised a one-time payment of up to $600 to help Canadians living with disabilities in the midst of this pandemic. The legislation that was intended to put that in place did not go forward last week because of the opposition parties. It didn’t get enough support, and so for now this is – they are trying to work out another way to get money to Canadians who are living with disabilities. Krista carr is the executive vice-president of the canadian association for community livingand she joins me now. Thank you for being here, ms. Carr.
You’re welcome. Thank you for asking me.
Rosemary:
So the legislation unfortunately did not get passed last week, and I say unfortunately because many Canadians with disabilities have tweeted me saying that they do need some additional money, and I certainly know the government is committed to getting it to them, but it is going to take a little bit longer. So maybe you can just tell me what you’re hearing from people about how quickly and how much they need this additional support.
Well, I guess from the beginning of this pandemic, as national disability organizations, we’ve just been overrun with calls of people with disabilities in crisis. I mean, we have to understand that so many people with a disability already live in precarious situations, live in poverty, live, you know, as a working poor, face discrimination and lack of support on so many levels, and this pandemic has just basically taken that to a whole other level of crisis, including families of children with disabilities. and so we’ve advocated since the very beginning of this pandemic as national disability organizations for financial support to assist Canadians with disabilities in their families.
Rosemary:
and the $600, again, I have had lots of people reach out, one gentleman in particular said to me this will actually make a huge difference. What would that additional support be needed for right now? is it the same kinds of things that, for instance, seniors are having to use as well, additional transportation, deliveries, that kind of thing?
Yes, many of the same things. Personal protective equipment for yourself and for your – the people who support you. Many people with disabilities have people coming in and out of their homes on a regular basis to provide support. It’s additional cost of groceries. It’s deliveries. It’s not being able to use public transportation anymore, and even many of the in-kind services that exist within communities that people with disabilities rely on, like you know wi-fi access ft libraries or tim hortons or food banks that provide them additional groceries, many of those have either closed down, even many food banks have closed down or do not have the level of food available to support people. and so there are just varying levels of all kinds of additional expenses, additional costs of services and supports and workers and paying workers to only work with one individualas opposed to working in other locations so that they can help themselves stay safe or their families stay safe.
Rosemary:
So the way the government was going to identify how to get this money to the people that needed it was through the disability tax credit and the information of who benefits from that, who has access to it. But I know that you and others have concerns that that maybe doesn’t hit everybody, that the disability tax credit in itself is maybe not a broad enough swath of people.
Yes, so I think the first thing I would say is that the announcement of the financial support to people with disabilities was certainly a welcome first step, and a relief, I guess, on the part of the disability community that there was a recognition by the federal government that this was community in need. and we’ve seen all kinds of payments go out the door to other populations in need as well. Now having said that, the disability – it’s a bit of a complicated situation because the federal government doesn’t have a financial income relationship with Canadians with disabilities in the same way they do, for example, with seniors through old age security. They don’t have that direct income relationship, and so they have the disability tax credit, they have Canada pension plan disability, they have the veterans with disabilities benefit and some other small peripheral things. and there are approximately 6 million Canadians with a disability, and 1.25 million of them qualify for the disability tax credit. and that’s 1.25 million people who are going to get desperately needed financial support, and again as I mentioned, welcomed, but it does leave out a significant number of Canadians with a disability. and so many organizations, like mine and others, have advocated, you know, is there an alternate mechanism to get the money to people. Could we do a federal-provincialtransfer where the money would go to, you know, people living on disability income assistance in the provinces and territories. But of course that also brings difficulties because provincial governments have shown, with theexception of British Columbia and a couple territories, that by and large they are clawing back at least partially or mostly all of any benefits thus far that people with a disability living on income assistance in their province and territory are able to qualify for. and so federal-provincial-territorial relations are difficult, and thefederal government I don’t thinkis not anxious to get into a situation where the money wouldn’t end up in the hands of people with disabilities.
Rosemary:
Or to negotiate with the provinces again for shared jurisdiction. Ms. Carr, I have been told the government is still committed to doing it. It’s just a matter of how and of course when, so we’ll keep on the story. I appreciate it so thank you.
Thank you very much.
Rosemary:
Thank you. Appreciate it. That’s Krista Carr in Fredericton, executive vice-president of the canadian association for community living.
okay, let’s take you now here back to Ottawa where we are getting our daily briefing. This is the chief public health officer, Dr. Theresa tam.
Thank you very much, Dr. Tam. [voice of interpreter]now Dr. Howard Njoo.
Good afternoon. I’ll begin with an update on the latest numbers for COVID-19 in Canada. As you know, these figures evolve rapidly and are updated in the evening on Canada. Ca/coronavirus. Based on yesterday’s data, therewere 99, 853 confirmed cases, including 8, 254 deaths and 62% who have now recovered. Labs across Canada have tested – in fact, we’ve alreadygone beyond 100, 000 cases. Labs across Canada have tested over 2, 254, 481 people for COVID-19 to date. Over the past week, an average of 36, 000 people were tested daily, with just over 1% testingpositive. In parallel with the COVID-19 pandemic, many communities across the country continue to struggle with historic rates of drug overdose deaths and substance use-related harms. Yesterday we released the latestavailable national data that shows that we lost 3, 823 people to apparent opioid-related overdose deaths in Canada in 2019. The majority of those who died were adult males. Our brothers, fathers, friends and neighbours. From the national data, we saw the number of deaths were on thedecline in the second half of 2019. In fact, the numbers of deaths reported in the last two quarters of 2019 were the lowestthey have been since 2016. This is a sign that our collective actions to address the drug overdose crisis had an impact. Sadly we are hearing from partners across Canada that overdoses, including fatal overdoses, are on the rise againin many parts of the country during this time of COVID-19. Changes in the illegal drug supply in the wake of COVID-19 may result in increased risk of overdose for persons who use drugs. We know that stigma stops peoplefrom reaching out, and using drugs alone is a major risk factor for experiencing a fatal overdose. People who use drugs may be feeling more isolated as a result of the physical distancing measures to control COVID-19. So now more than ever we must maintain our resolve to work together to stop overdose-related harms. Reach out to your loved ones. Connect with your friends and check on your neighbours so thatthey know you are there to support them. Health care and the public health agency of Canada are alsoincreasing supports for people who use drugs. We are focused on increasing access to treatment and harm reduction services, making it easier for people to access the medications they need, includingas a safer alternative to the highly toxic street drug supply. I encourage health care providers across the country to learn more about the options that are available to provide care for your patients who use drugs by visiting the COVID-19 and substance use tool kit now available online at Canada. Ca. We know that there is more we can do to prevent drug-related harms and overdose deaths as we learn to live with COVID-19. Together we can tackle these dual public health crises and save lives in communities acrossour country. Thank you.
Thank you, Dr. Njoo. [ end of interpretation ]now we’ll hear from the ministerof indigenous services, marc miller.
There are a number of things I’d like to address today, and first let me give a quick update on the progress we continue to see in flattening the COVID-19 curve in indigenous communities. As of June 19, we have confirmed263 cases of COVID-19 on first nations reserves. Of those, 213 have recovered. I’m pleased to report, again, that there are no new cases in nunavik and all the 16 cases that were noted before have recovered. The flattening of the curve is encouraging and demonstrates that indigenous communities have been successful in their efforts to stop the spread of the virus. As businesses reopen, as activities resume and as travel returns, we must remain vigilant. We must continue to take all necessary measures to protect individuals, families and communities. We must put people’s health and safety first. [voice of interpreter]once again, I’d like to take an opportunity to say that it’s important to focus on both physical and mental health. Recognizing that COVID-19 has affected nearly every facet of day-to-day life, Canada has committed and continues to support the delivery of quality care while first nations, inuit and metis individuals and communities take the lead in responding to their unique evolving needs. Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, demand for counselling and mental wellness support was already trending upward, but since the beginning of 2020, we’ve seen nearly 200% increase in demand. This number speaks for itself. We know there is a need for appropriate and timely mental health support, and we will continue to work with first nations, inuit and metis partners and communities as wellas with the provincial and territorial governments to safely adapt and expand current mental wellness services and support in the context of COVID-19, as well as address thecurrent suicide crisis among indigenous mouth. [ end of interpretation ]– youth. [ end of interpretation ]to date, the government of Canada has made $1.5 billion in distinctions-based funding available to indigenous people to support their efforts to successfully battle COVID-19. Notably, a $305 million distinctions-based indigenous community support fund. Of this amount, $215 million wasdedicated to first nations, $45 million to inuit and $15 millionin proposal-based fundings for organizations and communities all of which has been deployed into communities and to those organizations asking for that funding. An additional $75 million was also made available for organizations supporting first nations individuals off-reserve and inuit and metis living in urban areas, as well as $10 million in funding for emergencyfamily violence prevention shelters on-reserve and in Yukon. Furthermore, over $280 million was dedicated to support indigenous services Canada’s health response in first nationsand inuit communities. This is essential funding that will help to provide first nations and inuit communities with additional health care providers, personal protective equipment, health infrastructure, specifically re-tooling of existing communityspaces and purchasing mobile structures to support isolation, screening and accommodations andcommunity level infection prevention and control measures. In addition, as part of our response to COVID-19, we’re alsoproviding $270 million to respond to the financial pressures that COVID-19 has placed on the income assistance program. We also announced recently $75.2million in new investments to support post-secondary and recent graduates impacted by thepandemic and 440 million in funding to support indigenous businesses in the tourism industry, in particular in response to hardships created bycovid-19. We’re committed to responding to the needs of first nations, inuit and metis to prevent, respond and stop the spread of COVID-19. We’re committed to getting more nurses and paramedics to more nursing stations in health centres to help those who need it most. I want to take this moment to thank all the health care professionals working in indigenous communities for the dedication and determination to ensure that quality and culturally appropriate care, testing treatment are provided during this pandemic. They often go above and beyond to make sure their communities are safe and healthy. We would not have seen this level of success in planking thecurve without their work. Thank you. But there’s also another crucialtopic I’d like to address today and one that we can’t ignore, one that shouldn’t be dictated by politicians or media cycles, but one that should be discussedand thought about every single day in our homes, places of work, with our friends and family. Right now is a moment when Canadians are recognizing that there’s unfairness built into our systems, and that these systems are always been unfair towards indigenous peoples and racialized Canadians. It seems obvious. We need to ensure there’s accountability and that policingservices are committed to ensuring that they are always worthy of the trust we put in them. Indigenous peoples and their communities are entitled to the best there is of the RCMP who swore an oath to protect and to serve. and we need to constantly question and reflect on these issues, issues of systemic racism in institutions. My department is no exception. But particularly those who hold powers of life and death. These exceptional powers exercised by police services across Canada do come with exceptional responsibilities. We must fight to remove systemicracism from these institutions, institutions that are meant to serve everyone living in this country equally and fairly. These are difficult and uncomfortable conversations but important ones to have. While many people will never fully understand the lived experiences of indigenous peoples, we must stand and speakup in the face of injustices. Advancing our relationship meanschanging the colonial and paternalistic laws, policies andpractices and addressing their impacts on the lives of indigenous peoples. Meegwetch, thank you, Merci.
Okay, thank you very much, Marc. [voice of interpreter]now Minister for canadian heritage, steven guilbault.
Thank you, Chrystia and good day. From the start of the COVID-19 pandemic our government has been hearing the calls from the cultural and arts sectors. We have been adapting our measures to their most urgent need. [ end of interpretation ]it is estimated that artists, creators and cultural workers have collectively received over $2.5 billion from the Canada emergency response benefit and the Canada emergency wage subsidy. Even before the recent extensionof those two measures. In addition, I already announceda $500 million emergency fund for the arts, culture and sportssectors, bringing the total support of our government to those sectors to $3 billion. [voice of interpreter]our goal is to help as many organizations as possible so they can pull out of this crisisand resume activities as soon aspossible. [ end of interpretation ]– crucial role in the heritage sector. They preserve our artistic, cultural and historic treasuriesand give us a chance to better understand the rich and diverse society in which we live. Since March 14, our six nationalmuseums and the national battlefields commission have closed their doors to help protect our health and safety. Across the country, heritage institutions have also been facing significant difficulties. That’s why the government of Canada is taking new measures tohelp the museum sector. We are providing $25.7 million to the national museums and national battlefields commissionto help them maintain essential services and get ready to open their doors. [voice of interpreter]we have started the first part of phase two of the emergency fund for COVID-19 to support organizations responsible for culture, heritage and sport. I’m talking about $500 million that were announced last may. The purpose of it is to support a number of programs that are provided through canadian heritage through phase two we are broadening the scope of our help. We are injecting $53 million into the museums program to support organizations that have herrage goods. [ end of interpretation ]– even more organizations across the country. The assistance announced to datecomplements our other support measures. Organizations can find advice online at a new portal at the canadian heritage website to expedite their requests. [voice of interpreter]I know museums are looking forward to welcoming us again and getting out of this crisis will not be easy for museums. This is why our government remains open and ready to support them.
Thank you, Steven. We are now prepared to respond to your questions. [ end of interpretation ]
Today we’re going to start in the room, three questions from the room and then we’ll turn to the phone. One question, one follow-up. Dillon?
Reporter:
Hi, there. Minister miller, we have seen some arrests of indigenous people last week Winnipeg police kicked and kneed a restrained man. It was called police brutality and says Ottawa needs to take a leading role in com batting this, including the city police. I’m wondering if you saw that video and if you agree that Ottawa should go beyond the rcmpwhen it’s looking at police brutality.
Thank you, Dillon. This country needs to have a national conversation on the use and the spectrum of the use of force in our police enforcement agencies. That includes city police forces, no question. I agree with Minister vandel. I did not see the video. I’ve seen many other videos, and this is part of the pattern. We dedicate ourselves to being – to ensuring that there are independent investigations, and we do absolutely need to respect those. But it doesn’t prevent us from ensuring there is accountability, ensuring there are national standards that must be enforced and respected, and ensuring there’s a review in a timely fashion of an oversight and supervision of those police forces, like I said, that hold exceptional powers. and if there is systemic racism, we need to address it in a concerted fashion.
Reporter:
a question for Minister guilbeault. The forming of a Canadian museum for human rights, they were screening out gay content when religious schools tour the museum. At one point they physically blocked a display about gay marriage. You said that this is condoning homophobia. is anyone actually going to face consequences and are you issuing any guidance for other institutions?
Thank you. Our government expects national museums to be held to the highest standards of inclusiveness, social awareness and respect. We are aware of apparent cases of self-censorship of lgtbq realities at the canadian museumfor human rights in winnipeg andare taking this matter very seriously. Let me be clear, an institution like the cmhr should not be perceived as condoning homophobia or engage in self-censorship. We are in contact with senior management of the museum regarding these allegations and remain committed to promote and protect the rights of lgtbq communities in Canada and abroad.
Rosemary:
Just wanted to get that answer in from the heritageminister. The CBC story saying that employees at the Canadian human rights museum in Winnipeg had been told to shield some school groups from exhibits about gay and lesbian marriage in this country and other things. So that was the heritage Minister’s reaction to that. Let’s go inside the house of commons now where Andrew Scheer is asking questions, I believe, of the Prime Minister of Canada. Let’s listen in.
That is his legacy in chasing this vanity project, Mr. Chair. The Prime Minister shook the hand of the Iranian foreign Minister and even bowed just a month after that country’s military shot down a plane with dozens of Canadians on it. So again, was it worth it?
The right honourable Prime Minister.
Prime Minister Trudeau:
Mr. Speaker, I’ll take no lessons on international engagement from a party that promised to cut foreign aid in the last election. Fortunately Canadians didn’t return to them and this return to government continue to say look at staying positive and engaged on the world stage. Yes, we have always stood up clearly and strongly for human rights, for our values, and we will continue to, even as we engage constructively around theworld.
Mr. Scheer.
Mr. Speaker, this Prime Minister has sent billions of dollars of taxpayers’ money to countries with economies more advanced than Canada’s or led by dictators with terrible human rights records. That is his legacy. He’s also turned his back on our friends and allies, voting in favour of one-sided anti-israel resolutions at the united nations in order to curry favourfrom countries who do not acknowledge israel’s right to exist. So again, was it worth it?
The right honourable Prime Minister.
Prime Minister Trudeau:
Mr. Speaker, every step of the way we’ve continued to stand up strongly for Canadians’ values and Canadians’ interests on the world stage. It is in our interests to see a more peaceful, more prosperous world in which everyone has a real and fair chance to succeed, and that’s what we’ve been contributing to. On the question of Israel, we have stood strongly by Israel as their friend, but we have also expressed our concern about the annex policy they have put forward. These are issues that are complicated, but Canada will always stand true to its values and to our approach on the worldstage.
Mr. Scheer.
Mr. Speaker, this house voted to list the irgc, the Iranian revolutionary guard corps as a terrorist entity. This Prime Minister refused to take action and do that. He’s also refused to impose any magnitsky act – on human rights abusers across the world. All in an attempt to curry favour selling out Canadian values. Now he comes back empty handed, coming in last. So again, was it worth it?
The right honourable Prime Minister.
Prime Minister Trudeau:
Mr. Speaker, it is always worth it for Canada to step up on the world stage. It is always worth it for us to reach out and fight for things like fighting climate change, fight for things like women and equality, fight for things like protecting our oceans, fighting for opportunities for Canadians around the world and opportunities for the vulnerable around the world. Mr. Speaker, Canadians expect their government to step up on the world stage, and that’s exactly what we did.
Hear, hear.
Mr. Scheer.
That’s not what he did, Mr. Speaker. You see, when he was in the same room as dictators and despots and leaders of countries with terrible records, he was silent. He sat right beside the president of Senegal when that president defended senegal’s laws making homosexuality a crime. The Prime Minister said nothing. He was silent. He’s using Canadian tax dollars to invest in oil and gas projects in other countries in order to win favour as well. So again, when we look at this government’s record, when we look at his personal, his personal record on the world stage, our relationship with India has been damaged by his action. We have a worse trade deal than he inherited. He’s angered with his erratic behaviour our partners in the pacific area. and at the end of it, he came home empty handed. Was it worth it?
The right honourable Prime Minister.
Prime Minister Trudeau:
Mr. Speaker, Canada has continued to stand strong on the world stage, to engage with countries around the world in need of support, in need of economic opportunity. We have consistently stood up for our values, unlike the conservatives that have slashed protections for the world’s most vulnerable women by not funding reproductive rights and services around the world. Canada has always stood up for progressive values on the world stage, and we will continue to, Mr. Speaker. [voice of interpreter]
We will now go to Mr. Therrien. Mr. Therrien?
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The bloc, since October 21, has tried to be constructive, and the government leader knows this, and they know that we’ve always been constructive in our way of operating. We made a list of things we’ve collaborated on, and these are things that we’ve done, things we’ve made, regardless of who owns it. In terms of support for seniors, allowing people to earn a little bit more money without losing the CERB. Support for students, allowing seasonal workers and entrepreneurs to have access to the CERB, enhancing the emergency account and the wage subsidy, commercial rent support. We want to see more, but it wasn’t easy, and helping dairy producers by boosting the ability of the Canadian dairy commission. We were also the first to talk about the virtual parliament, but where the issue is, it’s in terms of the CERB. During this pandemic, the CERB should be help for people who are experiencing issues with their income. But the second aspect should be that the CERB shouldn’t hamper people from re-entering the workforce, and that’s where it failed. We have to change it. When will the government do to?
The right honourable Prime Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. First I’d like to underscore that in recent months we have seen parliamentarians of all stripes work together respectfully and cooperatively to help Canadians during this pandemic. We have passed several bills that were approved by the contributions of our members but also the members of the opposition parties. This is a wonderful example of how Canadian diversity is strong and how we’re going to continue to defend our institutions and allow them to operate even in a difficult situation. and in terms of the CERB, in thebeginning, yes, it was supposed – it was a bit of a break. People had to stay home, and we realize we shifted to the wage subsidy after, but we realize that there was – there aren’t enough jobs for everyone. There are many people who want to go back to work, but we do have to continue to offer the CERB, and we are looking at ways to encourage people to return towork, and as My colleague says, we want people to be supported, but also be able to work.
Mr. Therrien?
On April 9 we had a discussion with the government, and we talked about an employment incentive in the CERB. and it was supposed to be in the traditional CERB. We had a discussion about this. We wanted the government to commit, and they committed to this in a motion, and we answered – it answered the leader of the bloc saying that the CERB would be offered in order to offer an employment incentive in all circumstances. How can the government now keep its word on this?
The right honourable Prime Minister.
Prime Minister Trudeau:
Once again I’d like to thank My colleague for his question. It’s true, we wanted to make amendments to the CERB, to encourage people, force them to search for a job. That was within the bill that we presented last week to create more incentives for employment, to eliminate the disincentives that’s in the CERB. But unfortunately, we weren’t able to move forward with that measure or help people living with disabilities.
We now go back to Mr. Therrien.
Mr. Chair, when they say that they couldn’t add incentives to the CERB, well, what they were proposing last week was to add measures which were hard to enforce. We didn’t see any incentives. The Quebec government was asking for them. How come you’re not amending thecerb? right now it’s hampering our economic recovery.
Prime Minister Trudeau:
We understand that many companies need workers, and we’re celebrating that workers are coming back, but there are still many people, that even if they did everything possible to seek employment could not find a job this summer because the economy has not recovered yet. There are 3 million people looking for a job right now.
Back to Mr. Therrien. Quick question, please.
I understand that it’s hard to have incentives, but it is –we have to operate correctly in difficult conditions. We’ve been asking for incentives for a month and a half. We said it again. It’s dangerous not to have ones because people refuse to work because it pays more to stay home than to go back to work. Everyone has been asking for an incentive. People don’t want to be victims of this economic recovery. Will you quickly amend the CERB?
The right honourable Prime Minister.
Prime Minister Trudeau:
As the summer advances, we will look at the ways that we can ensure that there are employment incentives in the CERB and within the assistance system, but our basic idea was to help people in need, and that continues to be our priority, the well-being of Canadians.
We’ll move on to Mr. Singh now.
Point of order.
Madam?
Mr. Chair, the member of Barnaby south yesterday was non-parliamentary yesterday. He insulted the member from la prairie and the bloc. He called them racist on four occasions, and I consider that he challenged your authority when you asked him to apologize, to refuse to do so. He was asked to leave the house, and I ask once again to not recognize him today.
Point of order.
Mr. Julien? go ahead?
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I listened to your decision yesterday attentively. and this doesn’t apply to today. Chair, it wasn’t a conditional decision. For the bloc’s whip to try and change your decision, which was clear, this doesn’t seem appropriate. But I also wanted to quote chapter 13 of gag non that says that the chair can or speaker on his behalf can order a member to leave the house for a sitting day. That’s what you decided, and of course I would like us to move forward with question period.
I will continue, if I may. Madam, if you would allow that. What happened yesterday was part of a house sitting, and it was House rule. Today I received a letter from mam debellfoye, and I have the intention to reflect upon it and provide an answer as I only received it just before I came to this committee today. I will take time to reflect upon it and to provide an answer for the member before the next sitting. For today, this committee will continue normally, so I recognize Mr. Singh for the nextquestion. Ms. Debellfoye, you have another question or point of order?
I understood your answer correctly, Mr. Chair, and I appreciate that you will study our demand, but – request, rather, but there is a rather serious issue. If we allow a member or a party leader to insult another member, what will happen to all of us here? you will have the right to insult your colleague and then you’re only expelled for one day? this can’t be the case. Today I hear the NDP leader, and AM deeply disappointed because thought he was a really important democrat. But what example are we setting today? I would ask once again, Mr. Chair, to not recognize the member for Barnaby south.
Thank you very much for your intervention, but I did make a decision and we’re going to move ahead with Mr. Singh. [ end of interpretation ]
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I want to begin by acknowledging the words of the Prime Minister today and thank the Prime Minister for those kind words. I also acknowledge that the Prime Minister has again committed to change, but we need that change right away. Will the Prime Minister commit immediately to putting in place concrete policy changes to address the systemic racism in the RCMP?
The right honourable Prime Minister.
Prime Minister Trudeau:
Yes, Mr. Speaker, we need to take concrete action right away to address systemic racism in this country. We have much work to do. We will do it with partners. We will do it with everyone in this house who wants to work with us on it, and I thank the leader of the NDP for his commitment to this, and we will work together in short order on making this happen.
Mr. Singh?
Thank you very much for that response. I want to go into some details. Will the Prime Minister commit to what was in the motion which was supported it seemed like by most people, most of the members of this house, to do a full review of the nearly $10 million day RCMP budget to see where we can allocate funds to a health care response instead of a police response?
The right honourable Prime Minister?
Prime Minister Trudeau:
Mr. Speaker, I’ve talked about this over the past weeks. This is important for us to do. We need to ensure that we are spending every dollar of taxpayer money in a way to keep people safe and not perpetuate unjust systems. It’s not an either/or, either the police or community services. Obviously we need both, but we need them done right and we willwork with everyone to make sure that we’re getting that balance right and we’re getting the money spent in the right ways.
Back to Mr. Singh. Mr. Singh?
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We certainly, though, need more investment in non-police interventions, and that’s where we’ve seen some serious problems. Families have raised this concern that we need to have more investments in non-police interventions, non-violent interventions, and health care responses to health care crises. Will the Prime Minister commit to that course of action?
The right honourable Prime Minister?
Prime Minister Trudeau:
Mr. Speaker, we have heard those calls as well, and we agree that’s something we have to workon. We need to make sure that we are encouraging de-escalation programs, that we are encouraging front line interventions around mental health, around care that isn’t necessarily done by the police. These are things that we need todo together.
Mr. Singh.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today a report was of RCMP incidents of use of force was released, and I’m glad to see that. We’ll review that. Will the Prime Minister also encourage a release of the associated costs of settlement of cases that flowed from those use of force?
The right honourable Prime Minister?
Prime Minister Trudeau:
Mr. Speaker, we will of course be taking a very careful look at this report, but it highlights areal challenge that we’ve seen around systemic discrimination in our country, in our institutions, including in the RCMP. There are many concrete actions we need to take. As I’ve said many times, I’m committed to taking those actions. We need to make a significant change in our country for the better.
Mr. Singh.
One specific element of the motion that was nearly passed yesterday was to commit a full review specifically of the use of force given the release of that report will the Prime Minister commit clearly to a review of the use of force by the RCMP?
The right honourable Prime Minister.
Prime Minister Trudeau:
These are important conversations that have to be had both within the RCMP and between the government and the RCMP and between Canadians and their police forces, and these are things that we will certainly move forward on together.
Mr. Singh.
The – tribal council and mother of Chanel Moore, who was killed by the RCMP, has requested a meeting with the Prime Minister to discuss and determine immediate actions to implement in order to prevent more indigenous people from being killed by the police. Will the Prime Minister meet with Chanel moore’s mother and the tribal council of new chalk knit?
Our government has continued to meet with Canadians who faced extreme difficulties. Obviously our hearts go out to chantel’s family and the entire community. I will ensure that members of our government engage directly with her family and with the mother and the rest of the family and with the community. We need to work together on changing things for the better in chantel’s memory and in the memory of all Canadians who have fallen in this situation.
Mr. Singh, we have about 20 seconds left.
Okay. [voice of interpreter]the house was going to recognizethat systemic racism does exist within the RCMP and recognized that we have to take action. Does – can the PM commit today to take rapid action because we need concrete action rapidly.
The right honourable Prime Minister.
Prime Minister Trudeau:
Yes, Mr. Chair, we do recognize that there is systemic racism within our country, and we commit to taking concrete and quick action soon to address this issue in cooperation with others.
We will now take a short break to allow others to – [ end of interpretation ]
Rosemary:
Okay, that is the first round of questions and answers inside the COVID-19 committee today. The Prime Minister taking questions. a very strange moment that we’lltalk about now with Vassy kapelos and Catherine Cullen. I found it strange, anyway. The bloc quÉbÉcois trying to make a point that jag meet Singh had not apologized for calling one of its members racist yesterday, and the bloc trying to in fact have him removed or not recognized from the house for a second day. The speaker said that he would take that under consideration but did make the point that yesterday when that happened they were in a sitting of the house. This was a sitting of the committee. Different rules apply, and so he allowed jag meet Singh to ask hisquestions. I’ll bring in Vassy and Catherine here. I say that it was strange only because I suppose it’s about the bloc making a point. I’m just not sure that that – idon’t know. I just don’t know how that’s going to reflect on them to try and have the NDP leader bounced again from the house of commons because he wouldn’t apologize for a comment that he believes is what he felt and how he feels about it. and I would also point out that the leader of the bloc quÉbÉcoisallowed the M.P. in question, alain therrien, to ask the questions of the Prime Minister today, and I’m sure that too waspart of the bloc’s response to how this unfolded, Vassy.
Vassy:
Yeah, you would have to assume that that was a very purposeful measure by the bloc quÉbÉcois. He led the round of questioning, Alan therrien, who did. I guess strange is the right word. It was certainly not maybe what we expected as we watched it unfold. I took note from the speaker that that member of the bloc quÉbÉcois, that M.P., had submitted a letter to him prior to the start of what we were watching in committee there talking about what happened yesterday with Mr. Singh and I guess demanding some action fromthe speaker’s office – or the speaker, rather. I’m not sure exactly what those specific actions would be, but then in person stood up as you pointed out, rosie, and twice ormaybe even three times asked thespeaker to not acknowledge in formal terms Mr. Singh, which means don’t let him ask questions. He was up to ask the Prime Minister questions, and as you say, the speaker denied that request and said I’m proceeding as normal because it seems weirdto say, but this is a committee and yesterday was a very different sort of setting, and therefore the set of rules that applies or the way in which the speaker interprets them can change based on those circumstances, and then you heard Mr. Singh get up and actually his line of questioningwas very interesting as well, because it was directed towards the Prime Minister, but it all did come on the heels or rather I guess within the context of that motion that started all of this or that kicked everything off yesterday. That motion from Mr. Singh, he was looking for unanimous consent. He wanted support from everyone in the house of commons during that yesterday, and it talked about systemic racism in the RCMP, and it asked basically thehouse of commons to acknowledge that it exists and then take a series of actions in light of that acknowledgement. and those actions are what the leader of the NDP focused on in that line of questioning. So Prime Minister, will you do a, b and c as laid out in the motion. I thought that was an interesting just given everything that’s happened already and clearly Mr. Singh isshowing, you know, is trying to show that’s My focus, right, andwe had anticipated that from thendp, that it would be, you know, less personal and more focused on policy and certainly that is what Mr. Singh did in that line of questioning.
Rosemary:
and just so people understand too, the bloc quÉbÉcois said that the reason they did not want that motion Togo ahead, at least this is what the leader said today, was that they didn’t want a committee to reach a conclusion before they had done a study of the issue, which is sort of how things work. and I would also point out for people not familiar with how parliament works, that there is something called unparliamentarylanguage, and it was viewed by the speaker at the time that calling someone a racist was unparliamentary. I understand why many Canadians would find that odd, but that is what happened yesterday, and the point the bloc was trying to make is you shouldn’t be allowed to insult other people. I totally get that racism and the feeling that someone has done something to you, or been racist towards you, would be far more important to more people than unparliamentary language. I understand that, but I’m just trying to set up the context in which it operates, the house of commons, which is perhaps, you know, maybe a little bit dated for the conversations we’re trying to have right now. But that’s how that unfolded, and that’s why it became such an issue and continues to be today, Catherine. I’m not sure – I’m not sure how this is going to unfold. I think the NDP was probably right to move it back to the issues that they want focused on.
Catherine:
Yeah, I mean, it was remarkable, rosemary, to see that yesterday the bloc made this decision to shut down jag meet singh’s motion. Today they tried to shut him down, and I think you’re right to focus on the fact that what we heard from yves-franÇois blanchet earlier today in his news conference, the leader of the bloc bloc quÉbÉcois, that this suggestion that Mr. Therrien is racist, that he behaved in a racist manner, was from the bloc’s perspective the ultimate insult. Yves-franÇois blanchet talked about that being irresponsible. When we consider this from the perspective of jagmeet singh, his concern is that members of parliament are being dismissive about the very serious concerns that the whole country is looking at right now around systemic racism, that he does not want to give those concerns, you know, any – sufficient consideration, let’s say. It is interesting to note as well that Mr. Blanchet was askedearlier today about the prospectof a meeting between the bloc and the NDP to hash things out. Yves-franÇois blanchet said perhaps Mr. Therrien should meetwith Mr. Singh. I mean, look at what just happened. What is the likelihood that there is going to be any sort oftete-a-tete immediately. I think that is difficult to imagine. Substantively on the bigger issue, the Prime Minister said when we talk about health care services versus policing, it is not an either/or situation. He is not weighing completely defunding the police. Perhaps that’s not a shock to the average canadian. But he does say we need to consider whether that money goesinto health care or policing. How can it be best used. Mr. Singh pushing for specification. We didn’t get a lot of them, butthe Prime Minister tried to communicate a sense of urgency today. We don’t know what the timeline is, other than immediately.
Rosemary:
He does seem to keep saying that there is an acknowledgement that something concrete needs to happen, that they want to move very quickly on some things beyond the getting the RCMP to have body cameras for some of their force members. We don’t really know what that is, but it does sound like there is an acknowledgement that something needs to happen quickly, and we even heard that from Minister miller at the beginning of that question period, the indigenous services Minister talking about how things needed to change for indigenous communities as well. All right, thank you both very much for your coverage. I appreciate it. You can see Vassy later tonight on “power & politics”. I think perhaps jag meet Singh will be on your show. Touch wood. Yes, so you’ll want to watch that, and Catherine Cullen, of course you can watch her later on the national. Catherine will be doing the conservative debate, and Vassy has special coverage of the conservative debate starting at 7 eastern on CBC news network.” so they are very busy all day long. Thank you very much both very much. I appreciate it. Just to recap some of the news from the Prime Minister earlier, of course, the decision to launch a contact tracing app that will happen in Ontario. We are expecting more news from premier Doug ford at the top of the hour on how that will work, when it will unfold. The Prime Minister says that he believes it will deal with