00:00:00.000Look, if you follow the discussion on this on Twitter, Wally, you'll see there's actually some people saying that somebody who actively says they don't want to die in the moment could still be killed.
00:00:13.020And some people are defending this as being reasonable just because at some point in the past they expressed that this would be their desired future.
00:00:30.000I'm joined with MP Garnett Genius to once again discuss MAID.
00:00:35.300Just last week, we had the departure from the inevitable expansion of MAID
00:00:40.780into mental health eligibility in the criterium,
00:00:43.560but we've also had a concerning and controversial move
00:02:18.540And there's many others, but certainly Tamara and Andrew leading the charge.
00:02:23.540Because of their work and the work of others, people became aware of this issue, were advocating on this issue.
00:02:29.860I know there was very broad awareness of Bill C-218 and the issues around it.
00:02:34.700And as a result of that, we created the circumstances in which the government said they agreed with us that MAID should not be available for those whose primary complaint is mental health related.
00:02:50.820At the same time, on the same day they voted against the bill, C-218, that would have actually done that.
00:02:58.200So they're saying in one breath that they agreed with what we had been advocating on for a long time.
00:03:04.280But on the other hand, they voted against the bill, saying that they're going to come up with their own bill that does that, and they're going to table that bill at some point in the future.
00:03:11.920So troubling and cynical as an approach, because frankly, we've got this March deadline approaching, which is now less than six months away.
00:03:23.860And there's a long recess over Christmas for Parliament.
00:03:29.160So it would have, you know, the idea of saying we're going to oppose the one bill, but have our own separate bill, aside from any of the other issues, like it just doesn't make sense legislatively.
00:03:39.460They should have voted in favor of the bill that was that was there before Parliament.
00:03:44.220But so so good, good news is we've won that debate.
00:03:48.040The government says they agree with us.
00:03:49.520But the bad news is we're no further ahead legislatively because they voted down the bill that would actually achieve that objective.
00:03:55.420so obviously there's a package of a double whammy of two issues here advanced consent and mental
00:04:01.780health eligibility criteria i just want to get into the politics of it all do you believe that
00:04:07.440the reason again there's two things mentioned from from from mr minister fraser it was the
00:04:12.920language of course of the bill but the fact that they want to package this as well in the future
00:04:17.700fall legislation this could be a matter of a few weeks is what he said that they would produce
00:04:21.700legislation. We don't have that yet. But the nature of the government voting against
00:04:25.860Tim Ariansson's private members bill, is that just plain politics essentially and kind of
00:04:30.000starving conservatives of a win? Well, I think there is some political cynicism behind it,
00:04:36.160for sure. Like him saying, OK, well, there's some there's some wording changes that we would like
00:04:41.140to make. I mean, I think some of the wording changes they're proposing are pretty problematic
00:04:46.200in terms of the implications for people in certain situations. But fundamentally, they could
00:04:51.260have proposed those things uh as amendments at the committee stage so um it's if if you have
00:04:57.380if you agree generally with the objective of a bill but you have uh suggested language changes
00:05:02.540the the normal thing to do is to support the bill at second reading to make those amendments at the
00:05:06.460committee stage which is which is precisely what that uh stage is all about is studying it and
00:05:10.940making those refinements um so i mean why they did it i think there's a level of cynicism involved
00:05:17.020here for sure. I think people know about the work that Tamara and Andrew and others in the
00:05:25.060Conservative Caucus have done. But the bottom line is this isn't about that. This is about
00:05:29.700trying to get that issue resolved. The sad thing is, as you mentioned, yes, they're planning on
00:05:33.480pairing it with this issue of so-called advanced consent. And I think the issue is, should people
00:05:41.620consent or be expected to consent when they are receiving medical assistance in dying.
00:05:48.460The proposal that the government has put forward, and we haven't seen the legislation yet. So they're
00:05:52.500talking about a phantom bill that hasn't been tabled, likely hasn't even been drafted yet. So
00:05:56.340with those caveats, I mean, we'll see what's in the bill specifically. But the implication is that
00:06:02.360a person in their 30s, let's say, could express themselves in an advanced directive about some
00:06:09.680future illness that they might get. But in a sense, that's very hypothetical, that isn't based
00:06:15.860on any kind of lived experience with that, that's simply based on things that they've heard about it.
00:06:20.260And then at some future point, maybe decades later, they could be killed without being asked
00:06:26.020in the moment, simply because they had previously, in a more speculative way, thought that they might
00:06:34.440not want to live under certain circumstances. And I think it's your, your, your viewers and
00:06:39.700listeners will, will understand the fact that the people do adapt in different ways to different
00:06:43.560kinds of circumstances. Uh, there are, there are many cases where people say, well, I wouldn't
00:06:47.660want to live like that or under certain circumstances. Uh, and then, um, and then
00:06:52.280they find in those circumstances, uh, that there are, uh, other sources of, of connection and
00:06:57.740meaning, uh, in their lives that they maybe weren't expecting. Uh, this is why generally
00:07:02.620speaking on on big decisions we expect that people be be offered the opportunity to consent
00:07:09.800or not consent in the moment when something is happening and not and not just take their sort of
00:07:15.820previous prospective guesses about how they would feel under certain circumstances as being
00:07:21.540authoritative about about what's going to happen to them in the future so I think it's pretty it's
00:07:26.620pretty dangerous and look if you follow the discussion on this on Twitter Wally you'll see
00:07:30.040There's actually some people saying that somebody who actively says they don't want to die in the moment could still be killed.
00:07:40.820And some people are defending this as being reasonable just because at some point in the past they expressed that this would be their desired future.
00:07:49.120So it's a bit of a horrifying idea that you have people in discussions about Canadian politics saying, well, someone should be killed, even if they're asking not to be killed in the moment, simply because of something they said in the past.
00:08:04.320I want to ask you this, and to be fair, I understand that your caucus has a shared series of views depending on their personal conscience and beliefs and convictions, but you could say Arnold Viewers and your colleague is perhaps one of the more pro-life, on the record, individuals in your caucus, and he described in the past that the liberals are promoting a culture of death, essentially.
00:08:28.340And I just want to get into the idea, basically, what's been pushing, first of all, the passage of May and the expansions into different areas.
00:08:36.260From the Liberal Party point of view, even within members, there are mixed views.
00:08:41.100As you know, a few Liberal MPs voted actually in favor of Tamari Enson's bill, as you know.
00:08:46.280And of course, there might be others with a bit more silent protest or resistance on this very, you know, ethical, focused issue for the most part.
00:08:57.240What do you believe is driving the appetite in Canadian society on the pro-made side,
00:09:01.720both from perhaps liberal policymakers, but also from their private sector as well,
00:09:06.900the people who appear in committees that you've seen?
00:09:09.840Kind of what's the social trend there?
00:09:11.700I understand there's a civil liberty argument and there's also the medical freedom argument
00:09:15.260because what this really is from St. Fraser is decriminalizing the ability for doctors to do this
00:09:21.620and for provinces to allow their doctors to do this.
00:09:24.120So this isn't so much as in telling or granting the right as much as it is just removing any criminal barriers.
00:09:31.440So what's driving all this expansion, you think, overall?
00:09:35.660Yeah, so in terms of Canadian society and the conversations I'm hearing, I think the government is really out of touch with where people are at on this issue.
00:09:45.060My impression of public sentiment on this issue is there is concern about insufficient safeguards.
00:09:56.040There is concern about the administration of this and how the practical realities of MAID have gone far beyond what was originally sold.
00:10:06.080I was part of the original debates on this about 10 years ago, and I was very concerned at the time that the steps being taken by the government opened up a kind of slippery slope in which elites would argue, well, if we're allowing this, then why not the next step? Why not the next step? Why not the next step? And it would continue from there.
00:10:26.520And we've slid down that slope very, very quickly to the point where, you know, today people are defending things that would have been unconscionable 10 years ago when this conversation at the national level really started.
00:10:43.180And now we're at a point where Canada is kind of a cautionary tale around the world. People are bringing up Canada in the context of euthanasia debates in their own countries saying, well, even if they're pro-legalization, they're saying we can't become like Canada and we have to make sure we don't become like Canada.
00:11:00.640So it's becoming a little bit of a source of shame for our country, a country that has historically had a strong reputation for its belief in human rights. We've obviously been called out by various UN bodies engaged on the rights of people with disabilities.
00:11:17.320And I think, so both international opinion and Canadian public opinion are kind of disconnected from what some elites in Ottawa, especially in the Liberal Party, want to see.
00:11:29.720And I think for, you know, the other thing is that, you know, there are a lot of people living with disabilities, living in poverty, etc., who are concerned about how proposals for or pressure for MAID could impact their lives and the quality of care that they receive.
00:11:53.400but people in in positions of privilege are sometimes disconnected from that reality of
00:12:00.760Canadians that are concerned about these these points of pressure I think where the main
00:12:06.340conversation is going now Waleed is we've got to have this discussion about like what does autonomy
00:12:12.240and consent actually mean in this context because the idea that somebody would be would be killed
00:12:18.780who is not consenting in the moment when they're being killed,
00:12:22.180or the idea that people would repeatedly deal with requests
00:12:25.960and pressure to consider made when they don't want it.
00:12:28.920I mean, a lot of these things work against the idea of autonomy,
00:12:31.800which was supposedly the basis on which this was sold in the first place.
00:12:38.100we see the sliding down the slippery slope,
00:12:40.260but I think it's disconnected from what most Canadians actually want.
00:12:44.660Now, of course, this happens now within the Carnies term,
00:12:47.400And, of course, previous expansions and discussions I made started and continued mostly under Justin Trudeau.
00:12:54.020So do you see that there is a slightly different voice, tone, even potential redirection in the future,
00:13:01.060depending on, again, how the public and how the politics align with this particular issue?
00:13:05.120I mean, I would say, you know, as someone who has followed this issue for a number of months now very closely,
00:13:11.900I do think that there is some wind blowing in the favor of your direction.
00:13:16.460and against the direction of the government, again, on the mental health side.
00:13:20.620But the second side on advanced consent, do you not see a kind of a more nuanced, balanced discussion there?
00:13:27.740Because what I see is that you have a controversial issue packaged with perhaps a almost no-brainer in terms of the political spectrum, right?
00:13:35.260You know, you had Liberal MPs, you know, vote in their conscience on that issue with Mary Jensen and her bill just last week.
00:13:44.120So kind of looking at the second issue, let's drop the mental health question for now and let's just focus on the second part of this that's being packaged into the first.
00:13:53.960What kind of politics are you hearing about in terms of your constituents, in terms of Canadian society?
00:13:58.860Is that kind of a more, I don't know, controversial, more 60-40 kind of issue, you think?
00:14:05.840Well, it's early days in terms of public response on this specific issue there.
00:14:14.120But I think where where the public is at in general on this is is just like, should we be talking about further expansions of made or should we be talking about maybe how to introduce some greater controls to offer more protection to vulnerable people?
00:14:29.560Like what's what's our direction of travel? What's our what's our kind of point of emphasis? And it's clear still that the liberals are looking for opportunities for further expansion.
00:14:41.840Remember, the mental health piece, that's not them kind of introducing new controls or retrenchments. That's them simply deciding in one case to preserve the status quo and not to go further, but then another case on advanced directives deciding to go further than the status quo.
00:14:58.560So under Mark Carney, we continue to see a focus on not establishing reasonable controls or safeguards, but on looking for opportunities to further expand this. And this is, from my perspective, the wrong direction. They're so obsessed with the question of how do we ensure that there are as few limitations or restrictions as possible.
00:15:22.260instead of asking the question, well, what about the safeguards for the people that want to live?
00:15:27.260What about the safeguards for people that are looking for support and looking for protection
00:15:30.900so that they can stay alive? I think they're asking the wrong questions.
00:15:37.760Now, you started your question by asking about Mark Carney, the tone there. Is it similar or
00:15:43.820different from Justin Trudeau? I think there were people who wondered if, because Mark Carney has
00:15:51.460has spoken about his his catholic identity and and people wondered is he going to take a different
00:15:56.960approach than justin trudeau on some of these religious freedom uh issues as well as on uh on
00:16:02.580issues around protecting the vulnerable and what we've seen in reality from mark carney we've seen
00:16:08.800bill c9 um a a further attack on religious freedom going further than anything justin trudeau did
00:16:16.540And now we see this proposal for the further expansion of of of made or euthanasia, again, going further than anything Justin Trudeau did.
00:16:27.100So those that hoped that he might be a little bit different on these kinds of issues are, I think, disappointed by the realities of his record, wanting to go further than Justin Trudeau in attacks on religious freedom and in policy changes that further put vulnerable people in a more challenging and precarious situation.
00:16:53.180um so these are these are the realities uh they may not mesh with some people's expectations but
00:16:59.840these are the realities uh a government that is that is becoming even more radical and even more
00:17:05.960out of step with i think what the questions we should be asking which are how can we protect
00:17:10.440vulnerable people not how can we expand this this already uh broken regime even further
00:17:16.480well just taking things to your home province of course and there's going to be a referendum
00:17:21.020happening just early next week. I want to understand from your point of view on the
00:17:25.680MAID discussion, but specifically at the Alberta level, I know the province of Alberta and its
00:17:29.780government have been taking perhaps one of the most anti-MAID or MAID critical stances in recent
00:17:35.780history under the leadership of Premier Daniel Smith. First of all, what do you make of the
00:17:40.300record on the provincial government side of trying to comply as least as possible with any further
00:17:45.840expansion of MAIDs? But then also, you know, what are you hearing from the Alberta public that you
00:17:50.120represent as well and in terms of you know how people are frustrated with ottawa is this one
00:17:55.120more issue on the list you think yeah so alberta passed bill 18 which is a provincial law around
00:18:03.520made and it's an excellent piece of legislation it dealt with a number of different issues it
00:18:09.000eliminated so-called track two which is facilitated death for those who are not dying
00:18:14.720It put in place clear protections around the mental health issue, as well as, similar to the stuff I've been talking about around preventing coercion, they put in place very strong measures to prevent coercion in the context of MAID as well.
00:18:34.600And this was Alberta using their constitutional authority in the area of health care to introduce protections within the system that go beyond the protections, the inadequate protections that are there at the national level.
00:18:50.860So I think this was a great example of what provinces can and should do.
00:18:56.080I'd encourage other provinces to look at Bill 18 in Alberta and adopt that model.
00:19:01.040And I think it also shows Albertans that in the face of bad federal decisions, there are provincial powers that can be exercised. I believe, and I've been saying this in the context of the referendum, I believe in a strong Alberta within a united Canada.
00:19:21.740And I also see this as one of those examples where provinces can stand up and can use their existing constitutional jurisdiction to provide protections within their own provinces, within their own authority.
00:19:36.540So, you know, part of the conversation I'm having with people in the context of the referendum is that there are things we can do while in Canada to assert and use our own jurisdictions.
00:19:49.040Last time we had a sit-down conversation, it was earlier in Ottawa, earlier this year, we talked about your primary members, I believe it was C-260, about medical assistants dying, protection against coercion, or perhaps unauthorized or inappropriate individuals recommending made to patients.
00:20:08.460or we also discussed about the location and a few other elements too but I want to go back to that
00:20:16.020legislation or that proposed bill for now given everything that's happened so far in the recent
00:20:21.960times do you believe that you will have any opportunity to get further I mean now you're
00:20:27.380in second reading what are you hearing from some liberal MPs specifically from those who
00:20:31.820like Prime Minister Mark Carney at different times have talked about their Catholic faith
00:20:35.300their convictions, whose voting record in recent history and in the past, in the case,
00:20:39.580of course, of your former colleague Marilyn Gladue as well, who was one of the few handful