Analysis · beta

Kevin Lamoureux

Replying to Luc Thériault (Bloc Québécois)
“Madam Speaker, my colleague from Winnipeg North spoke about Quebec’s approach to advance requests. It was a long and rigorous process, but we came up with legislation. He says that process should be respected, but when it comes to administering medical assistance in dying, rather than introducing the notion of reasonable means to relieve intolerable suffering, as his bill does, why not use the wording in the Quebec legislation, which refers to determining whether an individual is experiencing suffering that cannot be relieved under conditions the patient considers tolerable? A person’s conditions could be completely intolerable and yet, through what might be considered reasonable means, such as chemical restraint, it could become impossible to respect that individual’s criteria. That is my first point. Second, how can an experienced legislator vote in favour of the principle of a bill that is unconstitutional and discriminates against people with mental illness?”

Not analysed yet

A requested analysis is usually ready within half an hour; come back to this page or reload it.

Madam Speaker, I know the member has been a very strong leader on the whole debate around MAID for a number of years, and I have appreciated his contributions, as the minister expressed to me his appreciation of the member’s comments. I know he gives a lot of thought to it. I would encourage the member to take advantage of what he brings to this Parliament on the issue. The depth of his knowledge of what is happening in Quebec could be of great benefit to Parliament. I trust and hope he will be one of the committee members, but he might want to consider bringing some of his thoughts and ideas, even before bringing them to committee, to the minister.