Analysis · beta

Arnold Viersen

Replying to Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault (Liberal)
“Mr. Speaker, in his speech, my colleague described medical assistance in dying as radical. He used the term “government-assisted dying” rather than the correct term, “medical assistance in dying”. He described Canada as a pariah when it comes to our current policy. I think that sort of language is detrimental to the quality of the debate we are having this evening and fails to reflect the seriousness of the issues being discussed. I would like to remind him that a recent Environics Research survey found that 85% of Canadians support medical assistance in dying, so there is a broad consensus. It is not a matter of course. It is about giving people a choice regarding their end-of-life care. Throughout these debates, we have heard moving testimony from people who came forward to express their desire for us to respect their will. I would like to hear what my colleague has to say to these people who are asking us to respect their desire to have access to MAID.”

Not analysed yet

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

Mr. Speaker, the reality is that, with the Canadian system, it is a choice to some degree, but somebody else is administering it. This is government-assisted. That is the reality of the system. Whether the member wants to acknowledge that or not does not change that reality. The world is watching. The United Nations has issued a directive to Canada saying that our MAID regime is not working appropriately and is a detriment to those living with disabilities. The member should read the report from the UN.