Latest news with #autonomy
CBC
20 hours ago
- Health
- CBC
Applications open for Canada's new disability benefit program
Canada's new disability benefit — a program that provides eligible people with up to $200 a month — is now open for applications. The program is available to people with disabilities between the ages of 18 and 64 who already have been approved for the disability tax credit. The government says payments are set to begin in July. The payments are meant to supplement provincial and territorial programs, and Jobs Minister Patty Hajdu said all provinces and territories except for Alberta have pledged not to claw back their own benefits. The benefit was part of the Trudeau Liberal government's promise to help lift people with disabilities out of poverty. Many advocates for people with disabilities have panned the benefit, saying it will do little to actually address poverty. Hajdu, whose new portfolio covers disabilities, said she has heard that criticism. "I don't think that disability [benefit] is what a person needs to sustain themselves, and I don't think it was designed in that way," she said in a recent interview. "But it is a payment that allows for a fuller autonomy of people with disabilities in that it's not directed towards any specific thing. It is a benefit that people can use to supplement whatever other earnings or income that they have." As part of the program, the government is providing funding to community organizations to help people who may need guidance on applying for the tax credit or the benefit program.
CTV News
21 hours ago
- Business
- CTV News
Applications open for new disability benefit program, payments start next month
Minister of Jobs and Families Patty Hajdu responds to a question during question period in the House of Commons in Ottawa on June 19, 2025. THE CANADIAN PRESS/ Patrick Doyle OTTAWA — Canada's new disability benefit — a program that provides eligible people with up to $200 a month — is now open for applications. The program is available to people with disabilities between the ages of 18 and 64 who already have been approved for the disability tax credit. The government says applications will be reviewed by June 30 and payments are set to begin in July. The payments are meant to supplement provincial and territorial programs and Jobs Minister Patty Hajdu said all provinces and territories except for Alberta have pledged not to claw back their own benefits. The benefit was part of the Trudeau Liberal government's promise to help lift people with disabilities out of poverty. Many advocates for people with disabilities have panned the benefit, saying it will do little to actually address poverty. Hajdu, whose new portfolio covers disabilities, said she has heard that criticism. 'I don't think that disability (benefit) is what a person needs to sustain themselves, and I don't think it was designed in that way,' she said in a recent interview. 'But it is a payment that allows for a fuller autonomy of people with disabilities in that it's not directed towards any specific thing. It is a benefit that people can use to supplement whatever other earnings or income that they have.' As part of the program, the government is providing funding to community organizations to help people who may need guidance on applying for the tax credit or the benefit program. This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 20, 2025. Sarah Ritchie, The Canadian Press
The Guardian
a day ago
- Health
- The Guardian
Britain is one step closer to compassionate, kind death for all
I am relieved and overjoyed by the historic vote on assisted dying in the House of Commons today. The road has been long and hard, and I am very aware that many others have been on that journey since long before I even became an MP. The question of whether to offer choice to people at the end of their lives was first raised in parliament in 1936 – almost a century ago. Since then, terminally ill people have pleaded repeatedly with MPs to heed their simple wish to have control and autonomy at the end of their lives. A courageous few have taken their cases to the courts, even while they confronted the prospect of their own imminent and inevitable deaths. The judges said it was for parliament to decide. Now, at last, the House of Commons has responded, and responded decisively to recognise the justice of their cause. While taking this bill through its Commons stages, I felt the burden of their anguish and that of those who are courageously and respectfully asking that their own death should be a good one, at a time of their choosing. It was for them that I and my colleagues took so much time and trouble to ensure that we put before parliament legislation that was fit for purpose while protecting everybody, but especially the most vulnerable in society, from any risk of coercion or pressure. Undertaking that task through the private member's bill process has not been straightforward. But that is how conscience issues are decided in our democracy. In doing so I have been fortunate to benefit from the expertise of excellent and dedicated government officials, lawyers and parliamentary draughtsmen – the foot soldiers of our democracy whose contributions often go unnoticed. The government is rightly neutral, but its hard work helped give me the confidence that the bill that now goes on to the House of Lords for further consideration is the best it possibly could be. I have also been supported by MPs across the political divides in the House of Commons and that has been a hugely rewarding experience. It proved once again that on this issue, like so many others, it is possible to work with political opponents and that, in the words of my sister, Jo Cox, 'We have far more in common … than that which divides us.' I believe that by working together with a shared commitment not just to get this reform through, but to do it carefully, responsibly and openly, we have done the job our constituents send us to Westminster to do. When other political arguments that we have day in and day out are long forgotten, this parliament will be remembered for many years to come for the decision we have made. And it is my genuine belief that in that time the controversy over this measure will fade, just as it has in other countries that took this step long before us. And just as it has over issues that were once fiercely contested but are now accepted as sensible and fair, such as equal marriage or a woman's right to choose. If this bill finally becomes law later this year it will still take some years to implement, although I hope that delay will be as short as possible. It will come too late for many, including some of those I have met along this journey. Their courage is extraordinary and their selflessness is remarkable. They say to me: 'I may not get the death of my choice, but if others coming later are spared the suffering and indignity of a painful death then it will be worthwhile.' Their voices have finally been heard. The journey is not yet over but the end is in sight. I would have been heartbroken if the vote had gone the other way. Not for me and my team and all those who have worked so hard on this bill, but for those whose lives would have once more been filled with despair and trepidation. I recall the words of Desmond Tutu almost a decade ago when he said: 'Just as I have argued firmly for compassion and fairness in life, I believe that terminally ill people should be treated with the same compassion and fairness when it comes to their deaths.' It has taken a long time – too long – for us in this country to heed those words but heed them we have, and I believe this will be remembered as a proud day for parliament and a day of hope for the future. Kim Leadbeater is Labour MP for Spen Valley
CBC
2 days ago
- Business
- CBC
Carney's push for 'nation-building' projects moves ahead despite some Indigenous opposition
Social Sharing Prime Minister Mark Carney promised during the election campaign to "build big, build bold" and the legislation that would enable federal fast-tracking of major projects appears poised to clear the House of Commons despite some Indigenous opposition. The legislation, Bill C-5, essentially gives cabinet the ability to pick certain projects to speed through the regulatory process, with an eye to projects that can deliver an economic boost to Canada, help strengthen the country's autonomy and resilience and, notably, "advance the interests of Indigenous peoples" and contribute to "clean growth." While the bill, the One Canadian Economy Act, is expected to pass the Commons this week with Conservative support, opposition MPs made a number of amendments to the legislation Wednesday night to, among other things, make the streamlined process more transparent by forcing Ottawa to publish the conditions of approval and limiting the government's ability to allow a project to bypass certain laws. Government House leader Mark MacKinnon said Thursday the cabinet will review the amendments quickly before deciding what it's willing to accept. WATCH | Carney says Indigenous rights are central to C-5: Carney says Indigenous rights are central to Bill C-5 2 hours ago Duration 2:01 Following pushback from Indigenous leaders on the government's bill to get major projects built, Prime Minister Carney emphasized that Indigenous consultation is central to the legislation. Speaking at a news conference in Ottawa on Thursday, Carney affirmed the government's commitment to 'embrace' Indigenous Peoples' right to free, prior, and informed consent under the Constitution. Canadians are tired of delays that have hurt economic growth and the government is determined to push ahead with the law, he said, which allows cabinet to exempt projects from provisions of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act and the Impact Assessment Law in the name of expediency. Cabinet reviewing amendments A Conservative amendment, if adopted, means however projects must comply with other laws, like the Conflict of Interest Act and Lobbying Act. "Under the original Liberal proposal, projects could have been approved and built that would financially benefit members of the cabinet," the party said in a statement. The Conservatives are making changes to stop the government from "sneaking in provisions that would give themselves the power to broadly skirt the laws of the land without consequences," the party said. The government hasn't said what exactly would be fast-tracked under this legislation — and there are no specific projects mentioned in the bill itself — but Carney has signalled support for new energy "corridors" in the east and west, which could include pipelines and electricity grids, new and expanded port facilities, mines and other resource-related initiatives. WATCH | Grand chief wants Governor General to intervene: Speaking to reporters at an announcement Thursday about measures to protect the Canadian steel and aluminum industry, Carney said C-5 is "the core of our domestic response" to President Donald Trump's tariffs. The push to get "nation-building" projects built, many of which would require huge quantities of steel and aluminum during construction, will help hard-hit sectors weather the U.S. trade war, he said. "It's an important piece of legislation that has massive support among Canadians," MacKinnon said. "It was at the heart of our election campaign and election platform." While some Indigenous leaders are opposed, others are on side with the push to deliver more money and jobs to communities that stand to gain from development, MacKinnon said. "There are Indigenous communities, Indigenous nations that want to participate — they exist all over the country and they deserve to have their voices heard," MacKinnon said. Still, some Indigenous leaders are pushing back against giving the cabinet, or the minister they designate to shepherd a project through, so much power to choose major projects. The legislation itself states the government will recognize, affirm and "respect" Indigenous peoples' constitutional rights when considering a project. But there's a fear among some leaders that the consultation process with First Nations, Métis and Inuit communities will be inadequate given Carney campaigned on making final decisions on projects within a two-year timeline. Right to be consulted The approvals process has been much longer than that in recent years with industry groups and critics saying endless consultations have bogged down getting things built, hurting the economy. Some Indigenous leaders, meanwhile, say they should be given a meaningful amount of time to offer opinions on a path forward. The Supreme Court has ruled Indigenous peoples have a right to be consulted on a potential project — but they do not have a final veto on whether something should go ahead. Carney promised Thursday to respect the government's legal obligations to Indigenous peoples — and make money available to communities that want to take an equity stake in proposed projects so any potential wealth can be shared. "Consultation, co-operation, engagement, participation is at the heart of C-5 and that is how you build a nation. And that's very much how we've designed it," Carney said. Despite those assurances, Indigenous leaders want more of a say over the bill itself, with clearer provisions that their rights won't be trampled as the government pushes to get things built fast during a trade war. WATCH | Senator says he'll introduce amendment to delay Bill C-5: Senator says he'll introduce amendment to delay Bill C-5 3 days ago Duration 1:14 Paul Prosper, a Mi'kmaw senator from Nova Scotia, is promising to "slow down the process" in the Red Chamber with an amendment to give Indigenous peoples more time to weigh in and make their pitches to change the bill. "If you don't do it right, we're looking at some potential litigation in the future. It's best to be proactive now," Prosper said. It's not clear if he will be successful. The Senate has already agreed to a "work plan" to get the legislation through the upper house before it rises for the summer recess. MacKinnon said the bill will be put to a final vote in the Senate next week. Nishnawbe Aski Nation Grand Chief Alvin Fiddler, who represents 49 First Nations in northern Ontario, wants the Governor General to step in before giving the legislation royal assent — which is an unlikely and constitutionally dubious proposition.
The Guardian
2 days ago
- Politics
- The Guardian
The Guardian view on assisted dying: a momentous bill that needs further attention
The central issue before MPs, as they decide how to vote on the latest version of Kim Leadbeater's assisted dying bill, is how to value individual autonomy relative to collective responsibility for vulnerable members of society when making regulations around the end of life. Should terminally ill people be allowed to end their lives with medical help? If so, under what safeguards? The question remains ethically, medically and legally complex. Technological and social changes enabling people to live much longer have created challenges around the resourcing of care and experiences of ageing and dying. There are profound questions about how we manage the final stages of life – and what we owe to those living through them. Ms Leadbeater, a Labour backbencher, has taken on the challenge of steering this bill through parliament with principle and empathy. The past nine months have seen an impassioned debate that has, rightly, filtered beyond parliament and the news media into everyday life. From the start, as this newspaper noted, public opinion has sided with the bill's backers. Yet even such public backing is tempered by serious concerns. Earlier this week, Gordon Brown cited a poll commissioned by Care Not Killing in which two-thirds of respondents agreed that the government should 'sort out palliative and social care first'. That concern is not misplaced. Too many people do not receive adequate end-of-life care. There is a danger that assisted dying, if introduced without sufficient protections or investment, could feel less like a choice and more like a pressure. Legalising assisted dying wouldn't open the door to something entirely new – it would bring into the open a phenomenon that already exists in the shadows. In Britain today, life and death decisions hinge on opaque prosecutorial discretion. Those who help a loved one die, often with kindness, face prosecution for murder or manslaughter. Or they may not. The Crown Prosecution Service decides, after a police investigation that can be traumatic: homes treated as crime scenes, phones seized, grieving families interrogated. For many, it's not the act that scars, it's the ordeal that follows. For the bill's advocates, the goal is simple: to spare people needless suffering. Some have watched loved ones endure drawn-out deaths; others, like the TV presenter Esther Rantzen, want control over their own. Some doctors see assisted dying as a humane choice. Many supporters of the bill are motivated by compassion, but questions remain as to whether the necessary safeguards and public investment have been seriously addressed. While many believe that a choice about dying is their right, it is essential to reflect carefully on the implications of such a momentous change on people with less agency and fewer resources. For a parliament less than a year old, this is a moment of political maturity and a test of its ability to handle one of the most emotionally charged questions of our time. MPs may pass the bill on Friday, but there is no doubt that the legislation will need further refinement in the Lords and government assurance to ensure that compassion is not compromised by cost-cutting, that vulnerable people are not left exposed to subtle forms of coercion, and that the values of care and dignity are central to how we support those at the end of life.
