An Act to amend the Canada Labour Code (harassment and violence), the Parliamentary Employment and Staff Relations Act and the Budget Implementation Act, 2017, No. 1

This bill was last introduced in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session, which ended in September 2019.


Patty Hajdu  Liberal


This bill has received Royal Assent and is now law.


This is from the published bill. The Library of Parliament often publishes better independent summaries.

Part 1 of this enactment amends the Canada Labour Code to strengthen the existing framework for the prevention of harassment and violence, including sexual harassment and sexual violence, in the work place.

Part 2 amends Part III of the Parliamentary Employment and Staff Relations Act with respect to the application of Part II of the Canada Labour Code to parliamentary employers and employees, without limiting in any way the powers, privileges and immunities of the Senate and the House of Commons and their members.

Part 3 amends a transitional provision in the Budget Implementation Act, 2017, No. 1.


All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, provided by the Library of Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.

Opposition Motion—Allegations of Sexual Misconduct in the MilitaryBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

May 4th, 2021 / 3:50 p.m.
See context


Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON

Mr. Speaker, I sat in on the testimony we had when we were studying Bill C-65, and no one who testified said that politicians should get involved in allegations of sexual misconduct and sexual harassment. We heard that there needed to be independent investigations into those charges, and if it was independent, people might have some confidence to come forward. Even then, they were still fearful.

Now, Lieutenant-General Jennie Carignan, who has just been appointed as chief of professional conduct and culture, will be looking to implement Bill C-65.

I am not saying that one is better than the other, but I am saying that we need to improve the process. I find it really disturbing for the Conservatives to stand in this House and accuse the Liberal government of not following the proper process, when it is exactly the same process that they followed.

Opposition Motion—Allegations of Sexual Misconduct in the MilitaryBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

May 4th, 2021 / 1:40 p.m.
See context

Brampton West Ontario


Kamal Khera LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Development

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with my good friend, the member of Parliament for Oakville North—Burlington, whom I have the privilege of working alongside on so many issues, including in committee on public safety.

Once again, I am thankful for the opportunity to rise today to address the House on a subject that concerns all of us: the well-being of the members of our Canadian Armed Forces and those who support them.

In recent months, Canadians have heard the heart-wrenching accounts of Canadian Armed Forces members and civilian colleagues who have been subjected to behaviours, treatment and experiences that are completely unacceptable. For far too long, their accounts have been ignored.

For instance, opposition members knew of the rumours against General Vance in 2015, yet still appointed him. They appointed him while there was an active Canadian Forces national investigation service investigation into him, and appointed him to the most senior position within the Canadian Armed Forces. The current leader of the official opposition said that he passed along sexual misconduct rumours about General Vance in 2015, claiming those were looked into. I ask my fellow Conservative members, how is this possible, if General Vance was appointed at the same time and the investigation was suddenly dropped?

What our members have endured is wrong. The Canadian Armed Forces is entrusted to keep Canadians safe at home and abroad. The organization owes survivors more. Every Canadian Armed Forces member makes enormous personal sacrifices to protect Canadians and, regardless of rank or gender identity, has an undeniable right to serve in safety. We must and we will live up to that expectation.

The Minister of National Defence has always followed the processes that were put in place when allegations were brought to his attention. This is something he has said publicly, in this House, and it is something he will continue to do. However, as members have no doubt heard from my hon. colleagues, our government is taking important steps to address systemic misconduct within the Canadian Armed Forces to bring about cultural change within the organization.

The need to change the military's culture is born of the reality that the lived experiences of many defence team members are completely out of line with the values professed within the organization and by the organization, which are values of integrity, inclusion and accountability. That needs to change, and we are committed to bringing about that change.

If we want that change to be significant, if we want it to be meaningful and if we want it to last, then we need to reflect honestly on what has been happening. Where we find failings and fault, we must accept responsibility. Where we are able to learn lessons, we must seize the opportunity to build a better organization. Where members of the defence team share their accounts and experiences, we must listen and we must listen very carefully.

The end goal is simple. It is to ensure that every member of the defence team, every member of the Canadian Armed Forces is valued and respected. Defence culture and professional conduct must reflect the core values and ethical principles our military aspires to uphold as a national institution, which is what Canadian Armed Forces members, veterans, recruits, public servants and Canadians deserve and expect of the organization.

It is clear that the measures we have taken already since forming government have not gone far enough and have not moved fast enough. This is why we announced last week that Madame Arbour will conduct an independent review into the Canadian Armed Forces, including the creation of an external reporting system that is independent from the chain of command and meets the needs of those impacted by sexual misconduct and violence. It is also why, in budget 2021, we committed over $236 million to eliminate sexual misconduct and gender-based violence in the Canadian Armed Forces, including expanding the reach of the sexual misconduct response centre and providing online and in-person peer-to-peer support. All options to create a safer future for women serving in the Canadian Armed Forces are going to be considered to change the culture of toxic masculinity that exists in the Canadian Armed Forces.

Last Thursday, the Minister of National Defence announced the creation of a new organization to lead us there. Among the many other initiatives I just talked about, the Department of National Defence appointed Lieutenant-General Jennie Carignan as DND's new chief of professional conduct and culture. Under her leadership, the professional conduct and culture organization will unify, integrate and coordinate all of the policies, programs and activities that address systemic misconduct and support culture change within the forces. The organization will include a new assistant deputy minister who will directly support Lieutenant-General Carignan. The team will bring together members from all ranks and classifications, reflecting the diversity that Canadians expect. Make no mistake. This is not a generic prepackaged solution to a long-standing problem. Before any future steps are taken, those working to bring about change will actively listen to the accounts of people affected, people at every rank, every level and across all regions of this country.

As so many members of the defence team have already shared experiences and recommendations, we do not have to wait before implementing a number of much-needed changes. Lieutenant-General Carignan and her team will take a number of steps to bring about change right away. To start, they will wrap up Operation Honour. Much has already been said about drawing this initiative to a close, but it bears repeating. Lieutenant-General Carignan and her team will review all of the research conducted under Operation Honour so its findings can inform renewed culture change efforts.

This new team will also develop mechanisms to implement the workplace harassment and violence prevention regulations of Bill C-65. It will also support ongoing efforts to bring the remaining provisions of Bill C-77 into force. This includes introducing the declaration of victims rights into the National Defence Act.

The next order of business will be to form a team to establish a framework that will help achieve a number of longer-term goals. It will realign responsibilities, policies and programs that address elements of systemic misconduct across National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces. It will also simplify and enhance misconduct reporting mechanisms, including for people outside of the chain of command. It will give greater agency to, and strengthen support mechanisms for, those who have experienced misconduct. It will enhance tracking mechanisms, from initial reports of the misconduct to case closures. It will also integrate additional data points, such as intersectionality, reprisals, member satisfaction and retention. Finally, it will lead institutional efforts to develop a professional conduct and culture framework that tackles all types of harmful behaviour, biases and systemic barriers.

So much work has already been done within the department to build healthy, safe and inclusive workplaces. So many organizations are focused on developing programs and policies to move us in the right direction, whether it is the gender-based analysis plus, the integrated conflict and complaint management program, the anti-racism secretariat, the Canadian Armed Forces diversity strategy, Canada's anti-racism strategy or Canada's national action plan on women, peace and security.

The professional conduct and culture organization is being established with the clear understanding that previous culture change efforts have fallen short of what was needed. With the standing up of this new organization, the defence team is taking a fundamentally different approach, an approach that will be more holistic and coherent in addressing the complex challenges faced by the Canadian Armed Forces.

In closing, I would like to reiterate our deepest concern for the well-being of every member of the Canadian defence team. The standing up of the professional conduct and culture organization is a testament to our genuine commitment to protect members of the Canadian Armed Forces. Our government has shown that we are dedicated and committed to creating a lasting culture change across the defence team. That is the goal, and we will do just that.

April 22nd, 2021 / 6:30 p.m.
See context

Kin Choi Assistant Deputy Minister, Human Resources, Civilian, Department of National Defence

Thank you.

Good evening, Madam Chair and committee members. Thank you for the invitation to participate in this discussion in my capacity as the assistant deputy minister of civilian human resources for the Department of National Defence.

I have been a member of the public service for over 29 years, having held a number of positions in a variety of departments. The national defence team is a large, complex organization that includes public servants and military members and that extends across Canada and abroad. The team has 18 different collective agreements that encompass approximately 70 occupational groups, including administrative support, technical trades, defence research and scientists. Most of these groups are represented by the 10 different unions with which we work.

In my role as the assistant deputy minister of civilian human resources, I'm largely responsible for four core functions: compensation, healthy workplace, diversity and inclusion and labour relations, which affect approximately 26,000 public service employees.

My team oversees a number of areas relating to people management, including staffing, learning and development, classification and organizational design, labour relations and compensation. As well, we are responsible for developing and implementing plans, policies and programs to recruit, develop and retain diverse individuals to ensure the Canadian Armed Forces are supported at home and abroad. In all aspects of our work we are committed to upholding the defence team's values of ethics, integrity and the well-being of our employees.

Though important steps have been taken to address the overall health and well-being of the defence team, clearly we have much work to do to effect enduring change. It is imperative that we continue to pursue this change in order to rebuild an environment of trust, respect and accountability reflective of the Canadians we serve. We will listen to all perspectives and make informed decisions to ensure that our core values lead to this meaningful change.

Finally, in my capacity as head of human resources for our public service employees, I take my responsibilities as functional authority for workplace harassment, discrimination and implementation of Bill C-65 very seriously to ensure fairness and due process, regardless of rank or position.

I acknowledge that there may be questions related to ongoing complaints; however, I will be unable to address the specific nature of these cases, as they are addressed through the independent process and recourse mechanism currently available to complainants.

Thank you. I look forward to your questions.

April 20th, 2021 / 12:45 p.m.
See context

LCol (Ret'd) Bernie Boland

Thank you very much for that particular question. Certainly, for me, I have been persistent. There is no doubt, from my perspective, that one of the basic approaches of the government is to ignore when they get something.

You identified that I raised a complaint based upon Bill C-65. I'm fundamentally waiting for the Minister of Labour to acknowledge receipt of my correspondence. She hasn't, so I am pursuing that.

As my co-panellists have said, there has to be an independent and autonomous opportunity for anybody who has the need to or requirement to make a complaint to advocate for it and to approach it in a suitable legal adversarial fashion, so that you can confront and address the individual who has perpetrated misconduct—harassment, human rights violations, racism and particularly sexual misconduct—and to address those, and those you are dealing with, in a system of accountability.

All three of those things are being denied to me. I'm capable of advocating. I've been denied that right to do it. I'm prepared to confront my respondent. I'm being denied that. There is no accountability for that. It needs to be separate and independent.

Thank you.

April 20th, 2021 / 12:45 p.m.
See context


Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB

Thank you, Madam Chair. It's lovely to be back here. Of course, it would be better if we had a different topic that was not so difficult to hear.

I want to thank all of the witnesses for being on this call today, for joining us and for sharing their stories and their insight. It's a very important conversation. I'm glad I get the chance to hear some of this testimony.

I'd like to start with retired Lieutenant-Colonel Boland, if I may, and ask a series of questions.

Mr. Boland, you note in your testimony that you took several approaches to try to seek justice. That included submitting to the Federal Court of Canada an application for a judicial review of DND's grievance dismissal. You gave notice to the registrar of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal to be a party to the tribunal hearing. You filed a complaint with the Minister of Labour on DND's breach of your Bill C-65 rights.

We are told that there are processes and policies in place. However, the people involved in upholding these processes are not following them. What oversight measures would you recommend so that these processes are indeed followed?

April 20th, 2021 / 12:10 p.m.
See context

Lieutenant-Colonel Retired) Bernie Boland (As an Individual

Madam Chair, thank you.

I'm Bernie Boland, retired lieutenant-colonel, who served honourably in the Canadian Armed Forces for over 30 years. For the past 12 years, I was an engineer in the public service. I retired in December 2020.

At the March 23, 2021, committee hearing, Minister Sajjan stated, “I take any allegation, regardless of rank or position, very seriously”, “We are committed to addressing all allegations, no matter the rank and no matter the position”, and “Sexual misconduct, harassment and inappropriate behaviour are not acceptable. We must call them out for what they are: an abuse of power.”

My testimony will present a concrete example of the difference between what DND practises and what it purports in addressing misconduct.

My case is comprehensively documented. The committee clerk has over 30 documents that chronicle the systemic and aberrant manner that senior executives who are commissioned to stamp out misconduct do not.

In the pursuit of justice, I followed the prescribed process. The defence officials assigned to assure that justice prevails robbed me of my right to advocate and denied me the opportunity to confront the offender in a balanced and equal justice for all, adversarial-based legal system.

In 2016, I reported wrongdoing and misconduct when an employee I had the privilege of supervising requested that I report the harassment and human rights violations perpetrated upon her by a senior engineering manager. I reported it. He was promoted. We faced reprisal and retaliation.

Her case is now at the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal awaiting adjudication on discrimination and deferential treatment due to age, gender, ethnicity and being a Muslim.

Once I reported the misconduct, I became an organizational threat. In retaliation, and to exonerate those responsible and culpable for the misconduct and human rights violations I reported, DND, in a formal departmental submission to the Canadian Human Rights Commission, secretly made me the scapegoat for the misconduct. I was made aware of DND's surreptitious actions by the woman harassed.

DND secretly making me a scapegoat was reprehensible, and I vehemently protested. On January 13, 2021, I formally submitted a complaint to Mr. Sajjan against the deputy minister, Jody Thomas, for condoning, as proper departmental conduct, DND's secret scapegoating of me.

Minister Sajjan's chief of staff acknowledged receipt of my complaint and assured me that it would be handled according to the applicable law. Jody Thomas is a Governor in Council appointee. No one from the Privy Council contacted me.

To ensure that my complaint against Jody Thomas did not drop off the radar, or more correctly wasn't institutionally ignored, I sent a February 7, 2021, registered letter containing my complaint against the deputy minister to Prime Minister Trudeau, with info copies to Katie Telford and the Clerk of the Privy Council, Ian Shugart. The letter's subject is “Defence Leadership Corrupts the Harassment Resolution Process to Protect the Harasser”.

No one from the PMO or Privy Council contacted me. However, Minister Sajjan's seriousness and commitment to addressing all allegations, regardless of rank or position, against the deputy minister, a Governor in Council appointee, was summarily and arbitrarily dismissed without investigation by Mr. Kin Choi, a subordinate of the deputy minister.

Though assured that the applicable law would be followed, Mr. Choi's expedient exculpation of his boss, Jody Thomas, broke the law. Specifically, Mr. Choi violated Bill C-65's workplace harassment and violence prevention regulations. Mr. Choi is responsible for the coordination and implementation of Bill C-65 in DND. He is also DND's functional authority for harassment prevention and resolution. Mr. Choi's conduct is rife with conflict of interest and bias.

After Mr. Troy Crosby, assistant deputy minister, materiel, deemed that DND secretly making me a scapegoat to the CHRC was proper conduct, I formally complained to Minister Sajjan, because the deputy minister did not take timely action on my complaint against her subordinate, Mr. Crosby.

Mr. Choi, a peer of Mr. Crosby's, summarily and arbitrarily dismissed, without investigating, these allegations. Mr. Choi also summarily and arbitrarily dismissed my grievance against Mr. Crosby for Mr. Crosby's failure to follow procedural fairness. The director general who made the submission to the CHRC secretly making me the scapegoat reports directly to Mr. Choi.

Notwithstanding the above, the most sinister aspect of this departmental behaviour, which must not be overlooked, is that DND overtly sanctions a covert program of secretly making scapegoats to the Canadian Human Rights Commission to exonerate those responsible and culpable for harassment and human rights violations. This is appalling. It must end immediately. The CHRC and the human rights tribunal must be made aware of it.

There is a cultural problem in the defence department, but there is institutional reluctance to distinguish between the approximate and ultimate cause of this problem. From my perspective, the ultimate cause is a breakdown and failure in leadership to act in an ethical, morally appropriate, determined and deliberate manner to arrest and eliminate misconduct. Instead, they too often conduct it and condone it.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

April 14th, 2021 / 5:35 p.m.
See context


The Chair Liberal Bryan May

I can't agree with you more.

Prior to this Parliament, I was the chair of the human resources committee, and we oversaw Bill C-65, which was on violence and harassment in the workforce. I can assure you, I'm very aware of the trepidation and challenges of coming forward, so are all of the members of this committee. A big thank you, sir, for the work that you do.

I will wrap up here by simply reminding everyone that on the 19th, we will not be having a meeting. Our next meeting will be April 21, which will be hearing from witnesses on the study of support services and veteran caregivers and families. It's our last meeting on that study.


March 26th, 2021 / 1:25 p.m.
See context

Lieutenant-Colonel Retired) Bernie Boland (As an Individual

Madam Chair, thank you for this opportunity to testify. I'm Bernie Boland, a retired lieutenant-colonel who served honourably in the Canadian Armed Forces for over 30 years. For the past 12 years, I was an engineer in the public service. I retired on December 30, 2020.

I'm testifying because DND has demonstrated an inability to act in an independent judicial fashion that honours due process, defends procedural fairness and respects the rule of law.

In 2016 I reported wrongdoing and misconduct when an employee I had the privilege of supervising requested that I report her harassment and human rights violations by a senior engineering manager. As compelled by oath and the code of values and ethics, I reported it. Her case is now at the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal awaiting adjudication on discrimination and deferential treatment due to age, gender, ethnicity and being a Muslim.

Once I reported, everything in the workplace changed. I faced reprisal and retaliation. I was silenced, denied due process and had my procedural fairness rights withheld. To date, external to DND, I have submitted to the Federal Court of Canada an application for judicial review of DND's grievance dismissal, given notice to the registrar of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal to be a party to a tribunal hearing, and filed a complaint with the Ministry of Labour on DND's breach of my Bill C-65 rights. Internal to DND, I have submitted formal complaints and grievances, all to no avail.

I also provided to the deputy minister detailed analysis of the lack of due process, procedural fairness violations, conflict of interest and decision-maker bias. Additionally, I provided to both the DM and Minister Sajjan independent analysis—the Lowry report—from a retired RCMP fraud investigator that confirmed and corroborated decision-maker bias, conflict of interest, denial of due process and violations of procedural fairness. It was ignored. However, because I reported the harassment and human rights violations of the employee I supervised, DND secretly, in a formal departmental submission to the Canadian Human Rights Commission, made me the scapegoat to exonerate those responsible and culpable. This DND submission was made without my knowledge and with no opportunity to defend myself. It was condemnation without any representation.

Once I became aware of DND's secret scapegoating submission, I formally complained because the director general, workplace management, secretly made me the scapegoat; Troy Crosby, assistant deputy minister, materiel, determined that it was proper conduct for the DG to secretly make me the scapegoat; and Jody Thomas, the DM, condoned DND's secret scapegoating of me as proper departmental conduct. Without any investigation, DND dismissed my complaints.

I also submitted a grievance and a request for an independent ethical review on the myriad conflicts of interest, bias, denial of process and withholding of procedural fairness rights. DND summarily dismissed these.

DND's justification, as stated by assistant deputy minister of human resources, civilian, Mr. Choi, is the following: “Mr. Boland speaks to not having an opportunity to defend himself. It is to note that it is the parties to the CHRC complaint (the DND and the complainant to the CHRC) who are entitled to procedural fairness rights. The DND, as the respondent to the CHRC complaint has no responsibility to gather information from all potential witnesses: this is the responsibility of the CHRC appointed investigator. The conduct is therefore not considered improper. ...the complaint pertains to a single matter and does not meet the threshold for a severe incident. It will not be investigated.

He goes on to say that “the complaint pertains to a single matter and does not meet the threshold for a severe incident” and it will not be investigated. The CHRC submission is a protected document: “Mr. Boland does not have access rights to the submission and therefore Mr. Hooey could not have reasonably known that it would cause offence or harm, nor can it be considered ‘directed at’ Mr. Boland.”

Mr. Choi's justification makes it unequivocally clear to me that DND will not act in a procedurally fair fashion. DND takes no responsibility to ensure that human rights are fulsomely and truthfully addressed in DND by DND. DND considers it proper to secretly make those who dutifully report misconduct the scapegoat for the misconduct they report.

Despite its zero tolerance policy, DND will unilaterally and arbitrarily dismiss misconduct to excuse its obligation to investigate it.

DND believes institutional secrecy absolves its wrongdoing.

Since 2016, in my effort to be heard, have due process applied and be treated in a procedurally fair fashion, I have formally engaged many, including the Prime Minister; Minister Sajjan; my member of Parliament, Pierre Poilievre; the Minister of Labour; and the ombudsman.

Despite these efforts, DND refuses to honour its commitments, and render due process and respect for the rule of law.

On January 1, 2021, Bill C-65 and workplace harassment and violence prevention regulations came into force. The deputy minister assigned Mr. Choi coordination and implementation responsibilities. Mr. Choi violated my rights, enshrined in this legislation, by denying my right to an investigation.

On March 3, 2021, on the advice of my legal counsel, I requested the Minister of Labour to restore my rights and remedy this breach. I have yet to receive any acknowledgement from the Minister of Labour.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

March 24th, 2021 / 6:40 p.m.
See context

Commr Brenda Lucki

Thank you for that question.

The independent centre for harassment resolution is there to, first of all, be compliant with Bill C-65, which came into play in January. It's also to provide a transparent and trusted system where people who want to bring harassment complaints can do so in a safe and non-retaliatory manner, as per Justice Bastarache's recommendations in that report.

It will be externalized. It will be outside of the chain of command as far as the investigators go, who will actually make the finding of harassment or not. That will be done externally, so it will increase the trust amongst our employees in that regard.

March 23rd, 2021 / 12:35 p.m.
See context


Andréanne Larouche Bloc Shefford, QC

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I want to thank Lieutenant-General Eyre and Lieutenant-General Allen once again for joining us today.

Yes, Mr. Eyre, I was referring to Bill C-65. I know that you're looking at workplace harassment and Bill C-77, which amends the National Defence Act and makes related changes. I gather that work will be done once the bills have been implemented. If you want to add anything, you can do so.

When I was talking about an external oversight committee, I was referring to a recommendation in Marie Deschamps' report, which dates back to 2015 and which recommended the creation of an independent body to handle reports of sexual misconduct in the Canadian Armed Forces.

According to a March 9, 2021, article in the Globe and Mail, the Government of Canada was looking at creating an independent body to investigate allegations of sexual misconduct, racism and discrimination. The article talked about current cases of sexual misconduct that affected various communities, including indigenous and LGBTQ+ communities, along with racialized women.

What structure is currently in place to handle reports of sexual misconduct and what's the reporting relationship between this structure and the Canadian Armed Forces?

March 23rd, 2021 / 12:20 p.m.
See context

LGen Wayne D. Eyre

Madam Chair, I think we're talking about Bill C-65 and Bill C-77. I can tell you right now that we're putting much effort into their implementation within the Canadian Armed Forces and DND in terms of victims' rights, workplace harassment and violence.... That all plays a part in the wider efforts to change our culture.

March 23rd, 2021 / 12:20 p.m.
See context


Andréanne Larouche Bloc Shefford, QC


You also spoke about Bill C-65 and Bill C-77 and the implementation of certain measures.

Can you reiterate what you feel is most important in this area?

March 23rd, 2021 / 12:05 p.m.
See context

LGen Wayne D. Eyre

We have to learn why previous approaches did not work, learn from that and incorporate those lessons into our plan going forward.

As we go forward, I see us moving forward on two streams. The first stream is that any external review that looks at our organization we have to embrace and fully support with the realization that we don't have all the answers. Then we have to look at and embrace any recommendations that come out of that, including, if necessary, an independent reporting chain to give all our members the confidence—or to restore the confidence—that their allegations will be properly looked into.

Second, and of more urgency, are the internal actions we need to take. I have talked about listening and learning. Ensuring that victim support is in place is an immediate priority. We have to respect due process for the ongoing investigations.

With regard to Op Honour in particular, I believe—and I have heard from many—that perhaps this operation has culminated and that we need to harvest what has worked from there, learn from what hasn't, and go forward with a deliberate change plan, a deliberate plan that includes not only members of the Canadian Armed Forces but also our public servant colleagues as well.

We need to align our internal organizations, because we have disparate pockets that are focused on this problem, and perhaps better alignment is required amongst the different organizations.

We have to continue to implement the provisions of Bill C-65 and then Bill C-77 and, along with that, the restorative engagement that comes with the final settlement.

February 25th, 2021 / noon
See context


Filomena Tassi Liberal Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON

This work is extremely important. You don't fix it with one piece of legislation. You fix it with a holistic approach. This committee knows that more than any other in terms of women.

Look what we have done for supporting women in the workforce. There's pay transparency to tighten the wage gap for the four groups, women being one of the groups included. There's skills training, making significant investments so that if I want to be a welder or I want to be a framer, I'll be given that opportunity. I've sat around tables with women who have had these opportunities opened to them because of the investments this government has made. I can tell you that they have gotten a second lease on life. They are over the moon. They are able to fulfill their dreams.

There's Bill C-65, the Employment Equity Act review, the commitments to child care—

February 25th, 2021 / 11:55 a.m.
See context


Filomena Tassi Liberal Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON

With respect to women, let me say this. It's not only this piece of legislation and the cost. You talk about the cost. What is the cost of inaction? What is the cost of doing nothing? Our children and our grandchildren will have to bear that, and the economy loses out. This is why our government has moved forward on so many measures: pay transparency, skills training, Bill C-65, an Employment Equity Act review, child care—