Bill C-3

An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Canada Labour Code

This enactment amends the Criminal Code to, among other things,
(a) create an offence of intimidating a person in order to impede them from obtaining health services, intimidating a health professional in order to impede them in the performance of their duties or intimidating a person who assists a health professional in order to impede the person in providing that assistance;
(b) create an offence of obstructing or interfering with a person’s lawful access to a place at which health services are provided, subject to a defence of attending at the place for the purpose only of obtaining or communicating information; and
(c) add the commission of an offence against a person who was providing health services and the commission of an offence that had the effect of impeding another person from obtaining health services as aggravating sentencing factors for any offence.
It also amends the Canada Labour Code to, among other things,
(a) extend theperiod during which an employee may take a leave of absencefrom employment in the event of the death of a child and provide for the entitlement of anemployee to a leave of absence in the event of the loss of an unbornchild;
(b) repeal the personal leave that an employee may take to treat their illness or injury;
(c) provide that an employee may earn and take up to 10 days of medical leave of absence with pay in a calendar year; and
(d) authorize the Governor in Council to make regulations to modify, in certain circumstances, the provisions respecting medical leave of absence with pay.

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

I have another question.

Bill C‑3 says—in subsection (1.4), I think—that we can accumulate days of leave. In other words, if someone has accumulated 10 days in their bank of leave and they are fortunate enough not to be sick, the bank of leave days can be carried forward to the next year and can be used in its entirety, as I understand it.

But does the counter go back to zero in terms of accumulating days of leave? I understand that you can't have more than 10 days. That's fine, it's a choice.

How can we make sure that people are not penalized in terms of accumulating days of leave in the following year if the 10 days per year in the previous year have not been used?

[Tony Van Bynen, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Thank you.

I've had the opportunity to contact Arden Krystal, the president and CEO of Southlake Regional Health Centre, in my riding. I asked her for her thoughts on Bill C-3. Ms. Krystal is, by and large, supportive of the legislation, particularly the changes to the Criminal Code related to intimidation and impeding access to services.

I am happy to see that we're collaborating on making this commitment we've made to Canadians a reality. Is it possible that there may be some confusion as to what the bill targets? Could you tell this committee what it doesn't target?

[Tony Van Bynen, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Minister, thank you for taking the time again to join the committee and to answer our questions.

Bill C-3 is so important to strengthening Canada's safety net and ensuring that Canadians don't have to worry about staying home if they're sick or about being unable to pay their bills.

I also want to take this opportunity to quickly say thank you to the health care workers in my riding and across Canada who've been working day in and day out in an already overwhelming environment to keep us safe and to protect our health.

Since 2009, the government has created greater access to paid sick leave for Canadians. Could you walk us through a brief timeline of the work that the government has done since then?

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I'm pleased to address you on this important bill, Mr. Minister. I thought it was interesting to hear you talk about your sense of urgency to get it passed so that we can provide this sick leave capacity for federally regulated workers.

Right away, I must say that I wish that sense of urgency had been there 12, 18 or 24 months ago when the pandemic was hitting full force. I feel that would have protected people and perhaps prevented the spread of infection and the overcrowding in our health care system. It is not as if the NDP didn't ask for it, because our leader has asked for it 22 times in the past year. It finally happened. We have talked about it before in the House. I understand that you are looking forward, but I feel this has dragged on a little over the past 18 months.

In your response to a question from Ms. Kusie, you opened the door for workers to have a few sick days already available. What Bill C‑3 is currently proposing is one day off per month, but it offers no leave bank to begin with. So to get two or three days of sick leave, it could take two or three months or maybe a little more if the employee was hired in the middle of the month, for example.

I'd like to hear your comments on that. Health experts tell us that people very rarely take only one day off when they are sick with something like the flu. Instead, they take two, three or four days off. Would you be open to the idea of setting up a bank of leave, maybe not all 10 days at once, but a small bank, so that the bill would be more realistic given how long people get sick for?

[Sandra Hassan, Deputy Minister of Labour, Department of Employment and Social Development]

Thank you, Minister.

Thank you for the questions, Ms. Chabot.

You alluded to some of the provisions in Bill C‑3, namely the accumulation of leave at a rate of one day per month, the issue of continuous service and the fact that the bill provides that employees could take a half-day, but the employer could also ask them to take a full day. Those provisions are currently in the bill.

Yesterday, our minister showed some openness to considering amendments to the bill. He would be very interested in receiving suggestions for wording related to requests.

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good morning, Mr. Minister.

Today, you are reiterating something that you mentioned in the House when the bill was introduced, which is the goal of strengthening the social safety net. That's also part of our objectives.

Giving 10 days of paid sick leave to all workers who are not entitled to it is a positive thing. I see this as one of the significant benefits that all employers should consider, because it helps attract and retain staff.

However, let me tell you that when it comes to the social safety net, we are wide of the mark. When I think of individuals with serious illnesses receiving only 15 weeks of sickness benefits under the employment insurance system, and the fact that barely 40% of workers are eligible, I can see that we have a long way to go.

My question is about the 10-day paid sick leave bank. I feel it's important that it be clearly articulated that this is a right.

I also have a few questions about the implementation of this measure. We need to make sure that after one month of service, workers will be able to use these 10 days of leave immediately, and that they will not be accumulated at the rate of one day per month.

You should also clarify what you mean by “continuous service”. Does it mean that if, during the course of a month, a worker needs to be absent for some other reason, they will not be considered to have provided continuous service?

In my opinion, you should clarify that people could take half-days of leave, while Bill C‑3 provides that the employer could require them to take a full day. To give this bill its full effect, unless it's not necessary, would you be willing to clarify provisions that would impede the accumulation of leave?

[Wayne Long, Liberal, Saint John—Rothesay, NB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good morning, Minister. It's great for you to be here with us today.

Good morning to all of my colleagues around the table.

I'll say just a few words at the start here about what we've all been through, all of us from all parties, over the last couple of years. Obviously we're in unprecedented times. We know, as the minister just said, that omicron is upon us and it's a game-changer with regard to what we're dealing with for the future. I'm very proud of my government. I'm very proud of all MPs across all party lines and how we have collaborated over the last two years. We've delivered programs. I'm proud of what we've done. No one knew in March 2020 what we'd be faced with, and whether it was the CERB, CEBA, the wage subsidy, rent support, business loans or what have you, we were there as a government for Canadians. We were there to support Canadians.

Certainly one thing that was missing—it's bothered me really for over a year now—is that I would have people coming into my constituency office and they were sick. They had to make a decision between going to work sick or staying home and not being able to feed their family, pay their mortgages or what have you. The fact that we're coming forward with Bill C-3 and the fact that it's going to give people who are sick the opportunity to be home, get better and not spread COVID, or what have you, around the workplace is profoundly important.

Minister, thank you, and I apologize for yesterday. I know there were some delays. I know your time is precious.

My first question to you, Minister, is this. From your side and the department's side, can you describe the necessity of paid sick leave and how you've come to where we are right now?

[The Chair (Mr. Robert Morrissey (Egmont, Lib.)), Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Good morning, everyone. I call this meeting to order. Welcome to meeting number two of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format pursuant to the House order of November 25, 2021. Members are attending in person in the room and remotely using the Zoom application. The proceedings will be made available via the House of Commons website. The webcast will always show the person speaking, rather than the entirety of the room.

I would like to take this opportunity to remind all participants to this meeting that screenshots or taking photos of your screen is not permitted.

To ensure an orderly meeting I would like to outline a few rules to follow.

Members and witnesses may speak in the official language of their choice. Interpretation services are available for this meeting. You have the choice, at the bottom of your screen, of floor English or French. If interpretation is lost, please inform me immediately, and we will ensure interpretation is properly restored before resuming the proceedings. The “raise hand” feature at the bottom of the screen can be used at any time if you wish to speak to the chair or alert the chair, or you can simply raise your hand in the room.

For members participating in person, proceed as you usually would when the whole committee is meeting in person in a committee room. Keep in mind the Board of Internal Economy's guidelines for mask use and health protocols.

Before speaking, please wait until I recognize you by name. If you are on the video conference, please click on the microphone icon to unmute yourself. For those in the room, your microphone will be controlled as normal by the proceedings and verification officer. When speaking, please speak slowly and clearly. When you are not speaking, you mike should be on mute. A reminder that all comments by members and witnesses should be addressed through the chair.

With regard to a speaking list, the committee clerk and I will do the best we can to maintain a consolidated order of speaking for all members, whether they are participating virtually or in person.

As you are aware, we are studying Bill C-3, an act to amend the Criminal Code and the Canada Labour Code. Pursuant to the order of reference of Thursday, December 9, 2021, the committee will commence its consideration of Bill C-3, an act to Amend the Criminal Code and the Canada Labour Code.

We will wait until we have the minister, who is doing a sound check.

I will suspend momentarily while we await the arrival of the minister, virtually.

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Again, I'm speaking to the surprise with which we find the minister here. I was also thinking that we could perhaps get the amendment in both official languages, as I think it would be very useful. Certainly, I know that this is something that is laid out in our routine motions.

I'll continue my remarks in French. I have a little more to say to the committee about the presence of the minister today.

As I just said, it was really a surprise to see the minister here all of a sudden. We think that it's very important to make sure that Bill C‑3 is adopted in the committee, of course, but also in the House before the Christmas break. That said, it's really difficult for us if we can't do our job properly. Our job is to review the bill so that we're ready for the minister's appearance. As I just said, I think that the minister also wants us to be ready to ask him questions.

I think that it's really important to look at the bill beforehand, as we've always done in the past with other bills. Canadians deserve to have bills properly considered. In order to properly study Bill C‑3, we must have the opportunity to ask all the necessary questions and hear from all the relevant witnesses.

I want to check with the chair and the clerk of the committee to see whether the two proposals, meaning the amendment and the motion, are available in French. I would feel more confident if the two proposals before us were in both official languages.

I certainly support my caucus colleagues from Quebec. I'd also like to say that in addition to seeing the amendment and the motion presented in both official languages—

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

—do. To sit here through Christmas, for certain.

Again, Bill C-3 is very relevant, and it's wonderful that the minister is here to—

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

It will be fun. Thank you very much, member for Edmonton Riverbend.

As such, I really think that, when we consider the sacrifices we are willing to make, we can reconsider if in fact the minister can take a look at his schedule. I think this was a reason the government was so intent on bringing a virtual Parliament back to the House of Commons. It's so we can have these types of flexibilities to be able to insert ourselves anywhere at any time—at the last minute even.

If the minister is able to put aside his activities of the day—at the last minute, I'm sure—in Ottawa, which might have been a nice luncheon or, in Newfoundland and Labrador, perhaps an afternoon tea—an Earl Grey tea maybe—certainly he can re-evaluate his schedule again and look for another possible time.

Again, I really hope that he might possibly do that, because certainly it would allow us to have some time to prepare, and we could certainly head into the holiday season with Bill C-3 going back to the House and perhaps even passing, with the confidence that we had addressed all of it. I would certainly feel a lot better finishing my Christmas shopping and doing my Christmas baking knowing that we had evaluated this in its entirety. I think everyone else would as well.

I know the member for Edmonton Riverbend is a relatively new father once again, and I'm sure he would feel better preparing for the holidays with confidence, knowing that we had given this evaluation as well.

I think everyone in this room definitely feels as though Bill C-3 is a priority. We have many members, including our own shadow minister for labour and shadow minister for justice, who believe in this legislation and believe it is important to get it passed. Certainly, it is our duty and obligation to have done a solid evaluation of it.

With the minister's last minute arrival here, I have not even had an opportunity to consult with those shadow ministers to get their ideas as to the kinds of questions they would like to have answered, and what their thoughts might be before we return this bill to the House. We are considering that as well, and it would also be good to get their input.

In addition, we have another colleague who was considering an amendment based on some legislation he was evaluating. It would be great if we could have a conversation with him as well in an effort to try to figure out if we can implement his ideas into the bill, but again, given that we just found out about the minister's appearance this morning, we won't be able to do that in a timely fashion. That's very disappointing, and it will also be a disappointment to this member of our caucus.

As an individual, I always like to be really expedient and get things done as soon as possible. I would like to compliment my colleague, MP Long, for being able to get the minister here so quickly. However, there are also some times when expediency must give way to careful, prudent and thoughtful evaluation, particularly when we're talking about Canadian legislation. This would definitely be a case where it's important to do that.

In fact, the official opposition has shown very good collaboration with the government since the beginning of the pandemic. I recall my previous time in HUMA when we were called at the very last minute, almost in the middle of the night I'll say, in an effort to pass the initial legislation dealing with the pandemic. You know, I think that was also like Bill C-3. It was very valuable and very necessary, and as the official opposition, we did what we had to do to serve Canadians and get things done.

We even did that again when I held the role of shadow minister for families, children and social development in terms of what I saw with the CERB and the CRB. There were different permutations of the legislation, because with every amendment that was made, in fact, another subset of Canadians the legislation did not serve was identified. At that point, we had to go back and amend the legislation again.

I would argue that we're even seeing that again with the CCPD, and unfortunately as well—I know my NDP colleague will agree—with the GIS clawbacks based on the CERB. I'm seeing some mild nodding of heads.

My point is that we've always been agreeable to come and do what was necessary to pass legislation and to get that legislation for Canadians. In fact, we would do the same here, because this is the spirit in which we like to do things, to get things done and to move things forward.

I guess that's why we're so very surprised by the appearance of the minister here today, which, again, is fantastic. As my colleague said, sometimes it's very difficult to get ministers to appear, which has been my past experience.

This minister in particular I know is a very warm, accommodating individual. I know in his previous role as minister for natural resources, a role that's very dear to my heart as a member of Parliament from Alberta, he certainly went out of his way to make all sorts of accommodations to work for both me and my citizens, as well as the citizens of Alberta, and the natural resources sector as well. I certainly can see that he is doing the same thing in this role, by being available to speak on Bill C-3.

I'm sure in his previous career as a journalist, he also had to exhibit the flexibility he is showing here today in being ready and available to talk about Bill C-3, particularly so early in the morning. I've heard from other friends who were anchors and such that you had to get up at 3 a.m. That I'm not sure I'm willing to—

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Thank you, Chair.

I'd like to thank my colleague for putting forward this amendment, which to me seems incredibly reasonable.

Again, we were not prepared for the minister to come here today and present to us on Bill C-3. Again, it's just very disappointing. I certainly was prepared to have this discussion over this week.

I want to clarify for my colleague from Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound that I certainly would sit here until the new year. I just said it was not my preference, but certainly, if that is what is required, I would be more than happy to do that.

I think we really should think about the precedent this sets and about the respect we have for each of the members of this committee, in that they would come here and be prepared for the minister. As well, I'm sure that the minister, as a good minister and a strong minister, would want to ensure that he heard from all of the members of the committee and was prepared to take their questions on any matter in the bill. I certainly believe that's what he would like to do so that, when we bring this legislation back to the House, he can do it with the utmost confidence that it was evaluated in every way possible.

We're here on day one, heading into hour two, and we're already in this position where, on this side of the House, we're made to feel uncomfortable. I'm sure that our NDP colleague, who I see has been replaced, is also wondering if this is normal. I certainly can assure her that it is not. I think it's very important that we consider the amendment by the member for Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound.

Certainly, it's a busy week for everyone as we head into the holiday season and depart for what will be six weeks, but I have many events this week that I would be willing to move in an effort to accommodate the minister, because I certainly understand that he must have a busy schedule as well. I even have my Christmas luncheon booked with my staff. If I had to, I would be willing to forgo that.

[Bonita Zarrillo, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

We weren't necessarily expecting this today. I have a colleague who was working on C-3 before it was brought to this committee. I would like to step away now to make room for Mr. Boulerice.

It's nice to see everybody today. I wish I could have stayed with you, but we'll see what happens. I might come back.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

It's Michael Coteau from Don Valley East. Thank you, Chair.

I want to say that, being a new member here and new to this committee, to have the minister come on the first day is quite impressive.

For the people in my community of Don Valley East, when it comes to Bill C-3 and paid sick days, it's an important issue. If I have the opportunity to ask the minister questions and get some more clarity on the bill, that's a good thing.

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Yes, Chair, I think everyone in this room absolutely anticipated the expedition of C-3. It's very timely. Frankly, I certainly didn't want to be here over the holidays, but I was prepared to stay until the end of this week in an effort to expedite this bill, because I recognize the significance of this bill for the government.

I must say, I think it's in very poor form for the committee to be informed the day of the appearance of the minister. We had no prior information of this. I don't think it's a good precedent.

The chair talked about working together in a positive and collaborative manner. To have the minister appear without any time for us to prepare for the minister with our questions, considering that we were anticipating perhaps not even the minister but discussing the bill itself later in the week, it's not really how we would like to see things done or to see things done in the future. We certainly would have appreciated some notification as to who and what and when. We didn't receive that here.

That's unfortunate, particularly when we have new members on the committee, and certainly from the NDP an entirely new member who, as I said.... In my almost five years here, I'm still learning the ins and outs of committee business and committee practice, so it's really not preferable. I really don't think it's in good form. It doesn't feel very good, as we are in the holiday season here.

I just felt I should voice all of that, Chair. Thank you very much.