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.

Criminal Code

[Scott Aitchison, Conservative, Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate that and the generosity of all my colleagues here. I will be splitting my time with the member for Northumberland—Peterborough South.

I always appreciate the opportunity to stand in the House and speak to the important issues of the day. This is quite clearly an important issue. I congratulate the minister on presenting this and fulfilling a campaign promise.

Of course, we are a little concerned. This is something that other members in the House have already raised. This is something that we have been calling on for some time, and it has been promised for a while. Of course, had we not had an election that was not necessary, and if our committees had been up and running, we could have been doing an awful lot more. In fact, the minister in his press conference pointed out that it may not really have that big of an impact: Most federally regulated private-sector companies, which are among the biggest companies in the country, already have incredibly generous programs to support their workers if they need paid sick leave. Collective agreements already cover an awful lot of these programs.

This is a bill that covers two very different areas. I will be focusing specifically on the labour portion of it. The other issue, of course, is that we are not entirely sure how many workers this will cover, but we are looking forward to seeing more details. We recognize as well that this is an opening toward discussing this further with the provinces and with many more businesses. It is important to keep in mind, as those negotiations begin and as the federal government starts speaking with provinces, the caution that the Canadian Federation of Independent Business has expressed. That is:

CFIB urges the federal government and provincial governments to exercise extreme caution when imposing new costs on small businesses at a time when a majority are still not back to normal sales or out from under their COVID-related debt. Small businesses are already facing a significant increase in employer contributions to CPP on January 1, 2022, carbon tax increases in several provinces, as well as other increases in the cost of doing business, including supplies, shipping, and insurance.

Additionally, many businesses may be cut off from accessing any COVID relief due to higher thresholds to access the new wage and rent subsidy programs.

As these negotiations begin, it is important that we keep that in mind. It is important to support workers, but it is also important to remember that small businesses are struggling.

I will say at the outset that Conservatives are generally supportive of this. We believe it is important to support workers, but we also point out that if we had not had an unnecessary election and we had our committees up and running, we could be doing an awful lot more to support workers in Canada.

In fact, during that unnecessary election, Conservatives talked an awful lot about supporting workers in Canada. We talked about a construction mobility tax credit that would allow workers to subtract up to $4,000 per year in temporary relocation expenses from taxable income. It would make it easier for Canadian workers to go where the work is.

Workers often have to leave their homes and families to take on temporary contracts in other parts of the country. Those costs can be significant, averaging around $3,500 for relocation. In some parts of Canada, often in rural and northern regions, they are struggling to find skilled workers and tradespeople, so we want to accelerate the investment and infrastructure that will create jobs and build a more productive and more connected Canada. To do that, we need to help workers get to where they are needed most. We could have been talking about that, of course, in committee.

We also felt that it was important to talk about making sure that infrastructure spending benefits Canadian workers by requiring that equipment and materials for federally funded infrastructure projects be purchased from Canadian companies, or from those countries with which we have agreed to mutually allow our workers to supply each other's infrastructure projects. We could have been talking about that if we had our committees up and running, and making sure that we were protecting Canadian workers that way.

We also could have been talking about another idea that Conservatives had in the election campaign, which was to support union training programs and apprenticeships, and to expand access to them. There is a desperate need in this country for skilled tradespeople, and it is a bright future for young people. We have talked about ensuring workers have the training they need for the jobs of today and, of course, tomorrow by supporting union and similar training programs and encouraging employers to invest in their workers.

We would have proposed, and we will propose if we get into committee, to double the apprenticeship job creation tax credit for up to three years to help create more places for apprentices. We talked about investing $250 million over two years to create the Canadian job training fund, which is another really great idea. If committees were up and running, we could be talking about it.

We talked as well about apprenticeship programs and training delivery agents, such as unions, post-secondary institutions and community organizations, that would give laid-off workers immediate access to training. These programs could reach out to traditionally under-represented groups. This could help tourism and hospitality workers who have been hit hard by the recession. It could support the talent needs of small businesses and help workers get the training they need, focusing on areas where there are shortages of skilled workers.

We also talked about creating the working Canadian training loan to provide low-interest loans of up to $10,000 to people who want to upgrade their skills, which would empower workers to determine what training they need, rather than having a government body tell them, which is another fantastic idea from the Conservative Party that we could be talking about right now if committees were up and running.

In addition, we talked about making sure that workers have a voice at the table. We proposed giving workers a seat at the table by requiring federally regulated employers with over 1,000 employees, or over $100 million in annual revenue, to include worker representation on their boards of directors, an innovative idea that we could be talking about right now in committee.

Conservatives have lots of great ideas, and we are eager to get to work. We are supportive of what the minister has proposed here today, and we are eager to see it happen, but perhaps one of the most important things we could do right now is to add some minor amendments to the bill to capture a private member's bill from the previous Parliament brought to us by the MP for Calgary Shepard.

It was an act to amend the Canada Labour Code on bereavement leave. Specifically, it would have provided three days of paid bereavement leave and two days of unpaid bereavement leave for parents who have lost a child under the age of 18 or a dependent child with disabilities over the age of 18, and for women who experienced a stillbirth from five days to eight weeks. It is not natural for a parent to bury a child, and Conservatives feel it is appropriate for the government to adopt this motion, perhaps including it in this bill to make sure parents have the support and time they need to heal from a tragic situation like this.

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

Madam Speaker, I have to say it is a relief to finally hear that the Conservatives are on side for paid sick leave, because throughout the pandemic I asked the Conservatives repeatedly if they would support paid sick leave, and they flat out would not respond. People were going to work sick, making a choice between paying rent and buying food or going to work and possibly infecting their co-workers. The mental health stress was compounded on people who were going to work. The impact on businesses, organizations and government agencies has been tremendous.

New Democrats are glad the Liberals are finally seeing the light a year and a half into the pandemic, but my concern is why it has taken so long for the Conservatives to stand up for workers' health. I really do appreciate the member talking about bereavement leave because we support that. There was a great HUMA report on bereavement, and we fully support the recommendations of that report, which even goes further than what the member is calling for, because no parent should be forced to go to work right after losing a child. Parents should have the time to deal with it.

Again, why has it taken the Conservatives so long to stand up for the health of workers? Why have they been encouraging them to go to work sick or making a choice of paying their rent?

[Scott Aitchison, Conservative, Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON]

Madam Speaker, I feel like we are not basking in the glow of warmth and love.

The Conservatives have always believed in supporting workers and making sure they do not have to make the choice between putting food on the table and going to work sick.

I am pleased we are here today. It sounds like we are all singing from the hymn book and working together. Maybe we should just continue to do that and move forward.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Madam Speaker, today I heard the word “compassion” come up a lot in my Conservative colleague's speech. He talked about it when he was addressing the issue of leave for parents who have lost a child. If we are talking about compassion, if it is hard for a parent to accept the loss of a child, would a cancer patient not also need better support to recover? Can the member say a few words about that?

The Bloc Québécois intends to raise the issue of extending leave for serious illness from 15 weeks to 50 weeks in memory of Émilie Sansfaçon.

Out of compassion, should a person who is suffering not be entitled to more weeks of leave to recover from their illness?

[Scott Aitchison, Conservative, Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON]

Madam Speaker, my hon. colleague's question is one that is very much worthy of discussion and consideration, which is all the more reason why we need to get committees up and running, so we can discuss these important issues.

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Madam Speaker, what a pleasure it is to hear a pragmatic voice because we really do need more pragmatic voices in the Commons. The hon. member for Parry Sound—Muskoka is an excellent example of one.

I wanted to come back to the question of bereavement leave. The member for Edmonton Riverbend, in the last Parliament, brought forward a bill to increase compassionate care leave. We all came together and increased bereavement leave from five days to 10 days for all family members, including caregivers, so that would include if one were to lose a child.

Can the member please expand on what it is he is now suggesting? Is he suggesting an additional three days beyond the 10 days for parents who lose children, or is he solely talking about people who lose a child in utero?

[Scott Aitchison, Conservative, Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am not exactly certain if I can give much more detail than I have right now. I appreciate the member's kind comments, but they may come to an end since I cannot give him much more of an answer than that.

I will just say it is very important for us to be in committee working on these issues and having these pragmatic discussions about what would be supportive of workers and families.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, hallelujah, we heard here today this hon. member from the Conservatives say the word “union” perhaps more times than he did in all the days of the last session of Parliament combined. I am more than willing, as is the entire NDP caucus, to continue down that line. He brought up specifically a bill that was first introduced by Chris Charlton and then my colleague Scott Duvall on the construction mobility tax credit.

What other possible worker-friendly and union-friendly policies could this member present to us today that we might find some common ground on?

[Scott Aitchison, Conservative, Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON]

Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for the opportunity to list off many more, but I have run out of time. I am happy to sit down with the hon. member and go through it in great detail. Maybe I can convince him to support all of our wonderful proposals to support workers and families.

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON]

Madam Speaker, congratulations on your appointment.

It is amazing. I am not sure what is breaking out in this place. Maybe we truly are basking in the light, or our love and affection is breaking out. I heard the Conservatives say “union”, which I will say again, and I heard the NDP use the religious refrain “hallelujah”, so hallelujah to that.

This is my first opportunity to rise in this wonderful House. I want to thank the wonderful people of Northumberland—Peterborough South for once again putting their faith in me. I was first elected back in 2019, and it has truly been a privilege and the honour of a lifetime. I must say, the second election may have given me even more pride and more reason to celebrate, as people had had the opportunity to judge what the Conservative Party had been doing, and they quadrupled my margin. It is a great testament to the work the official opposition is doing, and I greatly appreciate it.

I would also like to take a moment to thank the wonderful volunteers on my campaign. I know it is the same for many members across this place. We had volunteers who knocked on thousands of doors. They came out, talked to people, supported people and gave their time. It is truly the volunteers of our country, political and otherwise, who are the fabric of our great nation. I thank all my volunteers and volunteers in general.

Finally, I want to thank my wonderful son, James; my wonderful daughter, Margaret; and my very patient wife, Natasha. We all say that our spouses, our partners, must be among the most patient people in the world.

To the people of Northumberland—Peterborough South, I am so happy to be back, and I am ready to fight a bit, even though that is not what is going on here today. We are ready to collaborate like crazy here today.

Let us get into the substance of Bill C-3. It is really two pieces of legislation crammed into one bill. One part amends the Canada Labour Code and the other amends the Criminal Code. I will start by talking about the amendments to the Criminal Code. There are two relatively short changes to the legislation, with two primary goals. One is to allow patients to go to any type of hospital or facility free of intimidation or obstruction. The other is to allow medical professionals to get to their places of work so they can do the great work of savings lives.

I would like to pause there for a second and thank all of our wonderful health care professionals. I am blessed by having many in my direct family. I saw first-hand as they went to work throughout the pandemic. While many of us were able to use Zoom or work from the safety our homes, our frontline workers had to work in the hospitals, health care facilities and long-term care facilities, day after day, facing COVID-19 and the threat of infection, not just for them, but also for their families.

Something that has probably not been reported on as much, but having health care professionals in my family, I have seen it first-hand, is the effect of having to wear that PPE for 12 hours a day, day after day. Many health care professionals work shifts that are over 12 hours, sometimes in not the greatest conditions, all while facing COVID-19. We certainly owe all of our frontline workers and health care workers a great debt of gratitude. For these folks who are going in and literally saving lives, I think it only makes sense that they have free, clear and safe passage to their places of work.

However, when we get into the legislation, I really am looking forward to working in committee. I believe this legislation will pass and make it to committee. It is absolutely critical that we get there and get down to legislation.

I would like to say a bit about this legislation. This is absolutely clear, as we have already heard the members of the New Democratic Party discuss it, and I was here in the House and heard them bring this up over and over again. I do not mean to break the spirit of non-partisan basking in the light, but if we had not gone to the unnecessary election, we would have been sitting in the House. By the time committees start, we will have not sat for eight months.

During that time, we could have done some great things. Instead of that $600 million going toward quadrupling my margin, which I appreciate, although it probably was not worth that $600 million, we could have used it for paid sick leave. We could have used it to build new hospitals. We could have used that money to help provinces fund new schools. I look forward to getting to work and getting the bill to committee.

Although the election was in September, we will not have committees until February. We have to do a better job of managing that. We are here to help. In a non-partisan way, I am reaching my hand out to the minister. Let us get to committee as quickly as we can. We need to have the democratic process working. The House is among the greatest in our country and I celebrate it.

When we talk about our health care workers, there is no doubt we need to give them safe passage. However, that should not only apply to our health care workers, it should be all workers across all sectors and in all areas of our country. No worker should ever fear going to work, fear being intimidated or being impeded in some way. We need to ensure that all workers feel safe at all times. Whether it is a doctor going into surgery to save someone's life or someone working on a critical piece of infrastructure that keeps our energy flowing across the great country, all workers should be safe all the time.

One of the things I look forward to discussing at committee and hearing expert testimony on is the right to peaceful protests. I would respectfully say that people should have the right to express their feelings and to protest. It is our democratic right to be able to express our concerns, our fears and even our anger at times, although we have to be careful. However, there is a fine line. When people feel intimidated, their right to freedom of expression stops. I would agree with the minister on that. I want to hear more on that discussion at committee. We need to weigh both the right to freedom of expression and the right to peaceful protest. However, that right ends should any violence or threat of violence be used, which has no place in Canada, regardless of one's place of work.

I will talk a bit about paid sick leave. Times are getting so much tougher for Canadian workers across our great land. We have a 4.7% inflation rate. The cost of nearly everything is going up, and 53% of Canadians are within $200 of insolvency. Many are giving up the dream of home ownership because of the price of everything. We need to get back to making our country more affordable. Certainly, people should not have to put their lives at risk to feed their families. We need to make life easier and more affordable, as well as ensure they are safe.

I would also like to hear a discussion at committee on how we can ensure that Canadian businesses remain competitive at all times. Of course, it is Canadian businesses and entrepreneurs that drive many of Canada's great employment opportunities. Quite frankly, we need more union jobs in the country. We can do that by ensuring Canadian businesses remain competitive and innovative, with the help of the government, while maintaining the safety of our workers.

The bill is definitely a bit disjointed as it contains two very separate pieces of legislation, the protection of our health professionals and the addition of sick leave, but it gives me an opportunity to talk about how Canada can connect on everything. We need to collaborate and work together.

I have very much enjoyed basking in the sunlight today, which is the fourth time I have brought that up. I firmly believe that whether people are working on the oil rigs of Alberta, in the fields in Northumberland—Peterborough South or as fishers in the Bay of Fundy, all work is good work. We should collaborate on opportunities, work together for the collective good and celebrate our achievements together.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the comment of my hon. colleague about working together.

My concern in part of the bill is the issue of securing safe places for our medical front-line workers. This past week in my region, we lost a wonderful small-town doctor, who gave up her practice after years because of online harassment from anti-vaxxers. This is a huge loss for us. We had young mothers who were going to vaccine clinics in North Bay being shouted at and called murderers. These things have never happened in the north before, but they were being targeted.

What does my hon. colleague think about the need to have legislation in place to protect front-line workers, to protect families and teachers and those who do the work of vaccinating our children?

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am sorry to hear the news about the doctor who gave up her practice.

In general, we need a tone of collaboration and we need to extend to people something that seems to be getting more and more foreign to our culture, which is grace. We need to have more kindness, we need to come together and collaborate, not just in politics but otherwise. We can disagree without being disagreeable.

[Julie Dabrusin, Liberal, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Madam Speaker, it was great to hear from the member opposite about the need to protect all workers, but specifically our health care workers and front-line workers in the health field.

Beyond legislation, what can we do to better protect those health care workers? I hear about it all the time from people working in my community in the health care field that they feel very threatened by some of the anti-vaccine rhetoric. How can we work not only within his party but also within our communities to ensure we create a safer environment that goes beyond simply the laws, and disagreeing without being disagreeable?

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON]

Madam Speaker, there is nothing wrong with going into the battlefield of ideas and bringing the best ideas, and even having heated arguments. However, that is no reason for us to ever disrespect each other, never a reason to show that we do not love one another.

We live in the greatest country together. We will work at this together and we will continue to be the greatest country in the world, because we have the best people in the world.

[Yves Perron, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Madam Speaker, I listened carefully to my colleague's speech and I more or less agree with what he said about committee work, for example. This morning is a bit unusual compared to most days in the House, in that everyone seems to be happy to work together. It is nice, and everything feels rosy this morning. I am very happy and this should be how it always is. I agree with my colleague that this is what happens in committees.

However, it was kind of alarming to hear him say that committees would not be sitting before February. I agree that this does not make sense. When does he think the committees should start up? What is the Conservatives' position on this? Does he think that our Liberal friends could get to work more quickly? Everyone is nice, good and kind, but it is unfortunate that bills are not advancing right now and nothing is going on.