Evidence of meeting #47 for Canadian Heritage in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was veterans.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
John Brassard Conservative Barrie—Innisfil, ON
Is there anything from an ancillary standpoint that you've thought of since you introduced this bill? You've already spoken about proposed subsections 3(2) and (3). I guess they would be redundant, considering the argument you put forward before, and that's why you would look for them to be deleted.
From an ancillary impact standpoint, Mr. Fraser, have you thought of anything that would be affected by the passing of this bill?
Liberal
Colin Fraser Liberal West Nova, NS
I don't think there's anything of great substance, other than ensuring clarity and consistency in the law that in the federal statute we will say that the same language should be used for Remembrance Day as we use for Canada Day and Victoria Day, and Parliament affirming this important day by saying that we recognize that there's an inconsistency in the language, so we're shining a light on it and saying that Remembrance Day is important. I think any chance we get to raise the profile of Remembrance Day, it's the right thing for Parliament to do.
Substantively, though, are there ancillary or other problems that could create unforeseen consequences? I don't know of any.
Conservative
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Larry Maguire
Thank you very much, Mr. Brassard.
I'll move to Mr. Nantel, please, for seven minutes.
NDP
NDP
Pierre Nantel NDP Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC
Great.
First, thank you for paying so much attention to Remembrance Day. Actually, I don't think we can talk about it enough.
Last year, I had the opportunity to visit the Beaumont-Hamel site. Now I can tell you that I don't see July 1 the same way anymore. I observe the mourning from morning until noon, ideally by wearing forget-me-nots. It is too easy to forget events like this, especially when there is little video archive.
In this regard, it was probably a little more difficult to document the First World War than the Second. Any action that will allow us to realize the chance we have, as a society, and the sacrifices that have been made for us to live here is valid. It is true that the gist of your idea has been proposed many times.
We always expect the Legion to agree, and that proposals like these will be received unanimously, much like chicken soup. Yet, how do you explain that we have been circling this for almost 10 years? Do you think that it can be explained by the disagreement on how to honour our veterans, and the split between veterans, and between the Legion and the associations?
What do you think? Honestly, I think that should naturally be a consensus and that we should have taken these steps ages ago.
Liberal
Colin Fraser Liberal West Nova, NS
Thank you for the question.
I don't know exactly why the Legion doesn't agree. I know that many Legion members are in favour of amending the act through my bill. In my opinion, some people think it institutes a national holiday, which is unfortunate, since that isn't the case. Honestly, it's a much more modest bill. I believe that some people feel that the time isn't appropriate and that students should stay in school. I understand it, although I disagree.
Otherwise, I don't question the motives people may have to oppose my bill, but I think it's very important to have accurate information.
NDP
Pierre Nantel NDP Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC
Absolutely.
It is to be hoped that the proponents of both positions will listen to the deliberations of this meeting and hear your arguments, so that Mr. White will respond to what you are talking about, and we will get to the end of this debate.
There is the aspect of managing work schedules. I don't know anything about it, so I'm asking the question. If it is a federal bill that creates a statutory holiday, will it affect all federally chartered companies like banks, for example?
Liberal
Colin Fraser Liberal West Nova, NS
No. I have already been advised that this will not change anything for companies and entities that are subject to federal regulation. The bill only seeks to ensure consistency in the terms. It doesn't change anything for employees and employers.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Larry Maguire
Thank you, Mr. Nantel.
We will move now to Mr. Breton, please.
Liberal
Pierre Breton Liberal Shefford, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Fraser, thank you for being with us today to speak to your bill.
On Sunday morning, I had lunch with a veteran of the last war. He talked to me about all the sacrifices he had to make in those years. This is always extremely moving, and it makes us think further about what more we can do for our veterans. There should probably be an alternative to study.
I'll continue along the same lines as Mr. Nantel, who had started to talk about the financial and legal impacts of this bill. Some good questions have already been asked, and I don't want to repeat them. I'll be very pragmatic, and you can be as well.
In its current form, Remembrance Day has a financial impact on the working conditions of federally regulated employees. Is that correct?
Liberal
Colin Fraser Liberal West Nova, NS
Yes. This holiday is already set out in the working conditions of employees subject to federal regulations.
Liberal
Pierre Breton Liberal Shefford, QC
Your bill is intended to make this holiday, which is already a public holiday, a legal holiday. As I understand it, it would also apply to employees who are subject to federal regulations. Is that correct?
Liberal
Colin Fraser Liberal West Nova, NS
It is only an amendment to the Holidays Act. The bill only amends the federal legislation.
Please allow me to switch to English.
It's just to make sure I'm being perfectly clear.
It changes the statute that governs holidays at the federal level, which is the Holidays Act, and it adds the word “legal”.
There is some question about whether that has any actual legal impact, because it doesn't change anything substantively for any employees at the federal level. In response to Mr. Nantel's question, it has nothing to do with changing the contract that somebody would have, for example, as an employee at a bank. It doesn't have any substantive change. All it's doing is confirming, for example, the contracts that are already in place through collective agreements with federal employees. It would have no substantive change with regard to that. It's a gesture that some could call symbolic, but I see it as actually raising the profile and putting it in the same consistent wording as Canada Day.
Liberal
Pierre Breton Liberal Shefford, QC
Basically, your bill has no additional impact on businesses or public bodies that aren't subject to federal regulation.
Liberal
Colin Fraser Liberal West Nova, NS
Exactly.
As far as I am aware, there is absolutely no impact whatsoever to any employer, any private contract, or any public contract. There is no substantive difference.
Liberal
Pierre Breton Liberal Shefford, QC
Okay.
Your bill aims to institute a legal holiday, which is very symbolic. I say that with all due respect to your bill.
Liberal
Colin Fraser Liberal West Nova, NS
That would be a fair assessment.
I see it a little differently. I believe that while it doesn't necessarily change the behaviour of individuals and employers or employee relationships, it does say that we are going to make the language consistent with respect to Remembrance Day, that we are going to at least symbolically elevate the status of it in federal law to ensure that, when it comes to language, it is treated the same as Canada Day and Victoria Day. More important, it affirms Parliament's commitment to ensure that this day is seen as just as important as other days in federal statutes.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Larry Maguire
We'll move right along. Thank you very much.
We'll turn it over to Mr. Waugh for five minutes.