Evidence of meeting #7 for Foreign Affairs and International Development in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was president.
A recording is available from Parliament.
President, Union of Employees of Rights & Democracy, Public Service Alliance of Canada
Yes, we do.
Conservative
Peter Goldring Conservative Edmonton East, AB
I have to agree with my colleague that this certainly is micromanaging from a parliamentary point of view here, but I will ask the questions.
In the mandate of the organization, Rights and Democracy itself, does it not have provisos in there for how to proceed with certain events? In other words, in its mandate, in its rules of engagement you could say, have all of those procedures been followed in accordance with what the understandings are?
President, Union of Employees of Rights & Democracy, Public Service Alliance of Canada
Is the question for me?
Conservative
Vice-President, Union of Employees of Rights & Democracy, Public Service Alliance of Canada
As Maxime said, we have a committee that is formed by two members of management and two members of the trade union. That's where we bring all issues of discrimination or whatever conflict we have and we discuss it together first. This is a mechanism in order to try to solve any conflict at the local level instead of going for a grievance. Instead of filing a grievance, we try to solve it ourselves. But since Marie-France Cloutier was suspended, she was never replaced, so there is no committee. There is no space now for us to meet the management and discuss. There is no representative of the management. We asked for a meeting with Monsieur Gauthier several times.
President, Union of Employees of Rights & Democracy, Public Service Alliance of Canada
I just want to add that at the meeting we had with Mr. Gauthier, we had many issues that we wanted to discuss with him. It's only because we insisted many times during the meeting that we were able to address some of them, because he didn't want to.
Conservative
As an Individual
Just to clarify, Mr. Goldring, the collective agreement has a lot of provisions to solve conflict between management and employees. The collective agreement does not address conflict between board members and employees or board members and management, so we're talking about two very different types of conflict. The collective agreement is not going to have anything that deals with the situation.
Conservative
Peter Goldring Conservative Edmonton East, AB
Okay.
I think you had mentioned that this issue is in the courts, or it's with the lawyers. Has action been started? If action has been started, are we not in a bit of a conflict here by discussing this issue if it's before the courts?
As an Individual
I do not know formally if the action has begun. We have talked to our lawyer, Mr. Julius Grey, who is in the room, but we are not commenting whatsoever on anything that has to do with the legal action at all.
Conservative
Peter Goldring Conservative Edmonton East, AB
Okay. Now, are all three of you having impending action with the courts? You mentioned yourself, Madame Cloutier—
Conservative
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Dean Allison
Thank you, Mr. Goldring.
That's all the time we have. We're going to finish up with Madame Deschamps.
Bloc
Johanne Deschamps Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC
I'm going to start with a really very brief question. I would like to know who appointed Mr. Braun and Mr. Gauthier?
As an Individual
The members of the board are appointed by governor in council on recommendation of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, following consultation with the chair of the board and all its members.
As an Individual
Yes, and that's also the case for the president of the centre. So 10 of the board members and the president of the centre are appointed by governor in council.
Bloc
Johanne Deschamps Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC
That reassures me somewhat because I had the impression we weren't allowed to discuss that here, but this is the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development. I believe it is also our duty to get answers to all your questions, as Mr. Longangué clearly stated in his address.
A lot of questions also remain unanswered for us. You know we were deeply saddened by the death of Mr. Beauregard. Throughout the entire crisis, we were kept somewhat at a distance from Parliament. We were somewhat excluded for a brief period of time, and these incidents followed quite soon thereafter. In our minds, it was really necessary and imperative to have you here at this table to inform us and give us answers to our questions. We also sense the context in which you currently find yourself, a context of insecurity and discomfort, because we get the impression you have been stripped of your freedom of speech.
Mr. Vallerand, in your testimony and in the minutes you submitted to us concerning the recent incidents, I feel somewhat as though a virus entered your organization and that someone wants to blow it up. You are on the inside. You're going through this crisis. What will result from this? Does someone absolutely want to alter the nature of your organization's mission or to abolish it completely?
As an Individual
It's a budget that is annual and that currently relies on two sources of funding. We've previously spoken before this committee. Funding from CIDA is a particular cause for concern each year. Ms. Cloutier came here to explain that there was some uncertainty. It is clear that the controversy is gradually fading, and Mr. Latulippe's appointment will obviously calm things down. That's what we hope, and that's what everyone is expecting, but Rights and Democracy will have to go through another budget and will have to go through a next round of programming. It's then that the die will be cast. The test of a new president doesn't come in the first two weeks. It's when decisions have to be announced. It is clear that Mr. Latulippe will also have to experience the tense relationship that existed between Mr. Beauregard, Mr. Braun and Mr. Gauthier, in his own way, of course, but for the moment that situation remains the same.
As an Individual
Ms. Deschamps, allow me to answer you in English because I think the subtle meaning of the words is important.
I remember very clearly when we had the meeting with the entire staff, after we returned from the board meeting in Toronto. What emerged was a letter that we collectively signed. Marie-France and I chaired that meeting. I remember very clearly we told the staff there were two things we didn't want to happen. We didn't want people to lose their jobs and we didn't want the institution to close. Whatever action we took we had to make sure the institution stayed open and employees did not lose their jobs. Obviously, we put our jobs on the line by putting our signatures on that letter. We had the responsibility of telling the employees to please be aware of the consequences of signing this letter, so we did that. That was told to all the employees and repeated on several occasions.
Vice-President, Union of Employees of Rights & Democracy, Public Service Alliance of Canada
I would like to add to what Mr. Panossian said. I think that, for most of us, losing our jobs is not the most important thing. For us, what is at stake is the mandate of this institution. For a number of individuals, it would be so easy to leave because it's not easy to go through this day after day. However, we're not doing it because we don't know who will replace us or what will become of this institution.
The important thing is not our jobs, but rather our partners and all the programming that has been built up. What will happen to that? So the job is secondary. It's really more for those two reasons that we are still working for Rights and Democracy. We're still doing everything we can, in a professional manner, to do our job.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Dean Allison
Thank you.
Mr. Dewar, just one quick question and then we'll wrap it up.
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
Mr. Panossian, there is reference here to Mr. Braun in the documents we were given being outraged that the institute had embarrassed Minister Cannon around the Shia family law issue. That issue had been out in reports to us as a committee, etc.
How did he display his outrage and his anger around that?
As an Individual
I was directly implicated in that because Mr. Beauregard was in Kabul and I was here. They knew all along that it was my quote that was juxtaposed with the minister's quote on the Embassy front page. The interview I gave was not about the minister, was not about CIDA. It was about the general situation and knowledge of this law in Kabul. Immediately after it was published I was in touch with the head of the Afghanistan task force. That morning we had a discussion and explained the situation. The CIDA communications team and our communications team worked together to undo the damage that was done, because I was quoted out of context. When Mr. Braun found out, I believe he e-mailed Rémy. From what I remember, it was a long section in Mr. Beauregard's evaluation. When we read Mr. Beauregard's evaluation, I found out that he was--