Procedure and House Affairs Committee on March 10th, 2016

[Maryam Monsef, Liberal, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

Thank you for your question. The tone is an important measure of success on its own.

Before I go into this in any further detail, it's important to recognize that we, as the lower chamber, have certain limits we work within when it comes to our relationship within the Senate. The Senate's own rules, the way they operate within their committees, their own conduct, and their own activities are up to them. They are not for us to dictate.

Where we are able to make a difference is within an appointments process that puts merit ahead of patronage and that opens it up to all Canadians, so that people who may have never been considered for these positions can begin to be considered and can reflect Canada's diversity in the process.

Also, we believe that reducing partisanship and encouraging independence will mean that senators will feel more confident and comfortable to serve the best interests of Canadians, as opposed to any political party. I think that's a huge win for Canadian democracy.

[Anita Vandenbeld, Liberal, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

I'd like to pick up on your comments about the diversity because we all know that public policy benefits when there are more voices at the table with different life experiences and with different backgrounds. This is a process in which, as you mentioned in the criteria, we'll be able to bring in people who have different kinds of experiences that they bring to the table and different perspectives. Is that something you also see improving the debate in the Senate?

[Maryam Monsef, Liberal, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

I firmly believe that when you bring people from different walks of life around a table to make decisions on behalf of Canadians from all walks of life then the tone, the nature of the debate, the amount of deliberation, and the different perspectives that may not have been included in the past will all be present, and the end result will be better outcomes for Canadians in terms of policies and programs we implement.

I'm proud to be part of the government that recognizes that. I am proud to serve a Prime Minister who appreciates that. He not only has a commitment to all Canadians that will incorporate gender, linguistic, ethnic, and cultural diversity in his appointments to cabinet, but he demonstrates that with a gender-balanced cabinet.

One of the criteria we've asked the advisory board to be especially mindful of, and something the Prime Minister will give serious attention to when making his recommendations to the Governor General, is just that. We know that when you add women and when you bring people from different cultural groups into conversations we have in this House, and in the other House, it can only lead to better outcomes for Canadians. That's one way we can lead the world in terms of how a strong democracy can function. I think that's our responsibility as Canadians as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

I will now go to Mr. Schmale for a five-minute round.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

Thank you very much, Minister. It's great to see you again. For those who don't know, we share a geographical boundary and we share Peterborough County. I look forward to continuing to work on the various issues together on that, and it's great to see you in this capacity.

[Maryam Monsef, Liberal, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

Thank you, sir.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

It's very nice to see you.

Something you said piqued my interest. You had mentioned about the process for some people possibly being appointed to the Senate, but before that for the current system of being elected, where you run for nominations and then you go to the general election, you said some people might be a little disheartened by going through that whole process of meeting the people who get to elect them and appoint them to a legislative body.

I thought that was interesting because as we know in the Senate—as Mr. Christopherson and Mr. Reid pointed out many times—there are fewer of them and they have more power than the House of Commons.

I see a quote here from Emmett Macfarlane, who was the original designer of this process you're using, who said, “Serving in the Senate should be the result of answering a call, not making a call”.

I put two and two together. Why is it easier for them to go through this process of just putting a letter to the Prime Minister asking for an appointment, rather than knocking on the doors, listening to people, and meeting the constituents you are hoping to represent?

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Hear, hear!

[Maryam Monsef, Liberal, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

Firstly, I'd like to thank the honourable member for his leadership around raising awareness for ALS. The work you're doing with our colleague Greg Fergus is admirable and I thank you for that. I look forward to serving the people of Peterborough—Kawartha with you.

No Canadian will be able to write a letter to the Prime Minister and be appointed to the Senate. That's actually not how this process works out. Canadians will be able to apply, and there will be an advisory board—independent, at arm's length—that will assess the qualifications of these individuals and make non-binding recommendations to the Prime Minister.

It's not just that people are going to write a letter to the Prime Minister and hope he'll say yes. That may have been the old way, but it's certainly not the way we're moving forward.

I believe that being able to participate in an election, especially as a candidate, is a great privilege, and I have a lot of respect for the process itself; but this process is meant to be inclusive, and it's meant to work within the constitutional framework. In that spirit of inclusion, let's take a moment to reflect. I know many of us have not had a chance to do that, because we have all hit the ground running since October 19.

Let's think about how expensive an election campaign is. Let's think about what a privilege it is for us, as able-bodied individuals, to be able to go out and to knock on doors and to walk door-to-door and to be standing on our feet at various events. Let's take a moment to reflect on what a great privilege that is, and let's recognize that not everyone has the means to participate in what can be an expensive election campaign, and let's recognize that not everyone has the physical capacity to go out and to knock on doors.

That does not mean that individuals who cannot do either of those things are not connected to their communities, are not serving the best interests of their regions. What this process is doing is opening it up and creating a level playing field within the constitutional framework that will allow all Canadians from all backgrounds, from various socio-economic statuses, and with various disabilities, exceptionalities, and abilities to put their names forward to the Senate for consideration. I think that is something we can all be tremendously proud of.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

I would say that everyone has the same opportunity with selling memberships. That doesn't cost anything and that is part of the process.

What I've noticed here also is that we've talked about a lot of transparency and openness, which is great. You changed the process, but when I look at this I see that all you did was basically put in another level of the decision-making process. The names being submitted to this advisory panel are being kept in secret, and the names selected to go to the Prime Minister are being chosen in secret.

Rather than just the people in the Prime Minister's Office making that decision or finding the names, you've given everyone the ability to apply, which is a good thing. However, we don't know who has applied, what the names are, or who is being considered. If the Prime Minister selected this person, then who are the others who didn't get selected, and why?

In my opinion, that's just another level and it's done behind the curtain. I think someone says it isn't, but I don't see anything more than that you get to apply. What is different? What is being done in front of the curtain?

[Maryam Monsef, Liberal, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

What is being done is this. In the past there would not have been a conversation like this by this committee about the Senate appointments process, because frankly, in the past there was not a process that was open in any way to the public. With the greatest of respect, this is more change and more of an improvement than any other process that has existed before in the past around appointments to the Senate.

I challenge you to reflect on where the process was when the former government appointed nearly 60 senators. This is that difference.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

Respectfully, Madam Minister, I disagree. We had an election in Alberta.

[Maryam Monsef, Liberal, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

The difference here is that the criteria that individuals are being assessed against are based on merit and not political patronage.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

I would also argue that there are a number of senators with very extensive resumés.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Thank you, Mr. Schmale. We're over our time.

Thank you very much, Minister, for coming. I'm sure we'll have future conversations.

[Maryam Monsef, Liberal, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

I would, if I could.

Thank you very much. Thanks for your good work.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

We'll suspend for a few minutes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

This is a very productive working committee. We'd like to get lots done, so I'm calling us back so we don't socialize too much.

We have two really important things we have to do on our family-friendly report. One is the caucus reports and the other is the witnesses. We can decide later whether we go in camera for the witnesses, which we normally do. However, I suggest we do the caucus reports first because the NDP whip is here to present the NDP caucus report, and I think she'd prefer to do that so she can carry on with her other duties.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

Is that in public or in camera?

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

She has no problem with being in public.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

Okay, fine.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Does anyone have any problem with being in public for the caucus report?

[Some hon. members]

No.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

In deference to the whips, I know you're very busy. Maybe if it's okay with the committee we could let you go first.

[Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet, NDP, Hochelaga, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I am very grateful.

I will read my report in French.

We in the NDP decided to work on several fronts simultaneously to improve work-life balance. My team and I, as whip, have worked to establish certain things that would improve the lives of MPs. We have already achieved some things, and others are under way. Therefore, I will talk about what we have done and what is still to come.

I, along with Theresa Kavanagh, met with the Speaker of the House and Mr. Marc Bosc. We had several requests to make of them and received a really good response from them. The Speaker of the House has been very co-operative, and I am very happy. They agreed to most requests.

We have taken a number of steps and more are under way. One of these efforts relates to parking and reserved areas for pregnant women and young families. Three spaces have already been reserved: one at the back of the Centre Block, one in the Confederation Building and one in the Justice Building. They have already been identified with proper signage. That is one of the things we have accomplished.

There are also issues with day care. For example, day care does not accept babies under 18 months. Also, there is a problem when parents want to leave their children only part of the time. This problem has no easy solution, but in the meantime, the HR people said they would help young parents find a nanny for their babies. There is help on that front too.

We also made an important request, specifically for a room dedicated to parents of young children. We are very pleased to have received a positive response in this regard, and a room has been reserved on the 6th floor of the Centre Block. The room is not finished yet, but it will be. There will be a playpen or a crib where children can sleep, a changing table, a refrigerator, a microwave and a high chair. The room will also have a workspace for parents during the debates in the House.

Although these initiatives were undertaken by the NDP, all this is for the parents from all parties. Obviously, if there are six parents who want to share a room, it may be necessary to go back to the Speaker of the House to see whether it would be possible to get more space, but for now, this room will be very useful.

We also discussed how to address the same needs in the West Block. At some point, we will leave the Centre Block and the House will sit in the West Block. Keep in mind that we should have the same amenities in the West Block while Parliament is sitting. When we return to the Centre Block, we will take the time to plan all of this on a better scale, as we also mentioned to the Speaker and to Mr. Bosc.

We discussed many other things, for example, the availability of healthy snacks after cafeterias in other buildings close. At the Confederation Building and the Justice Building, there are vending machines where you can buy chips or that kind of snack, but that is not the best food for a breastfeeding mother or a pregnant woman. We should therefore ensure that healthy food is available. That will be good for everyone, not just for parents.

We also asked for high chairs for young babies. Those in the parliamentary restaurant, for example, are not suitable for a 6-month baby, who may fall down. Therefore we need high chairs that are better suited to small babies.

We also noted that at the Confederation Building, on the side where the buses arrive, the access provided for people with disabilities or those pushing a stroller is closed after 8 p.m. As a result, parents with strollers or people in wheelchairs who come through that side do not have the access they need to enter the building. They would have to go through the front, which has only stairs, so that does not work. There is no intercom, either. We told the Speaker about this.

There should also be a crosswalk at the Confederation Building. We have a reserved space, but there is no crosswalk at the side door that I just mentioned. There are many cars going by at that location and that is dangerous.

Lastly, we confirmed with the Speaker of the House that the votes that take place right after question period are very popular with young families because that compresses the working hours. Parents do not have to leave and then return to work later in the evening.

That completes my report. As you can see, these are practical things to ensure the well-being of parents and children on a daily basis. I am delighted that this worked out so well and that we had such a positive response from the Speaker of the House.