Evidence of meeting #128 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was workplace.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Executive Director, Equal Voice
Yes. I think everyone who's serving on the Hill deserves to feel safe in their workplace.
Conservative
Michelle Rempel Conservative Calgary Nose Hill, AB
Right now, if a candidate for federal office has to make expenditures during the writ period for security, like campaign office security systems, panic buttons or hired security guards, these expenditures must be included in the spending cap for a campaign, which can disproportionately affect women. Would you recommend that Elections Canada undertake a review to have certain types of eligible security expenses fall outside of the election spending cap?
Conservative
Michelle Rempel Conservative Calgary Nose Hill, AB
Thank you.
The other thing I'll mention is that there have been instances of political parties knowing about candidates who have been under investigation for things like sexual harassment or criminal harassment and still allowing them to run. They then ended up sitting in the legislature.
Would you recommend that political parties review their candidate selection processes to ensure that people who are under sexual harassment investigations would not be greenlit to run for their party?
Executive Director, Equal Voice
I believe it would send a very clear signal to Canadians that folks under investigation for these allegations need to be properly vetted.
Conservative
Michelle Rempel Conservative Calgary Nose Hill, AB
Thank you, Chair.
The other component that I think we'll be faced with in this committee in making recommendations is how to deal with MP-to-MP harassment. However, I do feel that part of the problem.... Other colleagues have talked about enacting workplace measures to ensure that these types of harassment situations are taken seriously. They're inevitably politicized in Parliament.
Would you recommend that any measures to deal with MP-to-MP conflict are handled by completely neutral arbiters, such as law enforcement or other officials outside of the party system, or even the parliamentary system, as it is under the role of the Speaker? The current Speaker has been accused of partisanship. Would you say or recommend that it is important to have a neutral arbiter to eliminate politicization in workplace harassment issues in Parliament?
Executive Director, Equal Voice
One of the recommendations from our review of the provincial and territorial legislatures as a best practice is an independent review place for that and a stream of—
Conservative
Michelle Rempel Conservative Calgary Nose Hill, AB
I would suggest that it's not the Speaker's office or the whip's office. Would you concur with that assessment?
Conservative
Michelle Rempel Conservative Calgary Nose Hill, AB
I'll just be blunt. I would feel completely like there's no way I would report something to the Speaker, so where would I go?
What I'm trying to say is this: Would Equal Voice suggest that it would benefit everybody if there were a truly neutral arbiter of any sort of dispute?
Executive Director, Equal Voice
I'm going to confess that the scope of this particular piece of research didn't look at the federal context and where it should sit.
Conservative
Michelle Rempel Conservative Calgary Nose Hill, AB
I'll go to Ms. Mendoza.
Would you suggest a neutral arbiter?
Liberal
Liberal
Liberal
Sherry Romanado Liberal Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Through you, I'd like to thank the witnesses for being here today.
As my colleague Ms. Rempel Garner said, today is the 10th anniversary of the attack on Parliament Hill. For those who were there that day, it's a pretty tough day.
With that, the reason we brought forward this study is that currently there are two policies that deal with harassment of parliamentarians. One is the sexual harassment policy and the other one is the harassment policy.
Currently, the sexual harassment policy does cover sexual harassment between two members of Parliament, but the harassment policy does not. Currently, the harassment policy does cover harassment between an employee and a member of Parliament or between employees, but it does not protect MPs from MP-to-MP harassment. We're looking at that because obviously there is an impact.
Currently, there is no mechanism for a member of Parliament who is going through psychological harassment—I assume physical harassment would come under the Criminal Code—to get some relief when going through such a difficult moment.
The nature of the job that we do is very adversarial. We're not talking about debate in the House; what we're talking about is someone who is being bullied, isolated, intimidated and so on and so forth.
In that regard, I'd like to ask Equal Voice if you have done any research in terms of that. You mentioned a little bit about recruitment for people considering this line of work. Have you looked into any research that would identify this as an impediment for people considering this role?
Executive Director, Equal Voice
We have not done that specifically.
One thing that came out loud and clear in this review was that many harassment policies across the country are not necessarily delivered in plain language that is easy to digest. Of course, going from jurisdiction to jurisdiction means that each context is going to have its own realities, and of course where you sit within that legislature matters immensely.
Plain, level information and clear and plain language and accessibility around the delivery of these harassment policies are critical for people to feel trust in them so that they can come forward and come forward safely.
When we looked at Newfoundland's workplace harassment policy, we found it to be very comprehensive. There are a lot of very strong practices there that are worth taking a look at.
Liberal
Sherry Romanado Liberal Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC
We also heard from colleagues that the reason some colleagues are deciding not to re-offer.... We've seen this quite a lot in Quebec with female politicians who've decided to not run again, especially at the municipal level. We're losing great colleagues and great parliamentarians across this country due to harassment and intimidation, especially in the online world. We're seeing more and more the politics of agitation, as we call it.
What would you recommend? This is something that's sort of outside the scope of what we can control, but what would you recommend in that regard?
Quebec did pass legislation to increase fines for those who harass elected officials. Do you have any recommendations for us?
Executive Director, Equal Voice
I think in the space around digital, there's work to be done to work with the social media providers to make sure that they're getting out in front of things sooner. In terms of volume, there's the role of bots in creating the quantity of the harassment that's happening. These are all dimensions where I think we can find some mechanisms.
In addition to this, I think what you're missing is the positive feedback loops: “Thank you for the service that you do every day, every single one of you.” You need to hear from many of us who believe strongly that you should be able to come to work safely and be protected in your digital space. That's really critical.
I think part of this is a news story that's a good news story about the positive work that's coming out of legislatures and governments across this country.
Liberal
Sherry Romanado Liberal Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC
At the end of the last...I won't say the “session”, as we're still in the same session. At the end of June, some parliamentarians around this table decided to bring forward a parliamentary pledge. Ms. Mathyssen is spearheading that initiative with a senator colleague. It's for parliamentarians from all parties, in both the House and the Senate, to make a pledge. That comes out of Halton, I believe. It's a commitment to call it out and to stand shoulder to shoulder when they witness somebody going through an episode of harassment, or to call out the bad behaviour if you're a bystander.
We're all very busy, but we're hopeful that with that movement, more and more people will recognize when someone's in the middle of a situation and step forward to say this is not acceptable behaviour, in the absence of a policy change.
Would you have any other recommendations for us as well in that regard?
I'll ask Ms. Mendoza.
Executive Director, WomanACT
Yes, I will definitely elaborate on that.
Absolutely, and that's why we talk about bystander intervention. Research tells us that it's not that people don't care; it's that they often don't know what to do or how to respond. Having proper mechanisms that are clearly available to people is very important. It's crucial, and so is the training to be able to respond. First it's to identify it and to respond to it and know that you're doing the right thing.
I always compare it to CPR training. We get trained every year, just like you have your training and your policy, and you're supposed to repeat it every year. The training has to be really on what to do when you see it.
Absolutely, I will definitely second that.
To your question earlier, I believe there should be a mechanism. I believe there should be a mechanism so that everybody feels safe but also so that what people can do when they are experiencing harassment is clear.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ben Carr
Thank you, Ms. Romanado.
Ms. Gaudreau, you have the floor for six minutes.
Bloc
Marie-Hélène Gaudreau Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
First, I'd like to sincerely thank the witnesses for being with us and presenting their reports and statistics. I'd be grateful if they would send us the documents they've talked about. We could talk about this for hours.
Ladies, as my colleague mentioned earlier, we're talking about modernizing the policy for preventing harassment between MPs. I don't know if you've ever compared Question Period in the House of Commons, which can be seen in person or on television, to those that exist elsewhere. Of course, I'm very familiar with the Quebec National Assembly. It's respectful. Members listen to what others have to say. There's no shouting. There's no fuss. In fact, it's healthy.
First, I'd like to know what you think of the climate in the House of Commons. I'd call it a lot of nonsense. I'd like to hear your comments on that. What do you think of the way we behave?
Executive Director, Equal Voice
I want to note that Prince Edward Island has anti-heckling legislation in place in their legislature. It does not mean that the tone of parliamentary approach is what one might desire. I have spent a bit of time in the north and I have seen how consensus governments comport themselves, and it's a different perspective.
I also want to note, though, that much of the very important work that happens at the House of Commons happens in committees, and there is great space there for great collaboration and really strong recommendations, but because the media spotlight isn't on this work, we are losing out on the storyline of really thoughtful legislative expertise.
Yes, it might be helpful to have a different approach in question period, but we also know that it's sometimes a bit of theatre.