Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I want to first thank my colleagues from across this committee for ensuring that we have a serious and I think well-questioned discussion about the seriousness of this. It's just so troubling. In my opinion, this is truly one of the greatest failures of our present time in this country—that we let folks die. We take this position on the international stage as if we want to protect folks, and then we send back bodies. That's unacceptable. I don't want to see this committee face this issue again. This report, this work, I encourage the ministry to take seriously.
I want to read a few facts that are concerning, in a vein similar to the one followed by my colleague Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné. They're related to the red flags that I think the ministry should certainly have been aware of.
These come from exhibit 13.6, and are as follows:
In a 2020 inspection, quarantine accommodations for 26 temporary foreign workers were being assessed. The only evidence collected to demonstrate that these 26 workers could physically distance as required was 2 photos of a table and photos of 2 bedrooms that showed the sleeping arrangements for only a small number of workers.
This was supposed to be on behalf of 26.
No follow-up occurred, and the employer was found compliant.
Why?
In a 2020 inspection, quarantine accommodations for 3 temporary foreign workers were being assessed. The photos obtained from the employer clearly demonstrated that the distance between workers’ beds in their shared bedroom was far less than the required 2 metres. No follow‑up occurred, and the employer was found compliant.
In a 2021 inspection that had been inactive for more than 2 months at the time of our review, quarantine accommodations for 10 workers were being assessed. Only 1 photo of 1 bedroom was obtained from the employer. Information on the number of accommodations being used to quarantine these workers and how these accommodations allowed for required physical distancing was not collected.
Why are these employers getting compliancy approvals when it's very clear...especially after my colleague Valerie Bradford's comments related to these conditions and the issues related to photos? Why were they found compliant?