House of Commons Hansard #197 of the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was syria.

Topics

Motions in amendmentEnhancing Royal Canadian Mounted Police Accountability ActGovernment Orders

5:10 p.m.

NDP

Sylvain Chicoine NDP Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC

Mr. Speaker, before addressing Bill C-42, now before us, I would like to wish a happy holiday to all hon. members, to our support staff, including the pages, clerks and officers of the House, to our listeners and to you, Mr. Speaker. This is probably my last speech in the House in 2012.

In my previous speech on Bill C-42, I said I was pleased with the introduction of this legislation in the House. The issue of harassment is a public and urgent concern for Canadians. We put a lot of pressure on the Department of Public Safety to make the issue of sexual harassment in the RCMP a priority. That is why we supported this bill at second reading, in the hope of improving it and proposing amendments in committee to make it acceptable and efficient, so as to adequately tackle the issue of sexual harassment.

The first version of the bill did not deal directly with this systemic problem, which is deeply rooted in RCMP corporate culture. The wording of the bill introduced at first reading would not have changed the existing climate within the RCMP.

When the bill was drafted, the Minister of Public Safety did not seem to take into consideration the various recommendations of the Task Force on Governance and Cultural Change in the RCMP. As I mentioned, we still supported the bill at second reading to properly study it and improve it in committee. Unfortunately, the study in committee did not go very well. I am really disappointed by the government's lack of co-operation on this issue.

The Conservatives did not really want to co-operate with us to ensure a balanced representation of the various views and positions. The government presented 12 witnesses to the committee, while we could only have seven. Moreover, in my opinion, the Conservatives' witnesses were not completely independent. All but one of the witnesses, who represented the government or the RCMP, presented the government's position without any real nuances. We feel the witnesses selected by the Conservatives did not come to express a completely independent opinion.

The Conservatives were also in no hurry to call the witnesses that we wanted to appear before the committee. The first witness was called to appear only at the fourth meeting, and most of our witnesses were called only on the last day scheduled to hear evidence. In a way, the Conservatives forced us to present all our amendments on the last day scheduled to hear our witnesses. They also asked us to present our amendments three and a half hours later, on the same day. That did not leave us much time to assess and examine the recommendations made by witnesses.

We also wanted to table amendments, based on the witnesses' recommendations, in order to make the legislation much more effective, so that it would achieve its objective. Such behaviour on the part of the Conservatives is totally unacceptable and impedes the work of Parliament.

We also proposed a number of amendments that were rejected by government members without any discussion. We proposed to include mandatory training on harassment for RCMP members in the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act, but that was also rejected. The Conservatives simply do not want to hear a dissenting opinion, or even recognize its validity.

The director of the Groupe d'aide et d'information sur le harcèlement sexuel au travail de la province de Québec appeared before the committee and said: “With the 32 years of experience we have, we have found out that when companies do have a clear policy, when employees do know what is acceptable and not acceptable, it makes it much easier for management to deal with the problems.” But the Conservatives preferred to ignore this important testimony.

It is also disappointing that the minister did not ask for a clear policy on sexual harassment in the RCMP, with specific standards of conduct and criteria for assessing the performance of all employees. Such a policy is necessary to provide a basis for a much fairer disciplinary process. The director of the Groupe d'aide et d'information sur le harcèlement sexuel au travail de la province de Québec also spoke eloquently on the importance of such a policy.

They chose to ignore her evidence and stubbornly insisted on a magic solution that will not resolve all the RCMP's problems.

We too put forward an amendment that would guarantee the independence of the body set up to investigate complaints in the RCMP. Once again, the answer was no. We also proposed adding provisions to establish a civilian investigative body, to stop the police from investigating themselves. Once again, this amendment was thrown out. Yet all Canadians are asking for such a provision. Trust in police investigations has to be rebuilt. When a police force investigates another police force, there may well be a conflict of interest or a perceived conflict of interest.

If the Conservatives do not want to listen to Canadians, perhaps they will listen to a former commissioner of the RCMP Public Complaints Commission. He believes that the bill is not in line with the review procedures established by Justice O'Connor and that it will not meet the needs of Canadians or the RCMP.

I would like to remind the House that Justice O'Connor mentioned in the Arar inquiry that it was important for Parliament to set up an oversight agency for the RCMP. It would appear that his recommendations have simply been gathering dust.

The bill would give the RCMP commissioner new authority, the authority to decide on appropriate disciplinary measures. This would include the authority to appoint and dismiss members as he chooses.

During my initial speech, I also said that the approach by the public safety department was a simplistic solution to a much bigger problem: they were just giving the commissioner final authority for dismissing employees. This is why we proposed an amendment to create police forces that were better balanced in terms of human resources, by removing some of the more extreme powers held by the RCMP commissioner and by strengthening those of the external review committee in cases of possible dismissal from the RCMP.

As I said earlier, while Bill C-42 may give the commissioner greater authority to set up a more effective process for resolving harassment complaints, and greater authority over disciplinary matters, it cannot provide the RCMP with the genuine cultural change that it needs to eliminate not only sexual harassment, but also cases relating more generally to the discipline and behaviour of RCMP officers.

Commissioner Paulson himself stated that legislative measures alone would not be enough to retain the public's trust, and that far-reaching reforms would be needed to address the serious underlying issues in the RCMP and foster a work environment that is more open, more co-operative and more respectful for all.

It is obvious to the NDP that the department lacked leadership with regard to dealing with the broader issue the RCMP is facing. Commissioner Paulson told the Standing Committee on the Status of Women that the issue goes well beyond sexual harassment. This situation must change. I believe that the minister should have taken the extensive experience of the RCMP commissioner into account.

In conclusion, if the Conservative government really wanted to modernize the RCMP, it would have agreed to implement the recommendations from the oversight agencies and proceed with an audit of the RCMP by a group of independent auditors that would have reported directly to Parliament. NDP members attempted to amend the bill so that it would deal with issues raised in the evidence heard, but the Conservatives refused to get on board.

Aboriginal Affairs and Northern DevelopmentCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

5:20 p.m.

Carleton—Mississippi Mills Ontario

Conservative

Gordon O'Connor ConservativeMinister of State and Chief Government Whip

Mr. Speaker, I seek the unanimous consent of the House for the following travel motion. I move:

That, in relation to its study on Bill C-47, An Act to enact the Nunavut Planning and Project Assessment Act and the Northwest Territories Surface Rights Board Act and to make related and consequential amendments to other Acts, seven members of the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development be authorized to travel to Yellowknife, Northwest Territories, in January 2013, and that the necessary staff accompany the Committee.

Aboriginal Affairs and Northern DevelopmentCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

5:20 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

Does the hon. chief government whip have the unanimous consent of the House to propose this motion?

Aboriginal Affairs and Northern DevelopmentCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

5:20 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Aboriginal Affairs and Northern DevelopmentCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

5:20 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

The House has heard the terms of the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

Aboriginal Affairs and Northern DevelopmentCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

5:20 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Aboriginal Affairs and Northern DevelopmentCommittees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

5:20 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

(Motion agreed to)

Enhancing Royal Canadian Mounted Police Accountability ActGovernment Orders

5:20 p.m.

NDP

Pierre Nantel NDP Longueuil—Pierre-Boucher, QC

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate my colleague from Châteauguay—Saint-Constant on his speech, which is indicative of his expertise on this issue.

We have pointed out many times the extent of the government's lack of openness. It is not at all transparent—even though that is what it expects of others—especially when it comes to amendments presented by our party in committee.

I would like to have a little more information about the amendments, but above all about the loss of job security for whistleblowers who speak out about sexual harassment, something that concerns me a great deal.

Enhancing Royal Canadian Mounted Police Accountability ActGovernment Orders

5:25 p.m.

NDP

Sylvain Chicoine NDP Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his question, which I may not have clearly understood. Was he talking about harassment complaints filed by RCMP employees?

Unfortunately, we found that the harassment of female RCMP officers by male officers is a major problem, and that female officers probably have some difficulty being heard and breaking the silence. Will the proposed legislation improve these people's lives? We doubt it.

Instead of giving this mandate to police forces, it would have been much wiser to create a civilian investigative body to deal with these issues, listen to female officers and investigate sexual harassment complaints. Female officers would probably be much more comfortable with this type of structure.

The establishment of a totally independent civilian investigative body would certainly have been more appropriate for dealing with this type of whistle-blowing and would have helped officers who may find it hard to report a fellow officer to do so confidentially.

Enhancing Royal Canadian Mounted Police Accountability ActGovernment Orders

5:25 p.m.

NDP

Randall Garrison NDP Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for his eloquent speech on this topic and for raising the example of the group from Montreal, which deals with harassment training and testified eloquently that the government's focus on discipline would not solve the problem. Firing a few bad apples does not change the culture inside the RCMP. That is why we moved a motion asking for training to be inserted in the law, so that the RCMP commissioner will have a specific legislated responsibility to make sure there is harassment training in the RCMP as the main way to improve the climate.

I would like to hear the member's comments on that, because I think the group from Montreal whose job is to work with employers to create a better workplace was quite eloquent in saying that training is needed.

Enhancing Royal Canadian Mounted Police Accountability ActGovernment Orders

5:25 p.m.

NDP

Sylvain Chicoine NDP Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his question and for his excellent work during the committee review of Bill C-42.

The member himself proposed this change to the bill to provide training to RCMP officers in order to make them more aware of their obligations regarding sexual harassment. During her testimony before the committee, an expert on this issue fully supported this measure to raise police officers' awareness.

The best way to do so is to give them training on their obligations, the rules to follow, the content of the legislation and the aspects that they need to consider. The hon. member is absolutely right: the best way to raise police officers' awareness is to train them in this regard.

Enhancing Royal Canadian Mounted Police Accountability ActGovernment Orders

5:25 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

Resuming debate. Is the House ready for the question?

Enhancing Royal Canadian Mounted Police Accountability ActGovernment Orders

5:25 p.m.

Some hon. members

Question.

Enhancing Royal Canadian Mounted Police Accountability ActGovernment Orders

5:25 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

The question is on Motion No. 1. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

Enhancing Royal Canadian Mounted Police Accountability ActGovernment Orders

5:25 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

No.

Enhancing Royal Canadian Mounted Police Accountability ActGovernment Orders

5:25 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

All those in favour of the motion will please say yea.

Enhancing Royal Canadian Mounted Police Accountability ActGovernment Orders

5:25 p.m.

Some hon. members

Yea.

Enhancing Royal Canadian Mounted Police Accountability ActGovernment Orders

5:25 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

All those opposed will please say nay.

Enhancing Royal Canadian Mounted Police Accountability ActGovernment Orders

5:25 p.m.

Some hon. members

Nay.

Enhancing Royal Canadian Mounted Police Accountability ActGovernment Orders

5:25 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

In my opinion the nays have it.

And five or more members having risen:

Call in the members.

(The House divided on Motion No. 1, which was negatived on the following division:)

Vote #590

Enhancing Royal Canadian Mounted Police Accountability ActGovernment Orders

6:10 p.m.

Conservative

The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer

I declare Motion No. 1 lost. I therefore declare Motion No. 2 lost.

Enhancing Royal Canadian Mounted Police Accountability ActGovernment Orders

6:10 p.m.

Provencher Manitoba

Conservative

Vic Toews ConservativeMinister of Public Safety

moved that the bill be concurred in.

Enhancing Royal Canadian Mounted Police Accountability ActGovernment Orders

6:10 p.m.

Conservative

Gordon O'Connor Conservative Carleton—Mississippi Mills, ON

Mr. Speaker, if you seek it, I believe you would find agreement to apply the results of the previous motion to the current motion, with the Conservatives voting yes.