Debates of March 1st, 2018

Opposition Motion—Canada Summer Jobs Program

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Milton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, in her intervention and question, the hon. member has admitted to the House that it is the policy of the government to change what will be Canadian public policy and determining that the attestation more fits with what should be looked at as opposed to what is currently being looked at CRA. The reason is that one of the things a charity has to do is describe all the activities it undertakes. This activity would be described in an application for charitable status.

Is she now telling me that because of the stories she told, charities will have their charitable status taken away from them? Is that where we are going in this situation?

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with great interest to my colleague, for whom I have enormous respect. However, I feel she took a turn in the road, going at the CRA. We know the previous government used the CRA to go after environmental groups. The question before us today is whether organizations that work with young people should get funding.

There were groups in my riding of Timmins—James Bay that abused it. A group called Priests for Life, which I have never heard of and has no connection in my riding, was using it strictly for militant work on abortion. To me, that is a fairly straightforward mechanism to ensure groups like that, which are not doing youth outreach, do not get the funding.

What concerns me is it seems we are going into a Liberal culture war here. Many groups do faith work and incredible work with community groups. They now feel they are under this attestation. I am trying to reassure people in my riding that if they are doing good community work, they are still eligible. However, I am very concerned that this ham-fisted response to what was a reasonable problem that could have easily been fixed would not have resulted in the kinds of concerns I hear across our region.

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Milton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is a fair comment. I appreciate the intervention from the hon. member, who I like very much as well, being the fact that we share roots from Cape Breton.

The ham-fisted way in which the government has shoved this attestation in haste to deal with the problem it botched the first time will set up a situation where we will have a lot more worried organizations. I do not think they understand and realize that there is already a Canadian public policy test sprinkled throughout legislation in the government. One of the more serious areas is in the Canadian registry for charitable organizations.

There can be many challenges others will launch, and letters that will be written to the CRA, trying to take away charitable status for many organizations across the country on the basis that the government has changed the attestation to be so specific, that it is deeming it is no longer within Canadian public policy. This is a mess, and we have to absolutely oppose it.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it would have been far more democratic and accountable for the government simply to say to its members of Parliament that if they did not like a particular funding of an organization, they should deep-six it, then stand before their constituents and be individually responsible. The Liberals keep talking about actions versus beliefs. If one reads the attestation, it says that one signs up with what the government believes to be the values of our country. That is Orwellian.

The member has referred to the CRA. The Prime Minister has mentioned that this kind of attestation thinking will apply to future youth programming. Is she worried about other programs, besides the CRA or the summer jobs, to which this new attestation Orwellian thought speech will apply?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Milton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, what the hon. member is talking about is legislative creep, and that is exactly what I am talking about today. I am very worried about the application of this to other aspects of government services.

We saw it already. It happened when the Liberal Party of Canada said that people must sign off on their own attestation on certain topics important to the Liberal Party of Canada, and thou shalt not speak of those things, even though people may believe another way. Now it has found its way into Canada summer jobs. Where is it going to find itself next? The Prime Minister has opened the door, and it is going to be part of other programs.

I am sounding the alarm right now. We could be in for a major problem with charitable status in this country and ripping the carpet out from so many vulnerable people who depend on charities and their good work.

[Mona Fortier, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for St. Catharines.

I am very pleased to be speaking today about the Canada summer jobs program and national priorities. As you know, Canada Summer Jobs is a federal program that provides employers with funding to help them create summer jobs for students. A summer job is key for students who want to acquire the type of work experience that employers look for in a curriculum vitae while earning money to pay for their next year in school. The work experience students acquire during the summer is important in the educational process, because it makes it easier for them to enter the workforce once they have finished school.

Society and the job market are in constant evolution. As a government, we must ensure that all young Canadians, including those facing obstacles, can get a good job. We must also make sure that employers have access to workers with the skills they need. This year, we set five national priorities for Canada summer jobs in order to be in a better position to meet current and future workforce needs and improve job prospects for young Canadians.

Employers who support these national priorities have been invited to apply, in particular employers who want to hire young people who belong to an under-represented group; small businesses; organizations that provide employment opportunities for official language minority communities; organizations that offer services to the LGBTQ2+ community or that support it; and, lastly, organizations that hire women, particularly in the fields of science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and information and communication technologies. Incidentally, this year, we extended the application period by one week, until February 9.

I would now like to address the reasons for setting each of these priorities. The first concerns under-represented youth. We are aware that all young people face challenges. However, some groups of young people encounter major obstacles, and a summer job can help. Consider young indigenous people, for example. Unfortunately, all too often these young people are less likely to finish secondary school than non-indigenous youth, which has a major impact on their career prospects.

Let's also consider young recent immigrants. Without work experience in Canada, without a professional network, without proficiency in the official languages, and without recognition of their credentials, they are unlikely to be able to get a job and keep it. The numbers speak for themselves: in 2011, 48.9% of young recent immigrants were employed, compared to 61% of youth born in Canada. It is therefore necessary to help these under-represented young people get the work experience they need.

Why are official language minority communities a priority? These communities help promote our two official languages across the country through their contribution to Canada's socio-economic fabric. Furthermore, pursuant to part VII of the Official Languages Act, we must take measures to enhance the vitality of these communities and assist their development, as well as to foster Canada's two official languages. By adding official language minority communities to our priorities, we are ensuring their long-term survival and vitality.

I now want to talk about the LGBTQ2 community. Our government recognizes that all Canadians have the right to live without fear of discrimination and to be fully included in all facets of Canadian society, regardless of who they love or how they identify or express their gender. This is why we committed to protecting the dignity, security, and rights of transgender and gender-diverse Canadians. Our government will prioritize the applications from organizations that create job opportunities for young people in this community. We are doing this because we recognize that this community has faced a lot of discrimination in the workplace.

Today, members of the LGBTQ still earn less than their peers. We are taking action to change that.

I would now like to talk about small businesses, which are vital to the growth of the Canadian economy. They represent 97.9% of all businesses in Canada, account for 30% of Canada's GDP on average, and play an important role in job creation.

Small businesses with no more than 50 employees are not always able to pay the full salary for a summer position. By providing financial assistance to hire young people and give them valuable work experience, we are helping these businesses as well as our youth. Young workers benefit from these professional experiences and bring many ideas and new perspectives to their workplace and their local community.

For the second year in a row, jobs in science, technology, engineering and mathematics, and information and communications technologies are included in the national priorities of the Canada summer jobs program.

We are supporting our government's vision to make Canada a global centre for innovation.

What is different this year is that we have added an additional priority for employers in these fields so that they recruit women.

We are stressing the recruitment of women because even though they have made progress in terms of labour force participation, all too often they continue to be under-represented in STEM professions.

By helping employers create job opportunities in these professions, we are helping students, especially female students, consider a career in professions that are in great demand and that will shape the future of Canada.

These priorities foster economic growth and help our middle class prosper. Young Canadians have many talents, and it is our responsibility to help them find their place in our society and contribute to our economy.

Our government knows that taxpayers' money should never be used to support organizations that seek to undermine the rights of Canadians.

We know that the opposition leader, the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle, has a long-standing friendship with the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform, an organization that actively opposes the right of women to choose what to do with their own bodies. Nine months ago, during the leadership campaign, he spoke with the centre's communications director, Jonathon Van Maren. Mr. Van Maren said that, like many of us, he knew for a long time who his top choices would be. The member for Regina—Qu'Appelle was pro-life and had the record to prove it.

The opposition leader said that he had always voted in favour of pro-life legislation, that he had always voted according to his conscience, and that he had spoken out against the fact that Henry Morgentaler was awarded the Order of Canada.

The support of the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform was key to the opposition leader's victory in the leadership race. As a result, it is easy to see why the opposition leader has a direct interest in ensuring that the centre continues to use Canadian taxpayers' dollars to promote its anti-abortion agenda.

However, the government side is determined to continue to help our young people continue their education and acquire the experience they need to succeed in life.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am sure that, like me, my colleague has had many people and groups in her riding approach her with concerns about how this attestation is being administered. I have had dozens of community groups in my riding approach me personally, either by email, in person, by phone, or by letter. They are very concerned about these issues. I also conducted a round table, where I had 13 participants who came and expressed some deep concerns.

Earlier in my remarks, I commented about a group in my riding that did not want me to use its name or divulge anything about it, because its members were afraid that because they were objecting to the attestation, they might be punished in future applications for other government programs. People are afraid to sign the letter, because they feel that the federal government will continue to limit freedom of belief and move these requirements into other federal programs. My colleague from Milton outlined that danger very well.

One of the member's colleagues, the member for Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, has come out very clearly in opposition to this attestation. He said that the attestation is “totally flopped” and that the test itself shows “a lack of respect”. We hear a lot about respect when it comes to this attestation. Does my colleague agree with her colleague from Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame?

[Mona Fortier, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for the question.

I am pleased to hear that he had the chance to talk with his constituents. I also had the privilege of hosting a roundtable and the questions were very clear. People wanted to know how to access the Canada summer jobs program, how to align with national priorities, and how to ensure that young Canadians gain experience that respects their rights.

There were plenty of questions and conversations. Employers who were interested said that they believed in it and that they would apply for the Canada summer jobs program and demonstrate that they respect Canadians' rights. I have received a number of applications and I look forward to seeing which ones will be accepted.

[Rodger Cuzner, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the intervention by my colleague today. Back in December, when there were some concerns raised, supplemental information was shared.

This is one program that members of Parliament are very much invested in. They have the opportunity to share the priorities of their ridings or areas with the program, and that weighs in on each of the applications. Everyone has a database.

What we did with the supplemental information was get it out to those who had applied in previous years. I think that satisfied the vast majority. Obviously, the number of applications is higher than it was last year, so most groups are comfortable with the additional information.

Would my colleague have undertaken a similar initiative? How did she address it when additional information was requested from the people in her riding who had applied?

[Mona Fortier, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for the question.

In Ottawa—Vanier it was very interesting to see how many groups, whether non-profit organizations, businesses, or institutions wanted to use this highly sought-after program to encourage young people to work during the summer.

I had the privilege of not only organizing a roundtable, but also sending a wealth of information through letters and on social media. I became very involved with local businesses and organizations to help them prepare and ask questions about their application, and to encourage them to apply.

There was a host of communications exercises, and my team answered the questions to ensure that people could respond properly and complete their application either electronically or on paper.

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, St. Catharines, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today, and correct the record on many of the inaccuracies being advanced by the opposition benches.

The absurd theory suggested that this is a debate on values or religion is simply ridiculous. This is simply a matter of reading a definition on a publicly available website.

If my colleagues will indulge me, I will take a moment to read the definition of the core mandate into the record:

An organization’s mandate is a statement of its main purpose or its reason for existence. The key activities undertaken by the organization, including services provided to the community outline how the mandate is fulfilled. For many not-for-profits and religious organizations, their mandate may be similar to the description of “ongoing programs” that they provide to the Canada Revenue Agency at tax time.

There are many colleagues on the other side who are playing lawyer. They will take a couple of words from the application, and not include the definition. We are legislators. We deal with definitions on defined terms every day, and to ignore the definition is misleading to Canadians, and that is unacceptable. Canadians are not being told the full story of the program, and kids and students are going to suffer.

As one can see, there is absolutely nothing that precludes religious organizations from applying, or even being granted funds under the Canada summer jobs program. I have had the opportunity in St. Catharines to speak to many faith organizations in my community, and I am pleased that they are applying, because there is nothing here that will prevent them from applying or receiving funding. No argument can be made to the contrary.

It is irresponsible for the opposition to advance the position that attesting to upholding charter rights equates to a values test. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms is not something to be trivialized. I contend that the charter is Canadian values themselves enshrined in law. Asking Canadians to simply reaffirm that public funds will be used in a way that respects those values and laws our nation is built upon is not much to ask for.

However, what makes me angry is that member after member from the Conservative caucus is standing up or Tweeting misinformation that is leading to organizations losing out on funding. This misinformation that is being promoted is leading to these organizations falsely believing that they are no longer eligible for funding. Every summer camp that kids do not get to attend or meals on wheels program that is short a driver in their ridings is thanks to the opposition and the misinformation that is being spread.

This is being made worse by the fact that they are only doing this to pander to their base. The farther their leader drags them away from the centre requires them to go looking for new votes. The general public, especially young Canadians, should not suffer because the Leader of the Opposition is trolling for votes.

If we look at the price the Leader of the Opposition had to pay to become the leader of the Conservative Party, we look to statements that have been made by a long-standing relationship with the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform, an organization that fights against a woman's right to choose. Nine months ago during his leadership campaign, he spoke to the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform director of communication, Jonathon Van Maren, who said, “Like most of you, I’ve known who my top choices are for months...[The Leader of the Opposition] is pro-life and has a record to prove it.”

That is because the Leader of the Opposition told the centre, “I have always voted in favour of pro-life legislation. I voted according to my conscience every time. I spoke out when Henry Morgentaler received the Order of Canada...”

That is the price that the Leader of the Opposition paid, and this is what we are seeing again today. There has been misinformation, as I have said.

Over the past two years, I have had the pleasure of visiting businesses, and organizations in my riding who were recipients of Canada summer jobs funding. I think particularly of visiting two young students at the Foster Festival, which is an arts and theatre festival in St. Catharines. They were theatre students at Brock University, and had the opportunity to build sets, meet new people, and have mentors in an industry that can be difficult to get into, especially in Niagara.

They were recipients of Canada summer jobs funding. So too were many faith organizations, and that will happen again. At those businesses and organizations, I had the opportunity to meet with students who were hired, and the message I got from them was identical. They were all pleased to have an opportunity to gain the on-the-job experience that they were receiving, to work hard, and make a few hard-earned extra dollars to take back to school in the fall.

I think it is obvious why the tactics of my colleagues across the aisle are so infuriating. These tactics are causing these students to suffer, to lose out on unique opportunities. Has anyone thought of the students and how the misinformation being spread impacts them?

I am grateful going to churches, to the mosque in St. Catharines, and to other faith organizations, and organizations that may not be churches themselves but are inspired by faith, inspired by Christianity. I am happy to report they are applying for Canada summer jobs. I look froward to visiting those students this summer so we can see them at work, building that on-the-job experience, and making a bit of extra money.

We are talking so much about religious values, yet no one on the opposition has stopped to ask about how this will affect the students.

We are the government that recognized the importance of this program. We doubled the funding for this program, because of the positive impact it was having on Canadian youth. The benefits and opportunities afforded to young Canadians demanded that this program be expanded. That is what should be on the minds of our opposition colleagues.

The opposition would rather see these funds used to undermine the hard-earned charter rights of Canadians. That is completely unacceptable. The Conservatives continue to speak about religious rights and freedom of speech, which are not impacted by the attestation, yet they seem to forget about the rights guaranteed to women under section 15. The equality of rights guaranteed under section 15 protects the rights of women should they choose to access safe abortion services.

We have already heard one member of the opposition rise today and liken the LGBTQ2 community to being a lifestyle choice. We have heard the opposition House leader comparing the government's protection of charter rights in this attestation to the horrible oppression and prosecution of the LGBTQ2 community during the 60s, 70s, and 80s. It is clear that the opposition does not get it, and it is clear that the government needs to stand up for these hard-earned charter rights.

Enough is enough with the misinformation. Enough is enough with the marginalization of charter rights. Enough is enough with the disrespect that has been shown toward young Canadians and organizations in our communities. This is a program about young Canadians getting good-paying summer jobs and life experiences that go along with that. It is time to put them back into the centre of our thinking and not treat them like political pawns.

Every year I look forward to seeing the Canada summer jobs list for my riding, to seeing the positive impact those jobs will have in St. Catharines, and on young Canadians. As in past years, I look forward to seeing that list in the near future. I am looking forward to seeing those kids get the skills that they are looking forward to very soon. I am also looking forward to continuing this in the coming years.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member for St. Catharines raising his concerns about misinformation. However, it is the Liberal government that proposed these changes. It is the one responsible for the administration of the program. It put out this attestation and gave very little guidance to Canadians. The opposition members ask questions, but we do not get firm answers, especially from the minister responsible. He can understand why some Canadians would be less than certain as to what the government is intending to do.

The government could have just said to their Liberal members of Parliament to reject Canada summer jobs applications that they disagreed with. That is something they could do, and be more directly accountable to constituents. It could have said, “Let's ban political or social advocacy, whether knocking on doors for political or social causes”, but it did not do that.

The Prime Minister has said he would like to see this kind of attestation applied to other areas in our system. Does the member opposite believe these kinds of attestations should be used for determining if someone should be able to get a job with the Government of Canada? This is the kind of ideological thinking that has consequences. I would like to hear from the member if he supports that.

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, St. Catharines, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the rights within the Charter of Rights and Freedoms are hard-earned, and we have members from the other side getting up in 2018 and still calling the LGBTQ2 community a lifestyle choice. In the eyes of the member who said those words, it would be fine to discriminate. It would be fine to use public money for that particular purpose. That is unacceptable. This government, and no government, should use public funds to undermine someone's charter rights. That is unacceptable.

Canadians expect the government to uphold the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. That is exactly what we are doing.

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

Mr. Speaker, I agree that organizations that receive government funding should not infringe on the rights guaranteed by the charter.

My colleague said that students should not suffer, and I completely agree.

I remember how last summer, the Liberals were bragging about how there were more jobs in the Canada summer jobs program. However, in Hochelaga, we noticed that each job lasted for fewer weeks. There may have been more jobs, but this is because each job lasted for fewer weeks.

Does the member not think that this is causing students to suffer and that they are being offered lower-quality jobs?

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, St. Catharines, ON]

Mr. Speaker, this is the government that doubled funding to this particular program. There are more jobs. There are more hours. I was happy to hear from my friend, the hon. parliamentary secretary, that applications are at an all-time high.

I am looking forward to seeing more applications to this program, seeing more jobs, and more young Canadians, especially in St. Catharines, and across the country, get to work, and get the skills they need.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I want to pick up on the point the member made that we have members of the opposition who seem to want to give misinformation that could ultimately lead to many students not having access to different types of job opportunities.

Can he expand on why it is important for members of Parliament on all sides of the House to look for an agency to support, and to not give misinformation, but provide information that is necessary to ensure that as many groups, both private and non-profit, are engaged in this particular program?

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, St. Catharines, ON]

Mr. Speaker, when I spoke with faith organizations, they raised concerns, but when I read the definition that I brought up in my speech, the concerns were lifted. That is important because faith organizations, the opposition members are right, are doing great work in our community. They are helping refugees. They are helping the homeless. They are helping with food banks and running day cares.

As legislators it is important to read the definition to define the terms. The opposition is excluding that entire point, which is fundamental to the definition. I beseech them to use that definition as they would any other piece of legislation or anything else from the government, so that they can get jobs for their young constituents, because clearly this is important to them and important to those organizations.

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Mr. Speaker, before I begin I want to indicate that I will be sharing my time with the member for St. Albert—Edmonton.

I am very pleased to have the opportunity to speak to my colleagues this afternoon about the motion. I want to thank the member for Elgin—Middlesex—London for bringing this very important matter forward in the way of a motion and as something we can discuss here in the House.

We are talking today about the change that the Liberals have made to the application process for the Canada summer jobs program. We know that the Canada summer jobs program is a valuable program for numerous organizations all across the country. It provides funding to assist employers, including not-for-profits, that create summer job opportunities for full-time students. There certainly does not need to be anything controversial about a summer jobs program. It is a win-win situation. Students benefit by getting valuable employment and work experience. Communities benefit from the important services provided by these organizations, but with the Liberal government, nothing is sacred.

In the dying days of 2017, the Liberals quietly introduced their new values test requirement for the Canada summer jobs program. When I first learned of this new requirement, I could not believe that the government, even a Liberal government, would demand that the people who serve our communities agree with its Liberal values in order to receive funding. There was no consultation process. There was no public feedback requested. Instead, the Liberals unilaterally decided that only the individuals and organizations who agreed with their prescribed set of values would be worthy of receiving the Canada summer jobs funding. This is just wrong.

Canadians know it. My office has been inundated with emails, letters, and phone calls from concerned Canadians. Many of the calls came from organizations in my riding that have taken advantage of the Canada summer jobs program to hire students for the summer to work in their various organizations. Impacted organizations include day cares, summer camps, small businesses, and municipalities. Each of these organizations read the attestation and felt that to sign it, to agree with the Liberal Party's dogma on certain issues, was an affront to the Charter of Rights. They felt that they would be compromising their beliefs if they signed it.

I know Liberal members have indicated confusion on this point. Why will Canadians not just sign the attestations? They have told these Canadians to hold their noses and sign it. After all, the supplementary information that was provided by the Liberal government after the swift negative response from Canadians was supposedly meant to clarify what was meant by the wording of the attestation, but the Liberals just do not get it. The Liberals' understanding of tolerance is so narrow that they cannot wrap their heads around the thought that there are Canadians who actually might have different beliefs and values than those of the Liberal Party. The Liberals can only tolerate those opinions, those beliefs, those values that agree with theirs. If people do not agree with them, they are no longer eligible to receive funding for a summer student.

Speaking of Canada's success, the Prime Minister stated the following:

But what’s made it work so well in Canada is the understanding that our diversity isn’t a challenge to be overcome or a difficulty to be tolerated.

Rather, it’s a tremendous source of strength.

However, here we are. The man himself contradicting his famous quote. Why? Because in the Prime Minister's world he thinks he holds the monopoly on what constitutes acceptable diversity. While he may talk a lot about respecting diversity, his actions tell another story. That is the real problem going forward.

It is important to understand that this change represents a marked departure from past practices in this country. Requiring Canadians to agree with a political party's values as a condition of eligibility for grant monies is not how government funding decisions are made. Despite the good work so many organizations do in our communities, caring for the disabled, refugees, providing day camps for children in need, assisting vulnerable youth at risk, providing shelter for abused women and children, providing food for those who are hungry, and also providing shelter for those who are homeless, their applications may be rejected simply for holding beliefs different from those of the people in power.

I received an email from a constituent, Sharon, who said that the fact that employers will now be required to attest that both the job and the organization's core mandate respect certain values, as determined by the federal government, struck her as seriously violating our guaranteed freedoms of religion, thought, belief, opinion, and association offered by Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms, especially the provisions under section 2. She said that this affected her and upset her. She thought she lived in a democracy where diversity and a mosaic culture were encouraged. She said she did not think she was part of a government-dictated cookie-cutter world. She said that she does not always agree with everyone else's point of view, but she understands that they have a right to their opinions, just as she thought she did.

It is not just people like Sharon who have voiced their concerns. Community organizations from right across the country have been facing a loss of funding that they have relied on for years through the Canada summer jobs program. This is a direct result of the Liberal government's ideological bullying.

Take for example Bridgepark Manor, a not-for-profit organization that offers seniors' and retirement housing in my riding. Bridgepark applied for Canada summer jobs funding, approximately $16,000, in order to hire two students to work full time over the summer holidays. The students would have been working in the food services area, gaining valuable skills, serving meals to the seniors at the residence.

As a result of the Liberals values test, the CEO and the board faced an impossible choice: either compromise their values or be denied funding. As a result of the organization making alterations on the application to the attestation, the reply that it received back from the government was that its claim would be rejected. There are now two more students in my riding who will not have an opportunity that would have otherwise been presented.

Here is another example. A community organization responsible for the annual agriculture fair in one of the communities in my riding has used the Canada summer jobs program in the past to hire a summer student. The job requirements include preparing and maintaining the fairgrounds, tasks like painting, lawn mowing, and weed trimming, but it too cannot agree with the Liberals values test. This is yet another job lost.

There are more examples. Catherine, a summer camp director wrote that she rejects this statement on the grounds of her rights to freedom of conscience, religion, thought, belief, opinion, expression, and association guaranteed in section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. She says that as a Christian organization that deeply values human rights, they will not betray their beliefs or conscience.

Josie, a recreation director with a municipal organization, wrote that without the help of the Canada summer jobs program, her organization's ability to offer programs and services will be severely diminished. She said she believed they were being denied equal access to a government benefit because of their organizational and personal beliefs, and that this violates the charter, which guarantees freedom of religion, thought, belief, and opinion.

I have another one. An arts organization in my riding, of all things, wrote that while they continued to affirm their intention as an association to support rights and freedoms, they protested the attestation requirement of the funding application that divided us along political lines.

The truth of the matter is that this policy is not about the activities or services an organization is engaged in. It is about targeting the personal beliefs of the individuals who run those organizations. That is shameful.

I have heard some Liberals in the House today say that they have taken a brave or bold step by introducing this values test. There is nothing brave about the Liberal Party using the powers of government to suppress views that are different from their own. The real heroes of this story are the many individuals and organizations who, when faced with this kind of discrimination by their own government, chose to stay true to their values. Even though they had nothing to gain and everything to lose, they were willing to take a stand for what they believed in.

I am reminded of the words of former Conservative prime minister John G. Diefenbaker, delivered in a speech in 1960:

I am a Canadian, a free Canadian, free to speak without fear, free to worship God in my own way, free to stand for what I think right, free to oppose what I believe wrong, free to choose those who govern my country. This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind.

Diefenbaker was in the midst of pursuing landmark legislation, the Canadian Bill of Rights, a bill introduced to guarantee civil rights for all Canadians, a bold vision for a Canada that respected the rights of individuals, and it was the reason his Conservative government extended the vote to indigenous Canadians, nominated the first indigenous senator, and appointed Canada's first female cabinet minister.

As a pluralistic society, Canada allows for diverse opinions and protects those who may think and believe differently. It was the strong foundation laid by that original bill of rights that paved the way for the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which guarantees freedom of conscience, freedom of religion, freedom of thought, freedom of belief, and freedom of opinion and expression for all Canadians.

In fact, the charter was designed to protect citizens from the government, not the government from them. The Liberals have acted in defiance of that heritage, arrogantly deeming the party's political values above the rights of Canadians outlined in these documents.

I call on the Prime Minister to rescind this shameful attestation requirement for the Canada summer jobs program. I call on the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour to rescind this shameful application. I call on the members of the Liberal Party to do the right thing, to respect the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and to vote to rescind this awful attestation.

[Doug Eyolfson, Liberal, Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia—Headingley, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I have one question, and it is a simple question that could be answered with yes or no.

If an organization believed in its core mandate that LGBT people were unacceptable and refused to hire someone that was LGBT, would that organization deserve to receive government money, yes or no?

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Mr. Speaker, this is a values test. This is a Liberal values test being pushed on every single Canadian.

This should make every single Canadian watching this proceeding here today shake in their seats. This is a values test that applies to the Canada summer jobs program today. It is a values test, and those who do not agree with the ideological positions of the Liberal government are going to be denied funding. The Prime Minister has already stated that he wants to extend this attestation requirement to other programs.

This is a values test that should scare the willies out of every single Canadian.

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague.

At the very least, I can say that I recognize how passionately he defends his opinion. However, we do agree on one thing. If the jobs we will be approving this summer need to pass the Liberal values test, I will probably also have a problem. However, I would have the same problem if they had to pass a Conservative or even a New Democrat values test.

The focus of these jobs should be respect for the rights and values enshrined in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. We are talking about the job, not the employer.

Does my colleague see a difference between an employer having beliefs that may conflict with what is enshrined in and protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and the job it offers having to comply with the charter?

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Mr. Speaker, shortly after the requirement of this attestation came to be, I was very delighted that the NDP chose to recognize the problem with this values test. They recognized it.

The member clearly indicated he has a problem with a values test from any government, whether it be the current Liberal government, a Conservative government, or in someone's wildest imagination, an NDP government. The member would object to any form of attestation that would require a values test according to that government's ideology.

I was delighted that the NDP initially recognized that position. I was disappointed that, because of the issues that were stated as the values test, the NDP flip-flopped on its position like a fish out of water. It would be nice if it could stand by principles instead of ideology.

[Andy Fillmore, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Democratic Institutions]

Mr. Speaker, I am so confounded by the mendacious invective from the Conservative benches, and from the leadership, that I hardly know where to start.

I come from a long career in public service and I have seen my share of sophistry and oratorical parlour tricks, where elected members were trying to confuse the public into believing something other than what was true, other than what was being proposed. What I fear here is that the overreach by the Conservative benches on this matter is so great that it is doing damage to the very institution of public service.

Misleading smart, good people, good organizations into believing that they should not sign the attestation, and that they are therefore ineligible for funding, not only harms those institutions but it harms the students.

Does the member not understand that unless an organization is hiring someone to protest a gay marriage, hiring a student to march against an immigration ceremony, or hiring someone to bar access to a health clinic, they should be perfectly fine to sign the attestation and hire a student? Is that not a clear position?

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I want to respond to the member across the way and give my final answer by taking an excerpt out of a four-page letter written by a pastor to his Liberal MP:

A person's, or church's, religious beliefs and practices are not subject to governmental approval. Pro-life religious organizations have a Charter guaranteed right to speak and act according to their conscience. Period. Personally, and as a church, we do not always agree with the means of action against injustices like abortion which some Christians may espouse. We get it.... But the right for others to follow their own conscience in that matter is sacrosanct, and it is the government's difficult job to protect that liberty—because that liberty, like it or not, is the law. Government officials and staff do not need to like or approve of it, but they must protect it. I'm not sure I understand how a Canadian government has fallen to such levels of intolerance. Is Canada no longer proud of its diversity? To ask people to attest to a set of beliefs or practices not their own is an obscene violation of personal liberty, not to mention privacy, and it is an inherently threatening act towards people and communities of faith. And that's how we feel by all this...threatened.

There is no space in Canada for attestations of this kind, for any purpose, ever. Canada is a diverse place where people disagree, especially over issues like abortion and traditional marriage; political leaders need to make peace with that diversity.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

I am sorry. We have run out of time. I appreciate that the hon. member had a bit more to say, but we really are past the time for questions and comments.

Resuming debate, the hon. member for St. Albert—Edmonton.