Debates of April 28th, 2021

National Defence

[Erin O'Toole, Conservative, Leader of the Opposition]

Mr. Speaker, there is much work for the Prime Minister to do, because he failed. For three years he did not act. The Minister of Defence knew about sexual harassment allegations. His top senior adviser knew. His chief of staff knew. The Privy Council Office knew. There was a timeline created. Emails were sent about sexual harassment.

Yesterday, the Prime Minister had the gall to suggest that he did not know the specific nature of the allegations. He either is not being straight with Canadians or his chief of staff chose to cover it up and keep him in the dark.

Will he fire his chief of staff?

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, yet, again, the Conservatives will not let the facts get in the way of a good political argument. If the member opposite had been listening to the committee, he would have heard from the multiple witnesses for three months, including non-partisan public servants, that the details of the allegation were unknown.

The record is clear. The deputy secretary of cabinet testified, “I did not have information [even] about the nature of the complaint or specifics that would have enabled further action.” The former ombudsman testified at committee that he could not provide any details. He said, “I took the investigation as far as I could with the complainant's authority.”

This highlights why we need a better system for people to feel safe coming forward.

Labour

[Yves-François Blanchet, Bloc, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Mr. Speaker, at the heart of the dispute at the Port of Montreal, is the urgent need to get Quebec's economy back on track and there are scheduling issues.

Will the special legislation undo what management did to scheduling on April 9? We asked the question and the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Labour told us that the content of the legislation meant that the unilateral changes made by either party in April 2021 were excluded. To me that means that the legislation will undo the changes made to the schedule. Can the Prime Minister confirm that interpretation?

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the Port of Montreal plays a key role in the entire Canadian economy and especially Quebec's economy. The current work stoppage is causing serious damage that could last for quite some time.

This is not a decision we take lightly. We believe in the collective bargaining process and that is why we have spent two years working with both parties at the bargaining table. We made this decision after all other possibilities had been exhausted. We hope that we can all move forward together for Quebec and Canada.

[Yves-François Blanchet, Bloc, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I will do him the courtesy of not thinking that he does not understand the question, and I will do us the courtesy of saying that he does not wish to answer it.

His special legislation is not being introduced after two years of intense effort to solve the problem; the government did nothing. It is being introduced on the planned first day of the strike.

Does his special legislation address the issue of schedules imposed unilaterally by the employer on April 9? The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Labour said that that is the case. As my esteemed colleague from Richmond—Arthabaska would say, can the Prime Minister answer yes or no?

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, it is important to stick to the facts. Since October 2018, the federal mediation and conciliation service oversaw more than 100 days of bargaining through mediation. In addition, my colleagues and I communicated many times with the parties and urged them to work with the mediators to reach an agreement.

Will the Bloc Québécois agree to open up the Port of Montreal and Quebec's economy by letting port operations resume and continue safely through the establishment of a neutral mediation and arbitration process to resolve the differences and arrive at a new collective agreement?

[Jagmeet Singh, NDP, Burnaby South, BC]

Mr. Speaker, today is the National Day of Mourning, a day when we reflect on those who lost their lives while going to work. The fact is that no workers should ever lose their life going to work.

The experts agree that one way we can protect workers so they do not get sick when they go to work is better paid sick leave. This is something we have been long calling for the Prime Minister to fix. We know better paid sick leave will save lives.

Will the Prime Minister finally do the job of improving paid sick leave so we can save lives, so workers do not go into work sick and we can protect them and their families?

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Every day, every day, but particularly on this National Day of Mourning, we recognize the essential workers who are on the front lines of this crisis. They should never have to make the choice between going into work sick or putting food on the table. That is why we brought in the Canada recovery sickness benefit, with up to four weeks of income support for people who were unable to work because they were sick or needed to self-isolate.

However, we know employer leave is the most direct support for workers. Effective September 2019, workers in federally regulated workplaces and industries have access to paid leave to treat an injury or illness. In parenthesis, the NDP voted against that. We will now work with the provinces so they can bring it in for their jurisdictions.

[Jagmeet Singh, NDP, Burnaby South, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister knows very well that we have a federal program that experts agree is simply not working. It needs to be improved.

This is about saving lives. Workers are going into work sick. It is not a question of whether they are or they are not, they are. When they go into work sick, they risk infecting their colleagues and their families then end up getting sick. We could prevent all that. Australia and New Zealand have some form of national paid sick leave that works.

Will the Prime Minister get the job done, improve paid sick leave to protect workers and save lives?

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, once again, we see the NDP completely befuddled about the division of powers in Canada, and the things that are the responsibility of the provinces and the things that are the responsibility of the federal government.

The federal government moved forward on sick leave that people could directly apply to, but we agree that best way to work with sick leave is for people to get it through their employers. That is why we brought in federal sick leave back in 2019, which the NDP voted against. That is why we are working with the provinces and encouraging them to bring in employer sick leave in the provincially regulated industries, which is most of our workforce.

National Defence

[Candice Bergen, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Mr. Speaker, when it comes to sexual harassment claims against Canada's top soldier and the fact that he believed he was untouchable and had Canada's top politicians under his control, as Vance did, the buck always stops with the Prime Minister.

The Prime Minister is positioning Katie Telford to take the blame. Lord knows, she is not the first woman he has thrown under the bus. However, is it not true that when the Prime Minister says he believes women, what he actually means is he is going to be covering up for the boys?

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to see the member opposite highlight the responsibilities of the Prime Minister in these issues.

There were questions and allegations about General Vance before he was even appointed to the position of chief of the defence staff under the previous prime minister, in which the Leader of the Opposition was associate minister of defence. We know that there were follow ups, there were investigations and the Conservatives chose to move forward nonetheless.

We moved forward with processes back in 2018 that were not able to come through, because the complainant did not want more information disclosed.

[Candice Bergen, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Mr. Speaker, he is one of the boys. He knows these women, who are overly sensitive and emotional, just experience things differently.

The fact is that in March 2018, the Prime Minister knew the incident of him inappropriately groping a young woman in 2008 was going to be revealed, and he was going to have to explain that. Therefore, is it not true that the real reason the Prime Minister covered up for General Vance is because he knew he had skeletons he was going to have to deal with?

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the respect and the support that this government has demonstrated every step of the way for people who come forward with stories of allegations, with experiences of mistreatment is consistent and will continue to be what we stand for.

That the official opposition needs to stoop to the level of disgusting personal attacks is yet another example of the loss it feels of being even slightly relevant at a time when there is a pandemic, where the solutions are based on science, at a time when the government has demonstrated, through a budget, that we are there for Canadians. All the official opposition can do is slight mud.

[Candice Bergen, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Mr. Speaker, now the Prime Minister is the victim. Give me a break.

The fact is that the Prime Minister and his government covered up serious allegations of sexual misconduct against the chief of the defence staff, and now he is covering up his cover-up by saying that he did not know. It is just not believable.

What is believable is this: The Prime Minister only pretends to be a feminist when in fact he is at the top of the old boys club, just a wink and a nudge, do not worry, boys, their secret is safe with him. Is that not the truth?

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, no, that is not the truth.

The committee has heard from multiple witnesses for three months, including non-partisan public servants, that the details of the allegation were unknown. The record is clear.

The deputy secretary of cabinet testified, “I did not have information about the nature of the complaint or specifics that would have enabled further action.” The former ombudsman testified at committee that he could not provide any details. He said, “ I took the investigation as far as I could with the complainant's authority.”

We need a better system to better support complainants coming forward.

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

Mr. Speaker, in 2018, a woman in the Canadian Armed Forces came forward with allegations of sexual misconduct against the highest-ranking officer in the military. The Prime Minister says that his office took those allegations seriously.

However, many people in his entourage were aware but did nothing. The Minister of National Defence, the Clerk of the Privy Council and the Prime Minister's chief of staff were aware. The Prime Minister is trying to claim that he did not know.

Was he aware of the allegations, yes or no?

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is mistaken. The Standing Committee on National Defence heard from multiple witnesses over three months, including non-partisan public servants, all of whom said that they were unaware. The record is clear.

The deputy secretary to the cabinet said, “I did not have information about the nature of the complaint or specifics that would have enabled further action.” Furthermore, the former ombudsman for the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces testified at committee that he could not provide any details. He said that he had taken the investigation as far as he could with the complainant's authority. This highlights why we need a better system.

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

Mr. Speaker, when a woman makes a sexual harassment claim, there should not be a “wrong door” for her to knock on. She should be listened to, and she should feel safe. The Prime Minister has failed in that regard.

Can he imagine what a woman feels when she is harassed by her superior and then completely ignored when she dares to speak out? It is a nightmare. Is the Prime Minister aware of the message he is sending to women who have been sexually harassed?

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, as we have said all along, we will support and listen to anyone who steps forward with allegations of sexual misconduct or harassment, and we will provide them with resources.

Our government has been taking concrete measures for many years. However, it is obvious that we need to do more. Very soon, we will be announcing even stronger measures to support everyone serving in the Canadian Armed Forces, who deserve greater support than they are getting now.

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister and his government keep saying, with a straight face, that sexual harassment is not tolerated, and yet they gave General Vance a pay raise after the allegations were made. That seems to be how things are done in the old boys club, and, as a woman, I find that very disappointing. The Prime Minister is not keeping the promises he made to women who want to believe in his feminist government.

How can he call himself a feminist when he is not keeping the promises he made to the women in our Armed Forces?

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, we have been making investments for years now to improve the culture within the Canadian Armed Forces and the situation for victims of harassment, intimidation and assault in the Armed Forces.

We know we need to do more, and that is exactly what we will continue to work on. Our feminist government has always been there to believe and support women, and we will continue to be there for them.

Labour

[Yves-François Blanchet, Bloc, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I have to admit that I do not understand.

On April 9, management imposed a decision that the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Labour says would be overturned by the special legislation. We know how this will end. The Prime Minister could put an end to the strike today, and the Port of Montreal could resume its operations tomorrow, thus saving tens of millions of dollars. That is what everyone wants.

The Prime Minister says a lot of things, but he never answers this one question: Why?

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, we have said for years that the best solutions are those found at the bargaining table. That is why we have been supporting negotiations between workers and employers for a long time, and that is what we will continue to do.

However, we are facing a crisis that could be extremely bad for Quebec's economy, its workers and its citizens. That is why we have had to take steps not to impose conditions of employment but to facilitate neutral mediation that will enable the parties to find the right solution. That is why we are going ahead.

[Yves-François Blanchet, Bloc, Beloeil—Chambly, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I get it. The proof that the government thinks that disputes should be settled at the bargaining table is the fact that it is introducing special legislation. That makes no sense at all.

I have news for the House. The union asked management whether it understood the interpretation indicating that it should reverse its April 9 decision on scheduling. Management said it would answer that question after the passage of the special legislation.

Was this whole thing staged? Was the intention all along to impose special legislation?