House of Commons Hansard #94 of the 43rd Parliament, 2nd session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was misconduct.
Erin O'Toole ConservativeLeader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, there are three tools we need to fight a pandemic: vaccines, rapid tests and information. The government has been failing on all three, and the Prime Minister is causing confusion again this week.
For months, Canadians have been told to get the first vaccine available to them. Today, the Prime Minister refused to confirm that advice on 10 different occasions. Canadians deserve clarity from the government. Is there a preferred type of vaccine?
Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, it is extremely important that Canadians get the facts. That is why we continue to update them on scientific recommendations and the recommendations of doctors. However, the reality is, and I will say it again, as I have said it many times this morning and as I have been saying for months, that the most important thing is for Canadians to get vaccinated with the first vaccine offered to them. That is how we will get through this.
Every vaccine for use in Canada has been judged safe and effective by Health Canada. We all need to get vaccinated to get through this pandemic.
Erin O'Toole ConservativeLeader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, during the Mark Norman trial, we learned that General Vance was so close to the Prime Minister's Office that he went to dinner with senior staff, including Katie Telford. Mark Norman could not have been charged without the testimony of General Vance.
Did Katie Telford sit on the General Vance allegation to further the Norman prosecution?
Erin O'Toole ConservativeLeader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, that is interesting because in January 2019, when this Prime Minister was asked questions about the Norman trial, he said he was in regular contact with General Vance. That was a year after the Prime Minister's chief of staff was made aware of sexual misconduct allegations against the general, and that was four months before this Prime Minister gave the general a $50,000 raise.
Did the Prime Minister himself know about the allegations against General Vance, or is he satisfied with the cover-up conducted by his chief of staff?
Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, once again, as a government, we have always taken extremely seriously our responsibility to ensure that survivors who come forward with allegations or experiences of sexual harassment or sexual assault get properly supported. We have seen, time and time again, over many years, that the processes in place have not been strong enough to support them.
We have made significant investments and improvements in those processes, but there is more to do. That is what we are focused on as a government. By appointing Justice Arbour and Lieutenant-General Carignan, we will continue to make sure we are supporting anyone who comes forward with allegations.
Erin O'Toole ConservativeLeader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, a survivor did come forward three years ago, but it seemed to interfere with the Mark Norman prosecution. The testimony of General Vance was critical to the Norman prosecution, and PCO lawyers, the department that is the Prime Minister's department, were found in documents to have said they needed to “engineer the issues at stake” in the Norman trial. Who was doing the engineering? It was the Privy Council Office and Ms. Telford, the chief of staff to the Prime Minister.
Therefore, I will ask him again: Did his chief of staff sit on allegations against the former chief of the defence staff to further the Norman prosecution?
Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, it is amazing to watch the leader of the official opposition twist himself in knots to try to perpetrate some sort of conspiracy theory.
The reality is that every step of the way we have moved forward on strengthening supports for survivors of sexual assault and made sure we are strengthening processes. There is more to do, but as a government and as an office, we have always taken that seriously. Every woman and man who serves in the armed forces, or works in any workplace in Canada, deserves to be supported if they come forward with concerns and allegations.
Yves-François Blanchet Bloc Beloeil—Chambly, QC
Mr. Speaker, nearly one million people across Canada are reported to have been the victims of identity theft.
One million people will be expected to pay taxes on amounts that they never received. They are victims of fraud. The government told them to pay their taxes and then it will see. We do not know how much money that represents either overall, by province or for Quebec.
How can the Prime Minister justify making victims of fraud pay taxes for the fraudster rather than giving them government support?
Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, that is completely false.
With CERB, the priority has always been to quickly help Canadians when they needed it. That is exactly what we did with CERB.
We know that some Canadians have been the victims of fraud. The departments are working closely with the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre to resolve those problems. We will continue to work together.
I want to point out that victims of fraud will not be held responsible for the amounts paid to people who stole their identity. We are there to support Canadians in these difficult times.
Yves-François Blanchet Bloc Beloeil—Chambly, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister just said the exact opposite of what he is doing.
He said victims will not be held responsible for the money paid to fraudsters, but these people are being told to pay tax on the money paid to fraudsters. That is the exact opposite of what the Prime Minister just said.
We also suggested doing like Quebec and giving people a month to figure things out, giving public servants a month they will surely need. Proportionally speaking, we should probably give the minister at least six months to get a handle on her file.
Will the Prime Minister pledge not to tax income people did not receive?
Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, as I said, the departments are working very closely with the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre to resolve these problems.
We will always be there to support victims of fraud in this country. We have also made sure that ESDC and the CRA have the resources they need to enhance their ability to detect, investigate and deal with fraud.
We will be there to help Canadians who have been victims of fraud.
Jagmeet Singh NDP Burnaby South, BC
Mr. Speaker, the situation with respect to sexual misconduct in the Canadian Armed Forces was exactly the same in 2015.
Justice Deschamps produced a report that raises concerns. She sent a clear message that simply repeating the mantra of zero tolerance without taking action to protect women was not good enough.
What did the Liberal government do?
It continued repeating the mantra without taking any concrete action to protect women in the Canadian Forces.
Why does the Prime Minister refuse to implement the recommendations of the Deschamps report?
Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, since 2015, we have taken concrete action both in the military and in our government to support survivors of sexual violence.
We have listened to survivors. We have strengthened our laws against domestic violence. We have made investments to prevent and respond to gender-based violence. In June 2017, we announced the first-ever federal strategy to prevent gender-based violence, along with a $200-million investment. We established a national action plan that was announced in January 2021.
We will continue to work to support everyone from coast to coast to coast.
Jagmeet Singh NDP Burnaby South, BC
Mr. Speaker, right now there is a chilling message being sent to women in the Canadian Armed Forces. It is that, if they raise a complaint and it makes it to the highest office of this land, they will be ignored and nothing will be done. Instead of fixing it, the Liberal government wants to put in place another inquiry, despite ignoring the inquiry from 2015 and not putting in place any of those recommendations. The Conservatives want to get into a fight about who is worse.
I will help everyone out. Both the Conservatives and the Liberals have failed to protect women in the Canadian Armed Forces.
What will the Prime Minister concretely do to protect women in the Canadian Armed Forces?
Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, last week, in addition to appointing Justice Arbour to move forward on lasting reforms, we appointed Lieutenant-General Jennie Carignan to head a unit specifically dedicated to hearing, receiving and supporting anyone who comes forward with allegations of unacceptable conduct, harassment or assault.
We have continued, over the past many years, to make investments in fighting gender-based violence, pushing back against misogyny, fighting domestic violence and being there to support survivors. We will continue to do that. There is much more work to do.
Richard Martel Conservative Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's chief of staff is supposed to be the Prime Minister's right hand, the person who works behind the scenes to make everything run smoothly. She is the one taking the helm in a storm. That person works closely with the Prime Minister.
The ombudsman confirmed that the chief of staff, Ms. Telford, was aware of the allegations against Mr. Vance.
Either the Prime Minister knew that or there is no communication at that office.
Which is it?
Harjit S. Sajjan LiberalMinister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, Canadian Armed Forces members make enormous sacrifices to protect Canadians, regardless of rank or gender, and they have an undeniable right to serve with safety. It is clear that we have not lived up to our responsibilities to protect members from misconduct. We are going to do better.
That is why we announced that Louise Arbour will lead an independent external comprehensive review. Plus, we have also named Lieutenant-General Jennie Carignan as chief of professional conduct and culture. These are the initial steps, and we will do more.
Richard Martel Conservative Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Canadian Armed Forces are a world leader in terms of the proportion of women in service. The Liberal Party claims to be the party of feminism and diversity, but it continues to sweep scandals under the rug to protect its old boys' club.
The Minister of National Defence failed to protect our women in service. There is a code of silence in this government. No one talks to each other.
How long is the Prime Minister going to keep trying to make us believe that he was not aware?
Harjit S. Sajjan LiberalMinister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, I want to be very clear. When Mr. Walbourne brought up those concerns of misconduct involving the former chief of the defence, he did not provide details.
Who had the details? The Leader of the Opposition did. He heard rumours back in 2015 regarding General Vance, and he felt they were so serious that he brought it to the former prime minister's chief of staff at that time. Perhaps the Leader of the Opposition would like to provide greater details about what he knew in 2015 and why they still appointed General Vance.
James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB
Mr. Speaker, the minister had actual evidence, not just rumours, and did nothing with it. The defence minister was personally briefed by the former military ombudsman about sexual misconduct allegations against General Vance, but the defence minister refuses to say he knew it was sexual misconduct.
Senior advisor to the Prime Minister Elder Marques knew it was sexual harassment, and so did the Prime Minister’s Privy Council Office. They released briefing notes and emails that proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that it was referred to as sexual harassment.
How does the defence minister expect us to believe that he never told the Prime Minister that his top soldier stood accused of sexual misconduct?
Harjit S. Sajjan LiberalMinister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, I want to make this very clear. As I said at committee, I did not know the nature, the specifics or the details. The former ombudsman brought up concerns of misconduct involving the former chief of the defence staff, but did not provide any details.
Who had the details? The Leader of the Opposition had them. Let us not forget, the member opposite was the parliamentary secretary of national defence at that time, while there was an investigation going on into General Vance. They still appointed him.
Maybe the member opposite would like to provide further details of what he knew when he was in that position and the appointment was made, while an investigation was ongoing at that time.
James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB
Mr. Speaker, maybe that defence minister would like to be the architect of some better talking points.
Former ombudsman Gary Walbourne testified at the defence committee that he told this minister, face to face, that the allegations against General Vance were of inappropriate sexual behaviour, but the minister keeps denying this. Gary Walbourne just said on Twitter that he is willing to take a lie detector test to prove that he is telling the truth.
Will the defence minister accept the challenge and take one too, right beside Gary Walbourne, so we could know, once and for all, who is telling the truth?
Harjit S. Sajjan LiberalMinister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, I have repeated the answer many times. As I stated, he did not provide any details or specifics of the case. One thing we have done is make sure we take action to provide support to women. We know that more work needs to be done.
While the official opposition and the member opposite play politics, we will stay focused on the work at hand to make sure that we create a harassment-free workplace, something that we are committed to doing.
Maybe the member opposite would like to explain what he knew at that time, when he was a parliamentary secretary and there was a formal investigation going on, and still made the appointment of General Vance as chief of the defence staff.
Karen Vecchio Conservative Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON
Mr. Speaker, on Sunday, the Minister of Defence said that the nature of the complaint ”does not matter”. When the general is in charge of Operation Honour, it matters. When he appoints a head of HR with so many sexual misconduct allegations against him that he is known as the “Mulligan Man”, it matters. When someone is a woman serving her country, it matters.
Could the man, who is the Minister of National Defence, tell me why he thinks it does not?