Debates of June 17th, 2021

National Defence

[Leona Alleslev, Conservative, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, Canada's military is in crisis on the defence minister's watch. There have been hours of jarring testimony detailing accounts of abuse of power, rape, sexual harassment and discrimination. Numerous generals are under investigation, others complicit through their actions or their silence. However, the defence minister will not accept any responsibility. He will not do the honourable thing, admit he has failed in his duties and resign.

Will the Prime Minister act and fire his defence minister?

[Harjit S. Sajjan, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, we will continue to work very hard to look after our women and men in the Canadian Armed Forces. The horrible allegations that have come forward are extremely alarming and we must work harder. The work we have done in passing Bill C-77 is one of the first steps, also SMRC and the work that is being done there, plus the work that Madam Arbour will also do. We will get this done.

[Leona Alleslev, Conservative, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the defence minister has consistently misrepresented the facts, refused to answer questions, failed to implement important changes to improve the military's culture and turned a blind eye to serious allegations of misconduct. The Prime Minister directed his ministers to create a “culture of integrity and accountability that allows [them] to earn and keep the trust of Canadians”. The defence minister has been derelict in his duty and has lost that trust.

Will the Prime Minister act and fire the defence minister?

[Harjit S. Sajjan, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, I respectfully and completely disagree with the member's assertions. Any allegation that has ever been brought forward was immediately taken to the appropriate authorities. We want to make sure that when survivors come forward, they are heard and they are supported. That is exactly the work that we started back in 2015 when we came into government, and we will continue this work because we know that we have a lot more work to do.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Mr. Speaker, since taking office, the defence minister has been making decisions that defy logic.

His government promised to help the victims of ISIS, and yet what was one of the first decisions this minister made? He decided to pull our CF-18s out of the bombing campaign against ISIS. That campaign was protecting the victims.

Can the minister tell us the real reason for the withdrawal of our CF-18s from the fight against ISIS?

[Harjit S. Sajjan, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for the question because I also briefed him on the plan on how ISIS was going to be defeated on the ground working with our coalition partners, and that is exactly what we did. We increased our troops contributions on the ground. We increased our intelligence support, because that is what our coalition partners asked for. Now, 98% of the territory is not controlled by lSIS. We also took a regional approach. Our plan worked because we worked with our allies by supporting our troops on the ground.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Mr. Speaker, that does not answer my question. What is the real reason? We do not know.

I have another question. This minister oversaw the wrongful indictment and unconscionable dismissal of Vice-Admiral Norman. When Norman stood up to defend Davie's construction of the MV Asterix, the minister did the Prime Minister's bidding rather than think of the best interests of the Royal Canadian Navy.

That is absurd. Can the minister tell us the real reason for the accusations made against Vice-Admiral Norman?

[Harjit S. Sajjan, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, talk about supporting the navy. The previous government allowed our two joint supply ships to be lost. We lost that capability. When it came to the interim supply ship, I supported this work. Our government approved it, got it done, but more importantly, we put the money into the defence policy so we can buy two brand new joint supply ships, and they are being built right now as we speak. Plus, we are also equipping the navy with the Arctic and offshore patrol ships, six of them, and 15 surface combatants, because we put the money there to serve our troops.

[Jag Sahota, Conservative, Calgary Skyview, AB]

Mr. Speaker, when Major Kellie Brennan appeared before the status of women committee, she told the committee that General Vance told her he was “untouchable” because he owned the CFNIS. Now it has been revealed that while under investigation he went golfing with Vice-Admiral Baines and Lieutenant-General Mike Rouleau, who himself held oversight authority for the military police. Given these startling revelations, when will the minister finally follow through with the Deschamps report recommendations and create a fully independent external investigation body?

[Harjit S. Sajjan, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, no person in Canada is above the law. The military police and the NIS are independent of the chain of command. When it comes to the incident of the golf course, the acting chief of the defence staff has also, as the member knows, advised me that the vice-chief of the defence staff is no longer in his role.

We know that we have a lot more work to do, and we will get it done. We have accepted Justice Fish's recommendations.

[Jag Sahota, Conservative, Calgary Skyview, AB]

Mr. Speaker, when Vice-Admiral Norman was under investigation, the minister immediately had him suspended. Meanwhile, when the minister became aware that the former chief of the defence staff was under investigation, he refused to even look at the evidence, left him in his role, and even gave him a pay raise.

Given that General Vance believes that he is above the law, and given the minister's refusal to act, does the minister also believe that General Vance is above the law?

[Harjit S. Sajjan, Liberal, Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, I completely disagree with the assertions that the member has made. Any allegations that were ever brought to my attention were always taken to the immediate authority. No politician should ever get involved in an investigation. No politician should start an investigation, especially on the Canadian Armed Forces members, as the previous government used to do.

Official Languages

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Official Languages keeps repeating that the Charter of the French Language and her bill do the same thing. She says that someone protected by Bill C‑32 has the same rights as someone covered by the Charter of the French Language.

However, when minister Jolin-Barrette says that the Quebec law must apply to everyone, the minister digs in her heels. When the House voted for Quebec's federally regulated businesses to be subject to the Charter of the French Language, she voted against it.

My question is simple: Why did she vote against it if it is the same thing?

[Mélanie Joly, Liberal, Minister of Economic Development and Official Languages]

Mr. Speaker, I think that my colleague should read Bill C‑32. She would get a good answer to her question.

Essentially, 55% of businesses that have already complied with Bill 101 in Quebec will have the right to continue under the same system, and those that have not can decide to do so at that time.

Naturally, we want to protect the right to work in French, the right to be served in French and the right not to be discriminated against for being a francophone in Quebec as well as in regions with a strong francophone presence.

My colleague will also recognize that within federalism, the federal government must have a national role and an approach that protects all francophones. That is the objective—

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

Order.

The hon. member for Saint‑Jean.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, our bill says that the Charter of the French Language applies to federally regulated businesses in Quebec. The minister recognizes that Quebeckers form a nation, that Quebec has a single official language and that French is the common language of the Quebec nation. She should therefore be able to understand that, as a francophone nation, Quebec must have a single language regime.

Why is the minister opposed to the Charter of the French Language applying to all Quebeckers?

[Mélanie Joly, Liberal, Minister of Economic Development and Official Languages]

Mr. Speaker, I have a lot of respect for my colleague, and I can see that our objectives are aligned. We both want to protect the French language in Quebec. Now, we want to protect it across the country too, and we will. We also want to protect linguistic minorities, including francophones outside Quebec and anglophones in Quebec.

My colleague should be happy. For the first time ever, the federal government is stepping up and protecting the French language. That is why I encourage her to vote in favour of Bill C‑32 on official languages.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am trying to understand where the minister stands on the language issue.

There are two systems: One is for the very large majority of Quebeckers, who are protected under the Charter of the French Language. The other is for about 200,000 workers in federally regulated businesses. These are the people Bill C-32 seeks to help.

My question is simple: Between Bill C‑32 and the Charter of the French Language, which one is more effective in protecting the right to work in French?

[Mélanie Joly, Liberal, Minister of Economic Development and Official Languages]

Mr. Speaker, that is not for me to say. The Conseil du patronat du Québec, the Fédération des chambres de commerce du Québec, the Chamber of Commerce of Metropolitan Montreal and all the unions that represent workers in Quebec are in favour of the bill. We can see that there is a very large consensus in Quebec and elsewhere in Canada to protect these rights.

Therefore, I think the federal government is doing its job and assuming its responsibilities, and the reform we presented is ambitious. It is a robust bill, and I hope the Bloc Québécois will be able to acknowledge this work and, of course, support the bill.

Public Safety

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills, ON]

Mr. Speaker, orders of the House and its committees are binding and must be complied with, just like Canadians have had to comply with public health orders about quarantining. Your ruling yesterday made it clear the government was defying three orders of the House and its special committee.

Will the government now comply with these orders and deliver the unredacted documents to the law clerk before the House has to adopt a fourth order demanding the government comply?

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, once again, we see the Conservatives playing games with national security. On this side of the House, we will never do that. In fact, the Public Health Agency of Canada has provided fully unredacted documents to the appropriate committee of parliamentarians with the appropriate security clearance. I have written to the committee to suggest that if it study this issue, that would be appropriate.

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am not playing games. Since the beginning of the pandemic, the Minister of Health has been telling Canadians to do what public health tells them to do. However, she insists on not doing what the House is asking her to do, and that is to submit the documents regarding the Winnipeg lab.

Does the government not understand that it is undermining the rule of law when it tells Canadians to follow the rules and then does not do the same?

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, I am so grateful to the public health officers across the country who have worked for so long to protect Canadians from COVID-19. In fact, I know many of them personally and I know they have done their absolute best to protect the citizens in their care. Just like them, we will never do anything to put Canadians' national security at risk.

We will continue to be open and transparent, and provide these documents to the appropriate committee, which the Public Health Agency of Canada has done. That committee has the appropriate clearance to review these documents.

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the pandemic has laid bare the truth about our institutions; they are weak and mediocre. We have no Governor General because of scandal; the former clerk resigned in scandal; eight senior leaders of the Canadian Armed Forces have been forced out. We have a military procurement that cannot procure and payroll systems that cannot pay. Now we have a Parliament that cannot do its job, because the government defies the House.

When will the government preserve what little remains, comply with the orders and hand over the unredacted documents to the law clerk?

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Minister of Health]

Mr. Speaker, again, on this side of the House, this Liberal government will never play games with national security, like we see the Conservative Party doing right now. The member opposite knows that there is a committee of parliamentarians that has the appropriate level of security clearance to review these documents. Those documents have been provided to that committee, fully unredacted. I have written to the committee, asking it to consider reviewing the issue.