Karen Vecchio

[Judges Act, October 2nd, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, it was wonderful working with that member on the Status of Women committee. It is a neat committee. While we do not always agree on everything, at the end of the day, we do have quite a bond. I am looking at other members on that committee as well.

This is exactly what we need to do. We need to send that signal out to the provinces. This morning I asked the Minister of Justice about a case in which intoxication became an issue and it was appealed on the basis of charter rights. At the end of the day, the perpetrator was not going to be held accountable for the sexual assault.

There are great challenges and concerns. Any person who is dealing with cases of trauma should have this type of training. Regardless of whether it is sexual assault, family abuse or any of those things, there needs to be that empathetic training. We need to ensure we provide all of those resources and tools. This is about compassion.

[Judges Act, October 2nd, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, we saw some horrific stories come out of Quebec. We talked about an offender who was released from prison and that evening killed a prostitute. We know he had violence in his life. Many reports had come out, stating that this person should not be left on day parole. Unfortunately, the parole officer told this person that he could buy sex. To me, a person who had used a hammer to kill another young woman is not someone we would want on our streets. One of the things we were looking at amending was ensuring parole officers were also engaged in this process.

[Judges Act, October 2nd, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, it is wonderful to be in this place and to talk about something that is so important. I would also like to thank the minister, because this is something I know she and I both believe in, that we need to work harder for women, especially when it comes to these horrible sexual assault cases.

I would also like to thank two other women in this House today, the critics for women and gender equality for both the NDP and the Bloc. My time working with them as the shadow minister for women and gender has been excellent. I know that when it comes to women's issues, we can work very well together.

I will be splitting my time with the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands, another member who will be working very strongly on this file.

I think we have to go back to why we need these changes in the first place. I was so proud to stand alongside Rona Ambrose, back in 2017, as she put forward Bill C-337. It was the just act, where we understood that judges need to be trained to understand what it looks like to be a victim of this horrendous crime.

We also have to talk today about what happens when there is something that is actually going against those women, and the misunderstandings of what it is as well. At the bottom of this, the survivors of sexual assault should never be afraid to come forward to the judicial system. They should never be afraid to pick up the phone and speak to law enforcement, knowing that what they are going to be bringing forward is urgent and it is necessary for it to be appropriately looked at.

There was a report back in 2014, and this was pretty much what kicked off Bill C-337. It was a report called “A Survey of Survivors of Sexual Violence From Three Canadian Cities”. It was published by the Department of Justice. We look at some of these things when we talk about women. We have seen so many cases.

We have seen so many movies. I still think of the movie with Jodie Foster, back in the 1980s. At that time, because of who she was, because of the way she looked, because of her poverty levels, those things were used against her. People did not believe her. Sure, it was a story that was fictional, but it is based on so many women's lives. This is something we really need to focus on.

There are instances where victims of this horrendous crime are being judged for their personal history. I think it is really important to understand that no woman, no man, no young girl or boy ever deserves this type of treatment. We should all be treated with dignity. When we go to the courts to talk about these types of things, we should be honoured and respected.

During the survey I was referring to, the survey of survivors, there were some key elements taken from this. This is what is really important: It is about talking to the survivors. What happened to them through this judicial process? What were some of the pros and cons of it? Part of the problem that we hear about all time is that people are not going to come forward if they feel disrespected, if they feel violated once again. They are concerned about the trauma from the sexual violence, and we need to have empathetic people who are trained, such as our judges.

I am very proud of many of the police associations that have been working to make sure they understand more about domestic abuse and sexual assault so that when they are going to one of these cases, they can be empathetic. It is a very difficult time. It is hard for people who have never been part of it or have never been traumatized in this area to put themselves in those shoes. Speaking to survivors is what we need to move forward. We need to make sure that the prevalence of sexual violence is ended, and we also need to make sure that we are providing the appropriate resources for one to become healthy and whole again.

We talk about mental health and addictions all the time in this country, but we also have to understand that some of the things that lead to these addictions and mental health issues can be things such as sexual assault and what happens when we are not worrying about the people who have gone through this horrific challenge.

There is one woman who has spoken about this, and this is just a quote from the study. She indicated:

...I think they really, truly need to understand there needs to be better education on the side of law enforcement, or on the judicial side, as to why it is so under-reported; why people feel such a sense of shame; why victims will blame themselves or feel responsible…why people tend to get away with this and why people are reluctant to come forward....

We have heard many times, “What does the judicial system look like?” The biggest concern that I have is that being a victim of this type of crime is not like being a victim of other types of crimes. This is someone violating every bone in a person's body, and I think we need to make sure that when we are looking at these cases, we are respecting the trauma the individual has gone through. If that trauma is untreated, if that person is revictimized, we are not doing them any good. We are selling them short of a better future.

These are really concerning things for me. We look at the stereotypes and understanding the stereotypes that we have of indigenous women, women in poverty and women of colour. What happens to these women when they put themselves forward? We have heard many times that the results of these court hearings can be skewed because of the victims' personal history. This should never have been something that causes the inequality that it has.

I can say that when I look across this room, I know that the member for London—Fanshawe and I will always fight on these things together, and that the people in London will always make sure that we have women's backs. A lot of that comes from the great leaders that we have in our communities. I can think of people like Megan Walker, whom I speak of often when it comes to the London Abused Women's Centre.

These are things that our women's facilities and organizations from across this country are fighting for. They see what happens when women have been assaulted and they see what happens when women are not believed. I think that is something we need to look at, because for me it is really important.

There are many negative impacts to a woman when she is not heard. If the judges are not going to hear her, what happens to that woman? We have to look at this. Is it a young woman who has gone to college, where we know that the sexual assault rates are extremely and extraordinarily high? What happens to her? She is a 20-year-old. What happens to her for the rest of her future if there is not a court decision or there is not the proper law enforcement to support her?

I look at some of the negative coping strategies that we talk about all the time when it comes to mental health. I look at some of the addictive behaviours. If a woman has been sexually assaulted and nobody is listening, what does she do so she can get through this trauma? We have to be aware of the addictive behaviours, when it comes to drug use and other horrific things like that. We also understand that there is a lot of self-harm that can follow sexual trauma as well. We hear a lot about cutting. We hear a lot about women and awful things that they have done, understanding that they have lost all self-confidence and that they are not whole. It is our job to make sure that these women have the opportunity to be whole again. That includes not only the proper judicial system but also the proper counselling and services in our communities to help them.

That is why, when I talk about the London Abused Women's Centre, I know that we have a great facility in our own community. I can only hope that across this country we can have these types of programs from coast to coast to coast and, for the member for Haldimand—Norfolk, to coast. We also have to understand that after this there are many suicides. Many of these people who have not been heard take their own lives, and that is just not appropriate. There is also great isolation. We have seen over the last six months what happens due to isolation. We have seen this with COVID-19. We have seen some horrific things, and we have seen many people lose their lives because of that. We also have to see the avoidance and the seeking of attention. There are so many scenarios that can happen to a woman who has not been heard.

Finally, we have to look at the unhealthy relationships, because we see this trend. Women sit back, those who have maybe not been traumatized in their lives, and they continue to wonder why women would go back to that type of relationship, but if we are not there to support them, they know no better. They do not know that there are men who are wonderful in this world, who will take their hand and walk with them and treat them exactly how they should be treated. Like I said, they should be treated like gold.

I am very fortunate, because I have that husband who stands alongside me. However, not everybody has that person in their lives, so it is really important. As the minister said, it is not just about women advocating for women, but it is also about men. I know that within this chamber I am looking at 338 members of Parliament who are all on the same side, and that is what matters here. I know that my own colleagues support me, and as a woman, that is what continues to create my confidence and continues to make me able to reach for the stars. I am so proud of the type of caucus I work with.

Today I saw in the London Free Press, one of our local newspapers, a story about a young woman who was sexually assaulted in the London East area at a bus stop. We need to make sure that we are there for that young woman who was just assaulted this morning. We need to make sure that we listen, and we need to make sure that she is able to go through the process fairly.

I thank the House for this time, and I thank all Canadians for listening.

[Judges Act, October 2nd, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, this is a bill that is important for all women across the country. When Rona Ambrose brought it forth in the 42nd Parliament, she stood alongside all the members in this chamber, as well as all the leaders, to put it through. However, I am very concerned with where we are going next.

By no means does the minister have to respond about this specific court case, but just a few months ago there was a court case on the rights of the person accused when intoxication became an issue. One of the biggest things about this bill, therefore, is to make sure that women and those who have gone through sexual assault have confidence in the legal system, but what about this new idea about intoxication and its use in June of 2020?

What are the minister's feelings about this, and how can we continue to protect survivors of sexual assault?

[Proceedings on the bill entitled An Act relating to economic recovery in response to COVID-19, September 29th, 2020]

Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his lengthy speech. I recognize the member is very passionate about this, but so are we, and so are the NDP, the Green Party and the Bloc. We are all passionate, because we are all working for our constituents.

We all know that these programs that were announced needed to be announced, because September 30 was the deadline. When prorogation was set, the Liberals already knew there was going to be a problem.

I am wondering, and perhaps the member could share with me, whether prorogation was to cover the butts of the government, or did the government actually think it reset the agenda? If that was the case, I am confused as to why we are having to go through this debate today, pushing through this thing. If we had done this last week, we would have been in better care. I am also having to share with my constituents that with this time frame, they will already have to wait because the government prorogued.

I am wondering if the member thought that was a good idea or not. How were Canadians going to get their benefits if the government was not working?

[Ethics, September 29th, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, I am just very concerned because last night as we were sitting at the procedures and House affairs committee, the meeting was adjourned.

There was supposed to be a meeting at 11 a.m. today. Why was it cancelled? Once again, it should not have been cancelled. The meeting should have been suspended. It is part of our procedural rules, and that was not done.

I am just wondering why the government is going outside of procedural rules to cover its butt when it comes to WE. When is it going to answer the question on the WE motion?

[Ethics, September 29th, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians are still looking for the truth when it comes to the WE scandal. Just last night the Liberal committee chair of the procedure and House affairs committee violated the rules by adjourning the debate. The chair then cancelled the morning meeting as well.

This has the PMO written all over it. We looked at this during the prorogation of Parliament, but this time it is happening at the PROC.

My question is for the chair of the procedure and House affairs committee. When will the committee get back to work to study the WE scandal?

[Proceedings of the House and Committees, May 26th, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, I thank our incredible House leader. She has done a great job since she took on this incredible role, and on March 12 as everything changed, she made sure that we were all on the same page. I appreciate her incredible work.

Everybody has seen many challenges, but one of the biggest challenges is if people cannot get out to make a few extra dollars they may need. Whether they are on GIS or old age security or maybe are part-time workers, there are a lot of people who do not have the money they need.

One of the members from Saskatchewan talked about the child benefit and I wondered if I got the child benefit. Yes, despite the fact I am a member of Parliament, I was paid $289 by the federal government last week for my 17-year-old son. People know how much money I make as a member of Parliament. What the heck do I need that money for when there are seniors in my riding who are going without food, when we meet so many people needing food banks? Yet the government sent me $289 by way of the Canada child tax benefit, while giving our seniors $300 in old age security despite the fact they are making less than $20,000 a year.

This shows the incredible inequities, the scope of the fact that they have not looked into these programs and that a person making the amount of money I am making is being paid the same amount as a senior on old age security during this pandemic. Shame on you.

Not you, Mr. Speaker.

[Proceedings of the House and Committees, May 26th, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, the London Abused Women's Centre is special in the hearts of anyone who has represented that area and all of the great work Megan Walker and her team have done.

Whether it is domestic abuse, sexual assault or human trafficking, we have seen those numbers rise during this pandemic. Unfortunately, the MAPI, the measures to address prostitution initiative, has been exhausted and the government has not implemented a program that would allow front-line workers to actually be able to work with sexually exploited people, whether they be young girls, young boys or women.

London lost the funding and luckily the community came together to support that program for one more month, but the government needs to step up. I believe the best thing we can do is to continue to voice that loss to the government benches, continue to voice the needs of the vulnerable young women and girls and to make sure there are people available to talk to them and to get them through this awful time and make sure they are not exploited by these creeps.

[Proceedings of the House and Committees, May 26th, 2020]

Mr. Speaker, I am so proud to stand here and represent the amazing people in Elgin—Middlesex—London.

Like many other members, I would like to start by talking about my incredible staff who have helped so many people through this pandemic. I send a special thanks to Cathy, Jill, Jena, Charli, Kim and Scott who have really kept my feet to the ground in ensuring the people of Elgin—Middlesex—London are served during this pandemic. I would like to send them my absolute thanks, and thanks on behalf of all 116,000 constituents as well.

Today we have talked a lot about the role of a parliamentarian. I know, like others, some of us have come with a background of what a constituency office looks like. In the last two months, I have been a constituency assistant. I went back to a role I did for 11 years. I was a receptionist, I was whatever they needed me to do.

As a member of Parliament, we have two very distinct roles. One role is to serve our constituents and do what they need. We attend important events or have meetings with our mayors and stakeholders and we ensure their voices are heard in Parliament. Part of that role at the constituency office is also being the liaison with departments such as the Canada Revenue Agency, immigration or Service Canada. We have many roles.

My greatest role is to be the voice of Elgin—Middlesex—London in Parliament. That is why it is very important that Parliament resumes. Following this vote tonight, we know we will be back in our ridings doing work, but once again, limited to the work we can do.

I would also like to thank my husband. This morning Mike was installing proper protocol in my office so we can serve our constituents, starting June 1. I thank my husband for putting up Plexiglas, which is very important. Serving our constituents has to be safe.

Through this pandemic, I have listened to people talk about social versus capitalist, all of those ideas, whether one is NDP, Conservative, Liberal or Green.

I want to read a post from earlier today. This is from a friend of mine, Cindy Watters-Carroll. She is not part of the 1%. She is a single mom with two grown boys. Her son A.J. is a tattoo artist, and I would like to thank him for doing my tattoo on mental health. He is a wonderful man.

Both Cindy and A.J. are in businesses that cannot reopen. This is what she sent me earlier, “I fear for small business owners, even with the slow return to our businesses, how do we survive the economic massacre that will follow for years? Yes the government is helping albeit not enough, but what happens after they allow small businesses to reopen at only half capacity? They will not help financially then, we small business owners will struggle as the economy and everyone else struggles. Canada is in debt and not just a little debt, so as we move forward over the next year(s) the help for small businesses will be gone. The cost off PPE and extreme cleaning procedures is very expensive and adds to our overhead, all while we take in even less income from working at half capacity and take in less income from those that now choose only to shop on line.”

These are the kinds of challenges we are beginning to see.

Back at the beginning of January, my husband and many of his colleagues started businesses. He started a massage therapy business. Out of his graduating class, many of those people rented spaces and started their businesses. For two months, many of these graduates were up and running businesses.

This group, until just a couple weeks ago, was not able to get any support from the government. They had worked for two months. Very few had reached that line of $5,000, because they had been in school for 22 months. I took it upon myself, on behalf of the graduating class, to write a letter, saying that this was a missing group. What is really important is that I do not know if they spoke to any other members of Parliament, but they spoke to me and I wanted to ensure their voices were heard. I sent that letter here along with many other letters from constituents in which they expressed their concerns.

That is what Parliament is here for. It is not just about answering the questions. It is about what do we do to find solutions. I do not think the government recognizes that there are 338 parliamentarians, all with incredible backgrounds and skills. Whether they were lawyers, doctors, real estate agents or anything else, we all have something to offer, not just the people sitting at the cabinet table.

Those are concerns I have as we talk about why it is great that we are getting more opportunities to ask more questions. However, I am not just about questions. I also think I am part of the solution, and that is something that I am really hoping the government will understand.

Prior to this pandemic, we spoke to agricultural producers. We know there were issues in the dairy sector, beef and pork specifically if producers are trying to ship their goods to China, and in my area, grains and oilseeds, which is very large. People could be beekeepers or working in many of the other sectors that are a part of the agricultural sector that is one of the backbones of Elgin—Middlesex—London. They had all of these concerns going into the pandemic. They had issues with their grain being stopped at blockades. All of these things were happening and the government did not do a lot about them. As we moved forward, the pandemic hit. Not only did producers have the first barrier of not being able to get their goods to market, they also had the other barrier of COVID-19. Now they have two strikes against them.

We talk about small businesses. I have heard many people talk about the decades of hard work by Canadians to feed their families and to provide jobs for their employees. Today, we have talked a lot about access to the programs for these businesses. I am sure that all 338 of us in the House of Commons heard about some of the eligibility requirements that just truly took so many of these small businesses out of the loop.

There are issues with personal bank accounts versus business bank accounts. I probably had at least 20 to 25 different business owners contact me specifically about that.

Of course, there is the payroll issue. When people are operating a small business, they may not pay themselves out of the payroll. I was a small business owner, and I can promise that making sure my employees were paid first was my priority, as it is for many small business owners. Not only is it embarrassing when they cannot give their employees a cheque to cash, but they know that the business is not going to survive and they hope there will be a job for the employees to come back to.

We can also look now at the commercial rent program put out just yesterday. There have been questions in the House about it. Many of us have been working on this file, recognizing that there is a huge gap. Tenants have been calling me asking me to please call their landlords and explain this program to them. There are many landlords who do not want to get involved with it. The fact is there is a 25% loss to landlords as well, so getting them to buy in can be difficult. We recognize there are changes being made to this program, specifically to the mortgages, but at the end of the day we know who is going to be hurt. It is going to be small business owners, all of the employees in that area and the communities that risk losing these incredible assets, whether it is a business that works in tourism or shops or art galleries. All of these places right now are at risk. These issues are once again a huge concern. This is not about capitalists versus small businesses, or about making certain types of income. All people, whether old or young, rich or poor, are being impacted in a different way.

I just want to give a couple of thoughts specifically on the CERB program. We recognized in the HUMA committee that the government did not do a gender-based analysis of this. I wonder, too, if the Liberals did that with the wage subsidy program or with the business assistance program for the operating costs.

Finally, I want to finish on a couple of things. Why is Parliament really important? Just a few minutes ago, I read that we are looking at Huawei. If there are not people in this place to hold the government to account, will the Liberals be allowing businesses like Huawei to set up? If we are off in our ridings working, how are we going to be sure that the Prime Minister is not making backroom deals with Huawei? Those are things that are really important and that Canadians are concerned about.

This is about our critical infrastructure that needs to be updated, and we know that. We know that because we are talking here today on why we cannot connect Parliament with the rest of Canada. I talked about the fact that I could not even have a staff meeting. I know that my friend from Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, whom I am sharing my time with, was dropped from our first call when we were doing this Parliament.

There is a lot of work to be done.

The COVID pandemic is occurring and we need to deal with it, but the world has not stopped. Human trafficking has not stopped. Businesses have not stopped. We have to realize that we have to work alongside this and take these proper precautions. I wish the government would change its mind and resume Parliament as necessary because there is a lot of work to be done, but, unfortunately, we will continue to be on hold.