Mr. Speaker, I rise in the House today to discuss solutions to the very serious problems of sexual harassment, abuse of power and bullying in the ranks of the RCMP.
Bill C-42 was introduced by the Conservatives to address serious allegations of abuse, bullying and sexual harassment that had been made by a number of female members of the force.
Those members reported that they were the target of sexist comments, sexual pranks and derogatory remarks in the workplace, and had been for decades.
The harassment came from co-workers as well as superior officers. They said the work environment was hostile and unhealthy for women. The abusive behaviour had become standard practice, one of them reported. According to these women, an abusive work environment had existed for years.
I am pleased that we are finally discussing this bill in the House of Commons. I hoped we would come up with workable solutions. I think we all agree that something has to be done to ensure that these RCMP employees are able to work in a healthy and safe environment.
The Conservatives introduced Bill C-42 as a solution. This bill gives the commissioner of the RCMP the ultimate power to discharge members for administrative reasons only and to appoint managers to resolve conflicts and investigate problems relating to harassment, in particular.
It also establishes the civilian review and complaints commission for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, the CRCC, to replace the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP.
The new commission will do its own reviews of RCMP policies to ensure compliance with the minister’s directives, the act and the applicable rules. It will have access to information under the control or in the possession of the RCMP. It will establish new investigative powers, such as compelling witnesses and officers to testify and compelling the production of evidence and documents. It will report to the Minister of Public Safety and the commissioner, and its recommendations will be non-binding.
The bill also creates a mechanism for investigating serious incidents, that is, deaths or serious injuries involving the RCMP.
I will remind my colleagues that the NDP supported this bill at second reading, because in principle, we wanted to rectify the serious sexual harassment situation in the RCMP.
In committee, my colleagues listened carefully to the experts’ testimony. The witnesses were clear: this bill would not be sufficient to create an open, collaborative and respectful work environment.
Giving the commissioner more powers is not the solution. The RCMP and the government have to go further in their effort to modernize the RCMP.
My colleagues on the committee proposed amendments in good faith, based on the experts’ testimony, to strengthen the bill and try to genuinely solve the problems of abuse in the RCMP.
For example, we proposed that the bill be worded more proactively to combat the systemic problem of harassment, and particularly sexual harassment, among members of the RCMP. That amendment was rejected.
After hearing the testimony of Yvonne Séguin, executive director of the Groupe d'aide et d'information sur le harcèlement sexuel au travail de la province du Québec, we proposed amendments that would tackle the hostile and sexist work environment head on: incorporating mandatory training on harassment for RCMP members into the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act.
When she appeared before the committee, she said:
With the 32 years of experience we have, we have found out that when companies do have a clear policy, when employees do know what is acceptable and not acceptable, it makes it much easier for management to deal with the problems.
This mandatory training would help establish a clear policy and a respectful work environment.
That amendment was also thrown out.
My colleagues also tried to guarantee the independence of the body set up to investigate complaints in the RCMP, which is an essential part of making the organization more transparent and responsible. That, too, was rejected.
The list goes on. The Conservatives voted against all of our amendments in the House without any discussion. They feel that the RCMP commissioner should have complete control over the RCMP. Concentrating power in one person's hands is not the solution. That is not how we will make the RCMP more transparent.
I would like to point out an important difference between the Conservatives and the NDP: we listen to experts and we are open-minded. When we look at a bill, we consult experts in the field, we do our research, and we study and consider numerous options. It is important not to focus on one opinion and cast all others aside. We do not start with a preconceived notion and ignore all those that differ from ours.
I would like to talk about the specific context of this bill. This issue is of utmost importance. We need to ensure that the female officers in the RCMP and the public served by the RCMP can trust our police system. I do not feel that this bill goes far enough to address the female officers' concerns. They asked for immediate, tangible results that will foster a safer and more open work environment, but the Conservatives have proposed giving the RCMP commissioner more power.
A recently published Human Rights Watch report describes how aboriginal women in the west mistrust the RCMP. Fifty women shared their experiences in the report. They alleged that the RCMP ignored their requests for help, abused its power and harassed them. They no longer call the police because they no longer trust them. This is only one example of the Canadian public's loss of confidence. Why not take appropriate steps now to deal with the problem?
It is important to deal with serious internal problems of abuse, intimidation and harassment in order to regain the trust of Canadians. We hoped that this bill might be a step in the right direction, but unfortunately the Conservatives chose to ignore all the recommendations made by the stakeholders. The solutions they have come up with would make things more difficult for employees who encounter abuse and bullying. This serious problem calls for real solutions and actions.
To conclude, I fail to understand how my colleagues on the other side of the House could have rejected all the amendments without any real discussion. I know that our points of view are different, but that is what debates are for. We might be able to find a middle ground. It is important not to forget the victims in this kind of situation. We are here to improve things. It is our duty to do so and that is what bills are for.
We have to go 110%.
A small step is not enough to tackle this matter; we need to do more. No matter what form harassment takes, it has serious consequences for the women or men who are affected. There are psychological consequences, like fear that the charges will be rejected, fear of being accused of provocation, anger, frustration, feelings of powerlessness, shame, intimidation, humiliation, depression, stress and anxiety, as well as a loss of self-confidence and self-esteem.
Harassment can also have serious tangible effects, such as poorer quality of work, job loss, loss of benefits, a bad reference from the employer, a tarnished employment record, unfair performance evaluation, or having one's work sabotaged. The victims' burden can take many forms.
It is totally unfair. That is why we have to change things and improve practices at the RCMP. People are supposed to have confidence in the RCMP and in this government. That is why I believe that we are not going far enough and not doing our duty.
