This view breaks the statement into its steps and names what each one does.
Mr. Speaker, Claims · 144 wordssexual misconduct in the armed forces is a known long-standing problem. It was known during the previous Conservative government. The previous Conservative government received the Deschamps report, 1which recommended changes, some of which required legislation, in March of 2015.2 The report was tabled and its recommendations were accepted just before the 2015 election. If Conservatives had been re-elected in 2015, the legislative changes necessary to address investigations and prosecutions into sexual misconduct would have been taken care of 10 years ago, but that is not how it turned out. The Liberals won the 2015 election.3 During the entire 42nd Parliament, the Liberals did absolutely nothing. They made literally zero effort to pass the necessary legislation between 2015 and 2019. We have to go through this to really figure out how we got here, when the Liberals are time allocating this bill today, in 2026.4 Positioning · 35 wordsDuring the 42nd Parliament, the Liberals’ main contribution to the issue of sexual misconduct was to cover it up. That is what it did when it touched the highest levels of the chain of command.Positioning Claims · 151 wordsSome will remember that former defence minister Harjit Sajjan helped cover up known sexual misconduct by the then chief of the defence staff, Jonathan Vance, along with some help from the Trudeau PMO. After the next election, in the 43rd Parliament, the Liberals still did absolutely nothing to implement the Deschamps report. They let new reports pile up, such as the Fish report and the Arbour report, 5while a succession of senior officers continued to be publicly accused of sexual harassment. Three elections in, the Liberals finally got around to tabling an earlier version of this bill in the spring of 2023.6 That was eight years after the Deschamps report, and then they made almost no effort to move the bill in the House. It sat there collecting dust on the Order Paper for a whole year before receiving, I believe, exactly one day of debate in the spring of 2024.7 Procedure · 12 wordsSome will remember what the Liberals did in the fall of 2024.Procedure Claims · 101 wordsThey sacrificed their entire legislative agenda in defiance of two orders of Parliament.8 They willingly did so rather than comply with rulings from the Speaker that found prima facie evidence of contempt of Parliament related to the corruption of the green slush fund and the lies told about the disgraced former minister Randy Boissonnault at committee and his conflicts of interest.9 That lost legislative session ended with the implosion of the Liberal cabinet, the resignation of the then prime minister and the prorogation of Parliament.10Partly on point It ended the Liberals’ attempt, their first attempt, to legislate the changes recommended by Justice Deschamps. Positioning · 50 wordsConservatives have always supported, and continue to support, the recommendations contained in the Deschamps report. We agreed with the recommendations when we were in government. Conservatives have continued to agree with them while in opposition during the 42nd Parliament, the 43rd Parliament, the 44th Parliament and, now, the 45th Parliament.Positioning Claims · 88 wordsWhen the Liberals finally called this bill, Bill C-11, last December, on a Friday, Conservatives allowed it to pass at second reading without even one full day of debate.11 Now we have the amendments. The amendments we are debating are the result of the defence committee’s work earlier this year. The defence committee heard brave, courageous testimony from victims of sexual assault, abuse and harassment within the armed forces. They heard about traumatic, harrowing experiences. The testimony that was heard at the defence committee was given serious consideration. Reasoning · 12 wordsThe appropriate jurisdiction of investigations and prosecution is not a simple question. Claims · 37 wordsIt is true that Justice Arbour recommended that all cases be referred to the civilian system, 12but it is also true that many victims expressed a variety of concerns about access to justice within the civilian system. Reasoning · 50 wordsThat is why Conservatives and Bloc MPs, even the NDP, all recommended that the best way to give victims their best shot at receiving justice is to allow the victim to choose which system makes the most sense in their particular case. The simplicity of this recommendation speaks for itself.Unearned certainty Claims · 46 wordsThere have been other inquiries and studies done at the defence committee, and none of the inquiries, the studies or parliamentary reports disagreed that there are barriers to justice within a system where the victim and the accused are part of the same chain of command. Reasoning · 4 wordsNobody is disputing this.Unearned certainty Procedure · 1 wordsHowever, ProcedureClaims · 53 wordsas was pointed out by witnesses during the committee’s study, the civilian system is also riddled with barriers to justice for victims. Official languages is an issue if a member cannot get service in the official language of their choice in the provincial system of where they are stationed. Delay is another one. Reasoning · 27 wordsThat is why the committee recommended choice. It would not be forcing anybody to have their case studied within the military system. It would be giving choice. Claims · 36 wordsDuring this committee study, no party had a majority.13 All the MPs worked together, regardless of their party affiliation. There were many amendments proposed, and there was very powerful and compelling testimony that drove these amendments. Reasoning · 22 wordsThat is what Parliament is all about: hearing from the witnesses at committee and working together to recommend improvement to the legislation. Positioning · 11 wordsThat is good opposition politics. That is good government party politics.PositioningPartly on point Procedure · 8 wordsHowever, we know that now everything has changed.ProcedureUnearned certainty Claims · 5 wordsThe Liberals have a majority, Positioning · 37 wordsand they have already demonstrated the contempt they hold for opposition MPs and for ideas other than their own.Partly on point In its arrogance and unbridled hubris, the Liberal government is ignoring the wisdom born of co-operation and collaboration.Positioning Claims · 33 wordsThere were 14 amendments, 14which were all supported by multiple parties, and now the Liberals are intent on ramming the bill through, after spending almost 11 years failing to introduce and pass it. Thanks · 16 wordsThe member for Nunavut, in particular, contributed to the bill in a very meaningful, important way.Thanks Claims · 139 wordsThis is what Canadians want. Her party did not even have a seat at the committee table, 15but she as an MP produced a good, sound, principled amendment that was debated and adopted at committee. Canadians say they want their elected representatives to be open-minded. They want them to work together and want them to respect and co-operate with each other.Partly on point That is what the defence committee members did. They took seriously the amendments offered by an MP who did not even have a vote at the committee. However, between the clause-by-clause review at the committee and the present, today, when the Liberals now have a majority and have used time allocation to curtail debate on this, the member for Nunavut has crossed the floor and joined the Liberal caucus.16 She had a history of principled opposition to government. Positioning · 27 wordsShe was one of the few NDP members who remembered that her duty was to oppose the government and not to hold the opposition party to account.PositioningPartly on point The ask · 21 wordsI hope the member for Nunavut will remember this and will not end up opposing her own contribution to the bill, Claims · 19 wordsbecause she proposed the amendment that would allow choice and flexibility in cases of sexual misconduct in the military. Thanks · 5 wordsShe was doing her job, ThanksThe ask · 21 wordsso now that she sits on the Liberal benches, I hope she will actually follow through and support her own amendment. Procedure · 9 wordsThe member for Nunavut is not the only one.Procedure Claims · 9 wordsThere are other members who have crossed the floor.Partly on point Positioning · 63 wordsWe now see the Liberals and their true colours: power at all costs and control at all costs, with power concentrated entirely in the hands of the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister’s contempt for Parliament as an institution is becoming obvious to all.PositioningUnearned certainty I am actually concerned about his limited civic literacy, when he speaks in English and calls other MPs his deputies, 17InsultClaims · 148 wordsand when he sets up photo op signings, pretending to sign bills into law. It is almost as if he needed to be told that it is actually the Governor General who signs laws, not him; that she does so only after they have been agreed to by a majority of members of Parliament, of both Houses of Parliament; and that none of those members in either chamber are his deputies.Off point I am disappointed that the government took 11 years to deal with a well-known and long-standing problem and that it is proposing to gut this bill after such clear and powerful committee testimony. I supported the bill in principle and sending it to the defence committee.18 I support the conclusions of the defence committee, which made important amendments to fix the bill. I oppose the Liberals’ attempts to undo the committee’s work by gutting the amendments today.
Analysed on