Discussion · Government Orders
Dane Lloyd Conservative
“I support our motion to help veterans get jobs. The government gave a security contract to an American company instead of the Canadian Corps of Commissionaires, which is a non-profit and Canada's biggest employer of veterans. It did this to save just $80,000, which hurts veterans and local community programs. I also want the government to drop its new rule forcing military chaplains to give only neutral prayers. It takes away their religious freedom, hurts Indigenous spiritual traditions, and was created without talking to chaplains first.”
“Mr. Speaker, it is always an honour to rise in the House of Commons to speak. I will be splitting my time with the member for Riding Mountain. Today I am proud to support our Conservative motion on the issue of veterans hiring. In this country, people who serve in our military oftentimes will leave that service with challenges. One of those challenges is finding meaningful employment. The Canadian Corps of Commissionaires is one such organization. It has existed since 1925. It is a not-for-profit whose mandate is to provide job opportunities for Canadian veterans. In fact, the Corps of Commissionaires is the largest employer of Canadian veterans in Canada. It is disturbing to see that over the past number of years, the Liberal government has been moving to erode the very privileged position that the not-for-profit Corps of Commissionaires had. It has removed its right of first refusal, which means that it will not get as many opportunities to provide that employment for veterans. Most recently, a contract was awarded by the Canada Revenue Agency to an American-based for-profit company, Allied Universal, over the Corps of Commissionaires. What I find hypocritical about this recent decision by the government is that we have a Prime Minister who was elected on a “support Canada, elbows up, buy Canadian” platform, and yet when it came time to award the contracts, the government chose a for-profit company over Canada’s largest employer of veterans, a not-for-profit, all for a measly $80,000 contract difference. If $80,000 is all it takes for the Liberal government and the Prime Minister to favour an American company over a Canadian non-profit, then we are in a very bad situation in this country. Throughout this debate, I have seen Liberals talk about this and say that they respect veterans, and I believe they do, and that they respect the work of the Corps of Commissionaires. However, it is also not just about the jobs that the Corps of Commissionaires provides to veterans. The Corps of Commissionaires is a not-for-profit, so the excess revenues that it raises outside of wages and benefits and the operations it conducts are primarily redirected back into our communities. I gave some examples, but I will share them again. Members can go to a Legion event anywhere in this country and they will see sponsorship from the Corps of Commissionaires. There is No Stone Left Alone, a veterans’ organization educating young Canadians about the sacrifices of Canada’s veterans. There is a national bursary program, which provides educational bursaries for the children of veterans, and a crisis and benevolent fund that supports veterans and their families who have fallen on hard times or had illnesses or injuries. These are just some of the wonderful programs that the Corps of Commissionaires is able to provide because of its privileged connections to government funding programs. I do not think the government could point to Allied Universal and say that that company is providing the same level of community benefits to our country that the Corps of Commissionaires has. It is hypocritical, but it is also undermining the social fabric of our country. This organization, for over 100 years, has supported our communities and supported veterans, and the government is undercutting the financial viability of this organization. It is undercutting job opportunities for veterans, and it is undercutting community supports. Now, in the second half, I want to raise the issue of chaplaincy and prayers. Over the summer, a new policy was released that dictated to military chaplains about what kind of prayers or spiritual reflections they were allowed to give at military-sanctioned events. One of those very important military-sanctioned events is Remembrance Day. This policy has sought, as the government has tried to do on a number of occasions, to introduce a so-called religious neutrality rule for chaplains. Chaplains are people who come from a wide variety of faiths. We have chaplains from Islam, Judaism and Christianity. We have chaplains who are humanists. I support pluralism because members of our military come from all faith backgrounds, including no-faith backgrounds, and it is critically important that they have access to chaplaincy services. What the government has tried to institute is a policy that says that at Remembrance Day ceremonies and other ceremonies that military members are asked to attend, chaplains cannot say anything, a prayer or a spiritual reflection, that reflects their faith. I raised this earlier, because it was asked of me by one of the chaplains, “What about the faith of indigenous Canadians?” In this country, we have sought to reconcile with first nations and the terrible past of suppressing indigenous spirituality and indigenous culture, which we saw through residential schools, yet we have a policy by the government that seems to run against the grain of its reconciliation rhetoric by telling indigenous people that their spirituality will not be welcome at these events. The policy of so-called religious neutrality will apply fully to indigenous people who are asked to provide spiritual reflections. I have gone to many indigenous events, and it is quite common for elders to talk about the Creator. In many cases, I have elders who talk about their deep Christian faith. To have a government policy come forward to say that those reflections are not welcome undermines reconciliation in this country. I also want to raise that I have been approached by chaplains who are very concerned about this issue. They tell me that there was no consultation, that this policy was rammed down their throats and that there was no opportunity for them to work with the government to meaningfully shape this legislation in a way that could respect religious freedom and people of all faiths. In fact, the chaplain organization in the Canadian Armed Forces has not even had the opportunity to meet with the Minister of National Defence since the Harper government. That is over 10 years ago. The chaplains were supposed to have access to the Minister of National Defence, but they have not had an opportunity to meet with the minister during the entire time the Liberal government has been in power, which is over 10 years. The government does not consider the very important work that chaplains do. It does not consider their opinions. It does not consider their feedback. If the Liberals were to sit down with these chaplains, they could have worked out a very agreeable solution to all parties. However, what is happening now, and what these chaplains are telling me, is that they feel a religious view is being imposed upon them, because by being forced to give a very humanistic, very religiously so-called neutral spiritual reflection or prayer, they are having their religious freedom imposed upon. They would rather not participate in such an event, but they know how important it is that they be involved. It is very interesting, because this policy seems to apply only to the Canadian Armed Forces, but there are chaplains in the RCMP. I was approached by a constituent of mine who has been a long-standing chaplain with the RCMP, and he is deeply concerned that the Liberals will seek to expand the policy. I do not see why they would not. It would be consistent. What is very special about this man, and very tragic, is that he is a chaplain and his son was one of the four Mounties murdered in Mayerthorpe, in my riding. He came to my office and asked me, “If I am up to pray out of remembrance for my son, will I be told by my government that I am not allowed to pray to my God? Will I not be able to give a spiritual reflection that reflects the journey, challenge and crisis that my family went through when we lost our son?” I would only ask that the government go back to the table, talk to chaplains and work out a policy that can work for everyone, because there are a lot of people who feel very deeply about this, and this controversy is not necessary. In fact, the House of Commons voted unanimously that we not proceed with this policy, yet it is being put forward.”
Mr. Speaker, it is always an honour to rise in the House of Commons to speak. I will be splitting my time with the member for Riding Mountain. Today I am proud to support our Conservative motion on the issue of veterans hiring. In this country, people who serve in our military oftentimes will leave that service with challenges. One of those challenges is finding meaningful employment. The Canadian Corps of Commissionaires is one such organization. It has existed since 1925. It is a not-for-profit whose mandate is to provide job opportunities for Canadian veterans. In fact, the Corps of Commissionaires is the largest employer of Canadian veterans in Canada. It is disturbing to see that over the past number of years, the Liberal government has been moving to erode the very privileged position that the not-for-profit Corps of Commissionaires had. It has removed its right of first refusal, which means that it will not get as many opportunities to provide that employment for veterans. Most recently, a contract was awarded by the Canada Revenue Agency to an American-based for-profit company, Allied Universal, over the Corps of Commissionaires. What I find hypocritical about this recent decision by the government is that we have a Prime Minister who was elected on a “support Canada, elbows up, buy Canadian” platform, and yet when it came time to award the contracts, the government chose a for-profit company over Canada’s largest employer of veterans, a not-for-profit, all for a measly $80,000 contract difference. If $80,000 is all it takes for the Liberal government and the Prime Minister to favour an American company over a Canadian non-profit, then we are in a very bad situation in this country. Throughout this debate, I have seen Liberals talk about this and say that they respect veterans, and I believe they do, and that they respect the work of the Corps of Commissionaires. However, it is also not just about the jobs that the Corps of Commissionaires provides to veterans. The Corps of Commissionaires is a not-for-profit, so the excess revenues that it raises outside of wages and benefits and the operations it conducts are primarily redirected back into our communities. I gave some examples, but I will share them again. Members can go to a Legion event anywhere in this country and they will see sponsorship from the Corps of Commissionaires. There is No Stone Left Alone, a veterans’ organization educating young Canadians about the sacrifices of Canada’s veterans. There is a national bursary program, which provides educational bursaries for the children of veterans, and a crisis and benevolent fund that supports veterans and their families who have fallen on hard times or had illnesses or injuries. These are just some of the wonderful programs that the Corps of Commissionaires is able to provide because of its privileged connections to government funding programs. I do not think the government could point to Allied Universal and say that that company is providing the same level of community benefits to our country that the Corps of Commissionaires has. It is hypocritical, but it is also undermining the social fabric of our country. This organization, for over 100 years, has supported our communities and supported veterans, and the government is undercutting the financial viability of this organization. It is undercutting job opportunities for veterans, and it is undercutting community supports. Now, in the second half, I want to raise the issue of chaplaincy and prayers. Over the summer, a new policy was released that dictated to military chaplains about what kind of prayers or spiritual reflections they were allowed to give at military-sanctioned events. One of those very important military-sanctioned events is Remembrance Day. This policy has sought, as the government has tried to do on a number of occasions, to introduce a so-called religious neutrality rule for chaplains. Chaplains are people who come from a wide variety of faiths. We have chaplains from Islam, Judaism and Christianity. We have chaplains who are humanists. I support pluralism because members of our military come from all faith backgrounds, including no-faith backgrounds, and it is critically important that they have access to chaplaincy services. What the government has tried to institute is a policy that says that at Remembrance Day ceremonies and other ceremonies that military members are asked to attend, chaplains cannot say anything, a prayer or a spiritual reflection, that reflects their faith. I raised this earlier, because it was asked of me by one of the chaplains, “What about the faith of indigenous Canadians?” In this country, we have sought to reconcile with first nations and the terrible past of suppressing indigenous spirituality and indigenous culture, which we saw through residential schools, yet we have a policy by the government that seems to run against the grain of its reconciliation rhetoric by telling indigenous people that their spirituality will not be welcome at these events. The policy of so-called religious neutrality will apply fully to indigenous people who are asked to provide spiritual reflections. I have gone to many indigenous events, and it is quite common for elders to talk about the Creator. In many cases, I have elders who talk about their deep Christian faith. To have a government policy come forward to say that those reflections are not welcome undermines reconciliation in this country. I also want to raise that I have been approached by chaplains who are very concerned about this issue. They tell me that there was no consultation, that this policy was rammed down their throats and that there was no opportunity for them to work with the government to meaningfully shape this legislation in a way that could respect religious freedom and people of all faiths. In fact, the chaplain organization in the Canadian Armed Forces has not even had the opportunity to meet with the Minister of National Defence since the Harper government. That is over 10 years ago. The chaplains were supposed to have access to the Minister of National Defence, but they have not had an opportunity to meet with the minister during the entire time the Liberal government has been in power, which is over 10 years. The government does not consider the very important work that chaplains do. It does not consider their opinions. It does not consider their feedback. If the Liberals were to sit down with these chaplains, they could have worked out a very agreeable solution to all parties. However, what is happening now, and what these chaplains are telling me, is that they feel a religious view is being imposed upon them, because by being forced to give a very humanistic, very religiously so-called neutral spiritual reflection or prayer, they are having their religious freedom imposed upon. They would rather not participate in such an event, but they know how important it is that they be involved. It is very interesting, because this policy seems to apply only to the Canadian Armed Forces, but there are chaplains in the RCMP. I was approached by a constituent of mine who has been a long-standing chaplain with the RCMP, and he is deeply concerned that the Liberals will seek to expand the policy. I do not see why they would not. It would be consistent. What is very special about this man, and very tragic, is that he is a chaplain and his son was one of the four Mounties murdered in Mayerthorpe, in my riding. He came to my office and asked me, “If I am up to pray out of remembrance for my son, will I be told by my government that I am not allowed to pray to my God? Will I not be able to give a spiritual reflection that reflects the journey, challenge and crisis that my family went through when we lost our son?” I would only ask that the government go back to the table, talk to chaplains and work out a policy that can work for everyone, because there are a lot of people who feel very deeply about this, and this controversy is not necessary. In fact, the House of Commons voted unanimously that we not proceed with this policy, yet it is being put forward.