Senate QP: Hajdu ducks a request

Posted on by

Following weeks of condemnation around the government’s insistence on the “Charter rights” attestation for Canada Summer Jobs Grant applications, it was time for the minister of labour, Patty Hajdu, to appear before the Senate to answer questions. Senator Larry Smith led off, as is customary, and he asked about the fact that no new federal drug testing regulations would be in place before marijuana was legalised. Hajdu noted that in her previous job, she dealt a lot with substance use issues with clients adn employees, and she was passionate about the topic. She noted that they are working with federally-regulated employers and labour groups, but also called out that this debate was a red herring because cannabis is not new, nor is use at work. Smith wanted some degree of certainty for employers, and Hajdu said they are already having those conversations, and most workplaces already have robust policies.

Senator McIntyre asked a follow-up, raising concerns by groups like the TTC and transportation agencies, and that they have concerns that there is not enough guidance. Hajdu reiterated that they are working with stakeholders.

Senator Day asked about seasonal workers in the fisheries sector, and the fact that some fisheries are closed because of the presence of right whales, which is hurting seasonal workers and it could then impact their ability to get EI. Hajdu noted that EI was Minister Duclos’ domain, but noted that they also have programs to help older workers to return to school to retrain if they wish to. Day worried that it was only for older workers and not younger ones, but Hajdu noted that provinces are free to design programs to meet their needs so long as they had shared outcomes.

Senator McPhedran asked about victims of workplace harassment under Bill C-65 and whether they would not be barred from filing complaints with human rights commissions. Hajdu said that they would examine any amendments that came forward, but that this was not just about legislation, but they were trying to affect a culture change on Parliament Hill in terms of workplace harassment. 

Senator Hartling asked further about Bill C-65, and Hajdu spoke about how the bill will compel employers to ensure they have policies and that they deal with complaints that are made. She added that support for complainants was also part of the legislation.

Senator Plett worried that the prime minister doesn’t take the sentiments of keeping an open mind seriously, and then laid out his disgust over the “discrimination” in the Canada Summer Jobs Grant attestation issue. Hajdu assured him that the attestation was not about values or beliefs, but was about ensuring that groups core activities is not about undermining the Charter value of others.

Senator Oh asked about the recognition of skills in immigrants, to which Hajdu said that they were working to ensure that there is better pre-arrival preparation for those immigrants, and a loan program that will support them while they get properly certified once in Canada.

Senator Wallin returned to the attestation question, and wondered if there was a Charter statement related to it that could be produced. Hajdu noted that they doubled the job grants, and said they would continue to ensure that grants continue to flow next year, including to faith-based organisations.

Senator Griffin asked about funding for literacy groups in PEI, and Hajdu said that the renegotiated labour market agreements would allow provinces to set their own priorities. 

Senator Martin returned to the attestation once again, and the 1500 grants that were rejected because of it. Hajdu clarified that the grants were not provided to students but to employers, that they doubled the jobs funded, and while they clarified the language on the website, any clarification to the attestation next year would ensure that it was about activities as not beliefs.

Senator Hartling returned for a second round and asked about the status of pay equity legislation, and Hajdu said that because it’s a complicated process, they were taking the time to ensure that they get it right.

Senator McPhedran came back for a second round, and wanted further clarification on the willingness to entertain amendments to Bill C-65 to ensure that complainants are not barred from seeing redress at human rights commissions, but Hajdu said she would only commit to looking at amendments but wouldn’t promise to agree to it.

Senator Joyal noted that she didn’t respond to Senator Wallin when it comes to the Charter statement on the attestation, and Hajdu again talked around it and did not respond to the request.

Overall, it’s been a while since the list of questions exhausted itself and we had senators standing up for a second go-around. They did need it, mind you, given that Hajdu was more evasive than most ministers tend to be in this format (though to her credit she did legitimately shut down some of the questions on marijuana in the workplace because it’s not something that’s just being invented. That being said, I’ll offer the shameless plug that I have a story on this coming in next week’s Law Times). I was surprised it took as long as it did to get to the attestation questions, but we got there, and it all went downhill from there, unfortunately.

Sartorially speaking, snaps go out to Senator Judith Seidman for a black leather jacket with a black top and slacks, and to Senator Serge Joyal for a tailored black suit with a light blue shirt and red tie. Style citations go out to Senator Peter Harder for a light blue jacket with black slacks, a white shirt and a grey tie and pocket square, and to Senator Marilou McPhedran for a black and white tunic over black slacks.