Hedy FRY

FRY, The Hon. Hedy, P.C., M.D., L.R.C.P.S.I., L.M.

Personal Data

Party
Liberal
Constituency
Vancouver Centre (British Columbia)
Birth Date
August 6, 1941
Website
http://www.hedyfry.com
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=9e8dc941-5170-448f-8b08-591892bb1d05&Language=E&Section=ALL
Email Address
hedy.fry@parl.gc.ca
Profession
physician

Parliamentary Career

October 25, 1993 - April 27, 1997
LIB
  Vancouver Centre (British Columbia)
  • Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Health and Welfare (Health) (December 6, 1993 - January 24, 1996)
  • Secretary of State (Multiculturalism) (Status of Women) (January 25, 1996 - January 14, 2002)
June 2, 1997 - October 22, 2000
LIB
  Vancouver Centre (British Columbia)
  • Secretary of State (Multiculturalism) (Status of Women) (January 25, 1996 - January 14, 2002)
November 27, 2000 - May 23, 2004
LIB
  Vancouver Centre (British Columbia)
  • Secretary of State (Multiculturalism) (Status of Women) (January 25, 1996 - January 14, 2002)
  • Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration with special emphasis on Foreign Credentials (December 12, 2003 - July 19, 2004)
June 28, 2004 - November 29, 2005
LIB
  Vancouver Centre (British Columbia)
  • Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration with special emphasis on Foreign Credentials (December 12, 2003 - July 19, 2004)
  • Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development with special emphasis on the Internationally Trained Workers Initiative (July 20, 2004 - February 5, 2006)
  • Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (July 20, 2004 - February 5, 2006)
January 23, 2006 - September 7, 2008
LIB
  Vancouver Centre (British Columbia)
  • Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development with special emphasis on the Internationally Trained Workers Initiative (July 20, 2004 - February 5, 2006)
  • Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (July 20, 2004 - February 5, 2006)
October 14, 2008 - March 26, 2011
LIB
  Vancouver Centre (British Columbia)
May 2, 2011 - August 2, 2015
LIB
  Vancouver Centre (British Columbia)
October 19, 2015 -
LIB
  Vancouver Centre (British Columbia)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 4 of 276)


December 7, 2018

Hon. Hedy Fry (Vancouver Centre, Lib.)

Madam Speaker, did you know that 34% of indigenous persons in Vancouver are homeless? Many of them are youth.

For over a decade, the Lu'ma Native Housing Society in B.C. has provided a safe haven for homeless indigenous youth in the province. From its medical centre to its community lodge and its housing program for aboriginal youth, Lu'ma is a shining example of what a community can do when it is allowed to create its own culturally appropriate solutions.

Now the federal government is providing Lu'ma with funding through the national housing strategy. This will allow Lu'ma to make significant strides toward solving homelessness among urban indigenous youth. Lu'ma is a shining best-practice model for urban aboriginal programs in Canada. I look forward to seeing more of its innovative work.

Topic:   Statements by Members
Subtopic:   Housing
Full View Permalink

November 29, 2018

Hon. Hedy Fry (Vancouver Centre, Lib.)

Mr. Speaker, if anyone doubts that one person can really make a difference in this world, I have a story to tell my colleagues of such a person. Joan-E or Robert Kaiser, a Vancouver drag queen, entertainer and actor, is a long-time advocate for persons with HIV-AIDS.

For over 20 years, she has hosted weekly gay bingo nights to raise money for the Friends for Life Society, an organization that provides support programs to individuals with HIV-AIDS and hepatitis C. During that time, she managed to raise over $700,000, which is an extraordinary accomplishment for one person.

With World AIDS Day upon us, let us all be inspired by Joan-E and pledge to do our part, however small, to end the stigma of HIV and to improve the quality of life of those affected with this chronic, insidious disease.

Topic:   Statements By Members
Subtopic:   HIV-AIDS
Full View Permalink

October 17, 2018

Hon. Hedy Fry (Vancouver Centre, Lib.)

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to stand and speak to this particular bill because I think it has been a long time coming in this House.

We know that staff on the Hill have had no recourse and we know also that parliamentarians have no protocols, recourse or processes with which to address sexual harassment, physical violence, intimidation of any kind and/or just basic workplace safety in the sense of fair play and justice in the workplace.

Why is that so? Mainly because most employees were afraid to speak up as they were afraid that they would lose their jobs and afraid of further intimidation. We know that these are the real reasons to deal with these issues.

We also know that there had been nothing in place for parliamentarians to discuss any sexual harassment, physical violence, intimidation or inappropriate behaviour from other parliamentarians.

Therefore, this is something that this government is trying to set right. We are trying to do this to address the problem not only in the federal public service and in the federal workplace but for parliamentarians, their staff, ministerial exempt staff and the Prime Minister's exempt staff. We will have the whole group covered then, who have never been covered before.

I guess most Canadians would find this extraordinary that this was not in existence before. However, we know that the reality is that where there is power there is also an abuse of power. That is what we see happening here, whether the power is based on gender, i.e., men in positions of power who tend to intimidate women who are under their jurisdiction or who work for them.

We must also address that while we have talked a lot about women and girls and gender in this particular bill, we need to recognize that this does not only apply to women and girls. We do know that young women, however, are about three times as likely to have these issues of sexual harassment and violence, etc. addressed to them.

We also know that systemic racism has really been a problem here within this House, within most institutions, and within most places that are federally legislated with people in positions of power.

We know that disabled persons also face this kind of intimidation, harassment and bullying, to use the appropriate term.

We know that people of different sexual orientations, the LGBTQ, have often been afraid to come out or to let people know of their sexual orientation because they fear bullying and harassment.

This is an issue that is becoming more and more complex as we look at the problems of the workplace with issues such as the use of social media. Especially as parliamentarians, we know that the use of social media can be very damning to parliamentarians. One can be found guilty even before one has been shown any due process.

This bill will take aspects of two separate bills and the labour code to have a comprehensive way to address this particular problem in its entirety so that we are not looking at sexual harassment only. We would be looking at violence. We would be looking at bullying and we would be looking at intimidation. Under that there are three specific things we are hoping to address. One of them in the labour code is that employers will now be bound to protect their employees from harassment and bullying and from the kind of intimidation and fear of reprisal that we know that employees now feel.

That is an important part of it that there can be no reprisals, rather that people can come out and speak freely. At the same time, this must be balanced to show that there is a fair and objective way of dealing with complaints when they come through. Of course, I think we have all found in this House that complaints against parliamentarians need to be very careful. When results of investigations occur and we find out that people are not guilty, we are going to be able to say so.

Having the ability to sully a name, especially a parliamentarian, is really important when we look at how we balance the objectivity of any kind of legislation.

Although parliamentarians are not necessarily employees, per se, they are part of this institution and this institution needs to look at how we deal with parliamentarians as well.

When we look at preventing this, which is what we are looking at as part of the bill, we are looking at things like how we prevent it, how we make the workplace a safe place and how we make it a place for people to feel free to speak out without fear of retaliation and reprisals. Making it easy for people speak out is one element. The second is to prevent it, which means the creation of a safe workplace and letting everyone know very clearly there are processes in place in which they can feel safe in coming forward.

However, the idea is to also have an objective way to look at it. I know people have been concerned that existing tribunals, etc. may be replaced. I do not think the bill says that. It does not say that they will be replaced. If they exist and are able to do the work and get the full amount of that work done, it would be fine. However, if there was none in existence, they may need to be replaced by one which would be able to deal with the whole issue. This is what we are trying to talk about here. There is no point in having people doing the same thing, as we now see, because the whole issue has been dealt with in two separate regiments. We would then need to bring them together, which may mean rejigging how we do this and who the people are who will look at this.

We need to ensure that at the end of the day there is a clear process, everyone knows what the process is, the process is objective and is carried out by people who have expertise and understanding of some of these issues. As I said before, a lot of people who have different sexual orientations are very afraid of social media outing them or of being moved from their place. Even though the Prime Minister stood in the House and apologized for all the damage done to people in the LGBTQ community who had worked in the armed forces and other areas of government, we still need to guard against it. Everyone in the House knows that it is not just legislation that makes a difference. Legislation has to be backed up by policies and by clear, fair, open and transparent programs.

The bill also talks about that openness and transparency. It is very important that there is annual reporting on how the bill is going through, how it is being implemented and what the outcomes are. However, it is also important to do this five-year review. At the end of five years, we will have to do exactly what is done in medicine. We need to look back to see if it has worked, if it has achieved its results, if the objectives have been met, or if there are problems, glitches or areas we can tighten or have things fell between the cracks.

As any legislation, it is also very important to have a look back and see if it worked and if it was effective and transparent.

I have been in the House now for 25 years, which is been a long time. I have seen so many people who have fallen by the wayside because they were afraid and did not want to come out. For me, it is why the issue of LGBTQ was really important. I knew many people who worked in the public service who were very afraid to come out and say what their sexual orientation was because they feared reprisals. Reprisals do not have to be in the form of firing, but can include shunning, how one treats someone, perhaps with a certain amount of psychological manipulation, disdain, making them feel lesser or making them feel they do not belong. We know about that with people with mental disabilities and physical abilities. It could also be that the workplace is not ready, or making room for them or not showing them they are welcome to be part of that workplace. There is a sense that one does not belong and is really out of place. These are some the most important things.

It is important that we will look at policies and programs, which will make it effective, that we will report on it every year and that in five years we would go back and look at if we achieved the results we said we would. That is a simple way of dealing with a long-standing problem.

Topic:   Government Orders
Subtopic:   Canada Labour Code
Full View Permalink

October 17, 2018

Hon. Hedy Fry

Madam Speaker, I think all amendments have been considered and will be considered. Again, with yearly reporting and with a five-year look-back to see how things have worked, there will be the ability to see if the amendment was necessary or if the existing legislation addressed the issue that my hon. colleague discussed. We think it will with all of its pieces. We will be able to look back and see.

Nobody ever writes legislation or moves it forward and has 100% of it work. This is why we have structures in place to look back to address and report on an annual basis on how things have gone.

Topic:   Government Orders
Subtopic:   Canada Labour Code
Full View Permalink

October 17, 2018

Hon. Hedy Fry

Madam Speaker, because I have been here for this length of time, I can tell the member that there is no perfect legislation, no perfect policy and no perfect program. We need to look at the issue as broadly as we can, try to address every one of those pieces, go to committee and discuss what we hear, discuss what we think is missing and then eventually do something about it. This bill would do something to address these problems.

The bottom line is that with an annual reporting mechanism, we will be able to see if indeed we have achieved what we set out to achieve or if there are things we need to tweak. This is important. It is why legislation is not a stagnant thing. It is always evolving as we move forward. We will see whether it works or not.

Therefore, no, I cannot tell my colleague that this is 100% certain, but I think the intent and the will of everyone in the House is to ensure that this is as good a bill as it can be at this time and follow through to see if it does in fact achieve its goals.

Topic:   Government Orders
Subtopic:   Canada Labour Code
Full View Permalink