Penny Collenette is an adjunct professor in the University of Ottawa's faculty of law.

You work on Parliament Hill in a vortex of power and influence. You are strongly attracted to your boss, who is an MP. She is also strongly attracted to you. Can the government ban your feelings? Would a law prevent you from pursuing your feelings?

You have been a victim of sexual harassment on Parliament Hill. Who would you trust? How could you be sure you would not suffer reprisals or lose your job?

Story continues below advertisement

These are some of the thorny scenarios to consider as the federal government, under Employment Minister Patty Hajdu, proposes new and long overdue legislation to protect employees, including Parliament Hill staffers, from harassment.

The minister has said that the government does not intend to "ban or monitor sexual relationships between MPs and their staffers" in spite of such efforts in the U.S. and Australia. Australia has just witnessed the resignation of the acting leader of its National Party for allegations of sexual harassment, not to mention an extramarital affair with his former press secretary, who is pregnant.

Ms. Hajdu is right to note that legislation will not and should not ban private and consensual relationships – but even consent within an hierarchical reporting structure is generally frowned upon, if only because it may impact professionalism. We have all witnessed workplace romances that end in recriminations and bitterness. The MP with power must not be able to discriminate against an employee with whom they have had a relationship. Disclosure as to the relationship in the first place would offer protection to all parties in case of further allegations or complaints.

Details will become apparent in the near future as the proposed legislation is discussed in committee and at the Board of Internal Economy. The discussions are very important for at least two reasons.

This is the first time this kind of framework has been proposed. Previous codes of conduct (not legislation) for MPs have always concerned themselves with private interests, not private life. Yet the mandate letters for the Trudeau cabinet ministers include the expectation that ministers will arrange 'their private affairs" so that they can "bear the closest public scrutiny." In other words, there should now be a heightened profile on conduct of any type.

Second, a smart and professional reporting scheme must foster trust between any employee and the office or person to whom they are reporting the incidents; otherwise, it will all be a waste of time.

Calling or making an appointment with someone you do not know, or an office without a track record of professional help, is daunting. The proposal to utilize occupational health and safety investigators in the Labour department, who may be experienced, could require a leap of trust for a Parliament Hill employee.

Story continues below advertisement

There will apparently be a 1-800 number, which is helpful thanks to its anonymity. This allows the complainant to make an initial attempt at reporting without having to face a stranger. A good ethical reporting line will triage complaints, find out answers (sometimes people just have questions, rather than complaints) and help to guide the individual to the next step, after the process has been explained and the person feels ready to move forward.

All this is a good start, provided there are timely reviews to ascertain effectiveness and options have been seriously considered. Another avenue is consideration of an independent third-party office physically separate from Parliament Hill. Certainly, optically, this is a better solution, but there would be practical considerations of location, budget and hiring practices, all of which could delay any implementation.

In addition to trust in the process and an ability to remain anonymous at the commencement of any potential investigation, it's clear that fairness must be built into the system. As we have learned, the presumption of innocence, while a cherished value, is only relevant in a court of law.

Unless someone wishes to go to the police or the media, the goal is to first guard complaints internally to ascertain their viability and severity, and to protect the privacy of all parties. Instead, good regulation will allow for a response to a complaint and mediation, if the situation can be resolved.

If we were not aware before of the sensitivity and emotional pain sexual harassment can cause, the #MeToo movement has revealed disgusting and disgraceful behaviour from powerful men in all sectors. It has also achingly revealed the secrets that many women have kept to themselves over decades.

This legislation is only the beginning. Relationships within the entire supply chain of the political world need a revamped professionalism when it comes to harassment and the power imbalance that comes with political workplaces and lifestyles.

Story continues below advertisement

No one wants to stop romance – but surely, by now, we can root out harassment.