Evidence of meeting #28 for Canadian Heritage in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was courts.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:55 p.m.
National Vice-President, REAL Women of Canada
It can't be answered. Are you still beating your husband? It's the same kind of question.
4:55 p.m.
National Vice-President, REAL Women of Canada
It's a matter of how it's interpreted, indeed, yes. Many of the interpretations, because of the court challenges program, have given a wrong interpretation.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Tina Keeper Liberal Churchill, MB
I'm not talking about the court challenges program; I'm asking about the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Do you believe in that?
4:55 p.m.
National Vice-President, REAL Women of Canada
I believe it depends on how it's interpreted. That's my only response. I can't say it's perfect, because it depends on how they interpret the very vague words.
4:55 p.m.
Executive Directeur, Canadian Constitution Foundation
We all know that the charter has the force of law. I don't think it's something you can believe in or disbelieve in; it's a reality that the charter is present with us.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
4:55 p.m.
President, Canada Christian College
I absolutely believe in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It is a great document; however, it is a living document and it is how you interpret it from one day to the next. As a clergyman, I am very upset with the issue that this fundamental freedom of religion has been really interpreted as freedom from religion, rather than freedom of religion, and that's one element I object to in its interpretation.
4:55 p.m.
Executive Director, Canada Family Action Coalition
I would agree that I think we need the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and I do agree with the majority of it. I believe it has some holes, as we see when various things go to the courts and sometimes come back to Parliament, even. I don't know that we will ever have a perfect charter, but we certainly need a charter.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Tina Keeper Liberal Churchill, MB
Thank you very much.
My second question is--and again, I'm sorry, but perhaps we could keep the answers short--do you believe in the concept of a court challenges program?
4:55 p.m.
National Vice-President, REAL Women of Canada
Absolutely not. It's not fair. You can't make it fair.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Tina Keeper Liberal Churchill, MB
Even though you've applied to the court challenges program, you don't believe in the concept of it?
4:55 p.m.
National Vice-President, REAL Women of Canada
No. The concept is wrong because you can't fund one side of a constitutional issue or one side of a moral value. The concept is totally impractical, and built into it inherently...it's discriminatory.
4:55 p.m.
National Vice-President, REAL Women of Canada
Because we wanted to be on an equal playing field with LEAF, which has all the money, or with the homosexual groups. We had to get our voice heard. How else are we going to get—
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Tina Keeper Liberal Churchill, MB
So did you feel this program was the opportunity to have your voice heard?
4:55 p.m.
National Vice-President, REAL Women of Canada
No, we did not. We thought if they're going to fund one side, they should fund our side. We didn't think it was fair at all, but we wanted to show, by our application, that this was a discriminatory organization. Certainly, the documentation and all the letters we had back, which we have on record--and we have put some of it into this brief--indicate totally that it was a discriminatory organization. By our applying, we produced proof of the fact that this is a discriminatory organization.
5 p.m.
Executive Directeur, Canadian Constitution Foundation
Should this program exist at all? Is that the—?
5 p.m.
Liberal
5 p.m.
Executive Directeur, Canadian Constitution Foundation
No. As I've stated, there are many visions of equality, and it's wrong for the government to be making decisions about handing out tax dollars to promote some and not others.
I will add, because it's highly relevant, that Chief Mountain's challenge has succeeded in the absence of litigation funding because it's been supported by voluntary contributions from Canadians who believe in his cause, and that's the way it should be. He's more disadvantaged than any of these groups that have received CCP funding. He's a carpenter, he has no funds, and it's been going ahead because Canadians have contributed voluntarily.