Status of Women Committee on Oct. 26th, 2006

[Helena Guergis, Conservative, Simcoe—Grey, ON]

It reads:

Whereas we recognize that all women are equal in Canada under the Constitution and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and we recognize the strength of women in Canada;

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Does anyone...?

Mr. Dhaliwal.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Newton—North Delta, BC]

The intention here, I would like to be clear, through the chair, is that it's not that women are weaker, but we're trying to say that they're not treated equally.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Okay.

Speak to the motion then, Ms. Mourani.

Yes, Ms. Minna, to the amendment.

[Maria Minna, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

Yes. Thank you Madam Chair.

I have to say that I oppose the amendment because it has nothing whatever to do with the motion. It's universally known that women got equality, whether by fighting for it in the Charter of Rights.... That does not automatically give them equality or mean that they have it. It says so in the document, which doesn't mean they are equal.

The reason for establishing Status of Women Canada was in fact to ensure that what the Charter of Rights says actually becomes the reality in the lives of women across Canada, through the programs of the Status of Women Canada.

The Status of Women Canada terms and conditions have been changed. Therefore, stating that women have equality in this amendment is rather redundant. It doesn't make any sense because that's not the intent of my motion.

Yes, a lot of women are strong in this country, Madam Guergis. So was my mother. But she was discriminated against badly and paid peanuts to raise my family, and she was mistreated and abused badly in her factory. The fact that she had rights didn't matter much, and the fact that she was a strong woman did matter. So, yes, women in Canada are strong, but that doesn't change the fact that this motion addresses a specific issue.

I'm not accepting the motion because that doesn't change.... The intent of the motion has nothing whatever to do with whether or not women are strong.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Ms. Mourani and Ms. Smith.

Then I'm going to call the vote on the amendment and then the motion.

[Maria Mourani, Bloc, Ahuntsic, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'd like to make an incidental remark, Madam Chair, because I've watched the time fly by and I really would have liked to continue discussing a number of points concerning trafficking in women, that is to say the point that is on the agenda here called “Planning a future business”. So I admit I'm a bit disappointed at the turn of events in the past 30 minutes, on the one hand. I find that disappointing.

Before finishing my remark, I would like to file a complaint with you. I would like the Bloc québécois to have a second round because witnesses have appeared here twice—even three times—and we haven't had our second round. I have a lot of questions to ask the witnesses and I can't ask them because we're wasting time. I apologize for saying it like that, but I find it a bit insulting for us, and even for the NDP, which can't ask as many questions as it would like. That was my first point. I'm going to finish my remark in a few seconds.

Furthermore, I've very concerned when I receive important documents for the committee and I note the use of unobjective words and phrases, in view of the fact that this committee is considering trafficking in persons for the purpose of coming up with a meaning of the definition. We're talking about sex work, etc. Consequently, I'd like to have some neutral documents that don't already suggest a definition.

I've finished my comment and I'll continue.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Ms. Mourani, if we could just deal with the motion....

[Maria Mourani, Bloc, Ahuntsic, QC]

That's because I'm trying to take the time allotted me, like everyone. I finished my remark. I hope you'll take my complaints into account.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Yes, madam.

[Maria Mourani, Bloc, Ahuntsic, QC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Now, as regards madam's amendment: “Whereas all women are equal in Canada”, when you talk about the word “equality”, you compare, you make comparisons. Now, when you compare, what are you comparing? Are you comparing men and women? Or women and women? What are you comparing? I don't understand this amendment. I'm sorry.

“All women are equal in Canada under the Charter.” They are equal among themselves? Is that what you mean? Which is true. Women aren't all equal; otherwise we wouldn't be here. This committee wouldn't be here if all women were equal. Furthermore, men aren't all equal, and women aren't equal to men. “We recognize all the strengths of women.” What does that mean, “recognize the strengths of women”? Is it muscular strength, intellectual strength, mental strength? So I understand nothing in this amendment, Madam Chair, and it's 1:15 p.m.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Ms. Mourani, thank you for your issues.

I'm going to call a vote. We have an amendment that's put on the table. I'm going to call a vote on that amendment, and I'm going to call a vote on the motion, which Ms. Minna properly put before us a week ago.

We now have Ms. Guergis. Would you mind quickly reading it again, just for the sake of the report, strictly your—

[Helena Guergis, Conservative, Simcoe—Grey, ON]

I would read it again, but I do remind the clerk that there have been other committees that have ruled motions like this out of order for being argumentative. I really think we should refer back to other examples from other committees before we proceed with something like this, since it has already happened, instead of being forced to accept something here when I've made a very valid point.

If you want to use the words “in compliance”, it's not. We're not to be passing motions that are argumentative or in the form of a speech. And that's exactly what this is. The other rulings were specific to preambles from other committees, so I really would like some comments from the clerk that she is solid on this, that she knows that what's happening right now is 100% okay, that she hasn't called and asked somebody to give her any more advice to tell her that she is doing the right thing, and that we should proceed.

[Maria Minna, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

Madam Chair, I thought there was an amendment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

We have a motion duly put before us. You can call it whatever you like. If you're looking at the exact recommendation that's in here, it is “Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), that the Standing Committee on the Status of Women recommends that the government reverse the $5 million in cuts to the operating budget of SWC....”

[Maria Minna, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

Madam Chair, then I would like to bring it back when we come to the next meeting.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

The first item on the agenda for Tuesday morning's meeting will be this. Then we will have to delete some of our witnesses in order to have time to deal with some of the other issues.

The meeting is adjourned.