Evidence of meeting #28 for Status of Women in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
9:25 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Just to get this moving, I wonder if what you were suggesting, Ms. Neville, was that the committee report its observations, including a scan of what's going on in other provinces as it relates to this issue, and make recommendations.
9:25 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Yes?
So Ms. Neville would insert in the last sentence, after “observations”, the words “including a scan of what's going on in other provinces as it relates to this issue”.
Can we vote on the amendment?
Yes, Mrs. Simson.
9:25 a.m.
Liberal
Michelle Simson Liberal Scarborough Southwest, ON
I just wanted to make one last observation.
I still think given the way it's worded, “enabling all women workers in Quebec”, the focus would still appear to be Quebec. While I really appreciate the subject matter, I don't think that it should be worded in a way that is specific to one province, because that's how it's going to read.
You know, if it's an issue, then we're going to be faced with various provinces coming, and we're going to be splintering and regionalizing a process. So if it's going to be a study, it should be for all women and then we'll get to see what actually transpires in other provinces, how they're dealing with it, and if this is even on their radar.
That's just a suggestion.
9:25 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
All right. Ms. Simson makes an important point. What I would like is for us to deal with the amendment that we currently have on the table. Accept it or not. Then we will look at the motion as written.
If you accept the recommendation, the recommendation would still read “Quebec,” but then you can vote for or against it. I think everyone has made their points. Unless Madame Boucher has something new to add to the discussion, we have to move on. Let's deal with the amendment.
9:25 a.m.
Conservative
Sylvie Boucher Conservative Beauport—Limoilou, QC
No. I just want to...
Repeat the motion, please, with the amendment.
9:25 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
The amended motion reads as follows:
That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the committee undertake a study of the feasibility of an agreement between the two levels of government enabling all women workers in Quebec the option of precautionary cessation of work with compensation from the Commission de la santé et securité au travail, and that the committee report its observations, including a scan of what is going on in other provinces as it relates to this issue, and make recommendations to the House.
Those in favour of the amendment? Those opposed?
(Amendment negatived)
9:25 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
The amendment does not pass.
Let's now vote on the motion as it is without the amendment. You have the motion in front of you. Those in favour of the motion? Opposed?
(Motion negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
9:25 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
The motion does not carry.
All right. Now we have another motion.
The other motion is from Ms. Neville and reads:
That the Standing Committee on the Status of Women unanimously endorse the initiative by Equal Voice to elevate the tone of the debate in the House of Commons on October 19, 2010, in order to attract and retain more women in politics and better showcase the good work that is being done; and that this endorsement be reported to the House as soon as possible.
So this is obviously not a study; this is merely an endorsement.
Ms. Neville, if you don't mind my noting a grammatical piece here, how it reads is to elevate the tone of the debate in the House on that one day. I think you may want to take out October 19, 2010, and put it at the end: “endorse the initiative by Equal Voice on October 19, 2010”. Is that all right? It was basically just that grammatical change.
9:25 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Do we have any discussion on this motion?
Ms. Neville, would you like to speak to it?
9:25 a.m.
Liberal
Anita Neville Liberal Winnipeg South Centre, MB
Yes, very briefly, Madam Chair. I think all of us here have been approached by Equal Voice. Equal Voice has certainly approached the leadership of every party asking for a day that will focus on--for lack of another way of describing it--good behaviour.
We know anecdotally that because of what they see on question period and in the House, many women are not enticed into politics, and I think that for this recommendation to be endorsed by this committee, that would give it added strength with the House leadership of all parties. Like you, I hope that it's not just October 19, but that it would be in place longer than that.
9:30 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Is there any further discussion in view of what Ms. Neville has said? Is everyone ready for the vote? Would you like me to reread the motion, or are you happy with it?
All right. Those in favour? Opposed?
(Motion agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
9:30 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
The motion passes unanimously.
We have the next motion, which is from Irene Mathyssen and reads as follows:
That the Committee undertake a study on the cancellation of the mandatory long-form census and its impact on women’s equality in Canada; as well as the removal of questions on unpaid work–formerly listed under Question 33 in the 2006 mandatory long-form census–from the new voluntary National Household Survey; and that the study take into account the United Nations Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action in which Canada committed to.
I think you mean “which Canada committed to,” because you haven't finished the sentence. I'll take off the “in” there and it will read “which Canada committed to.” All right?
Ms. Mathyssen, would you like to speak to your motion?
October 5th, 2010 / 9:30 a.m.
NDP
Irene Mathyssen NDP London—Fanshawe, ON
Thank you, Madam Chair.
This is in light of the concerns and the discussion we've heard across the country over the summer, and the fact that whenever we have a study here and we ask Stats Canada for information--we want to drill deeper--the response is always “Well, we can't provide that, we've had cutbacks; there is no collection of that data”. It has impeded our work. While this committee does exemplary work, I think that with better information, stronger statistics, we could complement what we've done and be even more forceful in terms of what we are able to recommend to government.
By virtue of the fact that we've heard from a number of agencies, organizations...government saying how desperately they need this information in order to plan, I think a study here is imperative as soon as we can manage it. Because the government is making decisions that are clearly not benefiting women and families in this country, but most certainly women, I would like to proceed with this.
9:30 a.m.
Liberal
9:30 a.m.
Bloc
Nicole Demers Bloc Laval, QC
Especially since, before the summer break, Parliament unanimously agreed to recognize the first Tuesday in April as Unpaid Work Day. But we will no longer be able to quantify unpaid work because question 33 on the long-form census has been abolished.
How can we honour and celebrate unpaid work if we have no way to measure it?
9:30 a.m.
Liberal
Anita Neville Liberal Winnipeg South Centre, MB
Thank you, Madam Chair. I will be supporting this motion.
I recognize Ms. McLeod's earlier comments about prioritizing work. I think this is an example of an issue that's come out of nowhere that has an impact on women.
If I could focus in on question 33, Madam Chair, I had a round table in my riding in early August on the cancellation of the mandatory long-form census. I don't want to say it was the overriding concern, but a very prominent focus of discussion was the cancellation of question 33--what it meant to researchers, what it meant for women who are not in the workplace, and the impact on a number of social programs.
I think this is important. Obviously we're going to have to prioritize it within the work schedule. I think it is one of those issues that no one anticipated, but it's in front of us and we have to look at it.
9:35 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Is there any further discussion?
I'll call the question on the motion.
(Motion agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
9:35 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Given that we've dealt with the motions, I would like us to move in camera to discuss how we prioritize our business. We'll just need a couple of minutes.
9:35 a.m.
Conservative
Sylvie Boucher Conservative Beauport—Limoilou, QC
I have a suggestion.
Je try to speak in English...but I will try in French.
9:35 a.m.
Conservative
Sylvie Boucher Conservative Beauport—Limoilou, QC
No. I would like to make a suggestion. We have a lot of work to do. I sit on three or four committees, so, if you agree, Madam Chair, and if others agree too, I propose that we have a subcommittee on agenda and procedure like other committees do. In that way, decisions can be made when people are away. I propose that it be made up of the chair, the two vice-chairs and a member of the other opposition party.
Sometimes, we have no time to talk about what we want to do in the long term because our time is limited. We are busy with other things. Is that something that would be of interest to you? We could move through our work faster.
9:35 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Hedy Fry
Thank you, Madame Boucher, but I would like to remind the committee that the very first time we set up this committee, when the House came back after prorogation, we agreed...and prior to that we had a tradition of not doing what other committees did.
Now, if this committee wishes to revisit that question, obviously we should discuss that. Madame Boucher has made a suggestion that we move away from this committee's traditional agreed-on policy of having the whole committee actually decide what we're going to do, and move to a steering committee way of doing things.
Does anyone want to discuss this or do you wish the status quo to prevail?
Madame Demers.