Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise tonight to speak in reply to private member's motion No. 141.
In his motion the member for Vancouver North asks that the government support the elimination of section 15(2) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This is the section of the charter which allows for actions to balance the inequality in Canadian society, including the promotion of equality of opportunity in the labour marketplace.
The member states that section 15(2) of the charter derogates from the principle of equality that is enunciated in section 15(1) of the charter. The dictionary states that the word "derogate" means to stray from. Therefore, the member seems to be concerned that section 15(2) of the charter strays from the intent of section 15(1). Just for the record, 15(1) is the section of the charter which ensures all Canadians equality before and under the law and equal protec-
tion and benefit of the law without discrimination. It is one of the fundamental principles on which the charter is based.
To address the member's motion, as far as this government is concerned there is absolutely no contradiction in wanting to ensure equality for all Canadians, as section 15(1) does, while at the same time having the capacity to act in cases where there is a need to correct inequality of opportunity for which section 15(2) provides.
It is exactly by being able to implement measures in support of disadvantaged groups that we do guarantee equality in Canadian society. This is the kind of equality that section 15(1) of the charter of rights and freedoms calls for and the kind of equality that makes Canada one of the best places in the world in which to live.
Over the years this government and other governments before it have been willing to act when it was necessary to improve conditions for certain disadvantaged groups or individuals. This is a very legitimate function of responsible government.
We are proud of our performance and of our support of the Canadian Charter of rights and freedoms, including the traditions that it reflects. We particularly support the provisions of the charter that advocate equal opportunities for all Canadians.
Because we believe that section 15(2) is a necessary part of the charter in support of equality, we are not in favour of seeing it eliminated.
The member's motion also calls on the government to end discriminatory hiring programs that result from affirmative action. Once again, those of us on this side of the aisle would remind our colleagues in the third party that promoting equality of opportunity does not mean discrimination for or against anyone in the workplace. It does mean however acting in a manner to ensure that there are no barriers in place which might deny some individuals or groups from having full and equal access to the same job opportunities as others in the same society.
Hon. members will recall the work we did last fall to introduce and to pass Bill C-64, an act respecting employment equity. Perhaps this is the sort of affirmative action the member from North Vancouver is referring to in his motion.
The purpose of Bill C-64 is not to promote discriminatory hiring. The purpose is quite simple and quite clear. It is to remove the systematic barriers that prevent qualified people from working, the kind of barriers that have nothing to do with merit or personal capability but have come about because of informal practices and rules that have developed over the years and can impede open access to job opportunities.
The purpose of Bill C-64 was not and is not to impose any kind of discriminatory hiring program or quotas, nor does it require employers to hire anyone who is not qualified to do a particular job. The bill specifically excludes hiring quotas or arbitrary numerical employment goals as being unreasonable.
There are no quotas, there is no hidden agenda, there is no reverse discrimination in our approach to employment equity. Merit remains the basic principle for hiring and there is no question about that. Anyone who reads the bill will see it.
It is also important to note that Bill C-64 was supported by a clear majority of members of this House, including the official opposition. Its advantages were carefully considered and recognized on the floor of the House, during committee hearings and more broadly by many Canadians.
It was during committee hearings that we heard some of the strongest endorsements of the principles of employment equity and of the value of equality in the workplace. Many of these comments came from the business community, including the business community in the member's home province. The business community understands that the world in which Canada does business is changing, that Canada has to be enlightened and forward thinking, that we need to be well positioned to attract and to employ the best and brightest people we can.
It is not just employers who support the principles of employment equity. Labour representatives have spoken in support of the direction we are following with employment equity in Canada.
The market is not always fair and equitable. It does need some guidelines and direction from time to time. We feel it is the responsibility of government to recognize when that time is and to show the appropriate leadership. This government has done that.
On balance, there appears a strong consensus across the country in support of what we have done. Business, labour and others support our approach to employment equity and the equality of opportunity in the workplace that it represents. There is a strong consensus, except from the party opposite.
There are still those who choose to ignore the evidence, including positive comments from the business community, from labour
representatives as well as from many others who have gone on record as supporting the principles of employment equity.
For those of us living in the real world, the very competitive real world of the 1990s, we know there are significant advantages to be gained from diversity in the workplace and by an enlightened approach to employment equity.
I invite my hon. friend opposite to consider the advantages. I also remind him that the government remains committed to its jobs and growth agenda. The underlying goal is still to get Canadians back to work. As the economic program continues to contribute to this goal there will be more jobs available.
Employers will continue to seek out the most qualified candidates for these jobs. Merit will remain the central qualification for hiring. The member for North Vancouver and his constituents should be reassured that the government is not doing anything to change that.
We do not need to abolish section 15(2) of the charter, as the member for North Vancouver has asked us to do. We need to get on with creating the kinds of partnerships that will increase the job opportunities for everyone.
Eliminating section 15(2) of the charter of rights and freedoms will not contribute to achieving the goal of this member. I do not support the motion to this effect.