Ethel Blondin-Andrew

[Unemployment Insurance, April 28th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, as you well know the people on this side of the House are the architects of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and we have a great deal of respect for the charter. Everything that the government undertakes does reflect that.

In reply to the question, that is a very specific question on which the minister has taken action. Of course everything we do upholds the charter. The full weight of the charter stands.

[Sahtu Dene And Metis Land Claim Settlement Act, April 25th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member. I know that he has had intense briefing this very day and put forward quite a few ideas concerning this claim.

I just want to say that some of the things I am hearing in this debate are very disturbing. It is a very ethnocentric view that is being perpetrated, but then I suppose that is the reason why we have different political ideologies. We totally support the land claims process. In fact as a government we want to make that process fairer and more equitable for the aboriginal people.

It is unfortunate that this particular claim is receiving all of the concerns that the Reform Party has. It is not specifically the Sahtu claim that is being dealt with here. It is the Reform Party's political agenda regarding aboriginal issues: self-government, compensation. However there are a number of things I want to hit on.

Talking about treating all Canadians the same I think is very misguided and misdirected through this claims debate because talking about treating aboriginal people the same is not treating them fairly necessarily.

If you know the language of constitutional debates and of aboriginal justice you will know that treating people who are poor, who are probably one of the poorest groups in the country, who have the highest unemployment, who have the highest rate of suicide-in Big Cove one a month-if you think about the social statistics, the under representation of aboriginal people in the financial institutions, the political institutions and when you think about the over representation of those people in terms of incarceration, poor health, poverty, suicide and a number of other social malaise, you will know that treating the people the same is not treating them fairly. Maybe we can eradicate that view.

Second, I would like to say that you are talking about the finality of the claim. It was my grandfather, Chief George Zault Blondin who signed treaty 11. It was with the good intent of holding in trust those things that we hold dear to us. I know from the history of my people that it was not to forfeit anything. It was signed to secure and hold close the things that mean something to aboriginal people.

This is a peculiar arrangement, a very difficult process, which for the last 20 or 24 years these people have undergone. They voted for it. They want it. We recognize that as a government. By taking the debate one step further, the hon. member alleges that if we have a deal there has to be finality, there has to be an element of certainty, that if we reach an agreement the people have to be responsible and must not ask for anything else.

My question to the hon. member is this. Is he alleging that once provinces become provinces they should not ask for any more transfer payments? Is he alleging that once municipal governments are formed they should not look for any subsidies in terms of tax benefits or anything like that? Is he alleging that any form of government that is established outside of the federal government should have that same finality as well? If we are going to treat people the same, so should governments be treated the same.

[Criminal Code, April 21st, 1994]

moved that the bill be read the third time and passed.

[Criminal Code, April 21st, 1994]

moved that the bill be concurred in.

(Motion agreed to.)

[Canada-Hungary Income Tax Convention Act, 1994, April 21st, 1994]

moved that Bill S-2, An Act to implement a convention between Canada and the Republic of Hungary, an agreement between Canada and the Federal Republic of Nigeria, an agreement between Canada and the Republic of Zimbabwe, a convention between Canada and the Argentine Republic and a protocol between Canada and the Kingdom of the Netherlands for the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of fiscal evasion with respect to income taxes and to make related amendments to other acts, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

[Supply, March 22nd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I am hearing a fundamental difference in vision here. We have our priorities right. We want to create jobs. We do not believe that investing resources to better the lives of young people who are unemployed, out of school and between the ages of 18 to 24 years is a poor investment. We cannot afford not to do it because those young people are actually a drag on the social safety net. We are either paying them unemployment insurance or welfare. We

have the choice of deciding whether they should be productive. This is an effort to enable these young people.

If I might explain in detail, once young people use the opportunities in community based pilot projects they get what is called a completer's bonus. This bonus could be in the form of a tuition voucher, a loan forgiveness note or a portable wage subsidy. It could also give them a credit note to start a small business or work with a small business. This is all directly related. It is not a government program for government people. It is the government's effort to provide adequate resources so that young people can have opportunities they do not now have.

It is a modest effort. It will not solve all ills. However in our review we are looking at every opportunity or every avenue to do better. We are not saying that we will solve all the problems of the world with one program. We are saying we cannot do everything but we know we have to do something.

We have to help those young people out there. If the Reform Party chooses not to, it sounds a little anti-youth to me and it sounds like a bit of a downer on the attitude toward youth.

I have met many youth who are capable, who want to work, who want the opportunities, who are on the cutting edge, who show leadership and who are very good at what they do. I could give many examples. I suggest that the hon. member go out there and meet with some of those young people.

[Supply, March 22nd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to respond to some of the concerns raised by the hon. member.

I can understand the cynicism on the part of the Bloc Quebecois. I have been to Quebec and probably the most enthusiastic response in terms of the youth service corps specifically was from the youth in Quebec with whom we consulted. They were the unemployed, people dealing with justice, young offenders, street people and street youth organizations. They were very enthusiastic and wanted to endorse it.

Opportunities big or small are not shunned by people who need the opportunities. Opportunities for youth in Quebec to do something with their lives, be it an opportunity for one person or opportunities for twenty people, will not be pushed to the side by young people. These young people were very enthusiastic. Every opportunity for every person is worth gold to those people whether or not the hon. member agrees.

We never said that we had magical solutions. I salute the Prime Minister; I congratulate him. He went to the source. We knew there were concerns. We knew there would be a lot of reluctance. Change is difficult. Change is not without pain. Change is not without the kinds of difficulty and the controversy we are not afraid to confront. We know there is no pretty way around making the changes that will eventually lead to long term gain.

In the interim we as a government are prepared to face the kinds of responses there are. We are prepared to make greater gains in the long run: short term pain for long term gain. We know there really is no pretty way around it. We never said we had magical solutions, but we believe every opportunity we create is for people who want it.

Perhaps as politicians we tend to extrapolate on what is good for people in terms of jobs when we do not really have the right to do so. Those young people want those opportunities. They told us that. They endorse the programs enthusiastically.

We hear the concerns about job creation and small and medium sized businesses. That was part of our platform. We never promised paradise to Canadians because we knew the problems that would be there when we were elected. We promised commitment. We promised to work hard. We promised to consult. We promised to try to create opportunities for those people to do for themselves, not to do for them what they could do better than we could as a government.

That is where we are going. That is our intention. I would like the hon. member to be there to help us.

[Supply, March 22nd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to rise to respond to the motion moved by the hon. member for Mercier.

I am very glad to reiterate for all hon. colleagues of the Bloc Quebecois the Liberal vision of Canada. It is a Canada that offers to all young Canadians the kind of opportunities to work, to grow and to prosper as so many other Canadians enjoyed before them.

It should be noted that part of a government's vision is responding in an accountable, responsible and innovative way to what it sees around it, and not only responding to the problems but capturing the spirit of the potential that is there. This is what we as a government are attempting.

I also welcome the opportunity to expand on this government's actions to date on how we will create jobs and opportunities through an integrated and effective approach to investing in people. As the Secretary of State for Youth and Training, I specifically would like to address the House on what concrete measures this government is taking to improve the job prospects of our young people, to get young Canadians back to work in the mainstream of the workforce.

I should perhaps preface the rest of my speech with some comments about how inspired I have been in my travels across this country since having been appointed secretary of state. I have met young people from all across the country, from the east to the west, from the north to the south. It has been very inspirational for me to know there is vast potential for us to work with.

We have a wealth of resources in the ideas, the energy and the leadership among young people. It should be noted that generally young people have the potential, the talent, the ability and the willingness. They need the opportunity and this is what I would like to address today.

Other hon. members of the government will rise to speak on the Liberal vision for Canada and how that vision is fuelling concrete measures on several fronts to mobilize Canada's economic and human resources to create jobs and opportunities for all Canadians.

During the election last fall the Liberal Party articulated a vision for a Canada where people live and prosper with a sense of hope and opportunity. Our vision was clearly spelled out in the Liberal platform called "Creating Opportunity" or the red book.

It is a vision of an independent country that is economically strong, socially just, proud of its diversity and characterized by integrity, compassion and competence. These are the guiding principles that generations of Canadians live by and they laid the foundations for a great country and a fair society. The government stands behind these principles and we will create opportunities that reflect our strong belief in them.

As the hon. member for Mercier is no doubt aware, the Liberal vision for a strong, cohesive and productive country hit a responsive chord among many Canadians. They increasingly felt isolated by their institutions, worried for our young people and uncertain about their future.

The previous government adopted a wait and see attitude to social and economic policy and left Canadians to fend for themselves. However, this government has acted quickly to address the new social and economic realities of a global

economy by inviting Canadians to engage in a far reaching examination and rebuilding of the very structures that have made this country so great.

The impetus for change can be seen all around us. Where Canadians were once sure footed, they now feel they are slipping. Nowhere is the degree of uncertainty and the desire for change greater than when we hear the call from our young people to give them opportunities to contribute to their community, their country and to join in with other Canadians in building a brighter future for this nation.

Canada cannot risk seeing a generation of young people sidelined in the job market because we did not have the right programs at the right times. Canada had over 400,000 young people under 25 who were looking for work each month in 1993. That is an unacceptably high unemployment rate of over 18 per cent. Without opportunity they will lose hope.

In human terms, there are a lot of idle young people whose talents are being wasted. We need to ensure that young people have better opportunities like access to work, education, job training or community service. It is not for lack of interest. It is for lack of opportunities that this situation exists.

The most recent labour force survey shows that while the number of unemployed in Canada is down, the youth unemployment rate is rising. It reached 18.1 per cent last month, its highest level since last June.

We want to rebuild the social safety net for young Canadians who need help to get their lives back on track. In restoring the sense of security and opportunity, we want to offer choices that will help them make their way in the workforce. That is what the social security reform will accomplish.

I want to make it clear that helping young people make the transition from school to the workforce is a major focus of social security reform.

The government is calling on all Canadians to join in rebuilding our social security net. We are strongest when we act as a team. We are strongest when we combine the talents of governments, business, labour, educators, community groups and our youth. Together we have the human resources necessary to find solutions. Together we can do a better job.

Young Canadians have as much to contribute and to gain from the rebuilding of our social safety net as any other age group in the country. They are a top priority because they are our future workforce.

Young people will be the beneficiaries of these revitalized social programs. They will see the productive outcomes of a social security net that rewards effort, offers incentives to work and restores hope for the future.

Our vision is to create a more productive economy by investing in the potential of our young people. To do this we have to recognize the needs of young people who are in the workforce now and looking for a meaningful outlet for their talents, energies and ideas.

We also have to plan for the next generation too: those students who are just entering high school now and who will be planning their careers for a yet unknown job market and the generation after them as well.

Social security reform is being propelled by a strong desire to meet the social and economic needs of Canada head on. Canada's social programs have served us well but they were designed in a different time for different circumstances. We cannot keep waiting. The realities of the next century are on us.

On January 31 the Minister of Human Resources Development announced a three stage process for social security reform. It involves the participation of Canadians from all levels of the community.

A parliamentary standing committee has been holding public hearings and is scheduled to submit its report to the House later this week. We have met a number of times with our partners at the provincial and territorial levels. These meetings will continue. A task force has been appointed to advise the minister. From these discussions an action plan will be drafted and tabled in the House in late April or early May. Canadians will be consulted on proposals for social security reform to be outlined in the action plan.

We are moving quickly because the economic prospects of young Canadians can only improve if our system which can help them make that transition from school to work is redesigned and improved to meet their pressing needs.

It is time to rethink our priorities and come up with a plan to meet the needs of our young people, our workforce and our society in the 1990s and beyond. In doing so we will also put in place a system that is responsive, compassionate and economical.

The majority of jobs created now to the year 2000 will require at least 17 years of education and training. That is high school, plus four or more years of further schooling. Employers have raised the ante. Yet approximately 60 per cent of young people go looking for work right after high school. The doors to entry level jobs will be closed to them unless we give them the opportunities to improve themselves.

Youth unemployment is directly linked to education and training. Between 1990 and 1993 jobs held by university graduates increased by 17 per cent. The uneducated and undereducated are being squeezed out of the workforce. The longer they are out of the job market, the harder it will be to get back in. The gaps on a young person's résumé will put them at a great

disadvantage when they are up against newer graduates just entering the workforce.

Young Canadians have the highest unemployment rate and are the most vulnerable to economic downturns. There may be fewer youths compared to their baby boomer predecessors. However, their needs are more pronounced because of the increasingly complex world they are entering, in terms of the workforce, what is productivity for a nation per se and because of global competitiveness as well.

The federal government is offering jobs and hope to young people who have been hit hard by the recession and have fallen between the cracks in trying to find a job after leaving school. The failure to make that transition has a ripple effect on the economy and society.

What is particularly disturbing is the growing number of young people who have never held a job. That is why it is essential that we help young Canadians.

The Liberal government is committed to helping young Canadians make that transition. It is a top priority and that is why we are moving ahead with the youth service corps that was outlined in the red book. The youth service corps will help offer young Canadians an opportunity to serve and learn about their country and gain important skills and valuable work experience.

The government will reach out to young people to prepare them for the challenges of the future. Liberals believe now more than ever that Canada needs the skills, talents and energies of every young Canadian. The youth service corps will get unemployed youth working in community service projects to address the diminishing opportunities for young people as a result of the tough job market.

It is not a question of whether young people want to work, because they do. It is a question of giving them the opportunity to do something constructive and rewarding that benefits the individual, improves their community and strengthens our country.

Canada simply cannot afford a lost generation. Demographic trends clearly demonstrate Canada will soon suffer a worker shortage. As baby boomers leave the workforce in large numbers we will increasingly count on your young.

To compete globally in the next century we will need a highly educated, highly skilled workforce. You need not be a futurist to know our continued growth and prosperity depend on the workers of tomorrow who are generally the unemployed youth of today.

This venture will be less costly than unemployment insurance and welfare and will give young people the tools to build better lives for themselves and for our society. Young people are searching for relevant work experience that will give them saleable skills to get their foot in the job market door.

During my discussions with young Quebecers on the concept of the youth service corps I heard firsthand their enthusiasm for such a program. Quebec youth eagerly identified with the goals of the youth service corps to give them practical skills and work experience while contributing in a meaningful way to their country.

The youth service corps is a smart and necessary investment in our future workforce. It is a concrete measure which addresses the serious need to help the unprecedented number of youth who are squeezed out of the workforce, who are giving up on finding work. Canadians age 18 to 24 who are out of school and unemployed will have opportunities to gain a sense of accomplishment, self-reliance and marketable skills through practical work experience in the community.

Do we act now to offer young people opportunities so that they can acquire some skills and learn good work habits? Or do we write off a generation of youth and leave them unprepared to compete for jobs? The government has decided to act.

The youth service corps represents one of several concrete measures by the government aimed to better prepare youth for the fast changing labour market. It is part and parcel of our underlying vision to invest in Canadians. The same vision is behind the social security review process.

Young people today want what other Canadians want: good jobs; opportunities to enter and re-enter the workforce; the right to be part of the mainstream and to be treated with dignity. That is the essence of our vision for young people.

The government stands for creating opportunities for young people. For the great majority of Canadians, jobs are at the top of the list. A job is the best form of security. We want to give young Canadians all the tools necessary to aim for, prepare for and find jobs.

I should mention a number of other things that relate to youth between the ages 18 to 24 who are unemployed, left on the sidelines, out of reach of the opportunities. We also have a general preoccupation with the poor, the disabled, the street people, the people who are most in need and at risk. The initiatives we have outlined in the red book express that very well.

Let me give a few examples. We have proposed an aboriginal head start program that will deal with preschool child development. It will help greatly those sole parents who struggle on their own with their children in the area of parenting skills and nutritional skills. We have a great need there. These are for the inner city poor.

In a particular area of Winnipeg, one out of three children lives in poverty. This program is designed for the inner city poor. We now have a program designed to help keep young children in school called the stay in school program. It has been

hailed as a success across the country. Many regions have supported the program. There has been a marked difference in the attendance of people who have been impacted by the program.

We also have the brighter futures program, which is a carryover from the last government. We do not discard what works. We try to perfect, adjust and make better things that would work under our mandate.

We now have Youth Services Canada which will break the cycle of dependency. It will take youth between the ages of 18 to 24 years off unemployment insurance and assistance. It will be an enabling process.

We also have the summer challenge program on which the minister will speak later. It is a very successful program. It is a program for the young people of Canada who are out there right now educating themselves, training and working. This is their opportunity to work between the months of April and September. They want to work and they are working.

We also have the proposed youth internship program. I could go on and on about the wonderful things we want to do but my time is running out. We have laid out our priorities. We have expressed a commitment. We have looked at the human side of all the misery out there. We have laid out our plans concretely. For the first time in the history of the country the government has come forward and laid out on paper what it wants to do.

In particular reference to my mandate we are committed to helping our youth. Our commitment will be expressed over the months to follow. It has only been since November that I have been in this mandate. Conversely I have been inspired by these young people. They are knowledgeable. They are mature. They want an opportunity. They are a leadership resource and we aim to work with them.

[Supply, March 8th, 1994]

Madam Speaker, I rise today to respond to the opposition motion urging the government to recognize among other matters the principle of economic equality between women and men and to implement measures to guarantee women equity in employment, wages and living conditions.

To begin, I wish to commend the opposition for raising these issues in the House on International Women's Day. This inspiring day is a time for celebration but also for reflection. We are inspired by the significant progress made recently by women in all areas of life. We celebrate their successes and their substantial contributions to our economy and our quality of life. But we also reflect on the inequities that still exist.

This government welcomes a debate on issues which affect women, a very important debate. This government is prepared to build meaningfully on past accomplishments. In that context it is committed to expedite the process of full and lasting equality for women in every avenue of human endeavour.

We must grasp the socioeconomic realities of the global marketplace. It places increasingly competitive pressures on successful industrialized nations. It also dictates that we forge ahead in eradicating inequality, not only for the inherent essence of fairness but also because Canada needs to promote full development of all its human resources. Only then can it continue to provide its citizens with the prosperity and promise to which they have become accustomed.

On the threshold of the 21st century, our nation must face many challenges. One of the most difficult is to ensure equal participation of women in all aspects of Canadian society. Although our government is proud that it has always contributed to the betterment of women in our country, we are the first to admit that much still remains to be done.

For example the feminization of poverty is a disturbing issue. Single parent families headed by women are the most afflicted. Close to 60 per cent of such families live below the poverty line. The poverty rate for elderly women is double that of elderly men.

Women also suffer from discrimination in the workplace. For example in the Northwest Territories 43 per cent of all workers were women in 1992. However the average income of women was 63 per cent of the average income of men. Women are overrepresented in low paying part time jobs and are often denied promotions, job security and standard employee benefits. This is not only unfair, it is unacceptable.

The achievement of equality in the workplace is an absolute necessity and cannot be compromised by dated arguments and head in the sand thinking. Equality is one of the core values of Canadian society and we cannot tolerate exceptions under any circumstances.

Our government is committed to ensuring employment equity and will strive to offer all Canadians better social and economic conditions. Women are entitled to their fair share of economic power and equitable participation in political decision-making.

We cannot have an egalitarian society if we are indifferent to some segments of our population. We quite simply cannot allow the disadvantaged to be left to their fate while the privileged prosper.

More than 10 years ago a Liberal government, in fact the current minister appointed the Royal Commission on Equality in Employment, the Abella commission. In response to that report the previous government brought in the Employment Equity Act. We were critical of the act in 1986 and we have not changed our minds since.

When the act was first proclaimed its stated purpose was to eliminate systemic barriers to employment faced by women, aboriginal people, persons with disabilities and visible minorities. While there have been success stories and individual employers who have set exemplary precedents, progress for women has not met expectations.

The law now applies to about 350 employers with over 600,000 employees in banking, transportation and communications. Since 1987, the proportion of women has grown by nearly 4 per cent and is now the same as their representation in the Canadian labour force. Nevertheless, women's employment is still highly concentrated in office work, sales and services.

Under the circumstances I am sure hon. members will understand this government's commitment to strengthen the employment equity legislation. It flows directly from our pledge to improve the laws and social programs which form the basis for

fundamental fairness and decency within which Canadians must be able to pursue their individual goals.

We are concerned about the existing act which has done little to improve the lot of women along with visible minorities, aboriginal people and persons with disabilities. We want to ensure that opportunity is distributed more evenly so that a broader spectrum of our society can aspire to earn a decent wage and live with dignity and respect.

In the red book, our government made three specific commitments on employment equity. First, the principles of employment equity must apply in the federal public service and federal government agencies and commissions. Second, we want to give the Canadian Human Rights Commission authority to investigate issues related to employment equity. Third, federal contractors should be required to comply with the established principles.

The Minister of Human Resources Development has indicated on several occasions that our government would see to it that specific action was taken over the coming year to strengthen employment equity legislation. Indeed, our government intends to establish a broader and more solid legislative base for employment equity, which will provide for better representation of designated groups in the labour force.

Employment equity means more than simply hiring women, aboriginal people, persons with disabilities and members of visible minorities. It means developing creative strategies to ensure that scarce jobs are filled according to the principles of sound human resource and equity planning. The focus must be on developing training and retention programs that allow longer term internal changes to take place in the workforce.

Employers can be expected to make more progress toward an equitable workforce during periods of economic growth than during periods of restraint. Under bullish economic conditions employers have more opportunities to hire and promote members of designated groups such as women. Therefore they may achieve good results without actually extending much effort. In times of restraint however the best efforts of employers may go unrewarded. Low proportions of designated groups hired and promoted in the workforce may reflect difficult economic times rather than a lack of effort on the part of employers.

In assessing the results we must take economic conditions into account. These variables require all partners; business, unions, designated groups and governments to collaborate to meet workforce equality objectives.

I think it would be remiss on my part if I did not let hon. members know about the excellent record of the federal Public Service on employment equity. The Department of Human Resources Development, which employs about 27,000 persons since its recent reorganization, is a good example.

Despite the anticipated challenges associated with restructuring and downsizing and the potential impact on employment equity, no group has been disproportionately affected. While concern over the possible negative impact in these hard times is quite legitimate, much of the progress achieved to date in employment equity has occurred under trying conditions as well.

Human Resources Development Canada now administers the programs and services of originating departments, including Employment and Immigration, Health and Welfare, Labour, Multiculturalism and Citizenship and the Department of the Secretary of State.

The consolidation of these programs and services can only have a positive impact on the future of employment equity. In Human Resources Development Canada the department's role will be greatly strengthened in this domain since it has already gained much in-house expertise with the addition of new programs and services.

Human Resources Development now offers a wide variety of activities and instruments which can be brought to bear to accelerate employment equity in the workplace. As a large employer in this nation and with a corresponding budget to generate social progress, the department will have unprecedented opportunities to induce a ripple effect in both the federal and private sectors. This holds true particularly with regard to employment equity.

Rather than get mired in complex details and statistics I believe it will suffice to say that there is a significant representation of women in senior positions of Human Resources Development Canada. The government is committed to ensuring that women and other designated groups will not be disadvantaged by downsizing and restructuring.

The department will be in a strong position to react promptly to any negative plans and could well serve as a barometer for excellence in the rest of the public service and beyond.

I would now like to address the issue of pay equity. The Canadian Human Rights Act considers that not giving men and women equal pay for work of equal value is a discriminatory practice.

The Canada Labour Code authorizes officials of the Department of Human Resources Development to audit the pay equity practices of companies. These officials may also submit cases of alleged discrimination relating to wage parity between men and women to the Canadian Human Rights Commission.

Audits are conducted to verify that pay equity implementation by employers has taken place. Refusal to act results in referral to the Human Rights Commission for further investigation and resolution. This inspection program has resulted in three cases being referred to the Human Rights Commission since 1989. Two of these cases have been resolved with wage adjustments of some $125,000. Two additional inspections have been initiated and should be completed this summer. These decisive, no nonsense responses demonstrate very clearly that pay equity legislation cannot be flouted or ignored.

Most employers are anxious to comply with pay equity guidelines, and under a new program it will be possible to examine an employer's implementation program, find any problems that may exist and deal with them quickly, without having to submit the case to the Canadian Human Rights Commission.

There have been some positive results emanating from pay equity compliance measures. Between 1971 and 1992 the wage gap between men and women has narrowed about 20 per cent. In addition, in 1992 women working full time earned an average of some 72 per cent of what was earned by full time working men. This represents an improvement of about 3 per cent over the previous year.

While these figures do not represent satisfactory levels of change, they do indicate some tangible movement. They also illustrate that equal pay compliance programs have resulted in industry-wide pay equity initiatives in the federal jurisdiction. These steps have often been promoted and sponsored by employer associations which set a standard for less sophisticated and less aware employers.

With the recent advent of labour-management partnerships directed at involvement in the pay equity implementation process, there is evidence that greater strides than ever before will be taken in this area.

Finally, Madam Speaker, considering the symbolic importance of International Women's Day, I would like to take these last few minutes to recall the recent advances which have been made by women. Their employment situation has developed spectacularly during the past decades, while the significance and diversity of their roles have also increased considerably.

We all know, unfortunately, that women who succeed still have trouble being accepted by many of their male colleagues.

For a long time women were rarely encountered in other than support positions. There was also tokenism of the most blatant kind. In the 1970s a disproportionately large number of women were concentrated in secretarial and clerical positions. Since then some of these imbalances have been corrected and many women have increased their career opportunities and some have advanced to executive levels.

It must be recognized that many women workers had to sacrifice personal lives for the workplace. Secretaries followed their bosses up the corporate ladder and became more trusted than senior advisers, yet were never given pay and positions commensurate with their worth.

Women who aspired to management positions either hit a glass ceiling or were removed from the decision making process. Many talented women found themselves excluded from the "old boys' network" in their job environment and were never really accepted, even on a purely professional level, as women doctors, lawyers or engineers.

However, Madam Speaker, there is a bright side: the position of women on the labour market has changed dramatically. According to 1991 census figures, women represented 45 per cent of wage earners in Canada, compared with 35 per cent 30 years ago.

In addition, as noted earlier, there has been significant improvement in the representation of women in management. We in this House are becoming increasingly aware of the impact women are having in all parts of the workplace.

Coincidentally 1994 is the 40th anniversary of the women's bureau. The women's bureau has much to be proud of. Since its inception in 1954 it has contributed significantly to the increased awareness of issues related to women in the workplace as to the removal of remaining barriers. The bureau interacts closely with key partners to change workplace policies and practices. It has helped considerably to move Canada forward as a country which promotes the advancement and well-being of all its workers.

[Aboriginal Affairs, February 25th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I will not offer my apology to members opposite because I believe that the questions I stated in my comments to the press were taken out of context by the hon. member.