Human Resources Committee on May 10th, 2007

[Ruby Dhalla, Liberal, Brampton—Springdale, ON]

We owe that to them.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you.

Mr. Lessard.

[Yves Lessard, Bloc, Chambly—Borduas, QC]

Mr. Chairman, this bill has been the focus of more consultations than most. They started well before the Conservatives were in power. When Mr. Dryden was minister, he tabled these measures, and there were broad consultations at that time. I remember that we, the opposition, often took the floor on this issue in the House of Commons. The debate was also unfolding in the regions, in communities, etc.

Today, with all due respect for Mr. Lake, I think that he is merely resorting to delaying tactics with his questions. He wants to know who has been consulted. I'll send the question back to him and ask who they consulted when, in a single week, they committed to spending $17.5 billion? Whom did they consult? It is the Conservative Party, the party in power, that has made a $17.5 billion commitment without consulting anyone, and without there having been any debate. This is a $17.5 billion commitment in the federal budget that blocks other projects, including the daycare bill.

This is a political choice. Why make political choices without carrying out consultations? When consultations are carried out, for daycares for example, people expect better than the best. There is something very questionable and even very reprehensible about all this.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you, Mr. Lessard.

Mrs. Yelich.

[Lynne Yelich, Conservative, Blackstrap, SK]

In all fairness, we went on the good intent of the author of the bill. When she came before us, she talked about how she would consult the stakeholders. We have three provinces that have to deliver the child care, and they're against it. One province said there was no consultation with the author. Quebec is exempt, so I'm not too sure why this member is that concerned. Quebec is exempt, so it's making decisions that are going to affect all of Canada.

This is supposed to be a national program, so I think it is in our best interest to make sure it is all-inclusive. That is what we're trying to attain here, with the good intentions of Ms. Savoie. However, we have to put this into law, and it is our duty as legislators to make sure that law is done properly, in the best interests of everyone, and with all due fairness.

I just don't see that this is quite the way to do it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you.

I have Mr. Lake and Mr. Lessard.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

On Mr. Lessard's comment about filibustering, I am due to leave for the airport at 6:15, so I will hardly be filibustering. You can make me miss my flight if you want.

As for asking who we consulted with, in fairness it does appear that we are the only party that actually consulted widely with parents on this issue—with large groups of parents. It's quite clear that although the sponsor says she consulted widely on this issue, she did not consult with first nations and she did not consult with the provinces. So if she didn't consult with first nations or provinces on the issue—those are two pretty big, important groups—who in the heck did she consult with?

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

I have Mr. Lessard, Mr. Brown, Mr. Savage, Madame Barbot, and Ms. Chow.

I'm going to cut off the speakers after that and we're going to vote on the subamendment, whether you want to or not. That's all there is to it.

Mr. Lessard.

[Yves Lessard, Bloc, Chambly—Borduas, QC]

Mr. Chairman, I am delighted to see that Mr. Lake has finally recognized that there has been a great deal of consultation. They themselves have held some consultations; I am delighted about that.

I was asking him about service engagement. I have yet to get an answer. I do not know who they consulted with, and my friend Mr. Lake did not answer that.

I would like to talk about something that was raised right at the beginning and that, I feel, deserves to be corrected. What are we getting involved in? We could sit on the sidelines and merely observe without saying a word, as far as this bill is concerned. I've said it before. The federal government does not put a penny into Quebec's daycare system, not one red cent. We could just stay out of this—

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

What about the social transfer?

[Yves Lessard, Bloc, Chambly—Borduas, QC]

—because if the legislation is passed, Quebec will be paying 23% of the costs. And yet, we will gain nothing from it. Why are we intervening? We have said it before, we're acting because this measure will strengthen the entire country. If it's good for Quebec and if it's what the others want, then we'll not stand in the way of it. On the contrary, we will help them. In the end, it will help us as well, because it will consolidate what we already have at home.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

I want to remind members that debate right now is on the subamendment, not on the actual bill itself.

We'll finish up with our last four speakers, and then we will have a vote on the subamendment.

Mr. Brown is next, followed by Mr. Savage, Madame Barbot, and Ms. Chow.

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

Thank you.

On the topic of consultation, I want to remind the committee of what Charles Dent of the Northwest Territories, who testified before us on April 26, said:

We're concerned by the manner in which this bill will insert federal influence into an area of jurisdiction that is exclusively provincial and territorial in nature. That this is proposed with no consultation with our territory is unacceptable. Just as our government consults with aboriginal governments when appropriate, such as when considering a wildlife act, we expect and deserve the same consideration from the federal level.

Clearly there is a lack of consultation. Whether we're looking at it with aboriginals or with provincial governments, it's not there. That speaks to one of the underlying problems with this bill. Obviously that's going to be one of the pitfalls.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you.

Mr. Savage.

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Thank you, Chair.

It's been an hour and a half, and this is the first intervention I've had. I felt a little bit drawn into it—I don't want to prolong this debate—because it seems to me we're getting off track just a tad. Actually, we're way off track, frankly.

With regard to Mr. Lake's comment about consultation—that they're the only ones who have consulted with parents—I have to take exception to that. The only parent that I've heard from in my province of Nova Scotia who opposed the bill was the minister from Nova Scotia, who appeared before us with concerns about the bill. Her appearance prompted many parents, including, obviously, child care advocates, to call up and say, “We do support this bill.” I have those letters in my office, if people want to see them.

The concern is that there was $345 million cut over five years for first nations early learning and child care. That was in the Kelowna accord. It's gone, and people are concerned about that. That's why it's important to fix this bill in that respect. Many parents have called me, as they have called all members of this committee—I've got a binder full—saying this is something we need to support.

You know what? There may be some flaws in it, but it's a very good piece of legislation.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you, Mr. Savage.

Madame Barbot, followed by Ms. Chow, and then we'll have the vote.

[Vivian Barbot, Bloc, Papineau, QC]

Mr. Chairman, I would simply like to point out that I find what the Conservatives are doing absolutely unacceptable, in the sense that they are clearly acting in bad faith.

During the hearings, there have been countless attacks against Quebec's bill. Then, it was against the fact that children were going to be cared for, and now, it is against the inclusion of aboriginals. This is completely unacceptable at this stage. We are legislators. It is our duty to take a stand on the bill that is before us, and that is all we have to do. I think that delaying the debate in this way is absolutely unacceptable. I wanted to emphasize that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you very much.

Ms. Chow.

[Olivia Chow, NDP, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

I just want to point out that Denise Savoie said from day one that there would be two types of amendments. One would deal specifically with aboriginal people. She said it very clearly. We knew it was coming. We've been talking about that. It is not a surprise. Secondly, she said there would be a very small amendment that would include home-based child care, which we all like—to regulate home-based child care.

So that's all we're doing today, actually, folks. We can pick at some of the words, but that's all we are doing. We are not making major changes.

As for consultation, since the 1980s there have been consultations on child care. Since 2000 there have been ECDIs, early childhood development initiatives. There have been multilateral framework agreements. There have been bilateral framework agreements. There are the new different agreements that we were talking about. There have been numerous consultations with parents, with child care groups, with governments, with aboriginal people, with the congress, with the AFN, and with all the provinces across the country. I just want to be very clear about that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you.

I was going to cut off debate here with Ms. Yelich, but Ms. Dhalla has indicated she'd like to speak as well. So, Ms. Yelich, you're back on.

[Lynne Yelich, Conservative, Blackstrap, SK]

I just think it's our responsibility to have someone define exactly how this bill will affect first nations. It's incumbent upon us. I don't think we can vote on something when we don't know what we're voting for. This is law; this isn't just a nice little fuzzy idea. We're talking about laws. We did have other people here who were as passionately against this, and they were parents and they were representing provinces, so we still have to deal with those provinces.

I would like to ask the experts just how they see this bill forming now. Now we have this great big national program, and then we exempt one province. Then we have two provinces and a territory that are against it. Then we have an expert who watches this, who has even agreed that the Liberal plan, going way back, was probably not a bad idea to address early learning and child care, but that this was not the way to do it. Bill C-303 is seriously flawed.

My question to the experts would have to be whether they see this becoming law, and if so, how they are going to administer it.

[Olivia Chow, NDP, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

Mr. Chair, I have a point of order.

Can I move a motion that we suspend the debate on this? We've gone around in circles. That question was asked about 35 or 40 minutes ago and I believe they have answered that. We can ask it four or five more times--

[Ruby Dhalla, Liberal, Brampton—Springdale, ON]

We should just go for a vote.

[Olivia Chow, NDP, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

—but I think we should go for a vote. We've been talking back and forth about the same thing.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

That's fair.

I want to remind the members that we're on a subamendment here. I appreciate that everyone feels the need to talk. You are MPs and I know you all have important things to say, but we need to keep to the topic at hand.

Once again, we're on a subamendment. We have had some fulsome discussion and I'm happy to call the vote if there's no one else who has anything to say.