Thank you, Chair.
Thank you, MP Gerretsen, for your bill.
I support the bill in principle. I do have a number of questions, though, starting with your suggestion that we delete clauses 6 and 7 of your bill because they appear to be redundant because of the announcements in the budget. Your bill was asking for 15 weeks. A pregnant woman qualifies for 15 weeks, and your bill was permitting that pregnant woman to use those 15 weeks however she sees fit, if she is employed in a high-risk vocation.
When I bounced this off constituents, off Canadians, what I heard was that each pregnancy is quite different. We have five children, and that's true. But if a woman feels her pregnancy is at risk, and she qualifies for those 15 weeks she could take eight weeks early, but you're saying allow them to take the whole 15 weeks if the pregnancy is at risk because they're in a high-risk vocation.
The women I'm hearing from are saying that if a pregnancy is at risk, allow the person to take the 15 weeks, whatever works best for them. If they qualify for 15 weeks, why would they not? Why would you have to be a forklift driver, a welder, or whatever? Let women choose.
You're suggesting you don't need the 15 weeks because the government's giving 12. Why wouldn't the government give 15 weeks if women qualify for 15 weeks? Why are they shorting the women by three weeks?