Status of Women Committee on May 14th, 2009

[Dr. Teresa Healy, Senior Researcher, Social and Economic Policy Department, Canadian Labour Congress]

Thank you.

I would like to raise the point again about the significance of what was articulated in the November statement with regard to wage controls, as well as the introduction of the first elaboration of this legislation.

I think what's really important for us to recognize is that there are significant pressures from business to try to find mechanisms to reduce public sector wages. I think we should consider the extent to which the introduction of this new concept of a market-based evaluation and comparison should be considered important in this legislation, because it is one mechanism through which public sector wages can be compared with the market-based economy. I think this is introducing a new concept, which we have to be very concerned about. It could have other applications as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you very much.

Ms. Byers.

[Barbara Byers]

You know, if we are all on the same page--wanting to actually have equal pay for work of equal value for women not just in the federal sector but in the federally regulated sector--then, in terms of the objective of how to get there, this law is not well thought out. It was not consulted with.

Anyone who is an expert, as we've had here, on pay equity would have told you that this law misses the mark in every conceivable way, that we will find ourselves a year from now, or five years from now or whatever, in exactly the same position.

Women will have lost hope, quite frankly. I think it's the responsibility of people in this room to give people hope that, yes, they can improve their wages and working conditions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you.

Ms. Pageau.

[Gisèle Pageau]

Thank you.

If we are all on the same page, as Barb said, and if all parties are sincere about implementing pay equity for women, two things have to happen.

First, it has to stay as a human rights issue; it cannot be separated from human rights because it is a gender issue.

Second, the work has been done, it has been studied, and recommendations have come forward; all we need is the goodwill of all parties to implement what we know will work and finally put an end to this discussion.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you.

Go ahead, Madame Chicha.

[Marie-Thérèse Chicha]

I would like to repeat what was said earlier. Pay equity is a fundamental right which it is taking a long time to give effect to. Thirty-five years ago, we might have been able to experiment with new models. But this is 2009 and the other models have been tried.

In Ontario and Quebec, the proactive legislation that has been implemented has shown itself to be effective. The proof of that is that this legislation is still in place in Ontario. In Quebec, a new bill will be introduced in the coming days which goes even further and improves on the existing Pay Equity Act. If the proactive approach had not been effective, Ontario and Quebec would not have kept using it. But, if these laws have been kept in place and are now being further improved, it is because this approach has proven itself to be the most effective one thus far for enforcing the fundamental right of pay equity.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you very much.

I would like to thank the witnesses for taking the time to come and for an excellent discussion. It was really nice to have three rounds for a change and to be able to discuss the issue very well. Thank you again for coming.

I will just give us a few seconds to go in camera....

Ms. Demers, did you want your motion in a public forum?

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Yes, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

All right. Okay.

Then we begin with business and the report. We agreed at the last meeting that we would stay until 1:30. As you may see on your agenda, it is going to go to 1:30.

Before we get into the report, the first order of business is that there is an outstanding motion by Madame Demers that had been presented on May 6, and we need to deal with it now. Do you all have it?

I will read the motion:

That the Standing Committee on the Status of Women call on the Minister of State for the Status of Women and the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development to ask Statistics Canada to measure and value unpaid, “invisible” work, like it did in the 1992 General Social Survey.

That the Standing Committee on the Status of Women call on the Minister of State for the Status of Women and the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development to ask Statistics Canada to measure and value unpaid, so-called “invisible” work, as it did in the 1992 General Social Survey.

Okay, good. That was 1992, then. I had to work that out in my head, and I'm not that fast.

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Your French is excellent. Thank you.

Madam Chair, we introduced this motion because Canada made a commitment in Nairobi, back in 1985, to abide by the United Nations Nairobi Forward-Looking Strategies for the Advancement of Women, under which governments were to collect statistics on the status of women, and ensure that these data, broken down by gender, recognize the paid and unpaid contributions of women, particularly in such areas as agriculture, food production, reproduction and domestic activities.

The last time this was done was 1992. In our opinion, that was a very long time ago. Women's contribution has probably been very extensive since 1992. It is important that a statistical study be carried out once again. However, in order for that to happen, Statistics Canada must cooperate with Status of Women Canada. The Minister of State for the Status of Women has to agree that this study should be done, in order that the invisible work done by women be reflected in the GNP and GDP. We need to know everything that has been done by women in recent years.

That is my rationale for introducing this motion, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you, Madame Demers.

Is there any discussion on this motion?

(Motion agreed to)

[Proceedings continue in camera]