Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you very much for being here this afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.
On my way to the meeting this afternoon, I was listening to a conversation between Mr. Nadeau and our analyst, Ms. Cool, in spite of myself. They were right in front of me and were speaking loud enough for me to overhear. Something in their conversation really struck a chord with me. I started wondering whether we were approaching this issue all wrong. Isn't it time to be innovative and to look at the bigger picture?
On a personal level, the reason I was able to attain the standard of living I currently enjoy is because my mother had six children. She did not have 1.5 or 2.5 children, she had 6. And she stayed home to raise us. She did not start working outside the home until she was 50 or 55 years old. Her six kids work and pay taxes. So that is wealth she contributed to through our upbringing. Yet, today, she receives the Guaranteed Income Supplement.
Isn't it time to start taking the attitude that governments, the state and businesses should have a program to ensure that we make payments to those women who have chosen to stay home to raise more children? Having a daycare program is very important. It is also important to provide everything that women need so they can work and have well-paid jobs and decent pension plans, but we also need to provide everything that women need to make real choices.
Things today are different than they were in the fifties. When women worked in those days, it was a second income said to be used to buy luxury items. That is no longer the case nowadays. That second income is essential for paying rent and buying groceries.
Therefore, isn't it time that we start taking an innovative approach and seeing things in a different light, looking at the bigger picture. I think that a summit is one possible way, among many, to study this problem with the bigger picture in mind.