Madam Speaker, I want to congratulate the hon. member for her convincing speech on the continuous struggle of women towards equality. I have two daughters and I do hope that they will live in a society where equality will be even more of a reality.
My question concerns some measures which seem in contradiction with the objectives and arguments stated by the hon. member.
First, one of the recommendations made by the Liberal majority on the human resources development committee provides that future UI beneficiaries, that is those who never received UI benefits before-this means a majority of young people and women-will have to work a greater number of weeks than other beneficiaries to be eligible for UI benefits and these benefits will be less than those that will be paid to people who have already been in the system for years. This seems to be
in contradiction with the principle governing the UI system and with your concept of equality.
Second, the same committee recommended that, in the future, students will have to run up higher debts, something which will affect women even more than men since, in the course of their careers, there are times when they are not gainfully employed, for example when they decide to stay at home to raise their children. Consequently, these women will be burdened with larger debts and for a longer period of time. That also seems to be a contradictory measure.
Finally, there is the plight of women who do not receive any welfare or UI cheques and who are not eligible for programs such as the assistance program for independent workers, which helps people start businesses.
Does the hon. member not agree that the government could have made an extra effort regarding these three areas, or should at least, through the social program reform, ensure that women in Canada and Quebec are not adversely affected by recommendations which are neither appropriate nor adequate in terms of helping them get where they should get in the future?