Mr. Speaker, as I listened to the speakers this evening in this debate I can say this is one of the rarer moments in this place where I have no doubt there is unanimous agreement about the spirit of the motion among all members here.
The economic exploitation of children is a violation of basic human rights. It is a violation that certainly outrages the sense of fairness and decency shared by virtually all Canadians.
I know very well that if we held a vote calling on nations to abolish child labour, all members of this assembly, regardless of their political affiliation, would be on their feet to support such a motion.
The hon. member for Winnipeg Transcona, who brought this motion forward, believes its passage would be a significant step by Canada in that direction. Regrettably it is rather more complex than that. Sweeping condemnation of all child labour assumes all children who work are being exploited. However, in many countries, including Canada, part time work is a fact of life for many children and it is neither exploitative nor detrimental to a child's development. It can help young people acquire skills and build confidence.
I know the hon. member will say he is not addressing part time jobs of people working at restaurants, McDonald's or delivering newspapers after school, and I understand that. However, to effectively combat exploitive child labour we must distinguish between work that helps a child grow into a responsible adult and work that is clearly detrimental to their well-being. That is the approach of the Government of Canada.
Oppressive child labour is rooted in poverty but it is also influenced by culture and traditional social values. Its eradication will not be easy. Simply putting children out of work is not the
answer. We need alternatives that ensure their education, their care and, equally important, substantial incomes for their families.
With reference to the hon. member's call for the government to prohibit imported goods made by child labour, as defined under the International Labour Organization conventions, let me point out that Canada is a member of the governing body of the ILO secretariat. We are represented by officials of labour programs from Human Resources Development Canada.
That enables us to play a proactive role within the ILO. I am sure the hon. member for Winnipeg-Transcona is aware the ILO has taken a number of initiatives regarding child labour. An agency of the United Nations with 173 member states in 1973, it adopted convention 138 which addresses the minimum age for admission to employment.
There is considerable compliance in Canada with the underlying principles of convention 138. For instance, all jurisdictions in Canada have protective legislation specifying conditions under which children under the school leaving age can be employed. The employment of children under the school leaving age is generally prohibited during school hours. In terms of work outside school hours, jurisdictions generally prohibit work for young people under specified ages in specific occupations and situations which are likely to be injurious to their life, health, education or welfare.
Nevertheless, there are some divergences between the convention's requirement and the Canadian situation. No jurisdiction in Canada prohibits all work, including light work, for children under age 13. The general approach in Canada is that light work outside school hours can be a valuable a learning and socializing experience.
For these reasons, ratification of convention 138 is still under consideration. The agreement of all jurisdictions would be necessary to both ratification and implementation of the convention.
Canada is also supporting the global effort by the ILO to eliminate child poverty through the international program for the elimination of child labour, commonly known as IPEC. Last February the Minister of Foreign Affairs, in co-operation with the Minister for International Co-operation and the Minister of Labour, announced that Canada is contributing some $700,000 to assist in this program
Canada's contribution to the IPEC will enable the program to carry out its work, an endeavour that encourages governments to conform to international minimum age requirements for workers. This investment will help move us closer to the ending of the exploitation of nearly 200 million child workers around the world.
The hon. member is no doubt aware that the ILO is holding its annual conference in June. Child labour is expected to be on the agenda of the formal tripartite meeting at the ministerial level. The Minister of Labour will head the Canadian delegation which will seek the support of other delegations to have the ILO member states address the most abusive forms of child labour.
Besides the measures I have mentioned, in 1991 the Government of Canada ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. The convention required signatories to protect children from economic exploitation and to protect them from work likely to interfere with their education or cause harm to their health or well-being.
Support for children is an important aspect of Canada's development aid program. My colleague from Dartmouth said a few minutes ago that about a million dollars a day from CIDA's budget is devoted to programs that address the needs of children.
As a member of NAFTA, Canada is a partner in the North American agreement on labour co-operation which also includes the principle of labour protection for children and youth.
Furthermore, we are not relying solely on measures now in place. The government is currently working with the ILO to build an international consensus. This consensus, which will be discussed at the 1998 ILO conference, will explore the establishment of a new legal instrument to strengthen international action against the worst forms of child labour. We believe our principal focus should address the main abuses suffered by working children.
The hon. member's motion calls for the government to take unilateral action to prohibit the import of goods made by child labour. My colleague from Dartmouth has already spoken on that matter. There is also a risk of driving the problem underground which would force working children into even more dangerous situations.
It is important to stress the government's unequivocal position that trade and human rights objectives are not in competition with each other. They are mutually reinforcing. They enable us to express our basic values. They enable us to work for clear and open rules to govern trade. In this way we reinforce our values and move closer to achieving our trade and human rights objectives. Besides working with the business community, the government is prepared to consult with trade unions, anti-poverty and child advocacy NGOs in the academic community.
In closing, I say to the hon. member for Winnipeg Transcona that I share his frustration. I share his anger that exploitative child labour exists. However, I honestly believe the government has a more effective approach which will contribute to long term solutions. For that reason I regret that I am unable to support the hon. member's request for unanimous consent to have this motion made votable.
