House of Commons Hansard #32 of the 36th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was powers.

Topics

Cultural Grants Acknowledgement ActPrivate Members' Business

7:25 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)

The time provided for the consideration of private members' business has now expired and the order is dropped from the order paper.

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

Cultural Grants Acknowledgement ActAdjournment Proceedings

7:25 p.m.

Bloc

Caroline St-Hilaire Bloc Longueuil, QC

Mr. Speaker, on October 3, on pay equity, I asked the President of the Treasury Board if he intended to return to the bargaining table with the Public Service Alliance of Canada. The question arose from a response the minister had made several days previously, one of the clearest ones he has made on the subject of the decision by the tribunal of the human rights commission in the matter before us.

The minister responded, and I quote “We stand ready to apply the various judgments once they are made final”.

The minister has just now told us that he will abide by the tribunal's decision. I must confess I had doubts about the seriousness of the minister's word. In fact, following this surprising response, I wondered whether, with this statement, the President of the Treasury Board was announcing his withdrawal from the bargaining table. And I hastened to ask him if this were the case. His response, let me tell you, left me somewhat stunned.

While we all know that it was the employer who broke off negotiations, the minister told me that he was quietly waiting for the union to come back to the bargaining table, and went on about his $1.3 billion offer. The employees are not stupid. They know very well that the minister is trying to get them to settle for less.

I know that my hon. colleague will soon rise in the House to tell us proudly that bargaining resumed on October 30. I wonder whether my colleague will be honest enough, however, to admit that he is not even in a position to offer a settlement larger than $1.3 billion, when he knows full well that the Public Service Alliance is demanding close to $2 billion. I look forward to hearing him boast about his wonderfully charitable offer.

Let it be known that, with Christmas around the corner, what the government owes its employees is not charity, but simple and fair justice. And this justice presumes the payment of the money to which they are entitled. Instead of asking me to use my influence with the unions to get them to accept this second-rate offer, I suggest that the minister should instead use his influence with the Minister of Finance to obtain the necessary room to manoeuvre and finally respect public servants.

In the second half of my question of October 3, I also asked the minister if he intended to use all the legal stalling tactics at his disposal to delay a settlement in this matter. I imagine he will tell us that he certainly does not, that he would never wish to delay a settlement.

If my hon. colleague replies in this vein, I will believe him. Better yet, I will say that he wants such a rapid settlement that he is using all the stalling tactics at his disposal.

If I may, I would like to give you some examples of what seem to some to be bargaining tactics, and to others, simple bad faith. Given that the tribunal's decision will not be handed down until the spring of 1998 and that this issue has been dragging on for 10 years, it is clear that everything is in place to rush employees into accepting a second-rate offer. Let us also remember that there is still the threat of special legislation.

We honestly believed in the government's good faith when we learned of the return to the bargaining table, but the tactics being used to influence employees are shocking.

When I read an information bulletin issued to employees, which points out how the settlement process will drag on if the employer's offer is rejected, I cannot help thinking that this is a tactic intended to influence their decision.

In conclusion, I understand that bargaining must include a minimum of strategy, but the government must also understand that its employees are not its enemies. They too are taking part in the public effort. The government must work with, not against, its employees. I have only this to add: do the fair thing.

Cultural Grants Acknowledgement ActAdjournment Proceedings

7:30 p.m.

Bruce—Grey Ontario

Liberal

Ovid Jackson LiberalParliamentary Secretary to President of the Treasury Board

Mr. Speaker, on October 3 the President of the Treasury Board answered a question from the member for Longueuil. She asked the Treasury Board a question about pay equity.

The government will continue to fulfill its obligations to pay equity. As part of its commitment, it enacted legislation for Canada in 1978. It has paid over $1 billion in pay equity payments. During the most recent negotiations it has offered $1.3 billion to PSAC.

On August 11, 1997 the government tabled an offer of $1.3 billion to resolve the pay equity dispute. On October 30, PSAC tabled a counterproposal to the current Treasury Board offer of $1.3 billion. In addition to salary adjustments that represent more than $2 billion, the PSAC counterproposals include interest back to 1983, compensation for hurt feelings and other related costs.

The government believes that a negotiated settlement would be in the best interests of all parties and would end the uncertainty to employees. The tribunal decision will provide the parameters for calculating the pay equity gap but will most likely leave some issues unresolved and this will require further discussions with PSAC.

This means further delays. Furthermore, any of the parties could file a judicial review. Negotiations will allow the employer and PSAC to resolve this matter and show that the trust and commitment can generate solutions to these difficult issues. A joint resolution will get the cheques in the hands of the employees sooner.

The government is firmly committed to the principles of pay equity and it wants a fair, speedy and equitable solution to the dispute with PSAC.

Cultural Grants Acknowledgement ActAdjournment Proceedings

7:30 p.m.

NDP

Louise Hardy NDP Yukon, YT

Mr. Speaker, earlier I asked the Minister of Foreign Affairs if, in the spirit of the Beijing conference on women, he would assure that funding for the women's group going to APEC this week in Vancouver would be there, as I had had calls from my constituents who are members of women's groups and who were not getting any funding to go.

The minister said that funding had been there and it was up to the groups to decide what to do with it.

As it turns out, APEC has been funded by the government for $46 million, a total of $57 million, $46 million by Canadian citizens to APEC, $9 million as business write-offs, and the association of citizens groups that had put together the people's summit has received $200,000. Barely three weeks before the summit was to begin it had only received $100,000 and that has forced the indigenous peoples to pull out of the people's summit which is running parallel to the APEC conference.

These citizens groups represent human rights groups, women's organizations, environment workers, migrant workers and anti-poverty groups.

APEC represents 18 countries. It is an association of economies and its goal is to pursue unfettered trade, unfettered meaning it does not have to deal with human rights or workers rights or the fact there may be child labour or forced labour. The people's summit was an attempt to bring a balance to this process. These countries are home to 2.2 billion people, which is 40% of our globe's humanity.

In 1993 the world conference on human rights in Vienna restated that all human rights are universal, indivisible, interdependent and inter-related. APEC's agenda is to separate trade as having nothing to do with human rights or workers rights, the very people who produce the money for transnational corporations and large economies. They do have rights.

That is not the way APEC sees it. APEC curtails democracy through informal understandings. Democratic countries align themselves with the most repressive and corrupt regimes in the world while at the same time shutting out the voices of the civil society.

There is also the argument that better trade will increase human rights. However, when trade agreements changed in China in 1988 and 1989 we saw the Tiananmen massacre. In Indonesia there continue to be vile human rights abuses, yet in the name of trade we will meet with these people and everything will be fine as long as it is in the name of the dollar.

The countries of APEC and the corporations of APEC, some elected, some unelected, refuse to discuss their impact on human rights, on working conditions, the freedom to associate, the freedom to negotiate, child labour, forced labour, environmental standards, immigration, migrant labour and their affect on indigenous peoples. Again I will state that the indigenous group had to pull out because there was no funding for it.

It is easy to shut out the voices of civil society because they are not funded equally by any standards; $57 million to APEC, $200,000 to the people's summit. They were not allowed to participate. There was no money for transportation. Even transferring the cost of one business reception would likely have covered every expense needed for the people's summit. It would have allowed them to fully participate.

Cultural Grants Acknowledgement ActAdjournment Proceedings

7:35 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)

I am sorry to interrupt the hon. member, but her time has expired.

Cultural Grants Acknowledgement ActAdjournment Proceedings

7:35 p.m.

Bruce—Grey Ontario

Liberal

Ovid Jackson LiberalParliamentary Secretary to President of the Treasury Board

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to respond to the hon. member for Yukon on behalf of the Minister of Foreign Affairs.

The Government of Canada has provided almost $200,000 in funding for many non-governmental organizations under the umbrella of the people's summit.

This financial support is given through the departments of foreign affairs and international trade and CIDA, under whose aegis APEC is taking place.

In addition, Status of Women Canada has provided support for the domestic workers forum held on November 15 and 16, 1997, to allow participants to discuss the impact of economic restructuring on their lives and to facilitate their participation in the decision making process.

Status of Women Canada will continue to work with women's organizations to develop long term domestic follow-up action to the people's summit, to contribute to Canada's efforts to recognize gender as a cross-cutting issue in APEC.

We have already seen progress in three key areas of APEC's economic and technical co-operation agenda: small and medium enterprises, science and technology, and human resource development.

The Government of Canada is also working with APEC economies to incorporate more formally a women's agenda at future APEC meetings.

Our government's financial support is intended to strengthen the capacity of Canadian NGOs to contribute to the development of APEC policies and programs.

Cultural Grants Acknowledgement ActAdjournment Proceedings

7:35 p.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)

The motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, this House stands adjourned until tomorrow at two o'clock, pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 7.39 p.m.)

(Link to Appendix)