Debates of Oct. 20th, 1999

Pay Equity

[Philip Mayfield, Reform, Cariboo—Chilcotin, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the Reform Party supports equal pay for equal work and so does the majority of Canadians. However, it is the government's failure to clearly define what equal value means that leaves taxpayers on the hook for billions of dollars.

My question is for the President of the Treasury Board. Why is each taxpayer stuck with a $343 bill to pay for the government's bungling?

[Lucienne Robillard, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for Infrastructure]

Mr. Speaker, the concept of equal pay for work of equal value is a human right that the Reform Party members do not know. It is a social concept that they do not accept. We accept that concept and will carefully look at the judgment to respect the principle of that concept.

[Philip Mayfield, Reform, Cariboo—Chilcotin, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government says it supports the principle of pay equity. It was a Liberal government which wrote the law. It was this Prime Minister who promised to pay on the basis of equity. It was this government that failed taxpayers by refusing to define the meaning of equal value.

My question is again for the President of the Treasury Board. Will she table new legislation to clearly define the meaning of equal value before the government is challenged again on its fuzzy thinking?

[Lucienne Robillard, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for Infrastructure]

Mr. Speaker, our first step is to look at the judgment that we will receive from the federal court. We have to study it because the impact of it on our public service is really important. Let us look at the judgment. We will make a decision about it and then look to the future.

Audiovisual Productions

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the RCMP investigation between 1995 and 1997 into the government's film subsidy programs contained allegations to the effect that there were serious shortcomings in the way the programs were run. The attorney general refused to lay any charges.

Was the Minister of Canadian Heritage aware of the very serious allegations contained in the investigation report?

[Sheila Copps, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, the allegations I know of are the ones that Bloc Quebecois members have repeated three times now. That is precisely why I have called for an RCMP investigation.

If the member has information other than allegations, I urge him to contact the RCMP.

[Gilles Duceppe, Bloc, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is a bit surprising that the minister is suggesting that she did not know about the results of the investigation conducted between 1995 and 1997. The attorney general did. Would he not have spoken about them to the minister immediately concerned? We shall take the minister's word.

Now that she knows about the allegations raised by the Bloc Quebecois—and it is a good thing that we did raise them—has she ordered Telefilm Canada to clean up the administration of funding for audiovisual works?

[Sheila Copps, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, for three days now, Bloc Quebecois members have been making allegations. I repeat: if they have any information to share, they should get in touch with the RCMP. In case they do not have the RCMP's telephone number, I have it here. It is 993-7267. I invite them to make the call.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Verchères, QC]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, in the latest episode of the series “In the Kingdom of the Cronies”, the minister stated that an investigation was necessary and that was why she had asked the RCMP to become involved in this new investigation.

What explanation does the Minister of Canadian Heritage have, since the attorney general considered there was no reason to lay charges in 1997, for the fact that she now finds every reason to justify a second investigation into the same matter, and what has led to the government to change its position now?

[Sheila Copps, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, if I remember rightly, last week the member from the Bloc Quebecois made allegations, and it is as the result of these allegations that I asked to the RCMP to investigate.

[Stéphane Bergeron, Bloc, Verchères, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the minister's red herrings are very revealing.

Did the decision by the attorney general not to act on the investigation in 1997, a decision that was given a month before have the general elections were called, not suit her government to a T?

[Sheila Copps, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, very serious allegations are still being made. I invite the member, if he has allegations or information, to pass this information directly on to the RCMP, which is doing an investigation because of these allegations.

Pay Equity

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, on Monday the government celebrated Person's Day to honour the long struggle for women's equality. On Tuesday the courts condemned the government for denying women's equality by denying pay equity.

The government has a choice, to honour the Prime Minister's commitment to pay equity or to continue to deny women equal treatment. Which is it going to be?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, we have recognized the principles so much that we have already negotiated and offered big money to the union. The problem is that there is no agreement on the amount of money that should be paid.

The previous president of the treasury board offered a substantial amount of money but the union rejected it. The court has now made a judgment which, as I just said, the government recognizes in principle. What we need to know is how much money has to be paid? A course of action will be determined after we have studied the judgment.

[Alexa McDonough, NDP, Halifax, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister insists that the government needs more time to study the judgment. Maybe it needs speed reading courses because Judge Evans' decision is crystal clear. He said, “This matter has dragged on for far too long and at far too great a cost for all concerned”.

For the good of civil servants, taxpayers and all working women, when is the government going to keep its commitment and settle the pay equity issue?

[Jean Chrétien, Liberal, Prime Minister]

Mr. Speaker, as I said, we have already tried to settle that but there was no agreement on the amount of money, not on the principle that compensation should be paid; otherwise the government would have made no offer at all.

After we have a chance to study the judgment, we will be in a position to appreciate what our real obligations are and how to implement the judgment if we decide not to appeal it.

Competition Bureau

[Bill Casey, Progressive Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I have a nice simple question for the Minister of Transport.

In order to protect all consumers, will all the proposals for the restructuring of the aviation industry be required to go through the Competition Bureau merger review process?

[David Collenette, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, all of the proposals that have come forward are applicable to section 47 of the Canada Transportation Act. The Competition Bureau certainly has a role. It will be issuing its report within a matter of days. The report will be made public and will help guide the hon. member and everyone else on this important issue.

[Bill Casey, Progressive Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I need a little clarification from the Minister of Industry responsible for the Competition Bureau.

Yesterday, the Minister of Transport said that the Competition Bureau does not deal with levels of service and price gouging, but the minister's website regarding the Competition Bureau states exactly the opposite and in fact deals with these issues when there is a merger involved.

Would the Minister of Industry clarify that? Is the website information right or is the Minister of Transport right?

[John Manley, Liberal, Minister of Industry]

Obviously, Mr. Speaker, the role of the Competition Bureau is to ensure that the Canadian economy retains, as much as possible, a competitive nature. That is in fact the best way of ensuring that prices remain low.

Pay Equity

[Monte Solberg, Reform, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the government is completely confused on the pay equity issue. It has no concept of what real pay equity means.

Does the Prime Minister agree with the President of the Treasury Board that this bizarre concept of pay equity “is actually a human right unable to be denied”. Is that really your position?

[The Speaker]

Colleagues, all questions should be addressed through the Chair.

[Lucienne Robillard, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for Infrastructure]

Mr. Speaker, I repeat, equal pay for work of equal value is the basic principle here. I know that the Reform Party does not recognize this. It was in its electoral platform that it would scrap that principle.

The Liberals believe in that principle. That is why that judgment is so important. We will now take the time to study it very closely.

[Monte Solberg, Reform, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, this is the most bizarre answer I have heard since I have got here.

The government is fighting in the courts the whole concept of equal pay. Every day its members stand in the House and defend why they cannot give the payout to workers in the union.

If the minister believes so strongly that this is right, why are they fighting it in the courts? Why are they not paying it out?

[Lucienne Robillard, Liberal, President of the Treasury Board and Minister responsible for Infrastructure]

Mr. Speaker, I do understand why the hon. member speaks about being bizarre. It is because we are speaking here about a human rights issue and that is why perhaps he does not know about it. It is a question of human rights and that is why it is so important.

The problem that we have is not on the principle but on the methodology. That is why it is so important to look at it very closely to understand the impact. As a responsible government we will act when we have all the information we need.