Mr. Speaker, poverty is a recognized source of inequality and disadvantage in society. In Canada the federal government has lost or relinquished most of its capacity to support Canadian citizens and is creating a culture that puts far more value on wealth than on human values.
In the past Canada has managed to move away from discrimination based on gender or ethnic background, but today we are moving toward a system of discrimination based on wealth. On February 13, 1998, our party put forward the following motion in the House of Commons:
That this House condemns the government for promoting an economy where the gap between the super rich and ordinary Canadian families is widening, risking the future of our youth, and strongly urges the government to introduce in the coming budget measures ensuring every Canadian an opportunity to share in a new prosperity.
Figures tend to indicate that in today's economy a few are getting richer while the majority of the population is not getting a fair share of the wealth in our nation.
A recent report by the Centre for Social Justice indicates that the average income for the richest 10% of families in 1971 was $170,000, 21 times that of the poorest 10%. By 1996 Canada's richest were making 314 times the average income of the poorest.
Bill S-11 is related to a recommendation from the Canadian Human Rights Commission which calls for, among other things, an amendment to the Canadian Human Rights Act that would outlaw discrimination against the poor.
Poverty is discriminatory enough. It prevents full participation in society and can deny adequate housing. It certainly affects educational opportunities and keeps a child in hunger. As Canadians we must not add to that litany by giving the poor no protection or recognition under our laws.
The Supreme Court of Canada ruled in the case of Vriend v Alberta that:
The law confers a significant benefit by providing state recognition of the legitimacy of a particular status. The denial of that recognition may have a serious detrimental effect upon the sense of self-worth and dignity of members of a group because it stigmatizes them—. Such legislation would clearly infringe on section 15(1) of the Canadian Human Rights Code because its provisions would indicate that the excluded groups were inferior and less deserving of benefits.
Poverty is still not recognized as a source of inequality in society. It is true that attitudes cannot be legislated, but attitudes can be changed and can be challenged, especially when decisions such as denying a service are based on discrimination. We will support the objective of ensuring that poverty or social condition cannot be used as a reason for discriminating in Canada.
The NDP is a party that promotes an egalitarian society. We believe in the role of the state in supporting a fair and equitable distribution of the benefits or the wealth generated. For us, society should be a humanistic one in which all members are treated equally, with respect, dignity and fairness. The law must protect a large segment of society that is being discriminated against just because it is living in poverty.
I think it is important to note that the motion before us today gives us an opportunity to speak to the issue of poverty in this country. I believe that this week the Liberal government has finally admitted that there was a great deal of poverty in Canada, given that it is considering appointing a minister responsible for the homeless.
It is interesting that the Liberal government would decide to appoint a minister for the homeless. One would need to look at why there are homeless people in this country today. There are homeless people because there is poverty. I am pretty sure that it is not the rich who are living in our streets. There are very few rich street people out there.
We need to look at why they are in the street, why there are people in my riding who have to go to the food bank, why there are children going to school without breakfast. Teachers know that when such children go home after school, there is probably no supper for them either.
It happens in the counties of Kent, Westmorland and Albert just as it happens in Toronto, British Columbia, Nova Scotia and Newfoundland. We can pretend it is not there, but that will not resolve the problem.
The Prime Minister has appointed the Minister of Labour as minister responsible for the homeless. We are pleased he did, but we must note that no money or information resources came with the title. The minister was given a title. What is her mandate? What resources are available? Who will be working with her?
I also asked for a parliamentary committee to be struck. We know that, if the minister is to really do her job, she will have to review and criticize the policies of her own government. When they changed the unemployment insurance program, they made people poorer. People are not poor for no reason. There are reasons.
Laws passed in this House continue to attack the poor. There has to be someone to make sure that, when legislation is introduced in this House, no group is attacked by it. It is clear that with the changes to the unemployment insurance program the poorest suffered. That is clear.
There needs to be someone to make sure it remains. I hope the minister responsible for the homeless will have the tools and the freedom to change the policies of her own party. That is where the problem starts. She will also need a committee.
If no members of the opposition work with her, how can we be sure that her appointment is not just a title to hide behind? We must make sure that the Liberal government does not find a way to go outside the House and blame everyone else if there are homeless people or poor children in our society so that it is not held responsible. We must ensure that the minister has the tools and latitude she needs to do her job.
Bill S-11 is necessary. This week, I took part in a press conference with my Bloc Quebecois and Progressive Conservative colleagues and our views on this are similar. I supported them. I think that we must sometimes put aside all partisanship and use common sense.
When I see something that can help someone in difficulty, I do it. That is what I did this week when I supported the bill introduced by my Bloc Quebecois colleague. The Progressive Conservative Party joined in as well, but the Reform Party refused. That is often the case. We are having the problems we are encountering today because the Liberal Party is promoting Reform Party policies. This is causing a serious problem.
I am very pleased to rise in the House today to speak in favour of this bill. I have no problem supporting it, nor does my party. We must start to pay attention to poverty, to the discrimination that takes place when someone is prevented from opening a bank account because they are on welfare. That is discrimination.
If an individual living in poverty declares personal bankruptcy, he will file for bankruptcy. That person will be told he must have $1,500 to declare personal bankruptcy. The majority of people living in poverty who declare personal bankruptcy do not have $1,500. But the service responsible for managing personal bankruptcies has this arrangement with the government, whereby the child tax credit can be used toward paying this $1,500 fee. The government takes that money out of the pockets of the family to give it to the personal bankruptcy service.
Once again, the children are the ones who are made to suffer when their family is in dire straits.
These are but a few examples of how much injustice there is in this country. I hope all opposition parties that object to the growth of poverty in this country will work together to make the Liberal government more accountable.