Debates of March 8th, 1999

International Women's Day

[Eleni Bakopanos, Liberal, Ahuntsic, QC]

Mr. Speaker, today, March 8, marks International Women's Day. The Secretary of State for Multiculturalism and Status of Women expressed all our sentiments when she said “today is a day to celebrate the gains that women have made and to plan for the day when we can take our place for true equality”.

This morning, in my riding of Ahuntsic, I organized for the fourth time a breakfast to highlight the work of non-governmental organizations. I once again had an opportunity to see the exceptional work and the unconditional dedication of several organizations in my riding, such as Transit 24, Concertation-femmes, the Montreal Italian Women's Centre, Maji-Soi, the Maison buissonnière, Remue-ménage, Mono-vie Ahuntsic, Entraide Ahuntsic Nord et Sud and the Centre d'action bénévole Bordeaux-Cartierville, to name but a few. These groups are dedicated to improving the life and plight of women in my riding of Ahuntsic.

Today women from Ahuntsic and all over the world, despite linguistic, cultural and political differences, will join together in celebration of the progress that women have made and recognize the further goals we need to achieve together.

Taxation

[Deborah Grey, Reform, Edmonton North, AB]

Mr. Speaker, we have been debating family tax fairness for days now but the Liberal excuse for rejecting our motion tomorrow is not exactly clear. Evidently they have to vote against it just because the opposition brought it forward.

Let me read that motion again:

That... the federal tax system should be reformed to end discrimination against single income families with children.

How on earth does the Prime Minister justify forcing his MPs to vote against that?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, it makes no sense to pit families where parents work either in the home or work out of the home against each other.

What is important is that the government recognizes the tremendous burden and responsibility that parents have raising children. It recognized its responsibility to work with them, which is why we referred the matter to the House of Commons finance committee.

I would ask the hon. member to work constructively with the finance committee to that end.

[Deborah Grey, Reform, Edmonton North, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I will tell you what pits families against each other. It is that a dual income family and a single income family pay such discrepant tax rates, and it is the government that does it.

The government has discriminated against parents who choose to have one of their spouses at home when they have children. The government has opted in budget after budget to let this discrimination continue. It is wrong.

I would like to know for those backbenchers who have the courage to vote against this discrimination tomorrow night, how he will force his MPs to continue to abandon their principles?

[The Speaker]

I would judge that the question is at best borderline. I see the hon. minister is on her feet. I will permit her to answer the question if she wants to.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Secretary of State (Multiculturalism)(Status of Women)]

Mr. Speaker, we are back again to a lack of understanding of the issue. The hon. member across continues to talk about the income tax system as if it is the only thing that is applicable to the issue.

If we look at the graph of a dual income earning family, in a dual income earning family someone has to take care of the children until there is a deduction for day care. That puts the dual income earning family $4,400 behind the single income earning family.

[Deborah Grey, Reform, Edmonton North, AB]

Mr. Speaker, talk about a lack of understanding. I think we have seen it demonstrated right there.

The minister can talk about graphs. She can talk about $4,400. She can talk about child tax benefit all she likes, but the government knows that these people are paying 60% to 100% more in the tax system. There is nothing fair about that. The lack of understanding is on the government side.

I would like to ask the minister, as soon as she sits down to hear the question, why the government will not make this fair in the tax system for families that choose to stay at home with their kids.

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Secretary of State (Multiculturalism)(Status of Women)]

Mr. Speaker, it is a case of “don't confuse me with the facts; I mean I don't want to hear what the facts tell me”.

This information does not come out of some ideology or some harebrained philosophy. It comes out of looking very clearly at the cost of a dual income family going to work and the cost of a single income family going to work, where they are both earning the same money. The facts speak for themselves.

I would like the hon. member to do some math 101 on this.

[Diane Ablonczy, Reform, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, at the risk of further confusing the secretary of state, and I hope not to do that, our motion simply calls for an end to discrimination against single income two parent families. That is it. There is nothing confusing about that. What is the problem? I ask the government what is the problem with that?

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Secretary of State (Multiculturalism)(Status of Women)]

Mr. Speaker, the problem is simple but not simplistic. The problem is simply that income tax is not the only system families depend on for their income. There are transfers to families in which the Government of Canada does not discriminate against single income families. The child benefit is a major one that assists low income single income families headed by single mothers.

[Diane Ablonczy, Reform, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I would suggest the government tries to find complexities where it does not want to find solutions. The fact is that single income two parent families are being penalized by this tax system. When is the finance minister going to end it?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member knows, we have a progressive tax system and we tax on the basis of individual income. If the hon. member is against that, then she should stand in the House and say that people who earn $25,000 a year should pay more in income tax than those who earn $50,000. If that is not her position, then she will go to the House of Commons finance committee and she will work constructively with members of the government who want to make sure that families who are raising children have a partner in the Canadian government.

Status Of Women

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

Mr. Speaker, today is International Women's Day, a day set aside to reflect on the status of women in Canada and to examine our behaviour and actions.

But, when it comes to women's issues, the most significant thing this government has done has been to abolish the Canadian Advisory Council on the Status of Women.

Is the minister responsible for the status of women proud of having abolished this agency and does she think doing so has advanced the cause of women?

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Secretary of State (Multiculturalism)(Status of Women)]

Mr. Speaker, it is interesting that today, on International Women's Day, we should think about women, but it is not the only day. While we only get such questions from the opposition today, this government spends the other 364 days looking after policies that would increase gender equality.

In response to the hon. member's question, Status of Women Canada this year has spent over half a million dollars funding 22 organizations within Quebec to assist them in encouraging equality for women in that province.

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

Mr. Speaker, if the minister paid more attention to what went on in the House, she might know that we have asked many questions about women's issues.

[An hon. member]

They never have any answers.

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

They never have any answers.

The Canadian Advisory Council on the Status of Women was created to advise the government on various women's issues and to propose policy directions.

Does the minister realize that, by abolishing this council, the government has become both judge and judged as it were? Can the minister tell us who is now advising the government on women's issues and who is representing women impartially when these issues come up for discussion?

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Secretary of State (Multiculturalism)(Status of Women)]

Mr. Speaker, when the advisory council on the status of women was disbanded, an independent arm's length body was set up to fund research on women's issues. Much of this research is critical analyses of the government's policies. We have funded five such research initiatives in Quebec over the last year.

[Caroline St-Hilaire, Bloc, Longueuil, QC]

Mr. Speaker, on this International Women's Day, there is a great temptation to review what the government has done to support changes in the status in women in society.

The main decision the Secretary of State for the Status of Women has made was to reduce funding to women's groups.

Is the Secretary of State for the Status of Women proud of what she has done when she sees the activities of thousands of women's groups threatened because she has literally starved them?

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Secretary of State (Multiculturalism)(Status of Women)]

Mr. Speaker, we have not cut the supply of funding. The same amount of money is going into funding. We have changed the manner in which we fund organizations to the benefit of the province of Quebec and the women's organizations there which are getting more money than they used to get. More groups are getting it. Some groups have availed themselves of three year funding which they never used to be able to do before.

[Caroline St-Hilaire, Bloc, Longueuil, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like the minister to go and see for herself what is actually happening. She might understand the real situation. What she has just said is utterly false.

I would remind the Secretary of State for the Status of Women what she has already said. She promised women's groups that there would be more funding available to help them.

When does she plan to honour her commitment, since, in the latest budget, there was not one cent more for these women's groups?

[Hedy Fry, Liberal, Secretary of State (Multiculturalism)(Status of Women)]

Mr. Speaker, I think one of the things that is very difficult for the members across to understand is that issues that deal with women's equality do not only sit within Status of Women Canada. Gender based analysis has made it possible for departments across this government to suddenly make women their number one priority. In achieving it, Human Resources Development Canada has gone about trying to enhance the ability of women to get training. The child tax benefit has assisted many of the poor, single income women with children so that they can afford to look after their children.

Taxation

[Bill Blaikie, NDP, Winnipeg—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance.

The Minister of Finance has demonstrated some open-mindedness in recent days about finding ways to end the discrimination against stay at home parents. He does not have to agree with everything the Reform Party is saying or for that matter what others may be saying.

I want to ask the Minister of Finance, within the context of preserving the progressivity of the Canadian tax system, would he commit that by next year's budget he will find a way to end this discrimination?

[Paul Martin, Liberal, Minister of Finance]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member knows that whether it be the care giver credit, the child tax credit, the national child tax benefit, we have worked on this problem consistently budget after budget. As the minister said, this is not something we all of a sudden discovered, as has the Reform Party.

I do not want to prejudge what the House of Commons finance committee is going to do, but I certainly am going to say that I am sure that the hon. member, unlike perhaps the Reform Party, will work constructively with the House of Commons finance committee to see if we can come up with what is the proper answer.

[Bill Blaikie, NDP, Winnipeg—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the problem with the system as it now stands is that there is no universal benefit that values parenting no matter how it takes place. We have to honour all those choices. We have talked about honouring the stay at home choice by ending the discrimination. We also need to talk about honouring the choice of those who choose to, or perhaps those who do not have the choice and have to work outside the home. It seems to me the way to do that is to make the new social union framework work. Test it by having the federal government show leadership and use the new social union to bring in a new national child care program. What about that?