Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to speak to the public service commission's hiring practices and particularly the Employment Equity Act which comes before the House for debate from time to time, hopefully with improvement.
By the tone of the speeches by the members, it is quite obvious that we do have some problems with the act but I do not think they are insurmountable. I think a number of things can be improved and it is important for all members, or at least all parties, to have an opportunity to put their presentations forward. That is refreshing. We have not had that opportunity on this legislation for a long time. I think the review is very much warranted
As a point of interest, I have a letter from the Public Service Commission of Canada dated November 29, 2001, It went to most members and most senators basically outlining what the commission does and informing us that there would be a briefing session for members of parliament on December 7 at the Centre Block. I am hoping most members will attend because I think most of us do have some serious concerns.
The letter states:
The PSC [Public Service Commission] is an independent agency reporting to Parliament which ensures that staffing and recruitment for the federal Public Service are made in accordance with the provisions and principles of the Public Service Employment Act.
It goes on in the next paragraph to state:
The Act supports the current use of geographic criteria--
That is one area I want to specifically address tonight, the geographic criteria.
It goes on to state:
—to determine the eligibility for Public Service jobs, also known as area of selection. The practice has been used for almost 40 years as a method of managing the volume of applications, reducing recruitment time lines, and upholding the public trust in the wise use of taxpayers' money.
Most of us have problems with that specific part of the act, the geographic criteria. We simply feel it is unfair. It is unfair for a number of reasons. When we were first elected in November 1988, and we are still here, we heard about western alienation and eastern alienation. We heard it then and we are still hearing it today. Obviously this is the position being put forward by some of our colleagues from Quebec with regard to recruitment and hiring practices.
Last year the member of parliament for Cumberland--Colchester, who is normally my seatmate and has been for a number of years in the House, put forward some questions to the government regarding geographically based criteria for hiring. I think he made a pretty good point in the House on a number of occasions. The one I think he gained the most attention on was the case with the Governor General herself. The member's press release headline, in two inch print, stated “Do not apply. Most Canadians shut out of competition in Governor General's office”. I have the documentation to back this up. It is not just a member ranting for the sake of getting publicity. I do have the specific job description here that was sent out by the public service through the Governor General's office.
The member's press release stated, “The Governor General has a job opening for a program and policy officer, salary range $48,800 to $50,600, but most Canadians who may be qualified for this job will never be given an opportunity to apply for it because the competition is restricted to those who live in certain postal codes in eastern Ontario and western Canada”.
I can remember when the member brought this forward and I could not believe what I was hearing. However he was absolutely correct. It meant the citizens of the areas that most members of parliament represent could not apply for the job in the Governor General's office. Under that set of criteria, the Governor General herself should not be residing at Rideau House because she would not qualify.
When the member wrote to the Governor General asking her to respond, there basically was no response except that this was how it was done and it would continue to be done that way.
It does not end there. I have a list which I have indexed. That was just one example. Here is another one.
This is for 50 permanent positions of senior financial managers-officers at the FI-3 or FI-4 levels. They would be positioned in the Ottawa-Hull area. These positions cover four financial profiles: systems, policy planning and reporting and accounting operations. These are well paid jobs that pay anywhere between $61,000 up to $70,000.
Who can apply? This was on the government's web page. It is not something that we just pulled out of thin air. This was advertised by the Government of Canada. Only people residing within 500 kilometres of Ottawa can apply. Why? It does not make any sense.
Here is another example. Industry Canada also has an opening for a correspondence officer but only those people living in Ottawa or Quebec can apply. So people from my province cannot apply. People from B.C., Manitoba and Alberta cannot apply. Why? It is not right.
Here is another one. The Department of Justice is looking for a senior business analyst. Who can apply? This time they have gone outside of Ottawa and included eastern Ontario and western Quebec, so there is a little change. One has to live in an area with a postal code starting with K1 to K7, K8A to K8H, K0A to K0J, J8L to J8Z, J9A to J9J or J0X. That is pretty specific.
Could we reasonably assume that we would get the best people for those jobs by restricting them to a small geographical area? My guess would be that we would not. It just so happens that these ridings are dominated by the Liberal Party. I would not want to say that this is politics at play, but what else could it be?
I will go on. The Department of Justice advertised for the same types of senior positions, restricted to eastern Ontario or western Quebec. In all fairness this one was dated March 13, but nothing has changed. We brought this to the floor of the House of Commons before but nothing has changed. It is still being advertised in the same way.
Here is one that really incenses the people of eastern Canada. The department of fisheries is advertising in this case for service delivery assistance, working in Ottawa. Obviously that is one of the problems we have in the department of fisheries today. It is a huge bureaucracy located about three blocks from parliament. Probably none of them have set foot in salt water either on the east coast or the west coast. In this case the applicants have to live in eastern Ontario or western Quebec, the Ottawa region and the list goes on and on.
The member for Cumberland--Colchester wrote to the various premiers of the provinces. I have with me responses from every one of those premiers. Every single premier, whether it was Manitoba's, B.C.'s or Quebec's all responded. They all wrote the minister. Some of them wrote the Prime Minister and expressed concern about the issue of geographical criteria and why in their opinion it was wrong.
I will quote a letter written by the premier of Nova Scotia, John Hamm., to the Prime Minister. In his letter, dated April 23, the premier stated:
I fail to see any justification for the restriction of applications for positions in the National Capital Region which have a national impact. If Ottawa is truly to be the nation's capital, Federal public servants must truly reflect the nation.
No one would disagree with that. Premier Hamm went on to say:
They should not just represent the concerns and views of that part of the nation within a perimeter of 500 kilometres radius around Ottawa-Hull.
I think every member of the House would agree with that, but why is it being done?
The premier goes on to quote chapter 7 of the labour mobility agreement. He said:
This was clearly the intent of Chapter 7, Labour Mobility, of the Agreement on Internal Trade. Article 701 of the Agreement states:
“The purpose of this chapter is to enable any worker qualified for an occupation in the territory of a Party to be granted access to employment opportunities in that occupation in the territory of any other Party”.
The Government of Canada is a Party to the Agreement. Chapter 7 sets out legitimate objectives which may restrict its application: none apply in the case of the vast majority of applications for Federal employment.
Therefore, we brought this case to the minister responsible, the President of the Treasury Board. We brought this to the floor before. This is what the premier of Nova Scotia said:
The Honourable Lucienne Robillard, President of the Treasury Board, in her replies--