Debates of Nov. 16th, 2004

Supply

[The Deputy Chair]

The hon. member for Calgary Centre-North.

[Jim Prentice, Conservative, Calgary North Centre, AB]

Mr. Chair, I did not ask the minister if she was reflecting. I asked the minister if she would apologize to aboriginal women tonight. I take it that the answer is that she will not apologize to aboriginal women for the failure of the Canadian government to protect them.

[Liza Frulla, Liberal, Jeanne-Le Ber, QC]

Mr. Chair, I am throwing the ball back to other governments, the Conservative government in the hon. member's province. It is true that, in some ways, we have a way to go as far as aboriginal peoples are concerned.

I must say, however, that the Prime Minister was the first to bring all aboriginal peoples together at a big round table. Following this meeting, we will continue with specific round tables, including ones to improve the status of women and children as well as social housing.

[Bev Oda, Conservative, Clarington—Scugog—Uxbridge, ON]

Mr. Chair, I rise on a point of order. May I remind the minister that the length of time to respond should correspond to the length of time it took to ask the question.

[The Deputy Chair]

Thank you for your point of order. May I remind members that we are checking the time with clocks.

[Loyola Hearn, Conservative, St. John's South, NL]

Mr. Chair, the member for Parkdale--High Park mentioned FACTOR, the Foundation to Assist Canadian Talent on Records. I totally agree with her comments about the great contribution some of the artists have made. What she forgot to talk about was the funding agreement which ran out last March. It received an extension for one year until March 31 of this year. It had been asking for increased sustained funding. It cannot plan for the future if it does not have long term sustained funding.

Why has the minister not announced long term sustainable funding for people like Nickelback, Alanis Morissette, Sarah McLachlan and Blue Rodeo who received less than $500,000 over the years but have made over $2 billion in sales for this country? Is it because she does not think it is important to plan or is it just bad timing?

[Liza Frulla, Liberal, Jeanne-Le Ber, QC]

Mr. Chair, one must not only ask questions, but also listen to the answers.

I think that my colleague, the hon. parliamentary secretary, addressed the important role of FACTOR. I should point out that it comes under support to music, which is part of the broader Tomorrow Starts Today initiative.

We have said repeatedly since 6:30 that we intend to renew this program, as it is one of this government's most important initiatives since the establishment of the Arts Council in 1957.

Clearly, we are negotiating the overall program, and I would even say the overall budget of Canadian Heritage.

[Jim Prentice, Conservative, Calgary North Centre, AB]

Mr. Chair, the minister has refused to apologize to aboriginal women but has indicated there is more work to do. Referring again to the Amnesty International report, does the work which has to be done concern the shortage of adequate housing, mass unemployment, high rates of suicide among aboriginal youth, and failure to provide safe and adequate drinking water in aboriginal communities? Is this where the work is to be done?

[Liza Frulla, Liberal, Jeanne-Le Ber, QC]

Mr. Chair, I think that with regard to our responsibilities, we all think that a lot of work needs to be done. I have said it. We are working very hard with first nations at the Department of Canadian Heritage and Status of Women Canada.

We are addressing the issue of violence against women as well as the preservation of native culture. Presently, a group is working on preserving aboriginal languages, some of which are disappearing.

I will let my colleague from aboriginal affairs provide answers for all the programs, tomorrow or the day after tomorrow, because I am not in a position to do so.

[Jim Abbott, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

Mr. Chair, referring back to “Our Cultural Sovereignty”, which I started with, recommendations 19.1 and 19.2, which the minister co-authored, recommended the creation of “a department of communications, responsible for broadcasting, telecommunications and the cultural industries”, yet we do not see it anywhere on the horizon. The point is that Bill C-18 is a warm-up of 20 year old legislation for Telefilm Canada. Why do we not see this on the horizon? What are we waiting for? What is the minister waiting for? Is she in charge of this department or not?

[Liza Frulla, Liberal, Jeanne-Le Ber, QC]

Mr. Chair, firstly, to the question as to whether I am in charge, I answer yes, absolutely, and with great pleasure and passion.

As for the review of the departments, the whole issue is the responsibility of the Prime Minister.

That being said, I am delighted to cooperate with the Minister of Industry, whose responsibilities include the section on telecommunications. He is also responsible, with me, for the section on copyright. We are presently drafting it together--

[The Deputy Chair]

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Davenport.

[Mario Silva, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Mr. Chair, I am pleased to have this opportunity to speak about the government program that means a great deal to many Canadians and is very important to Canadian society: the multiculturalism program.

Canada is known around the world as a land where people of many cultures and backgrounds live together in harmony. Canadians claim more than 200 ethnic backgrounds. Our largest cities rank among the most multicultural on the globe. Nearly 50% of the citizens in the city of Toronto were born outside of Canada. In my riding of Davenport, over 50% of the people were born outside the country.

I take great pleasure in knowing as of last week that this particular House is also unique, with many members born outside of this country. Last week I had the opportunity to find out that one of our members, the member for Charleswood St. James—Assiniboia, was actually born in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. That is a great example of the multiculturalism of this country.

At a time when religious and racial tensions are wreaking havoc in various regions around the world, we live to a great extent in peace and harmony.

Immigration has now outpaced the natural birthrate and accounts for 52% of the overall population growth. This is what it should be. As is well known, we need immigrants to fill our future labour needs.

Canada has always been characterized by a diverse ethno-racial, ethnocultural, religious and linguistic heritage. The first people of Canada, as we all know, are not homogenous groups but rather many nations, each rooted in their own traditions, languages and practices.

Through the centuries there came the French and the English and wave upon wave of immigrants from every point of the globe, who created the multicultural Canada we enjoy today.

In recognition of who we are as Canadians, a unique multicultural mix within a bilingual society, the Government of Canada, led by Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau, made a formal commitment to multiculturalism in 1971 with the introduction of the world's first national multicultural policy.

In partnership with other departments of government, with institutions such as the police forces and other services, and with citizens' groups and individuals, the multiculturalism program works to maintain and build upon our strong and cohesive society.

The fact remains that we have a strong legal framework. The fact also remains that the constitutional measures and the legislation we have are not enough to assure equal opportunity in a diverse society. To contribute fully and to achieve this full potential, all peoples must have a voice in society.

In some cases this requires programs to help equip communities, organizations and individuals with the skills and tools they need to advance their interests. Therefore, the priorities of multicultural programs are to combat racism and discrimination, promote cross-cultural understanding and a sense of shared citizenship, and help ensure that Canadian institutions and Canadian workplaces are representative of the face of Canadian society.

The multiculturalism program provides direct support to organizations and communities to carry out these priorities. It also has a close involvement in initiatives that enrich our culture, such as Black History Month, Asian Heritage Month and Canadian Multiculturalism Day. These commemorations serve as key focal points for a huge range of activities at the local, provincial and national levels.

In recent years the program has worked extensively with police services across the country to ensure that the cultural, social, racial, ethnic, religious and linguistic diversity of our citizens is respected.

A national-scale example is a project called the Law Enforcement Aboriginal and Diversity Network. This partnership fills an urgent need for a coordinated approach by policing agencies to better serve aboriginal and diverse ethnic, racial and religious communities.

Our approach challenges public institutions such as the police services, the education system and the health care system to ensure that they respect the cultural, social, racial, ethnic, religious and linguistic diversity of our society.

Researchers are now examining the results of the ethnic diversity survey, a partnership between the multiculturalism program and Statistics Canada. This groundbreaking survey is helping us recognize as never before trends and issues related to Canada's diverse populace.

The program also works hard to encourage federal departments to be a model in the hiring, retention and promotion of employees of all backgrounds. Through its national racism “Stop It!” campaign every March, it is getting the message out among young people that discrimination and racism are unacceptable.

There are many more programs too numerous to list right now, but I have tried to give a cross-section of them to present a picture of the depth and breadth of the work of the multiculturalism program.

Canadians treasure our reputation as a country where individuals are respected, but like everything of value, our Canadian models of multiculturalism must be fostered if Canadian society is to mature and thrive. Multiculturalism fosters the values of understanding and respect, encourages a common sense of identity and ensures the right to full social, political and economic access for all Canadians.

Ethnocultural groups are encouraged to nurture and preserve their traditions with our goal being not assimilation but integration, based on the celebration of and the respect for differences.

Operating within the context of two official languages and recognizing the special identity of the first nations people, multiculturalism is grounded in civility and mutual respect, values which as Canadians we all proudly share.

In a country where 13% of the population is made up visible minorities, our diversity is the hallmark of the Canadian identity. It is a source of economic and social strength and it is a success story. Pierre Trudeau once said:

A policy of multiculturalism within a bilingual framework is basically the conscious support of individual freedom of choice. We are free to be ourselves. But this cannot be left to chance. It must be fostered and pursued actively. If freedom of choice is in danger for some ethnic groups, it is in danger for all.

That is the work of all Canadians. It is also the work of the multiculturalism program. It is a program that respects in many ways the voices and interests of ethno-racial and ethnocultural groups within the federal government.

How successful is multiculturalism? It is one of those things that we perhaps tend to take for granted, but it received an important endorsement from the United Nations last summer when its latest human development index was released. The accompanying report suggests that multiculturalism is the key to building a free and equitable society and credits Canada as being the first country in the world to have a formal multicultural policy. The report also provides the best practices that governments should undertake to achieve cultural liberty in their societies.

Many of the types of policies, programs and services recommended are already being provided to Canadians through Canada's multiculturalism policy and programs, but like all societies the Canadian society is a work in progress. Despite our best efforts, some Canadians do face discrimination and hate. We have yet to eradicate racism. We all know it exists, yet we must all remain committed to stamping it out.

Therefore, I would like to ask the minister responsible for multiculturalism what he plans to do to combat racism. Is the status quo good enough or does he plan to do more?

[Raymond Chan, Liberal, Minister of State (Multiculturalism)]

Mr. Chair, first I would like to congratulate my colleague. He has impressed me. His knowledge about the multicultural program and the policy was so thorough that I am speechless. He is a new member of Parliament and yet he knows so much about what we believe in and what this country is all about. He is the first member of Parliament of Portuguese descent, and I must congratulate him and welcome him to this House.

The hon. member has asked a very important question about the very important issue of racism. I am the minister in charge of multiculturalism, which is one very important task, a very important mandate. I take it very seriously. Even though Canada is multicultural and there is so much harmony in our society, yes, racism does exist in our society. We must be very vigilant in doing everything we can to combat racism. It is to our peril if we do not do that. Racism is a deterrent to participation. If we do not deal with that issue, we will not be able to build this country with all the resources that we have.

With multiculturalism, one of the most important mandates is to make sure that all Canadians can participate fully in our society economically and socially, as well as politically. Only when we do that can we can make use of all the resources in Canada, particularly human resources, to build a strong country and to be able to compete with the rest of the world.

Many people thought that multiculturalism was designed for ethnic visible minorities. This is not true. When multiculturalism was designed back in the 1960s and the 1970s, the visible minorities were a very small percentage of Canada's population, probably less than 1% of the total population.

When I came to Canada back in 1969, there was only about 15,000 Chinese Canadians in Vancouver. We would hardly see another Chinese person on the street. Every time we saw another Chinese Canadian we would be so happy, we would say hello, shake hands, take out our address books and take down each other's phone number. Now there are 400,000 Chinese Canadians in Vancouver and we hardly say hello to each other.

We have to do our best to work together to build this country. It is amazing that from time to time when I reach out across Canada these days to talk about multiculturalism, many Canadians of European descent say, “Make sure that multiculturalism includes us as well”. Of course it does.

This is why I am so happy to see our first member of Parliament from Portugal, and other members of Parliament who descend from other parts of the world. It is amazing that over the years multiculturalism has worked so well.

I went to Saskatchewan and participated in a round table with the Ukrainian community. The Ukrainian leaders were so proud, when we talked about the history of multiculturalism, to tell me how it started. They said, “It was when the right hon. Pierre Trudeau had to deal with the inequality in Canada at the time. Even though the francophones in Quebec were the majority in the province, they had a hard time competing with the anglophones. Even though they were the majority, the economic control and political control in Quebec was in the hands of the anglophones. In order to have a level playing field for the francophones, the right hon. Pierre Trudeau started talking about two official languages for Canada. He brought people together to talk about how we could give all people in Canada a level playing field”.

When Mr. Trudeau talked about a level playing field for the francophones and the anglophones, the Ukrainians said, “How about us?” They are present in Canada. Of course in the 1960s and the 1970s, there were many ethnic groups in Canada, the Ukrainians, the Italians, the Jewish, the Germans.

Canada was multicultural in reality even back then. Multiculturalism evolved because of all these ethnic groups. All should have a level playing field and our party and the right hon. Pierre Trudeau believed in that. This is how the policy came about.

The visible minorities contribute a lot to Canadian society right now. It is important, as mentioned by my colleague, that the source of immigration has shifted. About 60% or 70% of the immigrants coming into Canada are from Asia. The visible minorities are going to build up to a high percentage in Canada. Right now they constitute about 12%--

[The Deputy Chair]

Order. Resuming debate. Could the hon. member for Nanaimo—Cowichan tell us what her intentions are as to the rules that were adopted today? First, will you be sharing your time?

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

Mr. Chair, no, I will not be sharing my time.

[The Deputy Chair]

Fine. What portion will be used for speeches and what portion for questions and answers?

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

Mr. Chair, I will be primarily focussing on questions for the Minister responsible for Status of Women which falls under the Department of Canadian Heritage.

According to the documents from the department, Status of Women Canada works to provide Canadians with strengthened and more equitable public policies by conducting gender based analysis in promoting its applications throughout the federal government.

I asked this question of officials who appeared before the Standing Committee on the Status of Women earlier today and I would like to ask the minister this as well. Why does gender based analysis not appear as a horizontal initiative in the estimates from the Treasury Board?

[Liza Frulla, Liberal, Jeanne-Le Ber, QC]

Mr. Chair, the first announcements regarding the overall policy on gender equality were made in 1995. We know that, in 2000, money was invested to give the departments the necessary research tools for them to make their announcements—or their self-assessment, let us call it that—on gender equality.

Nowadays, we provide the necessary tools to the various departments. Each individual department uses these tools to see if the Action plan for gender equality is implemented correctly.

I must say that the Department of Citizenship and Immigration is a shining example of a department that--

[The Deputy Chair]

The hon. member for Nanaimo—Cowichan.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

Mr. Chair, at the Standing Committee on the Status of Women, officials from the department were very clear that through the federal government plan for gender equality which was adopted in 1995, the government has made some inroads with respect to gender based analysis. The Department of Citizenship and Immigration is an example of that.

However, it is still not the business of government on a day to day basis. A perfect example of this are the changes to employment insurance which were made in 1996. Were the changes made to the Employment Insurance Act subject to gender based analysis and if not, why not?

[Liza Frulla, Liberal, Jeanne-Le Ber, QC]

Mr. Chair, I have to start by saying that this is a long term undertaking. No one can say that this is easy work. No one can say either that women have won. This is a long term effort. However, significant steps have been taken.

The first of these steps is in fact the Action plan for gender equality. Second, in 2000, funds were allocated to Status of Women Canada to design these research tools, such as the development of implementation methods for the action plan. Third, the development and delivery of training, learning and promotion programs, the coordination of activities--

[The Deputy Chair]

The hon. member for Nanaimo—Cowichan.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

Mr. Chair, with all due respect to the minister, I can understand it certainly takes a long time to institute longer term institutional change. However, the plan was in 1995, which was nine years ago. The reality is that for example in the Employment Insurance Act changes made to employment insurance discriminated against women. One-third of pregnant women are not eligible for maternity or parental leave. It is more difficult to qualify for benefits and the benefit period is shorter. Clearly, this legislation would have benefited from a thorough gender analysis.

When the minister talks about long term strategy, I would again ask the minister when will other departments be subject to a mandate of gender based analysis?

[Liza Frulla, Liberal, Jeanne-Le Ber, QC]

Mr. Chair, when one compares oneself to others, one does not look so bad. I am referring to my former department, Social Development, and I will address the National Child Benefit, parental leave and direct assistance to families, which arises from the concern with providing support to women in their daily life. That is one thing.

Second, we must talk about the Standing Committee on the Status of Women that has been created and in which I deeply believe. it has been created by my government because this question is a top priority for us.

There is also all the vertical work that we are doing with the tools that we have for--