Debates of Oct. 26th, 2006

Perfluorooctane Sulfonate Virtual Elimination Act

[Some hon. members]

Nay.

[The Deputy Speaker, NDP, Bill Blaikie]

In my opinion the nays have it.

And five or more members having risen:

Pursuant to Standing Order 93, the division stands deferred until Wednesday, November 1, immediately before the time provided for private members' business.

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

[Maria Mourani, Bloc, Ahuntsic, QC]

Mr. Speaker, on January 18, 2006, just a few months ago, the Prime Minister signed a letter in which he promised to support the human rights of women and agreed that Canada had more to do to respect its international obligations to women's equality.

What is this government's record so far? I have noted a number of points. The first point has to do with the delay in awarding grants. Many women complained all summer about not getting a response from the minister. Furthermore, there is still no pay equity legislation. The court challenges program has been abolished and changes have been made to the criteria for the women's program. We no longer find concepts such as equality, social justice, and advocacy, among other things. There is no child care service for Canada and no transfer to Quebec for the service it already provides. Finally, Status of Women Canada will get $5 million less annually, which is 40% of its budget.

I initially thought that the $5 million in cuts would be made over two years. Finally, at a meeting with Status of Women Canada officials at the Standing Committee on the Status of Women on October 5, 2006, we learned that $5 million is being cut annually, effective April 1, 2007 for 2007-08.

It was also disturbing to learn at that committee meeting that Status of Women Canada could not tell us where they would be making cuts. I found that interesting. I asked one official this: “The government is announcing $5 million in cuts, but as of today, October 5, you cannot say yet where you will be making cuts?” It is a bit strange.

The implication is that the government decided to make $5 million in cuts without consulting officials. That is what we understood. I could also interpret that as meaning that the Minister of Finance got up one morning and decided to cut $5 million from the Status of Women Canada budget, without consulting officials, even though he was declaring a $13 billion surplus and paying down the debt. The officials can talk to the Minister of the Status of Women later. I find that a bit odd.

Nevertheless, I asked the officials to explain where the money could be cut. They mentioned research. We can therefore expect that these cuts will include so-called “administrative” cuts. They could ultimately affect the organization's research capacity, policy analysis and development projects, consultations with women's groups and, of course, the ability of Status of Women Canada to conduct gender analysis in order to ensure that Canadian policies, laws and programs treat men and women equally.

After declaring such a large surplus, why then decide to cut funding for an organization as important as Status of Women Canada, when the standing committee has consistently called for more money for the women's program or for managing Status of Women Canada? The only explanation I can come up with—and I may be mistaken, but I do not think so—is that these are ideological cuts.

With all my heart, I would like someone to tell me how the government could cut $5 million from an organization that plays such a vital role in defending women's rights and has brought about changes in our society in terms of both social justice and equality.

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure for me to speak to the question first raised on September 22 by my hon. colleague.

Quite frankly, I am at a loss as to why the member has brought this issue back to the House, because the minister has clearly stated that the women's program will continue to be funded, full stop, period. Last year the women's program received $10.8 million. This year the women's program will receive $10.8 million. Next year the women's program will receive $10.8 million.

I am sure that Canadians watching the adjournment proceedings tonight will be pleased to know that the new Conservative government is continuing to fund women's programs at the same level and has in fact adjusted the terms and conditions of those grants to ensure that money actually gets into the hands of women.

The women's program was created in 1973 as a result of a recommendation by the Royal Commission on the Status of Women, which called on the federal government to provide financial support to women's associations engaged in projects of public interest. With an annual grants and contributions budget of $10.8 million, the women's program facilitates women's participation in Canadian society by addressing their social, economic and cultural situation.

I am pleased to report that the terms and conditions of the women's program have been renewed for the next five years. Furthermore, the grants and contributions budget of the women's program stays the same, and we will use it to bring real changes to the lives of women across this great country.

This brings me to the renewal of the women's program. The minister's vision for the women's program is that women become the true beneficiaries of its investment, that we see real results in the lives of women, and that there is accountability in using public funds. She has, therefore, taken the opportunity to review some of the program aspects through the process to renew the terms and conditions. As a result, the mandate, objective, expected results and recipients of the program have changed.

The current terms and conditions are designed to foster the full participation of women in the economic, social and cultural life of Canadian society. This means women are the direct participants of funded initiatives and direct beneficiaries of the outcomes.

Let me reiterate that point: women are the direct participants of funded initiatives. As I am sure the member opposite would agree, program spending should benefit women directly. We need to be proactive when it comes to funding organizations that help women in the workplace and in their homes. At the end of the day, women must see and feel the difference that women's programs have made in their lives: economic security, elimination of violence, and greater participation in social and cultural sectors of society and others.

While we have made commendable progress in advancing the full participation of women, the Minister of Canadian Heritage and Status of Women recognizes that there is still much work to be done. She recognizes, for example, the need to address the situation of aboriginal women, the economic security of senior women, the lack of integration of immigrant women into Canadian society, increasing rates of poverty among single mothers, and the lack of services for women in remote and rural areas.

Given this reality, the women's program has an important role to play. Its investment is crucial and must be used carefully so that there is a difference in the lives of those women who are poor, who are victims of violence, who lack services, and who are not represented in our institutions.

As the status of women minister, she wants to make a difference in the lives of Canadian women, young women and girls. She wants to spend and to use money so that it is action oriented and will meet their needs. This government only approves funds that are needed to achieve measurable results in a way that is effective and provides value for money for Canadians.

[Maria Mourani, Bloc, Ahuntsic, QC]

Mr. Speaker, as they say, if it walks like a duck and it quacks like a duck—

I agree with my colleague: the government did not touch the Women's Program. However, it is clear that the $5 million is no longer there. It was cut from Status of Women Canada's budget. We are told it was transferred to an administrative area.

What I see happening, what a lot of women see happening, and what many women's groups see happening is that losing that $5 million will undermine Status of Women Canada's ability to do research, analysis and policy development, to consult with women and to ensure that policies, laws and programs promote equality between men and women. Unfortunately, that is the reality of this situation.

The government can tell the people that the Women's Program is still in place and will be around for another five years all it wants, which is true, but women will not be fooled. Status of Women Canada's budget was cut by $5 million. That will have a direct impact on women everywhere.

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK]

Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague mentioned the fact that the $5 million which has been removed was administrative savings. That is quite correct. The point I wish to reiterate is that absolutely no money directly granted through programs to women has been cut.

We have a responsibility to all Canadian taxpayers. We have been able to find, through our expenditure review, approximately $1 billion in savings, which will result in over $650 million in additional funds to this government because of reduced interest payments. There are no funding cuts-- let me repeat, no funding cuts--to women's programs per se, only administrative savings.

[The Deputy Speaker, NDP, Bill Blaikie]

The motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, this House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 6:29 p.m.)