Debates of Nov. 1st, 2007

Opposition Motion--Status of Women

[Yasmin Ratansi, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for his passion, but it is really misplaced.

The NDP never has to worry about being government, so it can be as crazy as possible. In 1993 the Liberals inherited a bankrupt country. When a government inherits a bankrupt country, the first thing is to get economic sustainability so people can have jobs. People have to have jobs. If they do not have jobs, they do not know how to pay for things.

In 1993, yes, there was a Liberal red book. Government has to work with the provinces and territories. Once we worked with the provinces and territories for the early learning and child care strategy, why did your leader go and support the new Conservative government--

[The Deputy Speaker, NDP, Bill Blaikie]

Order, please. Perhaps we will end things there. The hon. member should not speak in the second person, and time has expired for questions and comments.

Resuming debate, the hon. Minister of Canadian Heritage, Status of Women and Official Languages.

[Josée Verner, Conservative, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in this House today to discuss the economic security of women.

Today, more than ever, women in Canada are seizing opportunities and pursuing their dreams. If we look at women in the armed forces, women in post-secondary education, women in the professions, women in the business world, women who stay at home to raise children, women in almost all sectors of activity, we see that they are excelling, making contributions and achieving their personal objectives and their potential. And the number of women doing so is growing.

The participation rate of women in the labour force has increased, going from 57% in 1996 to 62% in 2006.

Furthermore, studies show that female entrepreneurs are making significant contributions to Canada's economy. In the last 15 years, the number of self-employed female workers increased by 50%. The number of businesses run by women has a growth rate that is 60% higher than that of businesses run by men.

But we can do better. Women’s labour force participation rates are still considerably lower than men’s. The number of women sitting in Parliament is still around 20%, far below the critical mass of about 30%.

Women are over-represented in some groups, particularly those with low incomes, a trend that has not changed in the last decade.

Each of these situations is made worse in the case of women facing multiple disadvantages because of a combination of gender and other factors such as age, race, religion or disability.

That is why we have chosen to make women’s economic security and the elimination of violence against women key priorities, specifically by targeting vulnerable groups of women such as visible minority women, immigrants, seniors and aboriginal women. Each of those groups is at higher risk of economic insecurity and violence.

As was recently announced in the government’s response to the report by the Standing Committee on the Status of Women, the Government of Canada recognizes the importance of helping women and men balance work and family responsibilities, and of assisting vulnerable groups in achieving greater economic independence and security.

We are therefore taking action, in the form of a wide range of initiatives that will help women to take advantage of opportunities and meet the challenges they face in Canada today.

For example, our government is taking measures to enhance the economic security of women, by modernizing federal labour standards, expanding business opportunities for women, supporting a balance between work and family, improving job opportunities for vulnerable groups, raising the standard of living among older Canadians, and offering affordable housing and reducing the incidence of low incomes among Canadians.

As well, the recent throne speech included a number of strategies that will benefit women and enhance their economic security. I will name a few.

A commitment to a proud and sovereign Canada means that women will be assured of a place where they can raise their families, participate fully in public life, make a contribution and achieve their dreams.

By refocusing our attention on Canada’s North, we will be stimulating economic and social development, and this will provide direct benefits for the women who live there.

By supporting international trade, we will be creating new opportunities for women entrepreneurs and helping to create jobs for women and men.

By facilitating free trade among the provinces and territories, we will be creating new opportunities for women entrepreneurs and helping to create jobs for women and men.

Advantage Canada, the goal of which is to have better paid jobs and solid growth for Canadians, will benefit working women and their families.

May I remind my hon. colleagues that the women's program in Status of Women Canada's budget sits at $15.3 million this year. This is a budget increase of 42%, the highest it has ever been. I would also remind my hon. colleagues opposite that they voted against the budget that made this happen.

On October 11, 2007, I announced that 60 projects had been selected to receive funding totalling almost $8 million through the women's program of Status of Women Canada. This historic funding will strengthen the independence of women and girls across the country. Many of the projects will contribute to improving the economic security of women. Overall, some 260,000 women all across Canada will benefit from these 60 projects.

Here are some examples. In the Atlantic region, the result of one project will be a strategic model for mentoring and intergenerational consultation dealing with the obstacles faced by younger and older women who live in official language minority communities.

A project in the Ontario region will enable the development of tools, training, mentoring and networking programs for aboriginal women, immigrants, older women and members of racial minorities, who are trying to establish their own businesses based on “microskills”.

In the western and northern regions, there is a project to develop a program that community groups and governments can use to support female sex-trade workers during their transition to a new life.

These initiatives focusing on the economic security of women will provide meaningful results for women and girls today and in the future. They will bring about real and lasting change. They represent a rapid increase in opportunities for women and girls to participate in the life of their communities and their country, and to enjoy a life that offers financial security and freedom from want.

I want to highlight for members some of what this government has done in the past 21 months.

We increased the funding to the women's program, which includes the women's community fund, and we added the women's partnership fund to include the private sector.

We created projects for the official languages minority women's organization. We provided: almost $24,000 to Vision Femmes Beauce-Sartigan to promote women's entrepreneurship; almost $50,000 to support Prince George New Hope Society to help women starting new lives; $110,000 to the Second Story Women's Centre for training workshops in Nova Scotia; $165,000 for art projects aimed at improving the lives of at risk women and girls; $85,000 to the Single Women in Motherhood Training Program Inc.; $200,000 to the Saint John chapter of the Urban Core Support Network; almost $60,000 to the Arising Women Place for the project independent women; over $185,000 to the West Central Women's Resource Centre for its multi-year women's economic security and housing project; and $300,000 to the Canadian Women's Community Economic Development Council.

Violence against women and girls is a major concern to Canadians. The reintroduction of legislation to tackle violent crime is good news for women and girls. The tackling violent crime bill fulfills the expectations of Canadian women for strong measures to ensure they are protected from violent crime and from predators.

These are just a few examples of the concrete projects that this government is funding in its strategy to improve the economic security of all women in Canada.

At a time when we are turning our vision toward the future and working to ensure that Canada continues to be one of the most prosperous countries in the world, we must increase the participation of women in the work force and support their career choices.

An enormous wave of aging is about to be felt by Canadian society, and we will see the population pyramid flip over. During the next two decades, it is predicted that the ratio of older persons to active workers in Canada will increase by 20%. Many more Canadians will be over 65 years old and an even greater number will be over 75. Most of those people will be women.

Just as the huge cohort of the baby boom generation defined our national life for several decades, this new trend in population aging will affect the future of Canada. As Canada’s population grows older, women will play an even more important role in contributing to our economy and society, and they must—

Suspension of Sitting

[The Deputy Speaker, NDP, Bill Blaikie]

Order. I am told that there is some problem with the translation, i.e., there is no translation. I am wondering if we should suspend the House until such time as the translation problem is solved. We will suspend the House to the call of the Chair until the translation services have returned. There is obviously a problem that needs to be solved, so the House can consider itself suspended until we solve the problem.

(The sitting of the House was suspended at 10:49 a.m.)

(The House resumed at 10:55 a.m.)

Sitting Resumed

[The Deputy Speaker, NDP, Bill Blaikie]

Order. The House is now called back into session. I understand that the translation services are up and running. I am sorry for interrupting the hon. minister.

The hon. Minister of Canadian Heritage.

[Josée Verner, Conservative, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, I was saying that as Canada's population ages, women will be making an even greater contribution to the economy and society, so they should also benefit fully from the resulting economic prosperity.

The trend toward increased labour force participation among women, including older women, will fuel economic growth and productivity gains in the long term, thus benefiting all Canadians.

Almost every country in the world is looking at the major trends involving women and the labour force. They are actively implementing key policies for growth and economic prosperity that take into account women's essential contributions.

This phenomenon is sweeping the world. Many countries have recognized that their well-being and future financial viability will depend on women's increasing participation in the workforce over the next four decades. For example, between 2003 and 2050, the employment rate for women is expected to rise, on average, by 10% in the European Union and by more than 15% in Spain, Malta and Poland.

It is not surprising that Canada's financial institutions recently looked at the relationship between women's participation in the labour force and economic growth. The Toronto Dominion Bank recently published a report on a number of related issues, and the Royal Bank of Canada noted that “—if women had identical labour market opportunities available to them as men, then personal incomes would be $168 billion higher each year”.

It is in the public interest to take advantage of the talent that surrounds us. Our future prosperity as a country is directly connected to the prosperity of women and their families.

[Mario Silva, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Mr. Speaker, there can be no economic security without equality, and the eradication of the prosperity gap is extremely important.

It was the Conservative government that removed the equity from the status of women mandate, and then the minister talks about all these programs the government wants to do. How can women take advantage of the programs if in fact the government has cut the most important, independent issue that is at the core of women's independence, which is child care programs across the country? The government has cut the child care programs so women cannot take advantage of many of the programs it is talking about.

When the government cuts social programs, it disproportionately hurts women. When the Conservative government announced an unprecedented $1 billion cut in federal social spending on September 25, 2006, it was women and other vulnerable groups that disproportionately bore the burden of the cuts, which included $18 million from the national literacy program, $55 million from the students summer jobs program, $45 million from the affordable housing programs, and $10 million from the Canadian volunteer program.

The record speaks for itself. The government does not care about women's issues in this country.

[Josée Verner, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Mr. Speaker, a number of the statements my colleague made are far from true. With regard to child care, we decided to introduce a universal child care benefit for Canadian families, which pays $100 a month for every child under six.

It is not true that Canadian women all have identical needs, as the Liberal Part of Canada would have us believe. Women need flexibility in child care, and above all, they need to be able to make their own decisions.

Funding for Status of Women Canada has gone up by 42% under our government. That means that our government has decided to invest less in bureaucracy, which is what the former Liberal government did, and more in projects that benefit women directly.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I listened very carefully to the minister and I would like to ask her about the Conservatives' mini-budget.

By their own admission, the Conservatives' tax cut amounts to $190 billion over five years, that is, one-hundred ninety thousand million dollars, a lot of it a huge corporate tax cut. It is a fifth of the government's funding capacity. It is absolutely devastating that the mini-budget, supported by the Liberals, is effectively going to create huge deficits in terms of the programs that they say they want to protect for women.

We desperately need real child care, we need home care, we need affordable housing, all of the things that support women and their aspirations. There is none of it from the government and none of it in the future, by the Conservatives' own admission. Where on earth is the minister going to find the money to fund these programs when in fact it is very clear to us that programs will have to be cut?

[Josée Verner, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Mr. Speaker, once again, what the member is saying about child care and Canadian women is nonsense. It is not true that Canadian women all have exactly the same needs, as the Liberals and the NDP would have us believe. Women want flexibility, because they work at a variety of jobs. It is not true that they all work from 8 to 6 and that the program the Liberals wanted to put in place suited everyone.

Women want to be free to choose the sort of child care that works best for them. That is why our government decided to help women directly rather than transfer money from one government to another that would decide for women. The government decided to give $100 for each child under six directly to families, to let them decide what is best for their children.

Moreover, major transfers to the provinces were included in the most recent budget, which the NDP voted against, even though that budget was designed mainly to improve social programs. The economic statement presented this week by my colleague, the Minister of Finance, includes record-setting tax cuts for Canadian men and women.

Women in Quebec and across Canada will benefit from these tax cuts. This is how we will give women a chance—through the cumulative effect of all the measures our government is taking to benefit women.

[Johanne Deschamps, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I have a few questions for the minister, as she sings the praises of her government, concerning women entrepreneurs and women's freedom of choice.

In the northern part of my riding, there is an RCM that is home to 35,000 residents and is a single industry community. It is entirely dependent on the forestry industry. But as everyone knows, that industry is currently going through a very serious crisis.

In my region, the majority of women are single parents who depend on insecure work or a seasonal job, or else they work only at their employer's request. What will I tell them when they are no longer eligible for employment insurance? In fact, only 33% of those women qualify. What will I tell these women who have no coverage and will be forced to turn to social assistance?

It that what the minister calls prosperity?

[Josée Verner, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Mr. Speaker, our government is funding a number of projects aimed specifically at helping these women—still too numerous—get out of the cycle of poverty.

The latest economic statement from my colleague, the hon. Minister of Finance, provides significant tax cuts, for businesses as well as all Canadians. We also announced an increase in the basic personal income.

Furthermore, I encourage women who need training to bring their ideas to us. These are the very people we wish to help and we would be happy to examine their file.

[Maria Minna, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I want to go back for a moment and ask the hon. minister this. Immigrant women and even professional women in my riding are telling me that they cannot take advantage of training or jobs because they do not have anywhere to leave their children. Other women are spending $1,200 a month for what child care they do have, which is a tremendous amount of money. Rural women have told us they can not take advantage of training, education or part time jobs because they have no child care. There is even a safety issue on rural farms.

Since the Conservatives cancelled the child care program, how can women take advantage of any of the economic securities? The budget does absolutely nothing for those women. How will they help women who need child care so they can take advantage of all the things about which she talks? They cancelled the child care program, and there are no child care spaces.

[Josée Verner, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Mr. Speaker, as announced by our government, we are providing the universal child care benefit and, at the same time, creating child care spaces. And there are other things we are doing.

The member spoke a great deal about the women in her riding and their needs. I would like to speak about the women in my riding. These women have told me that they would like to have a choice. They do not necessarily work set hours, from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m., and they would like some financial assistance even if they do not have jobs with conventional schedules. That is what the women in my riding have told me and we must also listen to them. We must let them make their own choices.

Having said that, there are programs for women who would like to get out of the cycle of poverty and we are in a position to finance a number projects, especially since we increased the programming budget for Status of Women Canada. We decided to invest less in bureaucracy—as the Liberals did—and more in concrete results for Canadian women.

[Johanne Deschamps, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to point out that I will be sharing my time with my colleague from Compton—Stanstead.

The Bloc Québécois will obviously vote in favour of the Liberal motion. No one would oppose this motion that is asking the government for a real strategy to improve the economic situation of women. However, what is interesting is to see to what extent the Liberals, when in opposition, push such progressive measures; they were much more conservative when in power. This is a “soft” version of the Conservatives, but also a more centralizing one.

As for the actual Conservatives, we must condemn this government's failure to take any action or pass any measure in support of women.

We are far from achieving equality between men and women and, unfortunately, the actions of this government are only making things worse. If women have achieved equality, as suggested by this ultra-Conservative government, why do twice as many women as men live in poverty in Canada? Why is it that, more often than not, women leave their jobs to look after a parent or sick child?

I wonder whether the Conservatives realize that young women today have to forget about saving for retirement because they have to juggle career and family. Sometimes this forces them to take on part-time work that does not pay very well, and to focus on child care and other child-related expenses.

Today, the average income for women is still well below the average for men. In 2003, the average annual income for women was $24,400, which was 62% of the income for men, who were earning $39,300 on average.

In a recent study by Statistics Canada, from May 2007, entitled, “Has Higher Education among Young Women Substantially Reduced the Gender Gap in Employment and Earnings?”, we learned that although women are now more educated than men, their income is still inferior. In 2000 constant dollars, the average income for men who attended university was $45,054 and for women was $36,782. That is what the Conservatives are not telling the public when they have the nerve to say we have achieved gender equality.

In this week's economic statement, the Conservatives went even further in their attempt to sabotage gender equality. It is the men who will benefit from a significant cut in their taxes. According to the latest information from Statistics Canada, the median income in 2005 was $32,300 for men and $20,200 for women. Accordingly, two single people, whose only difference is their sex, will not benefit from the same tax cut. Cutting the tax rate from 15.5% to 15% will give the single male $113 more in disposable income in 2007, while his female counterpart will get only $53 more. That is less than half, but it also represents the Conservatives' idea of equality.

Tuesday's economic statement did not include anything for women in our economic reality either. Do you believe that a 1% cut in the GST will really improve the situation for women? To benefit from tax cuts, a person must first earn an income.

If the Conservatives were in touch with the situation women are in, surely they would know that women work low end jobs, unstable jobs, part-time jobs, seasonal jobs.

If they had really wanted to help women in their statement on Tuesday, they would have sorted out the pay equity issue once and for all. They also would have made the necessary changes to employment insurance so that women could benefit from a plan that reflects the reality facing female workers.

They would have given back to the court challenges program and the women's program the money needed for women to regain their voice in a country that sends soldiers to Afghanistan to fight for the emancipation of Afghan women, but is incapable of giving a real voice to its own female citizens.

Let us also talk about the cuts that the Conservatives made to Status of Women Canada, and the changes made to the women's program. These are more fine examples of this government's lack of vision. We have already established that equality between men and women exists only in the minds of this government and the minister, and that they are completely out of touch with everyday reality.

How can the member for Louis-Saint-Laurent claim to be familiar with the reality facing everyday women, when the women's program can no longer fund research on the economic and social status of women, or fund lobbying activities which at least informed the government of these realities?

In light of the government's decision to cut $5 million in administrative funding from Status of Women Canada, how can closing 12 Status of Women Canada offices help women raise awareness of the reality in their community? Do the Conservatives really believe that the head offices will know enough about what is going on in the different regions of the country?

My colleague from Laval and I have met and listened to many women’s groups that came and testified before the Standing Committee on the Status of Women. They virtually all denounced the decisions made by this government. How can the government and the minister claim to speak on behalf of women and represent them when women themselves are telling the government that it is headed in the wrong direction and its decisions do not make any sense? The ideologically motivated blindness of this government is unequalled, except for its desire to wipe out more than 30 years of work toward the equality of women.

Even in the matter of pay equity, it is deeply disappointing to see that this government does not intend to do anything at all to correct the terrible inequality between men and women. On average, women in Canada earn only 71% of what men earn. Even in fields where women excel and are in the majority, they still have to be constantly taking further training and courses to reach the pay scales of their male counterparts.

Through it all, the Conservative government continues to proclaim—through the voice of its minister—that all is well in the kingdom of Canada. They should finally wake up, and when they do, a little bit of humility would do them a lot of good. What are they waiting for to follow once again the example set by the nation of Quebec, which recently resolved this question once and for all by settling the pay equity issue, to the great satisfaction of the women of Quebec? Fortunately, the women of Quebec can count on the Bloc Québécois here in Ottawa to remind the government of its duties, defend their rights, and protect the strides they have made.

I would like to finish by turning to a subject that is very close to my heart: employment insurance. Once again, the blindness and ideology of the Conservative government prevent it from seeing straight on an issue that really hits the women of this country hard. Part-time workers, seasonal workers, those in unstable jobs, workers at home, natural caregivers, divorcees, women with little education, heads of single-parent families—only 33% of the women who contribute to employment insurance are eligible to benefit from it. This means that many have no protection at all.

Our lovely Conservatives should just develop a little backbone. What is there to fear in allowing the House to give the working women of this country an employment insurance system that meets their needs? Passing Bill C-269 would just correct this injustice done to women.

It was shameful to cancel the court challenges program, which helped women contest the government’s choices, as it was to make changes in the women's program, which enabled women to defend themselves and raise their voices in the debates affecting them.

If defending pay equity, fighting violence against women, promoting women’s right to abortions, and working to ensure their economic security are what the minister calls just playing politics, I will continue to play politics with all my heart and soul.

[Maria Minna, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the member to share with us, if she would, the Quebec model with respect to parental leave, which is much more generous than the rest of the country, and also the child care program, which again is a model for the rest of the country, both in terms of how it is assists women to be more economically secure and to participate in the labour force more and how it helps the whole family. My understanding is that in fact birth rates may have gone up as a result of that, but certainly it helps the labour market. Maybe she could share that with us because I think it is probably a model for this country in many ways.

[Johanne Deschamps, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague and I would like to say to her that she is quite right and that I am also very proud of the Quebec child care model. It is a universal model for all families, without discrimination, and it corresponds to the realities and the wishes expressed by Quebec's families. It is a government-funded model. It is a model which, in terms of equality and equity, costs the same for everyone. Thus, it is available for all Quebec citizens and families.

This model was established in 1998. I personally was able to take advantage of the child care services at an early childhood centre, known as a CPE. What is remarkable today is that, looking back, we can see how it has evolved and also how this service ensures that children are well-prepared when they start school. The people who work there are more than just babysitters. They are trained individuals who are very much in tune with the difficulties young children may experience.

Thus, my dear colleague is quite right when she says that, in Quebec, we have the best child care services network.

[David Tilson, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question to the member involves child care. The report of the Standing Committee on the Status of Women recommended that the government implement a national system of child care that is accessible and affordable.

I would like the member to comment on the criticism of that proposal that it is probably unconstitutional. It is probably beyond the terms of sections 91 and 92 of the Constitution Act. Transfer payments are made to the provinces for social services, and therefore, it is admitted by some that the recommendation falls outside the jurisdiction of the federal government.

Considering that the member is a member of the Bloc Québécois and supports stronger provincial rights, does she support that proposal by the status of women committee?

[Johanne Deschamps, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague's question is rather specific. I have a two-part answer.

First of all, women appeared before the Standing Committee on the Status of Women to tell us that most women want access to child care services similar to Quebec's current system. I think we are the envy of many women from across Canada.

Second, by wanting to limit the government's use of the federal spending power, this means giving each of the provinces the option of implementing a system that meets the needs and expectations of families in that particular province. The government of each of the provinces, like the Government of Quebec, has the knowledge and know-how. The only thing missing is the funds to be transferred from the federal level to the provincial level.

At home in Quebec, the system is already in place. We are therefore not asking for anything that would require consultations or long studies that would take more than 18 months to complete. We are calling for the transfer of these funds to Quebec and the provinces. However, since Quebec already has this service, we would like the government to give us the funds with full compensation, so we can improve the existing services.

[France Bonsant, Bloc, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to rise and speak here today during this official opposition day.

As we all know, for eight years, I sat on the town council for Ascot, where I was the only woman in that still male-dominated world of politics.

I am not sharing this experience in order to brag or to denigrate the field in which we work. I am relating it because I believe it is important to break down the barriers that, unfortunately, still hinder women's access to good jobs. We must try to change the macho culture and mentality that have dominated for too long in Quebec and Canada.

To allow women access to good jobs, greater investments must be made in meeting basic needs, as well as on the human side.

I would like to use my time here today to highlight a wonderful initiative that has been taken in my riding.

Last year, the Tools for Life project was launched to help young women enter the job market. The goal of the project was to help young women who had not finished high school, who had children, and who, in many cases, were single mothers. These women were, understandably, discouraged.

Thanks to Tools for Life, these young women learned to prepare budgets, to cook and to put together a resumé. Most importantly, they learned to shoulder their responsibilities and to believe in themselves. These young women quickly realized that people who believe in themselves can accomplish a lot.

I found the first Tools for Life project in Stanstead so inspiring and promising that I was delighted to be the honorary sponsor for these young women. That was a good move. Seven of the nine women who signed up for the program earned their diplomas, but most importantly, they finished the program with a renewed sense of pride. These young women are now working, and they have become part of their communities.

The project was such a success that it is now under way elsewhere in my riding in the municipality of Bury. Projects like this one enable women to escape the vicious cycle of financial insecurity.

Today's opposition motion supports that because it asks the government to develop a strategy to improve the economic security of all women in Quebec and Canada.

Despite progress toward equality, women are still at a disadvantage in the nations of Quebec and Canada, and elsewhere in the world. The federal government's failure to act on this issue continually reminds us of this.

Take, for example, the employment insurance reforms that neither the Liberal nor the Conservative governments wanted to implement. Or the child care system or the older women who are not receiving their guaranteed income supplement. Or the fact that here in Ottawa, in the federal public service, pay equity is still not a reality.

The time to act is now, but the government is still not doing anything. Instead of helping women, the federal government has been making their lives harder, and things have gotten worse under the Conservatives.

Despite growing surpluses, the government is still slashing its investments in people.

I am always astonished when I hear the Conservative ministers announce cuts to literacy, official languages, social programs or status of women, claiming that it is important to make budgetary choices, while the Minister of Finance announces an unexpected $14 billion surplus or cuts to taxes and the GST, as he did earlier this week.

I want to remind the government that disadvantaged women pay little or no income tax already. I also want to remind the government that these women's main expenses are rent and groceries, two areas where the GST does not apply.

This is nothing new, though. The Conservatives have always been far more inclined to help their friends in the oil industry than the people who need help the most.

What makes me even sadder are cases like that of the National Association of Women and the Law, which I learned last month had closed because of Conservative cuts, after 33 years of defending women's rights.

We had known since last October that the new women's program eligibility criteria set by the former minister responsible for the status of women would have an impact on organizations like this one, but we did not realize just how dramatic that impact would be.

At the time, the minister told us that only groups that aimed to improve women's economic, social and cultural status would be funded. Groups that did research on the status of women and worked to have legislation amended were therefore shut out.

The former minister said at the time that the idea was to fund “real” women. I believe she was making a thinly veiled allusion to REAL Women, an ultra-conservative organization founded in the U.S. that advocates a return to traditional values.

The change of ministers did not really improve matters. The new minister said that the National Association of Women and the Law had only itself to blame. I quote:

The Government of Canada is not responsible for the office closing. The office closed because the association was unable to raise enough money to fund its activities.

Clearly the minister does not understand her role very well. She is supposed to be the voice of women in cabinet, not the voice of the Conservative cabinet—a conservative voice in every sense—for women. Perhaps she should re-read the mission statement for Status of Women Canada. On the Web site, it says that Status of Women Canada is the federal government agency which promotes gender equality, and the full participation of women in the economic, social, cultural and political life of the country.

Do the minister's comments really come as any surprise, when her government has been trying for a year now to silence women's groups that stand up for equality? Not at all.

In my eyes, it is clear that gender equality, which was far from becoming a reality under the Liberals, has been regressing since the Conservatives arrived. For the Conservatives, the specificity of women's lives is not even worth talking about.

It therefore comes as no surprise that in their first election platform, the word “women” came up only twice: once in the context of increasing sentences for offenders and another time in talking about female immigrants who settle in Canada. That is quite the vision for women, who represent 52% of the population.

I am focusing on the Conservatives because it is time for them to take action. However, things were not much better under the previous government. In the last Parliament, I was a member of the Standing Committee on the Status of Women. One after another, the witnesses who appeared before us did not come to tell us that everything was just fine, quite the opposite. They came asking for more help from the government.

It makes me laugh today to see the official opposition calling for a strategy to improve the economic security of all women and then to add a deadline. I am in favour of such a strategy, but I find it somewhat ironic that this motion was moved by a party that formed the government for 13 years and never invested significantly into improving the economic situation of women. Perhaps they have become more progressive since becoming the opposition.

Like all my colleagues in the Bloc, I am surprised by the Liberals' attitude today. We are also condemning the Conservatives' actions vis-à-vis the status of women. Despite the progress that has been made in the past 50 years, women in Quebec and Canada still need us to care about them. A strategy to improve the economic security of all women in Quebec and Canada is welcome. This strategy should nonetheless respect Quebec's achievements when it comes to status of women.

[Maria Minna, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

Mr. Speaker, discussions have taken place among all parties and I believe you would find consent for the following motion. I move:

That at the conclusion of today's debate on the Opposition Motion in the name of the member from Beaches—East York, all questions necessary to dispose of this motion be deemed put, a recorded division deemed requested and deferred to the end of government orders on Tuesday, November 13.

[The Deputy Speaker, NDP, Bill Blaikie]

Does the hon. member have the unanimous consent of the House to move the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Deputy Speaker, NDP, Bill Blaikie]

The House has heard the terms of the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?