House of Commons photoLost her last election, in 2011, with 31% of the vote.
Justice Canada November 20th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, we know that in 2006 the justice department started to take another look at whether the $2.1 million payment to Brian Mulroney should be set aside but mysteriously the whole process just stopped.
Now the justice minister refuses to answer questions and threatens those who ask questions.
Why all the secrecy from the justice minister? Who stopped the justice department from discharging its duty to Canadians?
Airbus November 2nd, 2007
Mr. Speaker, this week we found out that Brian Mulroney received $300,000 from Karlheinz Schreiber in 1993. This is a fact that has been covered up for over a decade. Clearly the Department of Justice did not have all of these facts when it recommended a $2 million settlement with Brian Mulroney in 1995.
Now we have the facts. Will the government instruct the Department of Justice to get taxpayers' money back from Mr. Mulroney?
Airbus November 2nd, 2007
Mr. Speaker, it is clear that the government wants this Mulroney cash payment issue to simply disappear. Is it concerned that members of the current government could be drawn into a public inquiry?
Paul Terrien, who was with Mr. Mulroney and Mr. Schreiber in that infamous hotel in Switzerland, now serves as the transport minister's chief of staff. Faced with this new and disturbing information, the government must act.
Can the transport minister say what role his chief of staff played in the exchange of money between Mr. Schreiber and Mr. Mulroney?
Business of Supply November 1st, 2007
Mr. Speaker, I cannot begin to express how appalled I am that an hon. member of the House would say that women's equality is a notion. It speaks for itself.
The government brought in a Speech from the Throne that had nothing about health care, nothing that helped women in the least. Women and families were absolutely left out of the throne speech.
The member wants to talk about aboriginal rights. The Conservatives threw away the possibility and the opportunity of a generation when they got rid of Kelowna. If the government had any concern about aboriginals, it would have taken that fine document, which was negotiated with all parties, including all aboriginal leaders, in respect and it would have implemented it.
Business of Supply November 1st, 2007
Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt that governing has a responsibility with it. By the choice of this opposition day motion, we are making it very clear that the Liberals value the role of women in society and recognize that there is an appropriate role for the federal government to play in the equality of women and families. There are many female-led households. They are looking for the kinds of changes in legislation that my hon. colleague has just outlined.
Clearly the government has demonstrated that it has no interest in women. It is not a priority for it, which is why it has not acted on the thoughtful recommendations that have come forward from an all party committee and have been supported by the majority of parliamentarians on that committee.
Clearly action is called for and the government has no interest or inclination in stepping up to the plate.
Business of Supply November 1st, 2007
Mr. Speaker, I am extremely pleased to get up today and talk about this incredibly important issue.
The motion calls on the government to develop a strategy to improve the economic security of women all across Canada.
This is a very historic place. We should never lose sight of how significant what we do on a daily basis is to Canadians from coast to coast to coast.
When I walk up the Hill on my way to work, I pass the statue of the “Famous Five”. It reminds me that there have been initiatives, there have been rights and there have been advancements made for women by the women who came before us. It is incumbent on all members of the House, male and female, to ensure that those gains continue for our daughters, our granddaughters and all generations to come.
It is not easy making a living. While the government endeavours to convince Canadians that we are living in the lap of luxury and that there is great prosperity, it is simply not the case for all Canadians. Indeed, it is not the case for most Canadians, particularly for Canadian women.
Liberal members understand that pay equity is a fundamental human right, protected by the Canadian Charter of Human Rights. Equality for women is not possible without pay equity. Without it, women are simply denied economic equality.
The evidence is clear. The current pay equity law is not working. The lack of effective pay equity hurts women and by extension, it hurts their children.
Statistics Canada tells us that women generally have lower incomes than men. In the year 2003 the average pre-tax income for women was $24,400, while men earned an average income of $39,300.
At a time when action is absolutely needed to improve the economic security of women, what do we see? We see a government that continually steps aside, making cuts in the areas that need study and require action. Economic security goes hand in hand with equality. Actions taken by the Conservative government continue to squash the efforts that build toward equality and a better life for Canada's women and children.
The Conservative government has made deep cuts into those social programs that empower and enable women. When this minority Conservative government announced an unprecedented $1 billion cut in federal social spending, on September 25, 2006, women and other vulnerable groups were disproportionately bearing that burden. These cuts included $18 million from the national literacy programs, $55 million from student summer jobs programs, $45 million taken from affordable housing programs and $10 million from the Canadian volunteer program.
These cuts have come from a Conservative government that has recently announced a surplus that comes close to $14 billion. This is the same government that earlier this year recorded the biggest spending budget in Canadian history, yet it chose the most vulnerable in our society to bear this burden. This is a government that picks winners and creates losers. It has done nothing to enable women to recover from the challenges that they face in society, in the workplace and in their homes.
A few years ago, I was a member of a Liberal task force on women entrepreneurs. We spoke to dynamic women entrepreneurs across the country, women who were ambitious, talented and determined. Yet these women continued to face gender challenges as they launched and developed those businesses.
The fight for women's equality must continue and the Canadian government has a role to play in that fight. We all win when women get ahead.
A recent study by Catalyst determined that Fortune 500 companies with the highest representation of women board directors attained significantly higher financial performance on average with those in the lowest representation of women board directors.
While the Conservative government may choose to ignore the logic of women's equality, surely it cannot be blind to the value to the economy that women can contribute.
Further, University of Alberta Professor Karen Hughes has recently published a research paper indicating that women are contributing over $18 billion to the Canadian economy and own over 800,000 businesses in Canada.
Women are opening four out of five new businesses at a rate that has tripled over the last 20 years. However, women entrepreneurs continue to face challenges with the lack of benefits, a lack of protections and a lack of social services.
I am very proud of our previous Liberal government's commitment to women's equality. It was a former Liberal government that established the Standing Committee on the Status of Women, a committee that the current government was willing to get rid of. It was going to abolish it.
It was a Liberal government that created an expert panel to provide advice and options to strengthen accountability mechanisms to advance gender based analysis and gender equality issues.
It was a Liberal government that extended parental benefits to one year. I cannot think of a single program that our Liberal government brought forward that has not benefited people in my riding. They have said that it makes such a difference to their families. Parents often share it so it is a benefit where a family can choose to have the father or mother remain at home for part of that first year of their child's life.
A Liberal government created centres of Excellence for Women's Health and Gender and Health Institute to work on health policy issues unique to women.
It was a Liberal government that achieved results for Canadian women. This is in sharp contrast to what we see with the Conservative government, a government that continually demonstrates that it neither has interest or inclination to address the poignant problems facing Canadian women.
I will take this opportunity to tell the House about the women in my community of Kitchener Centre.
Kitchener is a popular settlement area for new Canadians. Immigrant and refugee women face an array of challenges, both social and cultural. As well, they are often targets of racial discrimination and they have difficulties in finding places in the labour market.
Statistics Canada will tell us that immigrant women, on average, have an income of only $16,700. This was a statistic for the year 2000. That is roughly about $6,000 less than a Canadian born woman would earn. As we recall, Canadian women earn significantly less than Canadian men.
The majority of women immigrating to Canada arrive with their families. Those who can find work face the added challenge of finding suitable child care and this challenge has been compounded by the Conservative's absolute lack of interest in a national child care system. The Conservatives have created no new child care spaces. They are giving Canadians, with children up to the age of six, $100 a month, which any parent will tell us is bus fare and not child care.
The Conservative government demanded the word “equality” be removed from the mandate of the Status of Women of Canada. Women in Kitchener Centre, not unlike women across the country, continue to be victims of violence.
The UN has recommended that Canada ensure that all provinces provide necessary government and non-government services to those who suffer violence. Instead of federal dollars being added to this, they have been withdrawn from women's equality driven advocacy groups. This limits women's access to help. There is an undeniable link between the achievement of women's equality and the elimination of violence against women.
There are few acts more courageous than a woman taking her children and leaving an abusive relationship. I believe that governments have to be there to support women and their families. This includes a commitment to equality. It includes a commitment to affordable housing. It includes affordable, quality child care.
All these things have been absolutely ignored and the government has not only refused to invest in it, but it has taken away funding.
I look forward to questions from my colleagues.
Airbus November 1st, 2007
Mr. Speaker, the current Minister of National Defence stated in this House in 1998:
Will the government do the right thing, clear the air on this sordid affair and call a public inquiry into the Airbus scandal?...When this happens, Canadians will be allowed to finally see the truth.
That was before anyone knew of the $300,000 paid to Mr. Mulroney.
Does the Conservative government still believe Canadians deserve the truth?
Airbus November 1st, 2007
Mr. Speaker, what is truly shocking is that despite serious allegations around Mr. Mulroney's conduct, the only answer we get from the Conservative Party is “take it outside”.
Taxpayer dollars are lining the pockets of Mr. Mulroney. Canadians deserve answers. Will the Conservative government announce an inquiry that is free and independent and that is free of Conservative meddling?
Business of Supply October 25th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, discussions have taken place between 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 for Markham—Unionville, 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, October 30.
Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply October 22nd, 2007
Mr. Speaker, I certainly do not have a problem with term limits, whether they are 8, 10 or 12 years, but I do believe that it is a debate that Canadians need to have. I personally do not support the idea of an elected Senate but that is the kind of engaged conversation we would need to have with Canadians.
The allocation formula as to how many senators are assigned to each region would be a very interesting discussion to have with the provinces and Canadians right across Canada. I feel passionate that one ought not to do by stealth what one does not have the stomach to do through the front door.
I would be all for comprehensive Senate reform but we need to engage Canadians. I do not believe in working around the edges. Term limits, in and of themselves, are not a particular issue for anyone. It is more the larger issue of representation. Canadians truly need an education as to what the Senate does.