Karen Redman

[Interim Supply, March 12th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, please record the Liberals who voted on the motion to concur in interim supply as having voted against this motion.

[Supplementary Estimates (B), 2007-08, March 12th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, Liberals will be voting in favour.

[Supplementary Estimates (B), 2007-08, March 12th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, Liberals who have voted on the previous question should be registered as voting in favour.

[Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, March 12th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, for seven months the procedure and House affairs committee has been trying to study election law violations by the Conservative Party while the government members did every procedural trick in the book to stall that committee. Frustrated committee members recently elected a new chair.

My question is for the member for Elgin—Middlesex—London. When will the chair call a meeting to study the elections violations of the Conservative Party, as well as voter identification Bill C-6, which was passed in the House on November 15?

[Business of Supply, March 6th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I would tell my hon. colleague that what I base my statement on is the fact that I have had not one or two but 50 or 60 women demonstrating outside my office, in the heart of Kitchener at Speaker's Corner, against the kinds of cuts that amplify and exhibit the kind of ideology of the government in doing away with the court challenges program.

I would remind this House that it was a program whereby people who felt that their rights were not being respected under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms could actually go to the Supreme Court. It was this money and this mechanism that allowed immigrant women to get language instruction paid for when they came to Canada, because there was a time when only men were given language training if English or French was not their first language. It was the court challenges program that actually led to immigrant women being able to get that kind of training as well.

I am basing my comments on the fact that the government is gutting the kind of advocacy and the kinds of issues that are the mainstay of bringing equality to women and girls, both in Canada and internationally.

[Business of Supply, March 6th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I have to say off the top that I am really not quite sure how that quote fits in with the comments.

I would say, having been in this House since 1997--and I have many colleagues who have been here longer than I have--that I think there has been a distinct race to the basement with the kind of personality politics and the kinds of personal slurs that we hear in heckling as well as in the demeanour in the House. That saddens me. I think we all bear a responsibility for this.

Quite simply, I think there should be more women in the House. I know that our leader has made a determination and is on the record as saying that he will have one-third of our candidates female in any upcoming election. I think that women do come with an ability to bring consensus and a different style.

I think it is very important that all members of this House be committed to equality for women and, yes, to economic independence. I can hearken back to the prime minister's task force on women entrepreneurs and the kind of statistical basis and support we received from the research that was going on in the Status of Women. That research had been going on for years and years.

Nothing disheartens me more than hearing many of the minority Conservative government ministers present pieces of legislation to committees and say, “I feel that this is a very good bill”. Somehow in the government there is the ideological “I feel that this is the right thing to do” approach and not the kind of objective research and testimony from experts that would factually support a good piece of legislation.

The Conservatives have gutted those kinds of resources, both in the community and in the government, and I think it leads to the continuing decline in the kind of support and objectivity that legislation has.

[Business of Supply, March 6th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity to participate in the debate today.

I am also pleased to say that I will be sharing my time with my colleague, the member for London West.

International Women's Day, which is this coming Saturday, has historically been a time when we celebrate the progress made to advance women's rights and assess the challenges that remain. Established in 1977 by the United Nations, International Women's Day encourages us to consider the steps to bring equality to women and girls, in all their diversity, and also to celebrate the collective power of women, past, present and future.

Sadly, Canadian women have received little more than lip service from the Conservative government. It is embarrassing to note that the government went to the UN Commission on the Status of Women meetings last week claiming there was a plan. Where the Conservative government is concerned, there is no plan. There is no funding. There are no details. And certainly there is very little interest in women's issues.

On this side of the House, we take women seriously. We recognize that women's equality is not some ancient battle that was won years ago. Every day, women face discrimination in various aspects of their lives, from getting a simple car repair to running multi-million dollar companies. Canadian women face a far different reality than their male counterparts.

Violence against women is one of the most deplorable acts that occur in our society today. Canadians look to our government to present concrete measures to end this social problem. All women have the right to live in safe communities, free from violence and free from the threat of violence.

Every time I read a report about violence against women, I am reminded that violence against women is not something that happens to other people in other communities. These are our friends, our neighbours, our sisters and our daughters.

Feminist centres reveal that one in four women endures a sexual assault in her lifetime. One in 10 women is beaten. Statistics Canada confirms that 51% of women, and I find this so shocking, have been criminally assaulted in their lifetimes.

Spousal violence has psychological, physical, social and economic impacts for the victims, for their families and for society at large. Female victims of spousal violence report being injured, suffering lost productivity and, in most instances, experiencing multiple assaults and fear throughout their lives.

There are extreme negative emotional consequences. Forty per cent of women assaulted by their spouses report that their children witness this violence, which in some cases is severe violence.

The number of shelters for abused women and their children has increased from 18 in 1975 to 543 in the year 2004. In addition to these shelters, over 600 services for victims of crime, including 105 sexual assault centres, are operational across Canada.

The shock is not that these shelters and these facilities exist for women. The shock is that we need them in these numbers. We need to get to the root problem.

Spousal violence makes up the single largest category of convictions involving violent offences in non-specialized adult courts in Canada. Over 90% of the offenders were male. One in five homicides in Canada involves the killing of an intimate partner.

Last night we saw a private member's bill go over the first hurdle. I guess the only thing that gives me any heart in this whole process is the fact that it was just a very small first step. The member for Edmonton—Sherwood Park says that what he wanted to do with his private member's bill was deal with violence against women who are pregnant.

It is a terrible issue. It is one that I think every member in this House would like to see curbed, but if we really want to do something about violence against pregnant women, we make the fact that they are pregnant an aggravating fact in the sentencing.

The whole thrust of the private member's legislation that the House dealt with last night flies in the face of Dobson v. Dobson, wherein the Supreme Court ruled that the mother and the fetus were one. As much as I think we all agree that we want to deal with violence against women, and certainly against pregnant women, I would contend that this is not the thrust of or the real reason for that piece of legislation.

These statistics are horrifying. Violence against women affects Canadian society. Ultimately, the impact of that violence is felt by everyone, both directly and indirectly.

We are all responsible to help end this scourge, but instead of cutting funding for women's advocacy groups the way the minority Conservative government has done, we should be ramping up support to work toward ending violence against women.

I have always reflected that this day is about the celebration of the fight that was put forward by the generations before mine. It is our mothers and grandmothers who fought for equality and rights, but over the past two years, more than ever, I have been reminded that women's fight for equality is far from won.

Canada has always been a prosperous, fair and egalitarian nation. From my perspective, it is an absolute affront to society that in a time when this country is recording record surpluses we see the elimination of programs that support equality for women.

I welcome the day when we no longer need a program to promote gender equality. I welcome the day when women's progress is not encumbered by discrimination, glass ceilings or ignorance, but we are not there yet, and I fear, more than ever before, that we are simply moving in the wrong direction.

Two years ago, Canada marked 25 years since our nation ratified the most comprehensive treaty on women's human rights: the UN Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women. It is known as CEDAW. By ratifying, the government has agreed to play a lead role in upholding women's equality rights.

Unfortunately, however, without a commitment to fulfill those obligations under this UN convention and under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, full equality will elude many women in Canada, particularly those of us who confront multiple oppressions.

Equality for women is not about who is right. It is about what is right. And equality is right.

Doors were opened by courageous women who came before us and we must do our part to ensure that they remain open to expand the opportunities for those who follow us. That can only happen with the concerted commitment of the government and all members of the House.

[Income Tax Act, March 5th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, if you were to seek it, I believe you would find unanimous consent to have the results on the motion before us deemed adopted similar to the last vote.

[Income Tax Act, March 5th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, with the consent of the member for Pickering—Scarborough East, I would ask that you would seek unanimous consent to apply the results of the vote just taken to the vote now before the House.

[Income Tax Act, March 5th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, while I realize that this is somewhat unusual, it is not unprecedented in the House for private members' bills. With the agreement of the member for Pickering—Scarborough East, I would seek the unanimous consent of the House to apply the results of the vote just taken to the vote now before the House.