Caroline St-Hilaire

[Pay Equity, March 9th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, government policy must be guided by many things, but mainly by the need to always set a good example. I must say that we have seen better examples than the one the government is setting at present.

The President of Treasury Board has decided to set an example as far as pay equity is concerned. His message is very clear. With its decision to appeal the human rights tribunal decision, the government is setting an example of flagrant lack of respect for its employees, women for the most part, by stubbornly refusing to ensure pay equity.

It is also setting an example by wasting the taxpayers' money on legal fees just to put off the inevitable a bit longer.

The government has set such a good example of poor corporate citizenship that others, such as Bell Canada, also feel no obligation to respect their workers.

The time has come for action. Let us have pay equity, and for heaven's sake, let us set an example for others.

[Petitions, March 8th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the constituents of Longueuil, who believe sincerely in the equality of men and women and in justice being done, I have the honour on this International Women's Day to table, and more importantly to support, a petition calling on the federal government to withdraw its appeal against the public service pay equity decision and to give effect to the court ruling that it pay its employees what it owes them.

This petition is the first in a series that my colleagues in the Bloc Quebecois will be tabling this week. I am also tabling the same petition for my colleague, the member for Louis-Hébert.

[Status Of Women, March 8th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I would like the minister to go and see for herself what is actually happening. She might understand the real situation. What she has just said is utterly false.

I would remind the Secretary of State for the Status of Women what she has already said. She promised women's groups that there would be more funding available to help them.

When does she plan to honour her commitment, since, in the latest budget, there was not one cent more for these women's groups?

[Status Of Women, March 8th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, on this International Women's Day, there is a great temptation to review what the government has done to support changes in the status in women in society.

The main decision the Secretary of State for the Status of Women has made was to reduce funding to women's groups.

Is the Secretary of State for the Status of Women proud of what she has done when she sees the activities of thousands of women's groups threatened because she has literally starved them?

[Status Of Women, February 9th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the women's program has been reorganized at the expense of women.

In fact, Status of Women Canada has decided to do away with the support component of its program, and this has deprived women's centres in Quebec and in Canada of thousands of dollars.

As the strategy to provide financial support to women's centres produces excellent long-term results, can the Minister of State for the Status of Women commit, for the good of women, to going back on her decision and restoring this funding immediately?

[Supply, February 4th, 1999]

You are on the right track.

[Employment Insurance, October 21st, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Human Resources Development.

Let us take a look at how women fare in his employment insurance system. This woman is a waitress in the Lower St. Lawrence region; she is pregnant and under preventive withdrawal from work. She worked enough hours to qualify for regular benefits, but not for maternity leave.

How can the minister defend a system that penalizes pregnant women? Is this not a shameful and scandalous situation that should be changed?

[Women's History Month, October 21st, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, October being Women's History Month and this year's theme “The Business of Women: An Evolving Story”, I would like to acknowledge the courage and imagination of all the women who made it into our history books, these repositories of our collective memory, as well as the many other women who did not.

Longueuil has a rich tradition of women who made their mark, including Simone Monet-Chartrand in the fields of human rights and literature, Jeanine Lavoix-Picard, the first woman elected municipal councillor, and the famous hat marker Yvette Brillon in the entrepreneurship category, to name but a few.

Women in business are nothing new, but today we can say they have become leaders in terms of job creation and economic growth. The “business of women” means entrepreneurship, of course, but also all the work done by women in their own homes and communities.

October is the month to remember all the women who have contributed to our evolution.

[Seniors Benefit, June 1st, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, here is a poem about this government's treatment of women over 65:

Her endless round of work complete, madame was much dismayed when, on retirement, it appeared that she would not get paid. The new reform, so brightly wrapped, ignored all she had done, and though they were her rightful due, of payments there were none. “But what about my kids,” she cried. “Is no allowance made? Without them you would all be lost, and others would need aid”. The man who held the purse strings said “Have I not been quite clear? You never drew a pay cheque, so you're on your own, my dear”

[Canadian Armed Forces, May 25th, 1998]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of National Defence.

I would like to remind the minister that there are women who have had to abandon their career in the Canadian armed forces, and that others are afraid to enlist.

What action does the minister propose to take, aside from making ridiculous and irresponsible statements, to bring an end to the problem of harassment?