Jean Augustine

[Grand Parents' Day Act, May 31st, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure for me to address the House on the private member's motion to establish a special day in recognition of grandparents for their enormous contribution to families and society. Liberals recognize this.

There is a process whereby private members' business gets to the House. The procedure was followed by an all party committee with the member across the way being a member of that committee. Tonight I will address the private member's motion on the recognition of grandparents.

Creating a special day for grandparents will afford Canadians the opportunity to further demonstrate their continuing commitment to the family. As Liberals we believe this. It is not dollars and cents. It is a philosophy Liberals believe in and share with members across the way.

I fondly remember my own grandmother. She was a wise woman, though uneducated in a schooling sense. She affirmed me with words like: "Child, you can do it". It is women like my grandmother that most of us in this room do remember. Maybe most of us are here as a result of the affirmation we received from our grandparents.

In December 1991, Canada ratified the convention on the rights of the child, a landmark in Canadian social history. Countries agreed that children should grow up in an atmosphere of happiness, love and understanding with the protection and assistance required for the full development of their personalities to better prepare them to become responsible adults. One of the central truths of the convention is based on the conviction that the family is a fundamental group of society and the natural environment for the growth and well-being of all of its members, particularly children.

The role of a grandparent is vital to the child. Grandparents can be companions, becoming friends more than parents. The relationship can be a major source of satisfaction to both the grandparent and the grandchild. Other members have referred to the fact that in today's society with marriage breakdown and single parenting, some grandparents take on the role of surrogate parents.

According to a study conducted by the British Columbia council for the family, grandparenting provides the older adult with a feeling of self-worth, a source of love, respect and support. Being a grandparent is a potential source of giving and receiving affection.

Grandparenting is also a means of establishing a link between past and future generations. Continuity, together with unconditional love, forms the cornerstone in the development of a child's self esteem and sense of trust. Among the riches that are passed down are language, culture and the wisdom that comes from experience.

A recent television show characterized the role of grandparents as one of providing both the roots and the wings of a whole generation of people. This is an apt definition of grandparenting.

Seniors, the majority of whom are grandparents, are a vital part not only of their own families, but also of all aspects of community life. They are active members of their communities. Some continue to do paid work, as does the member across the way. Some are members of churches, seniors organizations and clubs. Fitness and sports groups and cultural organizations such as art galleries, drama and musical groups all have the talent of our seniors. Seniors are involved in social action. They are teachers. They are board members. They are volunteers and they are politicians.

As we consider a grandparents day we should also contemplate our collective Canadian family in which seniors play a critical role. The uniqueness that grandparents bring to the family is in my opinion and that of many others worthy of being celebrated with a national grandparents day in Canada.

Grandparents and seniors in general deserve a day to commemorate their extensive and important contributions. This is why I support the private member's motion that is before us.

[National Access Awareness Week, May 30th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, this week is National Access Awareness Week. It was

my privilege yesterday to join with Canadians from communities across the country at the national kick-off ceremony.

This week gives individuals with disabilities the opportunity to celebrate their many accomplishments and allows for the setting of new goals for improving access.

With learning as the focus of this year's celebration, we are reminded that learning is a lifelong process. It is important to ensure that all learning opportunities are available to everyone, including Canadians with disabilities.

We have much to learn from each other. Canada cannot afford to ignore the tremendous talents, abilities and skills that persons with disabilities can contribute to the workplace, to schools and to communities.

As members of Parliament let us commit to removing all physical and attitudinal barriers faced by persons with disabilities to ensure their full participation in all aspects of community life.

[Supply, May 30th, 1995]

Madam Speaker, this is 1995. We have done several things in society to ensure we address equity issues. The member and his party should have a day or a few hours of work with someone who would spend some time taking them through the process. It is a red herring and a waste of House time to be addressing those two items.

[Supply, May 30th, 1995]

Madam Speaker, I rest my case on the member's statement. I am reminded of a verse I learned when I was very young: "There is none so blind as those who will not see. There is none so deaf as those who will not hear. A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still".

I wonder if there is a will to understand. I wonder if there is a will to comprehend the whole notion of equity, equality and diversity, ensuring everyone in society who for various reasons is taken to the starting line with the word go cannot make the same progress because of various institutional, systemic and other things built into the system.

As an educator I can define quota and numerical goals to the member who I think is convinced against his will and will be of the same opinion.

[Supply, May 30th, 1995]

Madam Speaker, I will share my time with the member for Halifax.

My colleagues in speaking to Bill C-64 have eloquently stated the numerous reasons why Canada must strengthen the Employment Equity Act. The changes are clearly necessary on moral, social and economic grounds.

I want to oppose this opposition motion and to demonstrate to the House that employment equity is good for the country. Let me remind the proposer of the motion that we brought forward Bill C-64 as progressive legislation that when enacted will quickly prove to be advantageous to both employers and employees.

This initiative has been especially designed to improve the plight of disadvantaged Canadians while at the same time enhancing the country's economic performance. It strikes the right balance between the legitimate needs of the designated groups and the concerns of industry about excessive government intervention, because that is what equality is all about; achieving equilibrium.

If the intent of the opposition motion is to satisfy business and industry concerns, the legislation will actually minimize the regulatory burden and cost to business by simplifying and streamlining procedures. All that is within the bill.

The Employment Equity Act that is before the House will not tip the scales in anyone's favour but instead will serve the best interests of everyone in the country. Quite simply, employment equity is good for Canada.

Canadians are proud of Canada's linguistic and multicultural diversity, so much so that we have enshrined equality in this country's Constitution. We believe firmly in ensuring the protection of individuals' rights, especially those most vulnerable to overt and systemic discrimination.

Report after report, research study after research study, prove that discrimination is a disturbing fact of life for too many Canadians, marginalized from the mainstream because of their race, gender or physical attributes.

I could go on to give the statistics because they disprove the suggestion that these individuals enjoy preferential treatment under the existing legislation. I would ask the opposition to support Bill C-64 because it incorporates constructive contributions of the many Canadians who appeared before the Standing Committee on Human Rights and the Status of Disabled Persons

to ensure that they achieve a reasonable balance. Good employment equity deals with workplace problems in a fair and even handed way.

Let me address some of the misconceptions that some people have about Bill C-64. First, we want to be quite clear that the government has no intention of legislating quotas. In fact the act specifically states that quotas cannot be imposed.

Under the legislation, a quota is defined as a requirement to hire or promote a fixed and arbitrary number of persons during a given period. What the act calls for are numerical goals, goals based on the availability of qualified people to do a given job. That is because the philosophy underlying the act is merit, not tokenism.

Under the provisions of Bill C-64, employers are responsible for setting goals and timetables to achieve greater equity in the workplace. The new law would oblige them to make reasonable efforts to achieve that objective.

The legislation recognizes that employers are in the best position to develop meaningful and realistic equity targets. The role of government is to assess whether the employer's numerical goals constitute substantial progress and whether the organization is truly making reasonable efforts to fulfil them.

The bill clearly states that if employers make a genuine effort to achieve greater equality in the workplace they will be found in compliance. The legislation also stipulates unequivocally that directions or compliance orders will not cause undue hardship for an employer, nor will it force firms to hire and promote unqualified people or create new positions in the workplace to satisfy numerical goals.

I should point out as well that the creation of employment equity review tribunals to hear appeals will ensure the interest and concerns of all parties are properly addressed. Good employment equity means equality for all.

There is no going back. We must move forward, removing the barriers to full involvement in Canadian society that have for too long been insurmountable and both a moral and economic imperative.

Employment equity is not about instituting new rules and regulations that will result in so-called reverse discrimination. Neither is it an impediment to business. Good employment equity is instead a catalyst for progress.

Workforce diversity allows us to capitalize on the under utilized talents and skills of more than half the country's population. That in turn enhances Canadian companies' competitiveness in the global economy.

The fundamental issue at stake is far more important than the bottom line on the balance sheet. Only when each Canadian regardless of his or her country of origin, skin colour, gender or physical attribute is free to participate fully in the economic, social and civic life of the nation can we truly say we live in a just and caring society. Our world is far from ideal but with progressive legislation like Bill C-64 we can help to reshape society in a way which will give visible minorities, aboriginal people, women and persons with disabilities hope for the present and confidence for the future.

Ultimately the employment equity challenge comes down to you and me, Madam Speaker. We cannot legislate attitudes. Progress depends on the willingness of each one of us to uphold the principles of equality enshrined in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The motion today would almost reverse Bill C-64 and it should be strongly opposed.

[Canada Elections Act, May 16th, 1995]

Madam Speaker, I take this opportunity to respond to the hon. member for Regina-Lumsden on his question concerning the uniformity of gasoline price increases across Canada.

As the matter involving an Ottawa gasoline retailer is presently before the court, it would not be appropriate to comment further on that case.

No federal government agency has the authority to regulate gasoline prices. It is within the jurisdiction of the provinces. In 1994 the Minister of Industry asked the director of investigation and research at the Bureau of Competition Policy to review the provisions of the Competition Act. His report stated the Competition Act is adequate to address concerns about anti-competitive behaviour and that amendments were not required at this time. The report is public and I encourage concerned members to read it.

At the suggestion of the hon. member for Ottawa Centre we are presently studying the implications of introducing whistle blower legislation to protect industry insiders who provide information about anti-competitive behaviour in the petroleum industry. The act empowers the director to investigate allegations that prices have been set as a result of anti-competitive behaviour. Where evidence exists of a criminal offence the case is referred to the attorney general for prosecution.

It is important to realize this is criminal law and offences must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. In the petroleum products sector uniform price increases may be the result of normal market forces; the visibility of posted prices and the homogeneity of gasoline tend to result in identical prices in a given market. It is very easy to immediately respond to a competitor's price movements up or down.

Gasoline prices should be set by competitive market disciplines. When there is evidence of anti-competitive behaviour the Competition Act authorities will take appropriate action. People with information about anti-competitive acts should bring the information to the attention of the director.

[Canada Elections Act, May 16th, 1995]

Madam Speaker, the questions raised by some members on Bill C-88 last week stem from an inability or an unwillingness to understand the plain meaning of the text of the bill.

The Minister of Industry was quite clear in responding to questions in the House on May 5. Perhaps repetition at this time will help the hon. member.

Only in rare cases would the federal government be a complainant in the dispute under the agreement on internal trade. If a dispute were resolved in favour of the federal government and if the province involved refused to comply with the impartial panel findings, then the federal government could withdraw benefits of equivalent effect. Such retaliation would have to be in the same sector as the original violation or in another sector covered by the agreement. Retaliation could not involve transfer payments or social programs because those things are not covered by the agreement. Anyone who takes the time to read the head notes to section 9 of Bill C-88 and article 1710 of the agreement on internal trade can verify the accuracy of what I have just outlined.

Remarks by Quebec premier Parizeau and Quebec industry minister Paillé on May 9 and May 10 suggest they had not bothered to do so before speaking on the issue. The repeated expressions of concern in this question by BQ and PQ representatives suggest they are unable or unwilling to understand plain and clear language.

Bill C-88 deals only with what the federal government must do to live up to its obligations under the internal trade agreement and nothing else.

At the April 12 meeting of the committee of ministers on internal trade, the Minister of Industry advised his provincial colleagues of the steps the government intended to take and that legislation would shortly be brought before Parliament.

Premier Parizeau has unequivocally supported the agreement and stressed the importance of free trade within Canada. He reaffirmed on May 9:

"The change in government in Quebec City has changed nothing. We believe in free trade".

I am sure all Canadians look forward to seeing what those governments that claim to support internal free trade actually do in concrete terms.

[Professional Women's Network, May 16th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, in Etobicoke-Lakeshore many women from diverse business backgrounds have come together to establish a network to help women in business.

The Professional Women's Network will provide a much needed forum for local business development and for the needs of professional and business women. These women representing a broad representation of professions will meet regularly to exchange ideas, share information, and work together to create opportunities for each other and for our community.

The growing prominence of women in professions and other sectors has proven to be a major factor in Canada's future growth, and the Professional Women's Network in Etobicoke-Lakeshore is testament to that fact.

The Liberal government recognizes the women of Canada have the imagination and determination to participate fully in the growing world economy. I support, commend and encourage the ingenuity of these and all women across Canada.

[Breast Cancer, May 9th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I commend the hon. member for Yukon for bringing this important issue to the House.

We assure her we will co-operate with her and with all her colleagues both male and female to find a solution to the problem of breast cancer.

I want to speak to the federal initiatives in the area of breast cancer. The Minister of Health, the secretary of state with responsibility for women's issues and the Liberal women's caucus have all lately addressed the issue of breast cancer, talking about wellness, promotion and education, ensuring we support our community in the search for the necessary awareness and cure.

For too long breast cancer has been one of the most silent killers in Canadian households. Breast cancer, as the member said, is a leading cause of cancer deaths among women. It is estimated that breast cancer accounts for 28 per cent of newly diagnosed cancer cases in women and for 20 per cent of all deaths due to cancer.

Members of the House should be aware the chances of acquiring breast cancer increase with age. In spite of progress in cancer research and improved methods of early detection, Canadian cancer statistics 1995 show the incidence of breast cancer has been increasing at about 1 per cent annually since 1983.

Mortality, on the other hand, has not increased. Rather, it has marginally decreased. About one in nine women will develop breast cancer over their lifetime, and this rate has remained unchanged. Breast cancer will strike 17,700 in 1995 and kill 5,400 this year alone.

For those affected the disease is often disfiguring and requires months of treatment and years of adjustment. I recently experienced an exhibition called "Survivors" where most poignantly those facts were brought out.

On June 12, 1992 the Standing Committee on Health and Welfare, Social Affairs, Seniors and the Status of Women tabled a report entitled "Breast Cancer: Unanswered Questions". In its response to the report the federal government at the time recognized the devastating effects of breast cancer to society as a whole and to Canadian women in particular and commended the standing committee for bringing to its attention the need for a concerted national effort to address this important women's health issue.

The federal government supported the overall direction of the standing committee's recommendations and sought, through a number of initiatives, to bridge the gaps in knowledge in the areas of prevention, screening, treatment and care. The government's response recognized and identified the need for in-

creased collaboration to address the health issue and serve as a framework to seek effective ways of responding to this national concern.

Twenty-five million dollars over five years was allocated for to establish a breast cancer research challenge fund, to develop five breast cancer information exchange projects, to convene a national forum, to support an co-ordinate provincial breast cancer screening activities, to support actions to foster uniformly high standards of care for breast cancer, and to support activities to enhance continuing education and training of health professionals in the area of breast cancer.

In exercising leadership in the area of research the federal government committed $20 million to the breast cancer research challenge fund and issued a challenge to individuals, communities and the corporate sector to match if not exceed these funds. The National Cancer Institute of Canada agreed to manage the funds accumulated through this challenge. This is accomplished through the management committee for the Canadian breast cancer research initiative, a partnership between Health Canada, the Medical Research Council of Canada, the Canadian Cancer Society and the National Institute of Canada.

In the spring of 1993 the federal government issued a request for proposals in order to fund existing cancer centres and other health care institutions across Canada for the development of breast cancer information exchange pilot projects.

These projects are now a reality and we are very proud of the work taking place. They are funded with $2.7 million over five years and located in five regions of Canada. They are developing specific expertise to disseminate state of the art, user friendly information on various aspects of breast cancer. These projects have a strong evaluation component and will serve as a model which can be used by other cancer centres or health care institutions to disseminate information on breast cancer to women, their families and health practitioners.

The national forum on breast cancer was held in Montreal on November 14 to 16, 1993 to determine priorities and directions in the areas of breast cancer prevention, screening, treatment, care, research as well as address issues relevant to survivors support, advocacy and networking. Throughout the event a number of common principles emerged, the need for better communication, collaboration, co-ordination at all levels and for greater consumer involvement.

The federal government has also committed $1.05 million over five years to the continued support and co-ordination of provincial breast cancer screening activities. To that effect Health Canada continues to assist with the activities of the Canadian breast cancer screening initiative.

Representation from the provincial and territorial ministries of health, existing provincial organized screening programs, the Canadian Breast Cancer Foundation, the Canadian Breast Cancer Network, the Canadian Cancer Society, the National Cancer Institute of Canada and Statistics Canada are all involved in the screening initiative.

In order to support activities to foster uniformly high standards of care a steering committee for the development of care and treatment guidelines has been established. It is composed of women living with breast cancer as well as representatives from organizations and groups responsible for delivering and implementing guidelines.

The Canadian Medical Association, the Canadian Nurses Association, provincial health ministries, the National Cancer Institute of Canada, representatives of provincial cancer agencies or their equivalent, the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada, the College of Family Physicians of Canada, the Federation of Medical Licensing and Authorities of Canada and Health Canada are participating on the steering committee.

Ten specific topics related to the care and treatment of women with breast cancer have been selected as the starting point for their activities.

The point I am making here is that there are many individuals, groups and organizations involved in looking for responses and answers to the issue of breast cancer. In order to improve the scope and content of the professional-patient relationship a co-ordinating committee on professional education has been established. The committee has brought together professional associations and representatives. Survivors of breast cancer are a key to any work that has to take place and to all the components of the federal breast cancer initiative.

Survivors' views and perspectives drive the products being undertaken. Each component of the initiative has survivor representatives as well as women at risk.

It is important to note that survivor driven organizations form a key characteristic of the breast cancer information exchange pilot projects' overall information dissemination strategy. This strategy is built on the concept of collaboration with key partners, chief among whom are women at risk, survivors and health care providers.

I think I speak for everyone on this side of the House in addressing this issue and in affirming we want to work with all members, especially with the member for Yukon, to eradicate this problem in our midst. This issue will not be ignored.

[Ve Day, May 4th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, it was 50 years ago that people around the world began celebrating the end of the long years of World War II. For Canadian soldiers, sailors, air crew, nurses, the merchant marine and all who served in the frontlines in northwest Europe, Italy, Sicily and Hong Kong, VE day ensured liberty for future generations.

We are proud of these people and of all Canadians at home who contributed so much in support of the war effort. In Etobicoke-Lakeshore we take special pride in the efforts and sacrifices of the men and women of our community and over coming months will recognize the value of their contribution.

We are proud also to see our Prime Minister representing Canada overseas as many countries come together to commemorate VE day and to honour those who lost their lives in war. The message the Prime Minister brings in 1995 is that Canadians treasure peace as much as they did in 1945.

I thank the many Canadians who struggled to give us the ultimate gift of freedom.