Val Meredith

[Petitions, March 3rd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to rise to present four petitions to the House with a total of 545 signatures.

The petitioners are praying and requesting that Parliament reduce government spending instead of increasing taxes and that it implement a taxpayer protection act to limit federal government spending.

It is my pleasure to support this process and I am pleased to present these petitions to the House.

[International Women's Day, March 3rd, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to speak on International Women's Day. As the secretary of state mentioned in her remarks, this day was designated in honour of early campaigns to improve working conditions for women. I would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge the efforts of some of these women.

In December 1993 the Manitoba legislature granted Dr. Charlotte Ross a licence to practise medicine. What makes this event unusual is that Dr. Ross obtained her medical degree 118 years earlier. Charlotte Whitehead Ross has links to this House. Her father, Joseph Whitehead, was the member of Parliament for the constituency of Huron North in the Confederation Parliament of 1867.

After being refused entry to any medical school in Canada because she was a female, Charlotte Ross obtained her medical degree in Pennsylvania in 1875. She practised medicine in Quebec for five years and then in Whitemouth, Manitoba, for another 32 years. She was the first female physician in both provinces.

The Manitoba legislature denied a request to license her in 1887 but she continued to practise unlicensed until 1912, four years before her death. She was a true female pioneer, a woman who was forced to confront state sponsored chauvinism with no employment equity or human rights legislation to protect her. In the proud tradition of western pioneers, Dr. Ross did what so many other prairie settlers did when confronted by arcane government regulations, she ignored them. Charlotte Ross' defiance undoubtedly helped make it easier for other women to follow in her footsteps.

In marking International Women's Day I am extremely proud to acknowledge the accomplishments of my great-grandmother.

Another woman who deserves recognition for her contributions in pioneering a role for women in the workforce is a constituent of mine, a friend and a mentor, Mrs. Ivy Pat Dillon. Prior to World War II at a time when the only job most women could get was as a secretary or a clerk, Mrs. Dillon worked as a manager for a company in the fledgling aerospace industry. She did not get there because of any affirmative action program or government initiative. Pat Dillon was a success because of her talents and her abilities.

Many other women of that era had to leave promising careers because they were expected to leave the workforce when they got married and raise a family. My mother was one of those women. She chose to give up a nursing career to raise a family of nine children. While she may not have climbed the corporate ladder, she made an enormous impact on her family, friends and community in many ways as a wife, a mother and a volunteer worker.

These women all overcame the challenges of a society that was very different from today's. Was it discriminatory? Without question, but societies evolve. It is just that some things take longer than others.

The greatest single factor in changing men's attitudes about equality in the workplace is not legislation. Rather, it is the fact that women have shown that they can compete with men on equal footing.

As a female baby boomer I have experienced amazing changes in the attitudes of both men and women toward the concept of equality. My working career has taken me from a clerk typist earning $210 a month to being an owner-operator of a small business, to a senior government administrator, to a self-employed realtor and finally, to a parliamentarian. During my career I have faced a wide variety of attitudes from males and females.

In her speech the secretary of state commented on the fact that women entrepreneurs experience difficulty getting financing. I can attest to that personally. When I approached a bank in 1980 to get financing to expand my business, I was shocked to learn that it wanted my husband to co-sign for the loan. This was required despite the fact that my husband had nothing to do with

the business, despite the fact that the business was successful, and despite the fact that I had been mayor of that community for three years.

I am happy to report that this attitude has changed. Perhaps it is because women are now in management positions. The last two managers of my local Royal Bank have been female.

However some attitudes have not changed. One of the most chauvinistic individuals I have ever encountered I met last month. This gentleman was of the opinion that no woman who is married should be permitted to work. He thought that married women who work are responsible for unemployment among men. Not surprisingly, he did not get a very sympathetic ear from me.

What I did find extremely sad about this attitude was the fact that the male who held these opinions was only 29 years old. He is a product of affirmative action mentality. He believes that as government has legislated more opportunities for women, it has been at his expense. He views himself as a victim of discrimination.

We cannot legislate attitudes. For women to show their male colleagues that they belong, they have to prove they can compete with them on a level playing field.

I am proud of the fact that to gain my seat in this House of Commons I proved I could compete on a level playing field. Unlike some of the female members from the government side, I was not appointed as a candidate. To secure the Reform Party nomination in my constituency, I ran against five male competitors. At a nomination meeting attended by over 600 voting delegates, I won a first ballot victory. In the subsequent election, all other candidates from the major parties were males. Obviously, I won that election.

There was no special consideration because I was a woman. I competed on a level playing field. That is the way it was supposed to be and that is the way it has got to be. If we want a society where men and women are viewed as equal partners, we cannot accomplish this by punishing young men of today for the sins of their grandfathers.

I am pleased to see the statistics that women graduating from university today will earn the same salary as their male counterparts. It is a reality that these women will lose ground when they absence themselves from the workforce to have children. The logical way to address this problem is for these women and their spouses to draw equally upon their registered personal savings plan to make up the difference.

The alternative would be for medical science to develop a way for men to share the joy of childbirth. However, even if science could develop the technology, it would not be of much use. I think all mothers would agree that men do not have the pain threshold to survive childbirth.

In this celebration of International Women's Day, I share with the secretary of state the goal of true equality of the sexes. I just do not accept that legislation is the way to accomplish it. It gives the impression that women are incapable of obtaining equality solely based on their performance.

Yes, women today will experience chauvinism and discrimination in their lives. But as one of my staffers says, a woman has to work twice as hard as a man to get half the credit. Fortunately, this is not particularly difficult. I believe it is a good sign on the road to equality to know that this quote comes from a male staffer.

[Petitions, February 24th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the third petition is signed by members of my constituency who are praying and requesting that Parliament oppose any amendments to the Canadian Human Rights Act or the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms that provide for the inclusion of the phrase sexual orientation.

[Petitions, February 24th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure today to present three petitions to the House.

The first petition is signed by 150 of my constituents who are praying and requesting that Parliament reduce government spending rather than increase taxes.

The second petition is signed by 55 members of my constituency. The petitioners are praying and requesting that Parliament reduce government spending instead of increasing taxes and implement a taxpayer protection act to limit federal government spending.

[Petitions, February 17th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the last petition I would like to present today on behalf of my constituents asks Parliament to reduce government spending instead of increasing taxes and to implement a taxpayer protection act to limit federal government spending.

[Petitions, February 17th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, the third petition comes from 275 people in my constituency, who ask Parliament to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act and the Criminal Code to allow dangerous offender applications to be made just prior to the expiration of the offender's sentence. Then if the court accepts the application, the court could issue an order for continued detention or supervision of the offender.

[Petitions, February 17th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I have a second petition. The petitioners pray and request that Parliament recognize the social commitment and dedication of all volunteer firefighters by raising the tax exemption from $500 to $1,000.

[Petitions, February 17th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to present four petitions to the House today.

It gives me great pleasure to present the first one on behalf of 1,556 of my constituents who ask Parliament not to pass Bill C-41, with section 718.2 as it is presently and not to include the undefined phrase, sexual orientation, as this does not warrant special consideration in Canadian law.

[Gun Control, February 16th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, for Canadians who are concerned about the cost of firearms registration and for Canadians who are concerned about crime on the streets using firearms, would the minister give them the statistics that confirm a national firearms registration program will save lives and will reduce the criminal use of firearms?

[Gun Control, February 16th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Justice could not or would not answer how a national gun registry program would reduce crime. If the minister could show this evidence to support registration, most Canadians would probably support it.

Will the minister provide this House with evidence that shows how a national gun registry will save lives and reduce the criminal use of firearms in our communities?