Crucial Fact

  • Her favourite word was liberal.

Last in Parliament October 2000, as NDP MP for Bras D'Or (Nova Scotia)

Lost her last election, in 2000, with 20% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Employment Insurance March 23rd, 2000

Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to speak to the amendment to the motion proposed by my colleague from Acadie—Bathurst with respect to workers in seasonal industries.

The nature of this amendment, which seeks to substitute the immediate action component of Motion No. 222, helps all of us understand exactly what the government is trying to do. It is trying to delay further and this delay is dangerous. This amendment to review employment insurance benefits for seasonal workers is yet another cheap stalling tactic by the Liberal government.

The motion proposes immediate action. We have been asking for that for a very long time as have seasonal workers. Even the delegates to the Liberal convention know it is right. They introduced a resolution calling on the government to remove intensity provisions which claw back benefits for seasonal workers who repeatedly draw employment insurance.

The board of referees of employment insurance in Sydney also know it, especially when they are forced to deny appeals by workers even though they “feel the claimant and many more like her are being penalized by section 15 of the EI Act and would like the powers that be to have a serious look at the act and some kind of restructuring in the near future”.

It is pretty clear to me and everybody except the government to understand that many seasonal workers are seasonal workers not by choice but because the very nature of their work is seasonal. In other words, the cycle which causes seasonal workers to apply numerous times for EI benefits is not the choice of the workers. It is a part of their working conditions.

Seasonal workers, their families and their children cannot wait for the government to figure out that it is only their work that is seasonal. Their needs for housing, food and clothing is not seasonal. The need to get by, day by day, with dignity is not seasonal. It is a basic right.

In my part of the country, looking at the most recent stats available from Statistics Canada, we can see that seasonal employment causes huge changes in the monthly unemployment rate where it has been as high as 20.6% in January 1999 down to 14.1% in August. By December 1999 the unemployment rate in Cape Breton had climbed back to over 20%. In our region where many workers depend on seasonal industries, even our lowest monthly unemployment rate is still much higher than the national average.

By cutting benefits to seasonal workers, the government is directly reducing the quality of life for the hundreds of thousands of people who are employed in seasonal industries in this country.

In my riding of Bras d'Or—Cape Breton, there are many people who depend on seasonal employment. Any Liberal who crosses the Canso tells anybody who will listen that it will be tourism that will save the economy of the island, that it will be tourism that will provide employment for all. Tourism is a seasonal industry.

It is my colleagues and I in the NDP who recognize that although tourism might provide a much needed push to the economy, if EI benefits for seasonal workers are not restored immediately the net gain will not be as big as the Liberals would like Cape Bretoners to believe. On one hand, it pushes for an industry that will provide seasonal work, but with the other it takes away the dignity that those workers deserve. The government should be ashamed of its attempts to sneak out the back door of its responsibility to encourage and promote economic development in Cape Breton.

Seasonal workers are not some marginal part of the workforce. They are an integral part of the workforce and they deserve to be treated with dignity. Most of the seasonal workers who have been affected by the cuts live in rural regions of the country. It is the rural regions that have really been suffering under the Liberal government's slash and burn tactics over the last few years and they are certainly not the beneficiaries of last month's budget tax cuts.

We must stop the marginalization of seasonal workers and we must stop it now. We should not need a lengthy review before benefits are restored to seasonal workers. I know I do not need that. We need to restore those benefits now.

Do we need to have a debate about the problems that seasonal workers face? Yes. Do we need to examine these problems indepth and create long term plans to reduce the recurring cycle of unemployment that seasonal workers face? Yes. Do we need to delay restoring Employment Insurance benefits by reviewing benefits? No. We need to restore benefits now. We need to commit ourselves to an extended debate here in the House and across the country in communities where people depend on seasonal employment. I would not disagree with the principle that the amendment in Motion No. 222 proposes, that is that we need to review EI benefits to seasonal workers, but first we need to restore benefits.

Seasonal workers will not be fooled by any attempts the government makes to increase its popularity in time for an election. The Liberal government's record shows that it deserted seasonal workers. The Liberals should be more concerned with rectifying an unjust and discriminatory policy than improving their lot at the polls.

It is through support of Motion No. 222 without the amendment, so that benefits to seasonal workers are restored immediately. The Liberals have a chance to improve their record. Who knows what it will do for them in the polls? Frankly, who cares?

The important thing is ensuring year round quality of life for all Canadians. Therefore I move:

That the amendment be amended by adding the following words after the word “review”, “in country wide-public hearings”.

Employment Insurance March 23rd, 2000

Mr. Speaker, Canadian women have been suffering both economically and socially from the policies of the government since 1993.

The government's own EI report tabled yesterday by the Minister of Human Resources Development once again showed yet another discriminating policy of the government. Only 30% of unemployed Canadian women now qualify for EI.

My question for the minister is quite simple. Will the minister stand up for Canadian women and stop these discriminating policies and correct the devastating gender imbalance which her government has created?

Supply March 22nd, 2000

And the NDP?

Home Care March 22nd, 2000

Mr. Speaker, last month the government released a damning report of its own lack of a comprehensive policy on home care. The report released by Status of Women states that there is an extreme gender imbalance in all aspects of home care. The study further condemns the government's inactions by stating that this government's policies and practices have a negative financial impact on women as home care recipients and as providers, whether paid or unpaid.

The report indicates that poverty is not uncommon among female home care providers, recipients and their families.

While the government is cutting back on health care, it is also causing enormous difficulties for those who are dependent on home care.

It is unthinkable that the government should continue policies which so clearly cause increased economic, social and medical suffering to so many women. Comprehensive standards for home care and home care providers must be developed now. At the beginning of the new millennium it is unthinkable that the government should allow conditions for an extreme gender imbalance—

Scotia Rainbow March 15th, 2000

Mr. Speaker, question after question about the mismanagement of public funds by the government and Scotia Rainbow have resulted in a series of inconsistent answers.

There are inconsistencies about how many jobs were created and inconsistencies about how much government money. The fact is after $20 million in government subsidies, Scotia Rainbow is now in receivership.

Will the minister now attempt to clear the air of this fishy smell and agree to a forensic audit?

Scotia Rainbow March 3rd, 2000

Mr. Speaker, attacks in the media indicate the Liberal wagons are circling around Scotia Rainbow. The government, time and time again, has said that it supports Scotia Rainbow because of the jobs it has created in my riding.

Twenty-two million dollars later and the employees of Scotia Rainbow were not paid today. My question is for the minister responsible for ACOA. Why is the government paying a company when the company is not paying its employees?

International Women's Day March 3rd, 2000

Mr. Speaker, March 8 is a time for us to celebrate the first International Women's Day of the new millennium. Women's day is a time to reflect and celebrate the progress that has been made in achieving women's equality in our homes, communities and across the world.

This year the stage is set for the exciting seven month long event, the World Women's March, otherwise known as March 2000. After the success of the Bread and Roses campaign in 1996, the Quebec Women's Federation decided to expand its idea and create a forum for women to talk, lobby, protest and march all around the world.

March 2000 will begin on March 8 across Canada and will continue until October 15 with a large rally in Ottawa. For the next seven months organizers of the women's march will draw attention to two key issues: poverty and violence. Whatever gains women may have made, poverty and violence are still huge obstacles to achieving true equality and justice for women in Canada and throughout the world.

For Canadian women the next seven months will be very exciting. It will be a time for creating and renewing relationships and connections around the world in solidarity with our sisters. The women will all come marching, marching hand in hand.

The Budget March 1st, 2000

Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague across the way for her wonderful speech. The reality is that the surplus which the government has, and is now deciding how to spend, was made on the backs of Canadian workers and not because the government has been a good fiscal manager. The fact is, that is where the government received its surplus and those Canadian workers have children.

I had the occasion last night to meet with the student union of University College of Cape Breton. As we speak, the students' professors are on strike because they are paid 30% less than other professors across the country.

One of the students wanted me to ask a question of the government. Why did the government not recognize the position in which students have been put in terms of high debt load and high tuition fees and why did it refuse to address that in the budget?

Scotia Rainbow February 25th, 2000

Mr. Speaker, there was a revelation in the House yesterday. We found out that the minister for ACOA can read a Liberal press release turned into an editorial.

I have an article from the Nova Scotia provincial election stating that a worker at Scotia Rainbow said he could not believe he had to put together Liberal election signs. Workers were asked to nail signs together on company time and put them on their front lawns. A lot of workers are feeling threatened.

Is it because of this connection to the Liberal government and Scotia Rainbow that the minister continues to dance around this issue?

Scotia Rainbow February 24th, 2000

Mr. Speaker, several questions about Scotia Rainbow have led to either inconsistent answers or no answers at all from the government and its ministers.

Canadians want to know how a $750,000 grant turned into a $2 million cheque. More and more alarming questions arise daily in the community about how much public money was received by Scotia Rainbow and how it is being spent.

If the government has nothing to hide, why does the minister not table today the complete Scotia Rainbow file if she has one? Will she do that?