Sheila Copps

[Status Of Women, March 8th, 1994]

Madam Speaker, if there is a woman who has been defending the rights of women in this House it is certainly not the one opposite who does not even want to be there. I think it is important that we work together to ensure that women have their place everywhere, including in the House of Commons. This is what the Liberals fought for before the last election, unlike the party opposite.

I might add that, thanks to the initiative of women such as the hon. Secretary of State, no cuts will be made to budgets for women's programs. Indeed, not one penny is taken out of the budget allocated to the minister responsible for the status of women, and I have this information directly from the minister responsible, because women in our caucus do a good job.

[Status Of Women, March 8th, 1994]

Madam Speaker, obviously when Canadians ask the government to tighten its belt, it creates problems. It was not easy to close military bases; it was not easy to impose a salary freeze to federal civil servants, including women who are at the bottom of the wage scale.

Our job is certainly not an easy one but we have to do it. If Canadians have given us a mandate, it is because they want us to make the right decisions, given the financial situation in which we find ourselves right now.

[Members Of Parliament Retiring Allowances Act, March 8th, 1994]

Madam Speaker, I have a six-year old Canadian who I fully expect to be working outside the home for most of her adult life. Obviously I and every other member of Parliament want to make sure that she has the security she needs and deserves. That is why we have promised to take a look at the issue.

The hon. member is throwing around these figures about the way we are making ourselves rich in Parliament. Obviously her colleague right behind her is in receipt of two pensions and we want to make sure that when we do parliamentary reform it is fair. We want to involve all members in the discussion to ensure that issues like double dipping are dealt with and make sure that pension reform is fair. It is important to restore the public's faith in the system.

We are not in this place to make a buck. I wish the Reform Party members would start to understand that.

[Members Of Parliament Retiring Allowances Act, March 8th, 1994]

Madam Speaker, the public is rightly concerned about the compensation of members of Parliament and I in no way intend to diminish that debate. That is why the very first action of the President of the Treasury Board was to set up a parliamentary committee so all members could have input into this most important issue.

However the member and the new members who are getting a handle on the workload of this place do a disservice to the Canadian public when they leave the impression that somehow we are here because of a cash-for-life lottery.

If I wanted to make money, I would take my talents and brains and apply them in lots of other places where I would not be dependent on a pension but would be remunerated far more per hour for the work than I do in this place.

[Members Of Parliament Retiring Allowances Act, March 8th, 1994]

Madam Speaker, I am really happy to receive the question, in particular on International Women's Day.

One of the things that makes the presence of women in the House so unique this time is that we can use lots of analogies. Hockey may be one we want to stay away from because many hockey players get no-cut contracts.

[Status Of Women, March 8th, 1994]

Madam Speaker, the hon. member seems to be talking out of both sides of her mouth. We have introduced reforms that will increase amounts paid to people on low incomes. People who have a second family income will get 55 per cent. But all individuals who are below the average, in other words, most women now receiving unemployment insurance benefits, will get an increase, thanks to Liberal reforms that reflect the recognition that those who are less well off should get more.

[Status Of Women, March 8th, 1994]

Madam Speaker, most women who are single parents have only one income. That is why they are single parents. And these women will receive 60 per cent.

Before the election, they were getting only 57 per cent. However, thanks to the Liberal Party's reforms, people on low incomes will get an increase, and this is being done to help women who are single parents and carry a considerable financial burden because they are raising their children on their own.

[Status Of Women, March 8th, 1994]

Madam Speaker, the reason why we are increasing unemployment insurance benefits by 3 per cent for low-income individuals is that many women who are single parents should be getting more unemployment insurance benefits. That is why the Minister of Human Resources has increased disposable income for women, and especially for single parents whose responsibilities are considerable.

[Questions On The Order Paper, February 21st, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, as noted in the speech from the throne, the government is committed to proclaiming the Canadian environmental assessment act as soon as possible. Further, in the red book, "Creating Opportunity-The Liberal Plan for Canada" and its accompanying backgrounder on environmental issues, a commitment was made to strengthen and enhance the act after proclamation. The government intends to keep its commitments.

The four regulations essential to the implementation of the act were published in part 1 of the Canada Gazette on September 17, 1993. The period for public comment was to expire on November 17, 1993, but, noting concerns expressed by Canadians, the government extended the comment period to December 17, 1993. The comments received have been compiled by the Federal Environmental Assessment Review Office (FEARO) and changes to the regulations based on these comments and the government's commitments are currently being prepared. These changes as well as the amendments promised will be examined by the government shortly.

The act must be proclaimed quickly in order to reduce the uncertainty associated with the application of the guidelines order now in force.

[National Arts Centre, February 21st, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, it is obviously the government that determines salaries by order in council. It is also obvious that the Prime Minister has already ordered a review of all salary levels set by order in council to ensure that Canadian taxpayers' money is not wasted. It has already been done.