Sheila Finestone

[Employment Equity Act, October 16th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, Bill C-64, the new employment equity act, was designed to resolve longstanding problems with the existing legislation and meet our government's red book commitments. It is part of the government's work toward achieving an open and inclusive society.

The legislation reflects the values of the government. It reflects the values of respect and understanding. The legislation is about fairness. It is about providing an equal playing field. Above all, the legislation is about making sure that all self-identified, qualified Canadians have a fair chance to compete for federal public sector jobs based on their merit.

The legislation continues to cover a total of 350 private sector employers and crown corporations that operate in federally regulated industries such as banking, communications and transporta-

tion. The legislation expands coverage of the employment equity act to the public service immediately. It also includes the Canadian Armed Forces and the RCMP.

There are four designated groups which continue to be designated: aboriginal peoples, members of visible minorities, women and persons with disabilities. The principle of self- identification is reaffirmed and definitions of the groups are in the legislation.

The legislation carries enforcement measures. It ensures that the Canadian Human Rights Commission has the mandate to conduct on site compliance reviews. It also confirms the administrative responsibility for the federal contractors program to the Minister of Human Resources Development. It makes use of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal which when hearing employment equity complaint cases will be called the employment equity review tribunal. This body will hear appeals from employers and referrals from the CHRC and ensure the final enforcement of the act.

With regard to the designated groups under the legislation they continue to be under represented as well as under valued in federal agencies and in federally regulated industries.

A recent study conducted by Krishna Pendakur of Simon Fraser University and Ravi Pendakur entitled "Earning differentials among ethnic groups in Canada" found that similarly qualified Canadian born visible minorities earn about 11 per cent less than Canadian born white people and that immigrant visible minorities earn 15 per cent less than Canadian born whites.

We are also familiar with the term glass ceiling, barriers to upper level management faced by many women and minorities in companies and agencies. This issue is addressed in applying more effective employment equity legislation.

We also found through partnership with the Canadian Advertising Foundation, the Asia-Pacific Foundation and the Conference Board of Canada that being sensitive and responsive to diversity is good for business. It makes economic sense and it is the fair thing to do. Companies that are sensitive to the diversity of the reality of Canada, that is the Canadian population, and companies that have made a commitment from the top down that they will be reflective of the people of this land have the key to the future: economic security. This is real at the local, national and international level.

Fairer access, meritorious advancement and equality of opportunity are key for all corporations that want to compete in the global marketplace. Our Canadian people often reflect and know the cultures of the new global markets. Why not use our diversity as a valued competitive edge to our mutual benefit? Global business is multicultural, multilingual and multiracial. Anyone travelling would know that; anyone in international business knows that.

Applying the rule of self-identified employment equity laws is an important tool to effect real institutional change, which is in the best interest of all Canadians and is an incentive for people to self-identify or to identify themselves.

This is a bill with a heart, one that recognizes the reality of Canadian business life. It clarifies existing obligations and helps to widen the circle of inclusion in our workforce at all levels. It does not force employers to create new positions, require the hiring or promoting of unqualified individuals, or contradict the merit principle in the public sector. It is about fairness and merit. It would be worthwhile if members opposite would keep all these issues in mind when speaking to this matter and tell the truth about what is in the bill.

It is about fairness and merit. It is about quality, not quantity. The bill does not call for nor is it about quotas for non-qualified members of designated groups.

Since the bill on employment equity was tabled for first reading, the members of the Reform Party have had a great deal to say about it.

In fact, it would be more accurate to state that they have had a great deal to say against it. They are rejecting the bill and the reason for their rejection is either that they are against measures in favour of employment equity or that they do not grasp the nature and scope of this bill.

Hon. members must recognize that this will simply not happen by crossing our fingers and hoping that we will achieve our goals of access, equity, fairness and a starting chance for self-identified minorities who wish to have consideration and to be included in the enlarged circle of the family of Canada.

In order to reach this goal some of the CHRC's responsibilities are education, awareness and sensitization to our multicultural reality. It will enable companies touched by this law to effect institutional change over time. We broadened the circle of representation through encouragement and education rather than through coercion. We do it because it is the right thing to do for Canada's qualified population by addressing whatever systemic barriers may be present that inhibit the representation of our diversity.

Before I close I highlight the Bank of Montreal as an example of a corporation that has demonstrated its commitment to create both an equitable workplace and a workforce that reflects the community it serves and a leadership that believes in fairness and a widened circle of service to the grassroots, the people they want to do business with.

It has published a report of its task force on the advancement of visible minorities. I would recommend close reading of the report. The main purpose was to identify barriers to advancement faced by members of visible minorities who were in business by the way and were earning well, and to develop action plans to eliminate those barriers for further upward mobility.

The task force recommended that the bank refine its workforce planning process to foster a workforce that reflects the diversity of the community at all levels. It recommended increased participation of visible minorities in leadership roles and the removal of barriers to the advancement of these persons and all other employees. It recommended the bank take action to further enable employees to take charge of their own career advancement and to increase competency based on non-subjective candidate selection. Its final recommendation was to enable employees from all backgrounds to develop the knowledge, skills, attitudes and behaviour critical to success in a diverse workforce.

When one wants to look at employment equity and when one wants to examine the fairness of the approach in the bill, the self-identification, the reality of who we are as a people, the greatness of our diversity and the differences from place to place across the land, it makes more and more sense that more and more Canadians will want to report origins other than British or French because that is who we are. Most of us have origins different from British or French.

The legislation will help set a framework within which all Canadians will have a fair and equal chance to participate in the economic prosperity of our country and in which all Canadians have an interest and a purpose to participate.

I wholly support the legislation. I hope all members of the House join me in ensuring a truly just, fair, equitable and prosperous society, one with which Canada can continue to be the world model it is today.

[Women's History Month, October 16th, 1995]

Really!

[Women's History Month, October 16th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, today we are celebrating Persons day, the highlight of women's history month.

This is a time to celebrate the contributions of women to Canadian society, a time to be proud of the remarkable progress Canada has made toward equality for women and against actions of racism and sexism.

The Fathers of Confederation made the original blueprint of Canada in 1867. However, it took until 1921 for women to earn the right to vote.

Nonetheless, throughout history, the women of Canada-in all their diversity-have prevailed. They have shaped the values of this great country: democracy, tolerance, generosity, fairness, and respect for human and minority rights.

Today we celebrate five intrepid women from Alberta who won a court case in 1929 that changed the lives of all Canadians. The court's decision made women legal "persons" under the constitution. And that made them eligible for appointment to the Senate.

Today we have the largest representation of women ever in the Parliament of Canada, in the Commons as well as in the Senate. With the charter of rights and freedoms, the constitution now guarantees women and men equal rights and freedoms as full partners in our society.

Women have made great progress toward equality, and that means progress for Canadians and for all of Canada.

Today we recognize women's issues as societal issues. We recognize and realize that women's equality is in the best interests of Canada. All our talent and all our potential in all the socioeconomic and cultural fields of activity must be used as we progress to face the challenges of the 21st century. That is why we must keep up the momentum toward our global goal of the universality of women's human rights, for they are inalienable, integral and indivisible.

The government has approved a plan of action to ensure that women's equality is kept on track. The federal plan for gender equality, equality for men and women, which was tabled prior to our departure for the fourth world conference on the status of women, deals with the real issues of the day. Those issues are action for the economic empowerment of women, action to support women entrepreneurs, action to promote employment equity so women can have a fair chance at the jobs of today. These measures and others, along with social support systems, can help women and their families rise out of poverty.

Make no mistake, the family is the basic unit of society and must be supported in all its forms. We need healthy, vital families and women's economic independence. That can help. It can allow women to escape domestic violence. There is a direct link between economic independence and violence. That is just one reason why we will continue to work on eliminating the violence that limits women's ability to participate in and contribute to society. We have taken measures such as stricter firearms control, a new anti-stalking law, federal subsidies for shelters for battered women.

Economic empowerment means recognizing and valuing the important role of women's unpaid work as homemakers, as caregivers, as volunteers, as those who look after the elderly. This work has value of great worth in our caring and sharing society.

That is why the 1996 census will include a question on unpaid work.

The federal plan also puts women at the heart of government decision making. It requires that every policy, program and law be developed with the impacts on women, as well as men, in mind. Let us not forget that women represent half of Canadian society. We are not a society of special interests but a society built by both men and women over two centuries.

We also have a global plan: the platform for action on women's equality adopted at the recent UN World Conference on Women in Beijing.

I am proud to say Canada played a leadership role in securing a strong agreement on the rights of women and girls in Beijing, which was signed by 189 nations attending the conference.

I am also proud to say that Canada's leadership on equality was recognized with two awards: a prestigious United Nations prize for advancing literacy, thanks to the initiatives in New Brunswick; and Canada was honoured with the global award for the most improvement in the status of women over the last decade. In making the award the International Federation of Business and Professional Women commended Canada for its steady and remarkable progress in advancing equality for women. This was acknowledged and awarded after 110 countries were carefully examined. Canada was not found wanting. Canada was found head of the pack.

The way to the future is clear. Canadians must continue that progress to a true partnership between women and men. This is imperative as we face an increasingly complex global society.

In closing, I want to extend my heartiest congratulations to the six women who were honoured today. Each of them were pioneers in their own way. Each of them fought against violence and fought for an integrated and accepting society. We owe them a great debt of gratitude. I extend them my best regards.

[The Hon. Audrey McLaughlin, October 16th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, it is a great pleasure today to pay tribute to the Hon. Audrey McLaughlin, an outstanding human being, a wonderful spokesperson in the interests of our society and always very measured but very convinced in her observations and in her remarks.

Audrey McLaughlin is one of the outstanding leaders and role models of Canadian politics and female politics. She has strengthened us all by her presence. She has been symbolic of all we are about and why and what we wish to achieve in terms of equality of opportunity, equality of access, equality by the very right of our competence our skills and our personalities. She is a woman who has all of those attributes.

In every way she symbolizes why we are all here. She has contributed in very significant ways to the changing of the tone and the substance of debate. That has been one of the most significant observations I could make as we shared the other side of this floor for many years. Audrey always had the ability to present her point of view in a very deliberate and measured way. She did not agree most often with the procedures of the House but she was never disagreeable in her approach to her point of view and expressing her firm conviction which she holds from depth of heart which becomes very obvious.

It was a privilege to have the Hon. Audrey McLaughlin on the trip we recently completed for the fourth annual conference in Beijing on women's issues. Her presence was a symbol to the host country as we travelled with four different parties representative of the diversity of this country, not only the diversity of political opinion but the diversity of our geography and the diversity of our people.

She is an eloquent spokesperson for the aboriginals of her region, the people who have elected her to the House; not only the aboriginals but certainly those she represents with such sincerity and depth of commitment to their interests and to their well-being. For this we owe her a very strong vote of thanks.

When Audrey would stand to make a speech or to pose a question she did it in a very holistic way. It was never with the finest of lenses, which I appreciate perhaps more than most. I like that approach because it puts an issue into the context of daily human life, of living. Living is so daily and, Audrey, you bring that to our attention so succinctly and effectively.

As a woman she is a trailblazer. In 1989 she became the first woman to lead a national political party in Canada, in fact in all of North America. Sixty-eight years after Agnes Macphail, the first woman was elected to the House of Commons. As a woman she bears the legacy of womanhood, having many and diverse roles which are rather in competition at many times. She is of course a politician but say she belies the phrase "you are too nice to be a politician".

She is a leader who brings with her and believes in sharing power and leadership and is a model to other women. We have stunning proof of that in the House, which you have just brought to our attention, Mr. Speaker. We all welcome Alexa McDonough as the new leader of the New Democratic Party. We wish her well as she takes on a very difficult and very trying role. I hope she does not find putting together both roles of politician and general citizen too difficult.

Audrey McLaughlin the activist has served on many boards and has brought a lot of interesting perspectives to these boards of directors. Audrey McLaughlin is also a mother with two children and it has taken the support of those children for her to be in the House. She has also been an outstanding daughter to her mother and we have all followed that with great heart.

On behalf of countless women and children across this land, we take our hats off to you, Audrey McLaughlin. We wish you well in your future.

[Referendum Campaign, October 16th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I would much prefer the apology come from Lucien Bouchard for his racist and sexist remarks-

[Witness Protection Program Act, October 5th, 1995]

Madam Speaker, I extend my gratitude to the Solicitor General of Canada for establishing a legislative base for the RCMP's source and witness protection program. I also assure him of my total support.

It is another useful and effective tool for our law enforcement officials. It will reduce crime and make Canada a safer place for everyone.

Our various colleagues in the House have defined the extent and content of the bill. I found the interventions of my colleagues very interesting. I particularly refer to the previous intervention by my colleague from Windsor.

As my hon. colleague and the solicitor general have said, in the past criminals have successfully used fear and intimidation of potential witnesses to avoid prosecution and punishment for their crimes. Enforcement agencies need the support and assistance of the public to further their investigations to successfully bring criminals to justice.

The bill under examination today is aimed at improving the RCMP's witness and informant protection program, making it more effective and more open. Its intent is to protect those who assist our police forces in criminal investigations, particularly when organized crime is involved.

It is an acknowledged fact that the contribution of informants and witnesses is often essential in resolving certain criminal investigations. The Quebec Minister of Public Security has, for instance, stated only a few days ago that the most effective means of curtailing the war between motorcycle gangs in Quebec is to recruit informants and witnesses. Those who cooperate with law enforcement agencies occasionally place themselves in dangerous positions as far as their personal safety is concerned, and we owe it to them to provide the best possible protection.

In the past, some participants in the old sources and witnesses program have complained that they did not get the benefits they had been promised. This will not happen any longer, because the

changes proposed today will ensure the application of clear and uniform criteria across the country.

The changes proposed by the witness protection program act will help ensure that both the applicants who enter the program and the RCMP which operates it have a clear understanding of their rights and obligations. The legislative initiative defines a range of protective services and benefits that can be provided. It makes the program more transparent and more accountable.

The process of how one gets into the program has been clearly defined.

A decision to admit an applicant to the RCMP SWPP, as it is called, will be based on the following factors: the potential contribution the witness source can make toward a particular police investigation; the nature of the offence under investigation; the nature of the risk to the individual; alternative methods of protection that are available; danger to the community if the individual is admitted to the program; the potential effects on any family relationships; the likelihood of the individual being able to adjust to the program, that is the maturity of that individual, the maturity of their judgment and other personal characteristics, as well as the cost of maintaining the individual in the program; and any other factor the commissioner of the RCMP may deem relevant.

Under the witness protection act there will be a clear decision making process to admit an individual into the program. In serious cases such as those requiring a change of identity or admission of a foreign applicant, the decision to admit an individual can only be made by the assistant commissioner in charge of the program. A decision to terminate protection must also be made by the assistant commissioner. In less serious cases the decision to admit an individual can be taken at the chief superintendent level. There are protections built into the legislation.

I am proud to say that more than any previous administration the government is committed to reducing violence in our society, specifically violence against women and crime motivated by hatred or bias against any of the vulnerable groups, particularly those which are listed in section 15 of the charter.

Violence is not a phenomenon that can be encompassed or dealt with in one big bold stroke. It is a complex problem with multiple causes and multiple effects. It touches all levels of society and all regions of the country. The whole program was worked out with all regions of the country, from the Atlantic to the Pacific to the Arctic, and that includes Quebec in the portrait. That is why the government is taking a comprehensive approach involving several federal departments.

In the past year a whole series of measures have been tabled by ministers, reinforcing our commitment to address the problem of violence. As the solicitor general has said, the government has instituted many new measures to make our homes and our streets safer. Members will recall that in our red book, safe homes and safe streets was one of our major undertakings and a commitment which we have met with great sincerity and alacrity.

I mention a few measures which are extremely important to women: measures against criminal harassment, commonly called the anti-stalking law; the firearms control legislation; the reform of the sentencing process; and the reform of the Young Offenders Act.

These widely varying initiatives have one common goal: to reduce violence and crime in our society. That objective is, moreover, set out clearly in the federal gender equality plan prepared under the auspices of the commission on the status of women, for which I am secretary of state, and tabled early this summer. Cabinet has been solidly behind this undertaking.

The federal plan also calls for the Canadian government to undertake a comparative analysis by gender of all of these initiatives. A similar endorsement was given at the fourth international congress for women in Beijing. This comparative analysis by gender indicates how policies affect men and women differently. I must say that I see this as an eminently logical undertaking.

In some cases, these differences are central to policy and play a determining role in its application. In others they have a minor impact and are only one of a series of factors that must be taken into consideration.

In the spirit of the federal plan for gender equality we must ensure that the specific needs of women who qualify are considered in the application of the RCMP sources and witness protection program. We have a tendency to think of the world of criminals and organized crime as a man's world, but that is not entirely true. Unfortunately hundreds of women are in contact with this violent world and many are dreaming of getting out of it, just like the men, if only they could do so safely.

These women could become vital sources of information for police and prosecutors. However they are vulnerable to fear, to intimidation and blackmail. They have to think not only about their own personal safety but in most cases they also have to be concerned with the protection of their children.

Women should know that under section 2 of the witness protection program act, protection may include relocation for themselves and their families, accommodation and change of identity, as well

as counselling and financial support. The objective of the program is to ensure the safety and the security of citizens, women and men, who assist police in their efforts to crack down on criminals. We all know this is a needed program and a needed access to information.

The program will help them to re-establish in a new location and will support them until they become self-sufficient if they fulfil the criteria I outlined earlier in my remarks.

All citizens who contribute to eradicating crime and violence from our society deserve our gratitude and support. We know that crime is on the decrease. Notwithstanding we will always have some individuals in society who will engage in abhorrent behaviour. We will always have those who will act outside the law in their selfish, personal interests. However initiatives such as this one will help to ensure society can be a caring, safe and just.

In some cases contributions that witnesses will bring to the court on very dangerous criminals call for extraordinary courage. We want those citizens who have demonstrated their concern for safety and security in the home, in the marketplace and on our streets to receive the best possible protection. No other program has been so comprehensive or so considerate of the needs of our citizenry. That is why I support the solicitor general's initiative.

I hope that all my colleagues in the House, particularly those who have been expressing their concerns on individual cases, will look at this collective undertaking, support it wholeheartedly and join in ensuring a speedy passage of Bill C-78.

[Questions On The Order Paper, June 21st, 1995]

I am informed by Status of Women Canada (SWC) as follows:

The four week New York preparatory meeting for the World Conference on Women March 15 to April 7, 1995 was held concurrently with the regular session of the UN Commission on the Status of Women.

(a) Cost to the federal government for participation at these meetings were as follows:

Secretary of State (Multiculturalism) (Status of Women)-$973

Status of Women Canada (three officials)-$19,677

Foreign Affairs (one official)-$5,000

Canadian International Development Agency (one official)-$8,055

Non-governmental organizations (two representatives)-$16,215 Funded by Status of Women Canada

Total Cost:-$49,920

(b) Representatives on the Canadian Delegation included:

Secretary of State (Multiculturalism) (Status of Women); Status of Women Canada, Valérie Raymond, executive director, world conference secretariat; Status of Women Canada, Rhonda Ferderber, director, external relations and communications; Status of Women Canada, Sheila Regehr, senior policy analyst; Foreign Affairs, Adèle Dion, co-ordinator, international women's equality; Canadian International Development Agency, Diana Rivington, senior policy adviser, women in development directorate; NGOs, Madeleine Gilchrist and Gulzar Samji; and two representatives of the government of Quebec, costs covered by the government of Quebec.

The appointment of a delegation to represent Canada at world conferences and/or preparatory meetings leading to those conferences is the responsibility of the Minister of Foreign Affairs. In selecting members, the minister ensures that the expertise is well matched to the issues to be addressed and that the delegation is representative of the diversity of Canadian interests at play in the conference.

[Poverty, June 7th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for Saint-Denis for her commitment and dedication. I must say our government is profoundly committed to the principle and the development of equality for women.

We have undertaken many projects in this regard. First of all, we restored the court challenges program. The Minister of Human Resources Development tabled a bill on employment equity. The president of the Treasury Board tabled the Employment Equity Act. The Minister of Justice has taken many initiatives in order to improve the Criminal Code.

[Supply, May 30th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I want to remind my hon. colleague that of those who appeared before the standing committee, 90 per cent supported employment equity.

I would also like to bring to the attention of the hon. member that Senator Pat Carney is a very staunch supporter of qualified women. At no time would anyone on this side or anyone who believes in fairness and equity suggest that factors other than quality and merit be taken into consideration. I would like to tell the hon. member that there are as many, if not more, competent, qualified women as there are men.

Last but not least, if someone has reasonable job qualifications, competence and equivalency, there is no discrimination in the ultimate selection. In short, with numerical goals a key ingredient of employment equity legislation is aimed at fighting rather than facilitating unjust discrimination and lack of representation.

Women make up 52 per cent of the population. I guarantee we can find competence among that-

[Supply, May 30th, 1995]

I suggest you read the standing committee report. You will find-