House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • Her favourite word was society.

Last in Parliament October 2000, as Liberal MP for Mount Royal (Québec)

Won her last election, in 1997, with 62% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Supply May 30th, 1995

Madam Speaker, I would say that all along the issue has been structural unemployment, systemic discrimination, the vital need for changes to the way one uses our unemployment insurance and the way programs are put into place, which have demonstrated that all people have not had the same kinds of opportunity. The world has changed dramatically. We need new jobs and new kinds of skills.

It may be the children of the very wealthy who may not get the jobs or the PhD who cannot find the opportunity, although the one who has the PhD has a much better chance of getting a job than those who are under-educated.

We have a target population because the system does not work without it. If the member finds that antithetical to his views that is just fine. The people of my riding and the people we represent realize we need a public policy to give people a helping hand. It is not gratuitous. It is good, constructive public policy.

Supply May 30th, 1995

Madam Speaker, I just wish the members opposite would stop and think about what they are saying. First, everyone who has chosen to come to Canada to become a citizen or who is a landed immigrant is a Canadian. One does not hyphenate a Portugese Canadian versus a Japanese Canadian. That is totally antithetical to the Canadian point of view.

Second, the reason for the targets, the goals, no matter what we want to call it, is because we have seen there has been uneven hiring, a systemic racism out there in terms of hiring practices. There needed to be some kind of mechanism to enable people to understand that after decades and decades of anti-discrimination laws nothing was moving. We certainly needed to have some form of mechanism so that those who were perpetually outside of the job stream could be included. It was not because they were low income versus high income. There are people who are low income who can end up being very high income earners. So do not give me that business. All one needs is an opportunity in life. If one is not given an opportunity to be hired because of the colour of one's skin then there is a reason why one is not getting a chance.

This kind of program and policy is to ensure that every Canadian, regardless of colour, creed, race, religion, language, sex or handicap, gets an opportunity.

Supply May 30th, 1995

You do not even know what it means, employment equity.

Supply May 30th, 1995

Madam Speaker, first off, I would like to thank my colleague for Québec for the courtesy. I am convinced that she is a supporter of employment equity.

The motion introduced today by our colleague for Fraser Valley East once again shows the Reform Party's intention to eliminate employment parity and to backtrack regarding Canada's achievements in the area of equality of rights over almost 40 years.

We know that in 1986, the former government passed the current law on employment equity. I congratulate it for this accomplishment. But it was the Liberal government preceding that government which established the principles and set down the cornerstones of employment equity.

In 1986, these principles were even entrenched in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which provides for the creation of laws, programs and activities to improve the situation of disadvantaged people. We built a framework of principles reflecting our vision of society and its future and established values for our society.

This is most of all evident in section 15 of the charter, which discusses non-discrimination regarding employment. The charter also covers the issue of the equality of women in sections 25, 26 and 27, and the issue of multiculturalism in section 28.

I must say that Canadian values are very well expressed in our Charter of Rights and Freedoms and that section 15 covers all rights and gives us the potential to promote those who are disadvantaged in our society.

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to make the business case. There is not only the fairness and equality case which is first and foremost as a Canadian value, but there is also the business case for employment equity.

As much as it is statistically justifiable, socially desirable and morally the right thing to do, it is also a fundamental necessity in today's business world. Even a cursory examination of current market conditions makes it abundantly clear that Canadian companies must fully capitalize on this country's greatest resource, its rich and diverse workforce, if they are to remain competitive in an increasingly global economy.

Hon. members of this House need not take it from me nor from this side of the House. Perhaps Reform members and their supporters might take a lesson from the people they admire so much, the independent business people and the large corporations. Take a lesson from what they have to say about the importance of diversity and gender equity to their business and their business values and to ours as well.

Throughout my remarks I will highlight comments of some of this country's most progressive business leaders, people who have found out for themselves that employment equity is not just a matter of common sense but also one of dollars and cents. Private sector firms including Canadian National, Canadian Occidental Petroleum, Bank of Montreal, Hydro Québec, et cetera, see equity as an asset and have seized it as a tool for improving their companies' performances. They have discovered diversity is a value added. We all know how important value added is in the competitive global economy we have to face.

Let me quote just one proponent of employment equity, Bernard Isautier, chief executive officer of Canadian Oxy:

In the global village we must learn to respect, appreciate, understand and value differences, in terms of race, ethnic groups, gender, culture and language. Diversity is a source of competitive advantage. If a company is to be successful in today's business environment, it must develop policies and practices in step with an increasingly diverse workforce.

I would like to briefly outline some of the key business considerations in the employment equity question which includes the fundamental principle of merit. Of course we are going to hire someone based on equivalent capacity and ability to deliver the job and do the task. We may have to train some people but there is certainly a merit principle as well as the ethnocultural reality of Canada's people and the equality of men and women.

Let us look at this. There is the matter of the changing face of the marketplace. People reporting ethnic origins other than Canadian, British or French now account for 40 per cent of the country's population. That number is expected to climb to 50 per cent within the decade. With these people come new markets and demands for new products or services which Canadian companies are finding profitable to satisfy. It is no longer just white rice and white bread, it is the whole range of wheat, grains and cereals that we can enjoy.

Petro-Canada, as one example, saw a 15 per cent improvement in gasoline sales in Vancouver when it started offering services in Mandarin as well as English, as did the Bank of Montreal in the delivery of its services.

Not only are there burgeoning business opportunities at home, but global trade is opening doors to markets with the potential for unprecedented growth abroad. International business, I would remind everyone in the House, is multicultural, multilingual and multiracial. Canada is a global village. That is who we are.

We are reflective of the four corners of the world. Those four corners have been here for a long time. The people are competent and capable and have the potential to meet the challenges of the new global economy. Opportunity knocks and Canada's diverse people are a natural competitive advantage. They may be seen now as a hidden advantage, but let us bring that out into the light and look at it in the clear light of fiscal reality. We cannot afford to exclude anyone nor should we wish to.

The Conference Board of Canada, with the assistance of the multicultural programs which I manage, recently released an 18-month study called "Dimensions of Diversity in Canadian Business" which documented the financial gains to be had from using our diverse workforce to access untapped markets both within Canada and around the world. The study's author, Christine Taylor, noted that the single most significant barrier to change is the belief that diversity is not a business issue.

If there is still any doubt among my colleagues they will be interested to learn that the report from the Conference Board of Canada notes that the gross domestic product rates in Latin America, China and the Pacific rim range from 6 per cent to 12 per cent annually. The purchasing power in these countries is enormous and holds tremendous potential for Canadian business. Let us not forget the business task force which the Prime Minister led to these parts of the world. These fast developing regions require vast investments in infrastructure, in public systems and capital. It takes special people to make such transactions happen.

More and more employers are finding that ethnocultural diversity, including visible minorities, with insider knowledge and contacts within those countries are instrumental in penetrating these new lucrative markets. These people are not being hired because of legislative requirements or simply out of a

sense of duty or altruism. Progressive businesses are choosing these qualified employees for the value they add to the company.

Unfortunately too many Canadians do not know about our secret power, the hidden asset of Canada. It is about time they did. If enough Canadian companies recognized this new reality there would not be any people looking for jobs. Too many are still bound by the straitjacket of stereotypes. That is why we need employment equity. It will bring better equality and justice and it will also meet the business needs of the community.

I hope Reform members are listening so they might decide to have an open mind. Never mind doing their polling, maybe they should think and talk to their constituents.

If critics are truly concerned about the welfare of corporate Canada, surely they cannot be opposed to employment equity measures that will enhance their ability to compete. As the conference board study notes: "Competing to win in the global economy requires an ability to attract, retain, motivate and develop high potential employees of both genders from a variety of cultural and ethnic backgrounds".

Having an employment equity plan in place eliminates the barriers that may prevent employers from harnessing the full potential of the workforce. I have had the pleasure of working on the Conference Board of Canada study with Prem Benymadhu, a really incredible gentleman who is the vice-president of human resources research. He said that much more than being a nice thing to do it really is essential for Canada. It would be a mistake, however, to assume that increased access to domestic and international markets is the only business advantage of employment equity.

Companies are learning that recruiting, promoting and retaining people who are representative of the Canadian population helps them provide better and more responsive client service. When we walk into a store and see ourselves reflected on the screen as part of the picture, when we see ourselves in the ads, whether we are brown, yellow, white or whatever our skin shade is, we feel that we are included, not excluded, and have a sense of belonging. We feel welcome and know we have our place within the peoples of Canada.

Companies report that there is an increase in market share of 38 per cent when they have changed their advertising and direction. By the way, I refer members to the Advertising Council of Canada study which indicated a tremendous increase in sales and customers when this principle and concept is applied.

The conference board survey showed one-half of the respondents discovered it was necessary to tailor their customer service practices to meet the needs of an increasingly diverse customer base. Responding to those changing needs is apparently very profitable. There was a very interesting explanation given to us by the Bank of Montreal on how it targeted its various bank branches to the population it was serving.

Therefore, it is apparently very profitable. The majority of companies reported an increase in market share. Seventy-eight per cent showed significant increases in customer feedback and 38 per cent indicated that their revenues had increased. I am sure everyone would love to give a business report like that.

Employment equity proves to be equally beneficial inside organizations too. Among the many advantages are improved workplace morale, higher retention rates and greater productivity. In fact, many managers find that women's work style, which focuses on team work, collaboration and open communications and mutual support, is especially well suited to the communication demands of the workplace in the information age.

Enlightened employers recognize that employment equity gives them improved access to a much larger pool of well informed and qualified personnel, which raises some very pragmatic issues around the whole question of an aging workforce.

Despite current unemployment conditions, demographic projections make it clear that Canada will soon be searching for qualified workers. Within a decade we will start to experience a severe skills shortage because of retiring baby boomers. That will also present other issues with respect to the aging of our population. They are all important social policy and program issues.

Given these population trends, given the decreasing birth rate within Canada, all but one-third of the new entrants to the workforce by the year 2000 will be members of the Employment Equity Act designated groups: women, visible minorities, aboriginal peoples and persons with disabilities. I would suggest that be carefully considered when members are looking at public policy. Maybe when they come out with their revision to what could be a good red book, they would find why and when.

Our country will need every one of these people and the time to prepare for the transition is now. As the report prepared by the Royal Bank of Canada stated, with a labour shortage predicted in the future and a more diverse population, it is very important to get off the mark quickly before the labour crunch hits.

That is why the vast majority of employers, such as the Canadian Bankers Association, the Canadian Association of Broadcasters, the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, federally regulated employers in the transportation and communication industries and other stakeholders affected by Bill C-64, the

employment equity legislation, which as members know the committee has finished reviewing, recognize the need for legislation in employment equity.

It makes good business sense. If one looks at the whole issue employment equity it is designated to promote the optimal use of our rich human resources. Although we have contract compliance, good business practice would not need and does not need it because it is something that you would want to do to improve your access to the market, to invite people into your stores, to place before them merchandise that they like, that they want and that they will buy.

The questions we are looking at and the bill concerning employment equity are intended to act as a stimulus to our national economy while correcting the injustice of discriminatory hiring and promotion practices.

When practicality for business companies is coupled with dignity for individuals everyone wins. I remind the House that for all the business benefits of employment equity-they are obvious and I have enunciated a number of them-it is in the interest of fairness and equality, in the interest of the value system that we have put before the Canadian people. It is a system that is inclusive and not exclusive, that is neither abusive nor unfair. It is one that looks at all people in Canada and says: "You are welcome. There is a place for you with your skills, with your knowledge, with your competence and with your abilities". It is not smart business to be exclusive.

I remember studying section 15 of the Canadian Constitution. It was delayed three years after the acceptance of the charter of rights and freedoms. That study took a year out of our lives. We examined section 15, the non-discriminatory section, and suggested the changes that were to come before the House in terms of formal laws as different from policies.

Employment equity was one. It had to do as well with the whole question of where the federal government had jurisdiction so that we could have contract compliance. Many of the provinces do the same thing.

Anyone who thinks that it discriminates against what is called the traditional Canadian had better look out there and see who is the Canadian. It is all of us in all of our beauty and in all of our differences.

We planted the roots of the employment equity policy 20 years ago. Since then, the successive governments have made an effort to promote it. It would seem that the only people who question the employment equity policy are our Reform colleagues.

I recommend that all members of the House vote against the motion and that they support and speak out regarding the importance of including every single person in this country, in all of our society's employment policies and to show what it means to be Canadian.

Diversity is the beauty of this country. This is a global village. We are reflective of the four corners of the world. If members come into the constituency of almost anyone who lives in an urban, semi-urban or metropolitan area they will note those differences. They will note the diversity and will recognize the importance of being inclusive of the ethnocultural and visible diversity as well as gender equity.

I urge all my colleagues to endorse the necessary amendment so that we can get on with the business of building a better Canada, an inclusive Canada, one that looks like all of us in this House.

Status Of Women April 6th, 1995

Mr. Speaker, I greatly appreciate the Bloc's concern for the status of Canadian women. I think this suggests it recognizes that equity and unity are going strong in Canada.

In this regard, she must recognize that our February budget did not contain any cuts in grants or contributions to women's groups. And I told women just that: "No cuts in grants or contributions". I told women and I repeat that the opinion of women from all regions of Canada will be taken into consideration when budget adjustments are made. I hope that the Bloc Quebecois is interested in the well-being of all women in Canada.

Status Of Women April 6th, 1995

Mr. Speaker, I am proud and confident of our government's unequivocal commitment to equality for women, period.

I must remind my hon. colleague that we have restored the Court Challenges Program, are setting up health centers of excellence for women and are working on sentencing reform, firearms control, employment equity and small business issues, all with women in mind. I think this clearly shows our concern for equality for women.

Multiculturalism April 5th, 1995

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to take part in this debate and to set the record straight and tell things the way they are. In Canada, multiculturalism is not an ideal; it is a reality.

[English]

Some people prefer to call this reality diversity or pluralism, or refer to the programs, policies and issues as intercultural, cross-cultural or ethnocultural. They can play the semantic game if they wish, but a rose by any other name is still a rose.

The hon. member who proposed this debate just said that we should never support group rights unless they are a majority. From my perspective and where I grew up, democracies are judged by how they treat their minorities.

Multiculturalism is not just a matter of the right of choice, which we all enjoy in our democracy in the maintaining of one's cultural roots. It is about respecting the right and ensuring it for all Canadians, whatever their race, religion, language or country of origin. It is about fostering a climate of mutual respect in a country where everyone is equal, where everyone has rights and, yes, responsibilities too. It is about equality. As our Prime Minister has said: "Equality is not about special interests or special rights. It is about social and economic justice."

Canada has a rich democratic tradition. The principles of justice, personal freedom, mutual respect, open mindedness, freedom, integration and the shared notions of justice have guided and shaped our social structures, our laws, our institutions and our way of life.

These are basic community and fundamental Canadian values. I would remind my hon. colleague-

-that the Prime Minister of Canada has often said our country's unity depends on its diversity, which is also our strength. It is in fact the essence of Canada.

I would say that we know that peace, prosperity and social harmony do not come from wishful thinking or letting the marketplace dictate or letting personal feelings prevail. They are partners in that undertaking, perhaps. They can only come about, in my perspective and in the perspective of this party, from good public policy, collaboration with the private sector, commitment and determination, and community goodwill.

The aim of the federal multicultural programs is to promote understanding among the various cultural communities. Who would quarrel with this objective? These programs are intended to help newcomers integrate into the country, to eliminate the obstacles to participation by all Canadians and to break down borders and put a stop to racial discrimination.

From a business and trade perspective, we find these policies have great economic benefits. The more we know about global markets, the more we can use the cultural and linguistic knowledge of Canadians in competing in those very markets where we now do global business and the more we will all benefit.

These are some of the things that multiculturalism is all about. It is far more than a case of enhancing and preserving culture. The hon. member surely realizes that we do not live in a perfect society.

There is discrimination, and although we may be number one on the UN list, we have not reached nirvana or utopia, to my knowledge, as yet. There are still talented people out there, citizens denied full access to the economic mainstream. There are still people out there sitting on the margins who have a vital contribution to make but are not able to make it because of discrimination, because of lack of understanding.

Linguistic, racial and religious tensions lead to misunderstanding. We sometimes take advantage of the public good. We often want to do things our way and we find it hard to put ourselves in others' shoes.

Good public policy and programs help all of us to stand tall and walk in confidence and pride as if we were in the other person's shoes.

I believe that Canada's multicultural policies and programs have helped ensure peace and stability over our great land. Certainly the rest of the world seems to think so.

By weaving together all the diverse cultures that people our land, we have created a magnificent Canadian tapestry, reflecting our Canadian culture, which is more than the sum of all its dynamic parts. At a cost that is not extraordinary, less than $1 per Canadian per year, this policy works at breaking down barriers and promoting institutional advances, thus providing individuals, as the member puts it, the freedom to pursue their

own cultural ideals in a society that can accommodate differences, build bridges, and profit from its pluralism.

Multiculturalism is not about living separately side by side; it is about living together. It is not about building walls; it is about tearing them down. It is about inclusion, not exclusion. It is about the fact that we are all Canadians. It is about respecting each other.

This government demonstrates leadership by tapping into the current and potential benefits of diversity. The multicultural program and policy, as I have said before, are good government policies. Its practices have evolved and are complemented by partnerships with individuals, corporations, organizations and other levels of government, whom I thank, as well as those individuals who serve them in a voluntary capacity.

Just for the member's information, we do not do song and dance or festivals, as she points out.

I am happy to share with the hon. member the initiatives we have taken with the Canadian Advertising Council and its study called "Colour Your Money", which shows that with sensitivity, good hiring practices and with the kind of publicity one would like to put out in our advertising milieu, diversity can be a very profitable business because one feels at home and welcome in the environment. I would be more than happy to share the successful partnerships we have had with the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, the Conference Board of Canada, the Asia-Pacific Foundation, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, the Canadian Association of Broadcasters, Cineplex-Odeon, and many others too numerous to name.

We look to the future by working together with Canada's youth, with teachers, school boards and school trustees, by assisting in the development of films and books and then making them available to the children in our schools and in our public libraries. We build an environment that helps shape their lives. By encouraging understanding and co-operation among our youth, we help shape the future of Canada, a future of mutual respect, understanding and co-operation.

I would advise the hon. member-she spoke on the day to eliminate racism-to look at that group. It is a fine group that we help fund. We are very pleased with the work that many of these groups do, both in their voluntary and professional roles.

We must affirm and reaffirm the Canadian values expressed in our constitution and in the charter of rights and freedoms-the freedoms we take for granted-the right and the duty of each Canadian to protect and promote this exceptional democracy and to participate in it fully and equally.

Recently the Governor General said during his moving swearing-in speech: "I believe we still learn as much from our differences as from our similarities. When we only talk among ourselves, all we get back are echoes. We only grow if we take the time to quietly and carefully listen to each other."

He added that, in Canada, we recognize one fact in life. People here are true to their origins, and they bring their origins here with them. An infinite variety of traditions and cultures make up Canada's unique mosaic, providing a fine example for the world.

I would say to my hon. colleague, who has put what I consider to be an unenlightened approach before this House, that there are no hyphenated Canadians and there is no segregation in our policy. If someone chooses to segregate or hyphenate themselves, they have the freedom and the right to do so. It is too bad they feel they must separate themselves from the glorious undertakings that we have as a country and a nation that is the envy of the world in this regard.

I would say to her in my closing remarks that the bottom line to my hon. colleague is that national values can cut across racial, religious and cultural lines in Canada, allowing multiculturalism to flourish in the best interests of all of us. It would ensure "old-fashioned Canadian common sense" to be the inheritance of all of our children's tomorrows.

Government Spending April 4th, 1995

Mr. Speaker, Dr. Simms, at the invitation of international agencies, has been invited to speak on Canada's very fine programs to ensure equality for all people, including employment equity for women.

She has also been asked to address the issues of sexual harassment in the workplace, for which Canada is doing a fairly good job to date. She is addressing these programs and policies in the Philippines where she has been invited to speak. The Minister of Foreign Affairs has agreed that Canada, as a role model, should speak in international fora of this nature. We are very proud she is going to represent us.

Crtc March 30th, 1995

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member should think through the outcome of her observations and her direction. It would mean that a worthy and considerate member of the ministry would have to resign as a result of interference in an arm's length organization.

Crtc March 30th, 1995

Mr. Speaker, I would suggest that the country and the government over time has been very grateful to the CRTC. It has been able to protect the Canadian cultural content of the delivery system through its broadcast system.

The growth of Canadian arts, culture and performers has been a vital part of the responsibilities administered by the CRTC through its vigilance and its application of the rules of the will of the House.