Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to discuss equity in the House, because it is a subject of great concern to me. People often tend to confuse equality and equity, and therefore I will take the time to clarify these two terms.
Equality means that two people doing the same work earn the same pay. Naturally, it would be illegal to pay a female nurse less than a male nurse if they were doing the exact same job. We no longer need to fight for equality. Most collective agreements provide protection for employees in this regard.
Equity means that two similar jobs are compensated in a similar manner. Here, the problem is that there is still work to do even though there have been some settlements. Let us compare a nurse who works in an aboriginal community to a police officer. We can say that these two jobs are comparable in that they require the same level of education. In Quebec, both jobs require a college diploma. Furthermore, both these jobs are demanding and have a fairly high level of responsibility. Thus, we can say that these two jobs are equivalent.
However, although pay equity settlements may restore the pay balance between some jobs, over time, negotiations and pay raises may create a new pay imbalance. That is why work on pay equity is ongoing. It is important to always be asking ourselves questions in this regard in order to ensure that pay equity is not lost over time, even if it was achieved for a certain period.
In 2013, the wage gap between equivalent jobs was the highest it has been in 10 years, mainly because women's average hourly wage increased by only 0.7% while men's average hourly wage increased by 2.2%. For every hour worked, men earned an average of $2.91 more than women.
Despite the efforts to reduce this imbalance, wage gaps still exist. The main reason is that, unfortunately, there is a high concentration of women in a small number of low-paying job groups. The fact is that women are more likely than men to make arrangements to balance paid and unpaid work. Unfortunately, women often end up losing out.
It is important to understand that the intention of the NDP’s motion to create a committee on this issue is to have concrete and binding work done. When a committee is created, it has to report on the work done on a daily basis. Since people are able to read the minutes of all committee meetings, committee members are required to carry out the work they have been asked to do.
There is also a participatory aspect to committees. We in the NDP do not believe that the study of pay equity must be confined to the government and its officials. We believe that all parliamentarians from all political parties must be involved in the cause of pay equity and, more generally, in the cause of women.
Let us therefore support the work of a committee that will be made up of members from all recognized parties and provided with mechanisms to allow the participation of parties that are not officially recognized in the House. I would point out that any member of the House may attend committee meetings, unless those meetings are conducted in camera. Apart from working meetings, the meetings of such a committee will be conducted publicly.
Any member may appear at and attend the entire meeting with no problem, even if the person is not an official member of the committee. There is a way to speak with the parties in order to have documents tabled. The rules of the House provide for important mechanisms that allow all members to participate. This is an essential point.
Now, this is also a participatory committee because it reaches out to the entire population. People who are interested in testifying and who believe they have something to contribute can contact the political parties and the Speaker of the House to ask to appear as witnesses. If their testimony cannot be accepted for various reasons, for example, if they cannot testify because of the time frames involved or because of a conflict with the committee schedule, they can decide to make a submission on the topic being discussed.
The committee is designed to be participatory. It will reach out to the population as a whole, rather than place the work on pay equity solely on the shoulders of a minister and her officials, something that would not be beneficial. This is precisely why we want a committee. It is to ensure that everyone can participate and work effectively.
I would like to point out that, unfortunately, Canada is well down the list of developed countries in the area of pay equity. According to the World Economic Forum, Canada ranks 80th out of 145 countries in this regard. Accordingly, since we are so far down the list, a pay equity committee is really a good way of ensuring that we make progress. We heard the Prime Minister say in Davos that he was a feminist. By agreeing to support the NDP motion, when the vote is taken tomorrow, he will show that he truly cares about feminist interests. In addition, his support would show that he clearly understands the inclusive nature of the motion and that, when it comes to improving the living conditions of women, it is important to bring everyone together, to work as a team, to avoid partisanship and to really bring solutions to the table. It is also time to take meaningful action. I believe we are at that point now. After all, this is 2016. It is important to see to it that pay equity is finally recognized as a right.
We also have to realize that public policy does not have the same impact on women as it has on men. We must take that into account when we make our decisions. We sometimes have to ensure that we push harder and make meaningful progress. Sometimes, when we support a relaxed approach we fail to achieve concrete results.
As we know, women make up about 50% of the population. However, there are always cases where women do not achieve equality. When it comes to representativeness on boards of directors or in various bodies to which people are appointed, or when it comes to public policy, we do not appoint women to those positions, although there are competent women. We really have to adopt policies that will bring about meaningful action. If we wait for things to happen by themselves, we will not succeed. We have to have the political will to change things and put clear policies in place.
It is high time we balanced women’s job-related responsibilities and family life, to ensure that things are much more egalitarian and equitable for half the population and that jobs that fall under federal jurisdiction, whether they are in the public or private sector, remain attractive for women.
They have to be able to choose their job voluntarily and dedicate themselves fully to it. Society will then go forward without losing sight of the pay equity issue, so that wins do not turn into losses in a few years and we do not lose what we have gained after so much effort.