France Bonsant

[Sitting Resumed, November 1st, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I will speak more slowly.

Why are pay equity, maternity benefits and parental leave not part of the Conservative Party election platform?

[Sitting Resumed, November 1st, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to the parliamentary secretary and I have a question for her. She is pleased, as a member, to have the same salary as her male counterparts.

Why then, in the Conservative Party election platform, is there no mention of pay equity, or maternity benefits, or parental leave?

[Sitting Resumed, November 1st, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague. Indeed, the guaranteed income supplement is something for which the Bloc Québécois has been fighting for the past 10 years. Many women live below the poverty line and cannot benefit from the guaranteed income supplement.

We are not asking that the guaranteed income supplement merely be readjusted. Rather, going back in time is what is really needed, to seek retroactive payments from the age of 65.

The government is amassing astronomical surpluses of $14 billion and, this year, if everything goes well, the surplus will be $20 billion.

Do you really think that the quarter cent or half cent to help these women, who are living in misery, will bother them? Not at all. I think the Conservative government needs to open its heart and its pocketbook to help these women living in poverty. These elderly women are like our library and hold our memories, and they are the ones who raised us. My mother always told me, “I raised my daughters for my sons-in-law and my sons for my daughters-in-law.” That is equality. These people deserve a little more dignity.

[Sitting Resumed, November 1st, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member. As we all know, the bill introduced by the leader of the Parti Québécois is causing quite a stir. The Government of Canada has recognized the Quebec nation. Now it has to walk the walk.

I support the bill's goal with respect to francization in Quebec because the rest of Canada requires some knowledge of English and French. If Canada wants to pride itself on its anglophone dominance, that is its choice.

Nevertheless, because Quebec is the only francophone province in anglophone North America, I will stand up for my language, my values and my culture.

[Sitting Resumed, November 1st, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his question. In Quebec, women working in the public sector fought for pay equity, and we won.

When I was first elected in 2004, I met with young female journalists working for Radio-Canada, the CBC, a Crown corporation, who have always sought pay equity with their male colleagues. It is now 2007, and they still do not have it.

Most single mothers work part-time, in their spare time, on weekends, etc. They have the right to equal pay for equal work.

The Bloc Québécois will continue to stand up for these women so that one day, they will win the fight for pay equity, just as we won it in Quebec.

[Sitting Resumed, November 1st, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to rise and speak here today during this official opposition day.

As we all know, for eight years, I sat on the town council for Ascot, where I was the only woman in that still male-dominated world of politics.

I am not sharing this experience in order to brag or to denigrate the field in which we work. I am relating it because I believe it is important to break down the barriers that, unfortunately, still hinder women's access to good jobs. We must try to change the macho culture and mentality that have dominated for too long in Quebec and Canada.

To allow women access to good jobs, greater investments must be made in meeting basic needs, as well as on the human side.

I would like to use my time here today to highlight a wonderful initiative that has been taken in my riding.

Last year, the Tools for Life project was launched to help young women enter the job market. The goal of the project was to help young women who had not finished high school, who had children, and who, in many cases, were single mothers. These women were, understandably, discouraged.

Thanks to Tools for Life, these young women learned to prepare budgets, to cook and to put together a resumé. Most importantly, they learned to shoulder their responsibilities and to believe in themselves. These young women quickly realized that people who believe in themselves can accomplish a lot.

I found the first Tools for Life project in Stanstead so inspiring and promising that I was delighted to be the honorary sponsor for these young women. That was a good move. Seven of the nine women who signed up for the program earned their diplomas, but most importantly, they finished the program with a renewed sense of pride. These young women are now working, and they have become part of their communities.

The project was such a success that it is now under way elsewhere in my riding in the municipality of Bury. Projects like this one enable women to escape the vicious cycle of financial insecurity.

Today's opposition motion supports that because it asks the government to develop a strategy to improve the economic security of all women in Quebec and Canada.

Despite progress toward equality, women are still at a disadvantage in the nations of Quebec and Canada, and elsewhere in the world. The federal government's failure to act on this issue continually reminds us of this.

Take, for example, the employment insurance reforms that neither the Liberal nor the Conservative governments wanted to implement. Or the child care system or the older women who are not receiving their guaranteed income supplement. Or the fact that here in Ottawa, in the federal public service, pay equity is still not a reality.

The time to act is now, but the government is still not doing anything. Instead of helping women, the federal government has been making their lives harder, and things have gotten worse under the Conservatives.

Despite growing surpluses, the government is still slashing its investments in people.

I am always astonished when I hear the Conservative ministers announce cuts to literacy, official languages, social programs or status of women, claiming that it is important to make budgetary choices, while the Minister of Finance announces an unexpected $14 billion surplus or cuts to taxes and the GST, as he did earlier this week.

I want to remind the government that disadvantaged women pay little or no income tax already. I also want to remind the government that these women's main expenses are rent and groceries, two areas where the GST does not apply.

This is nothing new, though. The Conservatives have always been far more inclined to help their friends in the oil industry than the people who need help the most.

What makes me even sadder are cases like that of the National Association of Women and the Law, which I learned last month had closed because of Conservative cuts, after 33 years of defending women's rights.

We had known since last October that the new women's program eligibility criteria set by the former minister responsible for the status of women would have an impact on organizations like this one, but we did not realize just how dramatic that impact would be.

At the time, the minister told us that only groups that aimed to improve women's economic, social and cultural status would be funded. Groups that did research on the status of women and worked to have legislation amended were therefore shut out.

The former minister said at the time that the idea was to fund “real” women. I believe she was making a thinly veiled allusion to REAL Women, an ultra-conservative organization founded in the U.S. that advocates a return to traditional values.

The change of ministers did not really improve matters. The new minister said that the National Association of Women and the Law had only itself to blame. I quote:

The Government of Canada is not responsible for the office closing. The office closed because the association was unable to raise enough money to fund its activities.

Clearly the minister does not understand her role very well. She is supposed to be the voice of women in cabinet, not the voice of the Conservative cabinet—a conservative voice in every sense—for women. Perhaps she should re-read the mission statement for Status of Women Canada. On the Web site, it says that Status of Women Canada is the federal government agency which promotes gender equality, and the full participation of women in the economic, social, cultural and political life of the country.

Do the minister's comments really come as any surprise, when her government has been trying for a year now to silence women's groups that stand up for equality? Not at all.

In my eyes, it is clear that gender equality, which was far from becoming a reality under the Liberals, has been regressing since the Conservatives arrived. For the Conservatives, the specificity of women's lives is not even worth talking about.

It therefore comes as no surprise that in their first election platform, the word “women” came up only twice: once in the context of increasing sentences for offenders and another time in talking about female immigrants who settle in Canada. That is quite the vision for women, who represent 52% of the population.

I am focusing on the Conservatives because it is time for them to take action. However, things were not much better under the previous government. In the last Parliament, I was a member of the Standing Committee on the Status of Women. One after another, the witnesses who appeared before us did not come to tell us that everything was just fine, quite the opposite. They came asking for more help from the government.

It makes me laugh today to see the official opposition calling for a strategy to improve the economic security of all women and then to add a deadline. I am in favour of such a strategy, but I find it somewhat ironic that this motion was moved by a party that formed the government for 13 years and never invested significantly into improving the economic situation of women. Perhaps they have become more progressive since becoming the opposition.

Like all my colleagues in the Bloc, I am surprised by the Liberals' attitude today. We are also condemning the Conservatives' actions vis-à-vis the status of women. Despite the progress that has been made in the past 50 years, women in Quebec and Canada still need us to care about them. A strategy to improve the economic security of all women in Quebec and Canada is welcome. This strategy should nonetheless respect Quebec's achievements when it comes to status of women.

[Canada Student Financial Assistance Act, October 29th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak today as part of the debate on Bill C-284, which proposes to amend the Canada Student Financial Assistance Act.

Education is the cornerstone of the development of societies throughout the world, and the Quebec nation is no exception. The evidence of this is that a number of years ago, Quebec implemented a very successful education policy.

I would like to remind this House that just 40 years ago, Quebec had the lowest enrolment rate in North America. In 1960, only 63% of students entering elementary school finished grade 7. Just 13% of francophones finished grade 11, and only 3% went on to university. During my childhood in Waterville, despite the creation of the Université de Sherbrooke in 1954 and the presence of Bishop's University in a neighbouring city, it was rare to come across a university graduate. Now, my younger colleagues and my daughters have had the opportunity to go to CEGEP or university, and it is common practice in many places.

This fall in Sherbrooke, nearly 22,000 students were enrolled at our two universities, not to mention another 8,000 students at our post-secondary training centres. To achieve this level of education in our region and everywhere in Quebec, Jean Lesage's government and those that followed made a radical policy shift to improve access to education. Thanks to its three-pronged approach—increasing funding for post-secondary studies, maintaining low tuition rates and instituting an effective loans and bursaries program—Quebec's government made extraordinary progress in a short period of time. Today, enrolment rates in Quebec are on par with Canada's in some fields and higher in others.

For example, recent statistics show that 69% of young people in Quebec who have completed high school also have a post-secondary diploma or a university degree, compared to 63% in Ontario, 61% in the Atlantic provinces and 54% in western Canada. Despite such impressive efforts, Quebec is still trying to do even better. The only things missing now are the financial and governmental tools currently under Ottawa's control. These include control over income taxes, research funding programs, training programs and access to international forums. Someday, these tools will be in the hands of a sovereign Quebec, but in the context of today's debate, the main problem is that the federal government keeps trying to encroach on jurisdictions where it does not belong without giving full, unconditional compensation to Quebec and the other provinces that want it.

While Quebec is still trying to outdo itself, the federal government, be it Conservative or Liberal, prefers to create its own specific programs, ignoring the unique features of Quebec's education system. Today's motion by the Liberal Party to increase federal student financial assistance is yet another example of this centralizing vision. In fact, this is a typically Liberal debate, just like the debates we became accustomed to during the 13 years the Liberals were in power.

The solution is simple, though. The federal government should stay away from education and, by extension, from investments in access to post-secondary education, especially if it wants to limit the federal spending power. As I said earlier, Quebec has made great strides in education in the past 40 years, and our loan and bursary system is now recognized the world over. As in many other areas, Quebec is leading the pack in student financial assistance. During the debate in committee, the Bloc Québécois proposed amendments that would have recognized the difference between Quebec's loan and bursary system and the system Canada wants to introduce.

We proposed that Quebec be allowed to opt out of the Canada Student Financial Assistance Act with full compensation and no strings attached, but the committee chair ruled that these amendments were out of order. This is the same chair who, along with his government, has talked about open federalism, respect for Quebec's jurisdictions and limiting the federal spending power. I question his sincerity.

We in the Bloc Québécois recognize that most of the provinces have not developed the sort of services and programs Quebec offers. That is why we proposed to include a clause in the bill that would have recognized Quebec's efforts and allowed it to opt out unconditionally and with full compensation.

Because our amendments were rejected, Quebec will not be compensated for the excellent initiatives it has put in place. We are getting used to that. Previously, the issue was child care centres, and now, it is the loan and bursary system. It is easy to conclude that the Conservative and Liberal governments are using every means possible to try to standardize all the programs and services for Canadians, despite obvious interference in areas of jurisdiction that do not concern them.

The other reality is that the Quebec nation is distinct and has made its own choices. If the other provinces would like to follow the example of certain programs and services developed by Quebec, they are entitled to do so. It comes under their areas of jurisdiction. We would even encourage them do so, for it is true: we have very effective programs.

At the risk of repeating myself, in Quebec, we are always striving to outdo ourselves. We believe that, in order to broaden the Quebec loans and bursaries system even further, the easiest and most effective solution, apart from sovereignty, does not involve further interference on the part of the federal government. The easiest solution remains, for now, a substantial increase in transfers to Quebec and the provinces in the areas of education and social services.

Because of the fiscal imbalance, which was created by Ottawa, the federal government now thinks it has to help students financially, so they can access post-secondary education. However, by restoring transfers to the provinces for education, the federal government would never again have to introduce an initiative such as the one before us here today.

Despite the increased transfers in budget 2007, there is still a $3.5 billion shortfall in education for the provinces for 2008-09, and more than $834 million for Quebec alone. Unfortunately, it seems that Ottawa is ignoring our proposed solution of significantly increasing transfers, even though it has achieved consensus, not only in Quebec, but also amongst the provincial governments.

For the Bloc Québécois, when it comes to social services and education, we believe that Quebec and the provinces must determine their priorities themselves. In short, under the circumstances, the Bloc Québécois will not support the motion tabled here today by the Liberal Party.

[ASTROLab at Mont-Mégantic, October 24th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, astronomy enthusiasts are no doubt familiar with ASTROLab at Mont-Mégantic, the most powerful astronomical observatory on North America's east coast.

In order to continue research in astronomy and astrophysics, the darkness around the observatory needed to be maintained. Chloé Legris and the ASTROLab team spent several long years working to reduce light pollution in the area.

Their hard work paid off on September 20, 2007, when the sky over ASTROLab became known as the first International Dark Sky Reserve. Thanks to the cooperation of local RCMs and the City of Sherbrooke, which filtered the light from their street lamps, this world heritage site will become the only place in the world to rediscover the stars.

Congratulations on this feat.

[Summer Career Placement Program, October 23rd, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Human Resources and Social Development stated that he made changes to the summer career placement program because he did not want American multinationals such as Wal-Mart benefiting from the program. He is right. Some Wal-Marts did take advantage of the program, but not in Quebec.

Having denounced this state of affairs, can he explain the fact that at least one of the Wal-Marts that benefited from this program is located in his riding?

[Committees of the House, June 15th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the 19th report of the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities.