Irene Mathyssen

[Business of Supply, May 11th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, the member is quite right. We have heard a great deal in this House, and it goes back to our involvement in Afghanistan with the call to support our troops, making it very clear from the Prime Minister's Office that somehow support, or lack of support, for the troops was integral to the way the House would operate and do business. Therefore, there is a lot of talk, but very little action.

I would like to underscore some of the things about which I am very concerned. One is a lack of long-term care for our veterans.

If veterans were in World War II or Korea, yes, they would have long-term care, but for post-Korean veterans or veterans who suffered in the Golan Heights or gave all that there was to give in Afghanistan, they are not covered in terms of long-term care.

This is an affront to the men and women who put their lives on the line. Yet, we still see the Conservative government making excuses about why it cannot make sure that all veterans are provided with the services they absolutely need and deserve.

[Business of Supply, May 11th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to speak to this motion today, because Canadian veterans are our heroes, and they should be treated with the utmost respect and provided with all the support we can possible give.

Conservatives continuously remind us to support our troops—we hear it all the time—but fail to understand that support must continue once those Canadian Forces are no longer active and they become veterans. We owe them that much. We were, and are, a country engaged in modern-day conflicts in places like Somalia, Bosnia, Lebanon, Cyprus, East Timor, Afghanistan, and now Iraq.

Our troops have answered the call to assist communities jeopardized by floods, earthquakes, ice storms, forest fires, hurricanes, and tornadoes domestically and around the world. However, Veterans Affairs Canada has not adapted to the very real needs of the veterans of the modern day. This government has failed to support the obligations we owe veterans who served in the great wars, in Korea, and on peacekeeping missions.

In fact, because of the shortsightedness of the Conservative government, our relationship with our veterans has been damaged and diminished rather than enhanced. Older veterans were told to learn to use the Internet, for example, for continued service when local VAC offices faced service reductions and closures.

The Conservatives have cut—and this has been said a number of times—more than 900 jobs from Veterans Affairs since 2009. That is 23% of the workforce.

Compensation for funerals under the Last Post Fund has not kept up with the actual costs, leaving cash-strapped veterans and their families to pay the difference. Veterans requiring long-term care beds have been shuffled off to provincial jurisdictions because they have had the misfortune of outliving their life expectancy.

The ministry refuses to extend our obligation as a courtesy to them beyond the contracted dates. These are veterans with special needs who need special care as a result of their service to our country.

New Democrats have long advocated for the continuation of the veterans long term care program. The rates of homelessness and suicide among our veteran population are horrifying, but testimony to that fact and effects of post-traumatic stress are not being seriously addressed. Families are left without the supports they need to deal with younger veterans suffering from post-traumatic stress, and injured veterans with obvious disabilities as a result of their service must suffer the delay and humiliation of proving to the department over and over again that they have been disabled, in order that they continue to receive support.

The current government's Bill C-58, as proposed, is a good start, but many veterans feel it just doesn't go far enough in enhancing programs and services for all veterans and their families under the new charter. New Democrats agree with these veterans and their families. That is part of why we have chosen to dedicate this opposition day to point out that financial compensation and support services to past and active members of the Canadian Armed Forces who have been injured, disabled, or died as a result of military service, and to their dependents, must improve. We have a moral, social, and legal as well as fiduciary obligation to do that.

Dr. Pierre Morisset, a retired major general and the chair of the Scientific Advisory Committee for Veterans' Health, was a witness before the veterans affairs committee last year, and he said, “When a soldier leaves the forces and is officially known as a veteran, then he's treated in the civilian health sector”. Dr. Morisset went on to say that the civilian health care system is “not necessarily tuned to the reality of what kind of life the soldier may have had”.

Similarly, Dr. Ruth Stewart of Athabasca University argued that:

The Canadian Forces represent a distinct culture, containing distinct subcultures. They possess unique languages, norms, and customs, and are socially stratified to a degree completely foreign to most north American civilians.

Once a soldier leaves the military, he or she is left to the care of civilian doctors who will do their best, but they do not have the expertise to deal with the specific issues veterans face. Veterans are our national heroes and, as such, they are a federal responsibility and should be looked after by the federal government. They are not, as the government believes, a problem to be dismissed, undervalued, or offloaded to the provinces.

This Parliament's veterans affairs committee identified three core themes for the study resulting in the new veterans charter: care and support of the most seriously disabled, support for families, and improving how Veterans Affairs Canada delivers the programs, services, and benefits of the new charter.

The Conservatives' Bill C-58 would only partly address some of the 14 recommendations contained in that unanimous report. It would, for instance, only provide assistance to help 100 of the most seriously injured.

The NDP believes that we have the obligation, and capability, to help all veterans and their families.

New Democrats will push for the retirement income security benefits to be increased from 70%, as outlined in the bill, to 100% of what the veterans received in VAC financial benefits before age 65, to ensure that veterans have financial stability.

The critical injury benefit proposed under Bill C-58 would provide a $70,000 tax-free award to support the most severely injured and ill Canadian Forces members and veterans. However, under the proposed criteria for qualification, only two or three people per year would qualify. This is simply not good enough for our veterans. They have given their lives and their careers for this country.

We have also heard from veterans who are disappointed in the government for not addressing the disparities and unfairness related to lump-sum disability payments, as compared with civilian court awards for pain and suffering.

Scott Maxwell, executive director of Wounded Warriors Canada, said the new benefits under Bill C-58 would go to just 1% of all severely disabled vets and Sean Bruyea, veteran advocate, has expressed similar concerns.

Injured and disabled vets should not have to fight their own government in court for the compensation and care they deserve, but sadly, this has become all too common under the current government.

If the Conservatives are serious about improving the care of our veterans, they should stop fighting those veterans in court and recognize our historic covenant.

Today, New Democrats are calling upon the government to restore our country's relationship with the veterans to one that is based upon respect rather than neglect.

Instead of including provisions to assist veterans in an omnibus budget bill—a cynical attempt to force opposition parties that support the measures for veterans to vote against them—the Conservatives should recognize the historic covenant that we share with veterans and honour it with decisive action.

I would like to speak, now, about the proud history of military service in London, Ontario.

I cherish the relationship I have been able to foster with the veterans in my community who have served us so well over the years. Their participation in our community enriches all of us. They support hospitals, young athletes, the homeless, the wounded, and the forgotten. I feel very privileged to stand with our veterans in the community.

Perhaps members have heard of the proposed demolition of many buildings at Wolseley Barracks, including the historic officers' mess. Bob Marshall, president of the Duchess of Kent Legion, would like to see the officers' mess repurposed as the Legion's new home, rather than demolition.

This is a reasonable proposal, a win for the Legion, a win for Wolseley Barracks, and a win for the community. I am fully behind it. I hope that the Minister of Defence has had time to consider this proposal adequately and that he will support it.

I would also like to remind the House that, when in opposition, the Conservatives promised they would make significant veteran reforms. Sadly, after nearly a decade in office, they have done little to address the gaping holes in the services offered Canadian veterans and their families. In fact, they have gone so far as to challenge the existence of our sacred covenant with those veterans.

The Conservatives have forgotten our veterans and the contribution of modern-day Canadian Forces veterans and RCMP who served in peacekeeping around the world. That is absolutely unacceptable. Canadians are passionate and proud in our gratitude for our veterans.

During Remembrance Week and beyond, Canadians choose to honour the men and women who gave us a strong and free country. It is long past time for our federal government to likewise honour all veterans, both past and present, by serving their needs.

Monuments and parades are lovely, but they are cold comfort to the veterans and families who are suffering neglect.

It is time to mean what we say when we repeat the promise to remember. It must be accompanied by real action. That is what New Democrats are promising and proposing today with this motion

The NDP is the only party with a comprehensive veterans policy that we intend to implement when we become the government of this great country.

I am proud to support today's motion. I hope everyone in this House will do so also.

[Petitions, May 11th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I too have a petition that calls upon the Government of Canada to end the tax on menstrual hygiene products, because they are essential products. They are not a luxury, and it creates difficulty for many women and girls in this country.

The petitioners are calling on the government to end the GST on feminine hygiene products.

[Employment Insurance, May 11th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, what about the 3,000? The Conservatives always have money for their wealthy friends, but nothing for Canadians in need.

The Conservatives just do not seem able to grasp that the money in the EI account does not belong to them; it belongs to Canadians. Fewer than four in ten unemployed Canadians get EI benefits, yet instead of improving access, the Conservatives are raiding the account to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy.

Why are the Conservatives giving the rich the benefits they do not need and leaving unemployed Canadians to fend for themselves, 3,000 of them?

[Employment Insurance, May 11th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, Carissa Kasbohm became seriously ill shortly after she gave birth to her son in 2010. At a time when she really needed support, the government denied her sick benefit claim.

Some women who were unjustly denied benefits by the government have since received payment, but more than 3,000 of them have been forced to go to court to try to get justice for the unfairness perpetrated by the government.

Why are the Conservatives refusing to give women like Carissa Kasbohm the benefits they paid for, the benefits they need to support their families?

[Business of Supply, May 8th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, we know that essential products that are shipped to the north are incredibly expensive.

In response to some of the Pad Parties that have been held across Ontario, I purchased some feminine hygiene products and took them to my local shelter and they were horrendously expensive. If they are horrendously expensive in southern Ontario, I cannot imagine how inaccessible they would be in the north.

We come back to the dignity of women. Women deserve to have equity and these products.

[Business of Supply, May 8th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague is absolutely correct. Some provinces such as Ontario, Manitoba, Alberta, British Columbia and the Territories, have indeed removed sales tax from feminine hygiene products. I would say very clearly to the government that if provinces can do that and the sky does not fall, then this federal Parliament can indeed remove what is essentially an unfair tax.

I would also note that by virtue of the fact that in a very short time, I received 10,000 signatures and 72,000, some online, it would suggest that women are fed up. They are angry and they want to be taken seriously. They do not want to be dismissed. They want equity and this is a good first step.

[Business of Supply, May 8th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, folks have to understand that when the GST was brought in in 1990, there was a decision made that necessities of life would not be taxed and therefore made more accessible to people. Among those things were diapers, incontinence products, testing kits and ironically, as I mentioned in my speech, cocktail cherries, wedding cakes and chocolate chips.

What people were thinking at the time is sometimes a mystery, but after 25 years there is an opportunity and there has been previously, to correct the injustice. Feminine hygiene products are a part of women's reproductive health. They are an absolute necessity. Young women and girls cannot go to school, to work or cannot operate in society without proper products like this. So the tax must be removed.

[Business of Supply, May 8th, 2015]

moved:

That, in the opinion of the House, the government should remove the GST from feminine hygiene products.

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel.

I am honoured to rise in the House today to introduce our New Democrat opposition day motion, which states:

That, in the opinion of the House, the government should remove the GST from feminine hygiene products.

While we have come a long way with regard to gender equity in Canada, we still have far to go. Let me first speak of the victories.

Women in Canada are considered persons under the law, with equal access to all the rights and privileges of men in Canadian society. Since the election of Sister Agnes Macphail to the House in 1921, we have seen the proportion of female members of Parliament steadily rise. On Tuesday this week, the province of Alberta made history, not just for electing its first NDP majority government with Premier-elect Rachel Notley at the helm, but for electing the most women in any government in Canadian history.

The Royal Commission on the Status of Women in Canada, the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, of which Canada was a proud signatory, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, along with the Constitution and the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action are all components of the road map to sexual equality in Canada that stipulated that all of the costs of physical and social reproduction, most of which constitutes the unpaid work of women raising a family, caring for frail and elderly family members and housework, should be shared among all members of society.

At this point I will turn from speaking about victories to speaking about the challenges.

Canada has not fared so well in the area of gender equity. Placing a discriminatory tax on products that are used exclusively by women, girls and transgendered people is unfair. Allowing the tax to continue for 25 years is inexplicable. This country, which, in the 1990s, could boast about being on the top of the international heap with regard to gender equity using United Nations gender equality indicators, has now slipped to number 19 on the world stage.

Federal tax policies are structured such that the ratio of profit between women and men is 60:40 or less. In other words, federal tax policy favours those with a higher income and since men, by and large, earn higher incomes than women, men are advantaged and women are disadvantaged under current taxation regimes. Women, on average, make only 78% of the wages enjoyed by men for doing work of equal value. The same reality of inequities touches on almost every part of women's experience in this country.

Even though reproductive rights have been enshrined in Canadian law, women must continue to fight to have access to the safe and timely abortions that should be guaranteed in every hospital in every province. Consequently, the reproductive health of women is compromised. We need to be very concerned about that reality, just as we as a country bear the shameful record of thousands of missing and murdered aboriginal women. Violence against aboriginal women, indeed, all women and all people, should never be tolerated or dismissed.

While first nations communities and their supporters continue to call repeatedly and loudly for an inquiry into the systemic causes of this tragedy, the government refuses to acknowledge the problem. Regressive policies such as those that increase the age of eligibility for OAS and GIS from 65 to 67, no seniors strategy at all, and the lack of an affordable, accessible and universal child care program affect women most acutely.

A New Democrat federal government in 2015 would restore the age of eligibility for OAS and GIS to 65, implement a federal minimum wage of $15 per hour, implement a universal child care program accessible to all Canadians at $15 a day, implement a seniors strategy, and call an inquiry into missing and murdered indigenous women. While I have no doubt that there are many hurdles yet to face on the road to complete gender equity in Canada, I have hope for that future.

There is one way that we in the House can correct gender injustice right here, right now. Today we have the opportunity to make a minor adjustment to the Excise Tax Act that would remove the GST from feminine hygiene products.

Allow me to speak about something the government has deemed a luxury: menstruation. If anyone can believe it, feminine hygiene products actually fall under the category of luxury items in the Excise Tax Act and are, therefore, subject to the federal goods and services tax. This is just the reality.

As a woman, I think I can call myself an expert on this topic, and while I have heard menstruation described in many ways, the curse, the crimson tide, a visit from auntie flow, monthlies, feeling delicate or the big red monster, I have never heard it described as a luxury.

Why then are feminine hygiene products, pads and tampons, treated as luxury items under the Excise Tax Act? Why are women discriminated against while this tax leaves such things as wedding cakes, chocolate chips, cocktail cherries and Viagra exempt?

Taxing female hygiene products amounts to gender discrimination. It is clear and simple. With this motion, we have the opportunity today to rectify that. This motion calls on the government to remove the GST from feminine hygiene products, to simply remove the tax. As often happens when legislation is drafted quickly or thoughtlessly without consultation or debate, or announced outside this chamber in places such as Davos, it is the people who can least afford to bear the brunt of the inequity who suffer the most because of it.

Taxing feminine hygiene products is symbolic of the systemic inequality Canadian women face in all areas of life, especially women in poverty.

I would like to thank Jill Piebiak, Kathleen Fraser and the organizers of the Canadian Menstruators group for initiating the awareness campaign on change.org that has resulted in over 10,000 signatures on a paper petition to this House and over 72,000 online signatures in support of this initiative.

I am so encouraged by the organizing and mobilizing efforts of these young feminist activists. As a result of their efforts, my office has received countless emails and calls of support. I have heard from women who cannot afford feminine hygiene products and feel compelled to stay home during their periods. I have heard from students who need to count and parcel out their pads and tampons to make sure they last the month.

I have heard from women's shelters and food banks that keep a steady supply of feminine hygiene products on hand for women who cannot afford them once they have paid the rent and fed the kids. The mobilizing effort of the Canadian Menstruators group has also resulted in the organization of pad parties where donations for women's shelters are collected along with petition signatures.

The fact of the matter is that these items are essential. Women do not and cannot choose to have a period. Taxing feminine hygiene products is blatant gender discrimination. It is an injustice that can be quite simply rectified. This House has the power to amend the Excise Tax Act and deem feminine hygiene products as essential, thereby removing the tax.

Even with the recent reduction in the GST, people with periods are still paying unfairly into the system. According to Statistics Canada it is estimated that in 2014 approximately 18,000 Canadian women between the ages of 12 and 49 spent about $520 million on menstrual hygiene products.

This amounts to approximately $37 million dollars in government sales taxes collected from women. It just makes me see red. It may seem small but a tax on tampons, pads, panty liners, menstrual cups and alternatives can add up quickly when combined with the systemic challenges faced by many women, trans people, gender-queer people and other menstruators in terms of income, housing and economic stability.

My predecessor in this initiative, the former member of Parliament for Winnipeg Centre, Judy Wasylycia-Leis said:

The GST on tampons and sanitary napkins amounts to gender based taxation. The taxing of essential and necessary products used exclusively by women is unfair and discriminatory. It unfairly disadvantages women financially, solely because of our reproductive role. The bill...would be of particular value to lower income women.

This motion allows us to correct the injustice, here and now, today. Remove the tax and make life more equitable and affordable for Canadian women. We can do this, and after we do, feminists young and old, male and female and otherwise identifying, can move on to the next challenge in achieving a Canada that is equitable, accessible and fair, and where not one of us is left behind.

[Petitions, May 7th, 2015]

Mr. Speaker, I have a petition that is calling upon the Government of Canada to cease taxation on menstrual hygiene products. The paying of this tax contributes to the financial burden on Canadian households, particularly of women who are struggling financially. It is an essential product and we and the undersigned want the Government of Canada to extend a 0% GST rate to these important products.