Jean Crowder

[Supply, November 16th, 2004]

Mr. Chair, earlier the minister referred to the early childhood development initiative and talked about the collective responsibility and yet the federal government continues to funnel funds to provincial governments that then do not follow up on their commitments. In the early development initiative framework agreement it talked about accountability from the provinces and yet we are continuing to send money to British Columbia without it having any accountability on how it spends the money.

If we are sorting out these agreements, how are we going to hold provinces accountable, or is this just federal money thrown down the tubes?

[Supply, November 16th, 2004]

Mr. Chair, I come from a riding that has the second largest first nations population in British Columbia. When I hear the minister talking about $1 million spread over four years for domestic violence, Canada has a significant first nations population and $1 million over four years is $250,000 a year. With all respect, that will not even begin to tackle the problems that we are seeing in first nations communities.

Where is the commitment to some long term, stable funding for first nations communities in dealing with the violence and the dismal conditions on first nations reserves?

[Supply, November 16th, 2004]

Mr. Chair, it is time for the government to walk the talk. If Status of Women Canada is truly a priority for the government, why will it not commit to removing it from the Department of Canadian Heritage and make it a stand alone federal government department? Status of Women Canada has been bounced from one area to another and it is time it had a home of its own.

[Supply, November 16th, 2004]

Mr. Chair, I come from British Columbia and when we talk about child care, what we have seen over the last three years, despite the framework and the early development initiative, is that child care spaces in British Columbia have been seriously reduced because of a lack of commitment by the federal and provincial governments.

Also listed as priorities for the department are eliminating systemic violence against women and children and advancing women's human rights.

I have met with national native women's organizations that cannot operate because of federal funding limits and provincial cuts. The minister is well aware, as noted earlier, of the “Stolen Sisters” report by Amnesty International, which outlines our country's failure to protect indigenous women in Canada from violence.

Why after only three years did Heritage Canada cut core funding from the aboriginal women's programs to these essential organizations?

[Supply, November 16th, 2004]

Mr. Chair, I would like to remind the minister that the initiative on the status of women was actually suggested by the NDP and supported by the opposition parties before the Liberals agreed to it.

One of the priorities of the Department of Status of Women is to improve women's economic autonomy and well-being.

The reality is that Statistics Canada reports that one in five Canadian women live in a low income situation. On average a woman earns 70¢ to 80¢ for every dollar a man earns, depending on which statistics are used. More than 72% of part time workers are women.

Wage inequity follows women for life. The Canada pension plan is based on an individual's earning history and many women retire into poverty. The average Canada pension benefit currently paid to women is $285 per month. For men it is $410 per month. This does not sound like progress.

Would the minister comment on funding for the department? Does she feel that the money allocated to status of women is appropriate given the enormous challenges faced by Canadian women on a daily basis just to earn a living? How does she plan to increase the resources to address the realities of women living in Canada?

[Supply, November 16th, 2004]

Mr. Chair, with all due respect to the minister, I can understand it certainly takes a long time to institute longer term institutional change. However, the plan was in 1995, which was nine years ago. The reality is that for example in the Employment Insurance Act changes made to employment insurance discriminated against women. One-third of pregnant women are not eligible for maternity or parental leave. It is more difficult to qualify for benefits and the benefit period is shorter. Clearly, this legislation would have benefited from a thorough gender analysis.

When the minister talks about long term strategy, I would again ask the minister when will other departments be subject to a mandate of gender based analysis?

[Supply, November 16th, 2004]

Mr. Chair, at the Standing Committee on the Status of Women, officials from the department were very clear that through the federal government plan for gender equality which was adopted in 1995, the government has made some inroads with respect to gender based analysis. The Department of Citizenship and Immigration is an example of that.

However, it is still not the business of government on a day to day basis. A perfect example of this are the changes to employment insurance which were made in 1996. Were the changes made to the Employment Insurance Act subject to gender based analysis and if not, why not?

[Supply, November 16th, 2004]

Mr. Chair, I will be primarily focussing on questions for the Minister responsible for Status of Women which falls under the Department of Canadian Heritage.

According to the documents from the department, Status of Women Canada works to provide Canadians with strengthened and more equitable public policies by conducting gender based analysis in promoting its applications throughout the federal government.

I asked this question of officials who appeared before the Standing Committee on the Status of Women earlier today and I would like to ask the minister this as well. Why does gender based analysis not appear as a horizontal initiative in the estimates from the Treasury Board?

[Supply, November 16th, 2004]

Mr. Chair, no, I will not be sharing my time.

[Right Hon. Ellen Fairclough, November 16th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, at a meeting of Equal Voice this morning the achievements of Ellen Fairclough were recognized.

When Mrs. Fairclough died this week many younger women may not have recognized her name but Ellen Fairclough blazed a trail for women in this House.

She was called Hamilton's real first lady, the first woman to represent Hamilton in Ottawa, the first woman cabinet minister and the first woman to head Hamilton's Hydroelectric Commission. She fought to prevent discrimination in the Unemployment Insurance Act and was the first woman to be acting prime minister of Canada for two weeks in 1958 when she was the most senior cabinet minister in Ottawa.

However she did more. Mrs. Fairclough fought for equal pay for women, for extending the right to vote for natives and for ending an immigration policy that favoured whites.

I join with my colleagues, particularly the member for Hamilton Centre, in praising the fine work of Ellen Fairclough.