Maria Minna

[Points of Order, February 25th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, during question period the Minister of Justice referred to my question as having been referred to the courts. With all due respect, I was not referring to the court challenges program although it was mentioned. My question had to do with the fact that not only have the advocacy programs for women been cut, but we continue not to have them. The answer was totally inappropriate.

[Status of Women, February 25th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member did not answer the question.

We have no issue with the CDA receiving funding. We have a problem with the hypocrisy of the government, however.

The government cut the court challenges program, telling Canadians it did not make sense to fund an organization that challenged the federal government. However, it has no problem giving money to organizations that agree with everything the Conservative government says.

When will the Conservatives come clean and admit that they have a double standard?

[Status of Women, February 25th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, the government keeps trying to defend cutting women's advocacy groups, and Canadian women are noticing. Yet the Conference of Defence Associations, the oldest and most influential advocacy group in Canada's defence community, receives $500,000 in funding from the government.

Why is it that defence advocacy groups that get government contracts receive so much attention when women's advocacy groups fighting for women's rights get the door slammed in their faces?

[Status of Women, February 8th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the chairperson of the Standing Committee on the Status of Women.

Does the chairperson plan an early meeting of the committee to consider how the Minister of Canadian Heritage, Status of Women and Official Languages misled the committee this week during her appearance regarding equality?

[Status of Women, February 7th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I find it appalling that the member who spoke for the government said that this time could be used for other important issues, as if this is not important. The other comment she made was that the Conservatives would not fund one opinion over another. The last time I looked, I thought that women's rights were human rights and not subject to opinion. They are not a matter of opinion; they are a matter of fact.

I will present a scenario. Two years ago, the Conservative government removed equality from the Status of Women program and shut down 12 of 16 offices.

After two years of aggressive lobbying from all opposition parties in the House of Commons, all provincial Status of Women ministers across this country, all women's organizations in the country and after advocacy organizations, like Women and the Law, were forced to shut their doors, and after they shut down the women's rights and then the voices of women in this country, the Conservatives came out with the word again and put it somewhere. Why? Because we are coming to an election soon, after all, and the Conservatives want to be perceived as moderate. They are trying to fool women.

Yesterday they put the word “equality” in the cover page and not actually in the program mandate. Because my colleague and I issued a press release and were pretty aggressive on that, today we have a different version. The Conservatives have now put “equality” in the program mandate but the criteria for the funding with respect to research and advocacy on behalf of women is still not there. They are still not eligible for funding and regional offices are still shut down.

This shows real contempt for Canadian women on the part of the Conservative government in my view. The Conservatives are playing a shell game with the women of this country, because at the core of the Conservatives they really do not believe in women's equality. I do not believe so after what I have seen.

All the projects funded may help the individual woman who is lucky enough to access some of those programs the Conservatives are funding that deal with their specific problem individually, whether it be access to training or something else, but it will not change the conditions, the policies and the environmental culture that caused that problem in the first place. It will most certainly not help the thousands of Canadian women who are affected by the systemic barriers to services or the law.

For example, women in this country cannot access civil law because legal aid funds do not cover that and yet their spouse, who may have assaulted them, can access legal aid assistance under the Criminal Code, while the woman cannot access it because it is civil. That is pretty sad.

Those are the kinds of injustices for which those organizations work and fight. It is the research on policies and laws that discriminate against women that was done by women's organizations and then their lobby that really gave women their voice, which then resulted in changes by government, things like changing the assault of women. Police never charged the person who assaulted when they went to a home. The woman had to charge the person. Now it is the police who must charge the person who assaults.

Parental leave, rape shield law, property rights at time of divorce, all of these things were done because women had voices through organizations that did research and then helped them to lobby for those things.

The Conservatives are playing, as I said, a disgusting shell game because of a possible election coming up. They do not truly believe in any of this. Otherwise this would not be happening at the eleventh hour and they would have done it properly and made the proper changes.

Another example is that the Conservatives initially took out the word “political”. Now they have inserted another word that says “democratic”. However, it means very little. It is attached to nothing. Women's organizations will still remain shut down. Advocacy on their behalf will remain shut down as well. Pay equity will still remain a dream for women. The United Nations recommendations to give women more equal rights will still not be a reality and will not mean anything.

I have been told that the government cannot fund women's organizations that lobby and yet it can give $500,000 to the Canadian Conference of Defence Associations, which is a lobby organization for defence contracts. We cannot give money to women's organizations to lobby for women's rights in this country. How sad is that?

The government has made women voiceless, just like it has done with its backbench members who cannot say anything. Women in Canada are not allowed to be advocates.

Does the government really think Canadian women are stupid? The minister should be ashamed of herself and either show respect for Canadian women or resign. It is quite obvious she has absolutely no influence over the Prime Minister in this area of policy.

On top of all this, the Conservatives have shut down the court challenges program, which allowed women to challenge government laws on policies that assisted women to attain their rights. This was a very valuable tool for women and it remains shut down. This again shows to me that this work means nothing, otherwise the government would have reinstated the court challenges program which gave women the strength and power to access their rights.

Unless people have money in this country, they cannot access their charter rights. The government has left it up to only those men or women who have money. No one else can access their charter rights.

Equality is not a word that should be thrown around lightly without substance behind it. Many people are struggling all over the world to fight for their equality and many are dying for it. We in this House have been talking about Afghanistan. Our soldiers have given their lives in Afghanistan to assist women, in part, to regain their rights in Afghanistan and yet the government turns around and plays charades in its shameful games with Canadian women's rights, human rights. I find that appalling and embarrassing as a Canadian. I cannot believe that the Conservatives would do that.

We are lucky to live in a country that prides itself on multiculturalism, compassion and goodwill toward one another but we are not perfect. We have a history of issues and problems in areas marked with violence. We are learning from that but we have a great deal more to learn. We should be condemned for the way we treat women and for the way we treat our aboriginal women in particular.

In a time when we should be moving forward and correcting these past wrongs, what does the government do? First, it cancels good programs and then, because it thinks it will go to the electorate and the polls indicate that women may not vote for the Conservatives, they put a word back in that means absolutely nothing.

By eliminating the early learning and child care agreements that we had established across this country, by eliminating the Kelowna accord, a real plan to help eradicate poverty among first nations communities and by closing 12 out of 16 Status of Women offices across this country, the government is telling women too bad, so sad. The Conservatives claim it is not their problem if women do not have child care and cannot go to work. They are saying that they should stay on welfare.

I met with rural women this summer and their major problem is that they do not have access to government services in their region. Many of them do not have access to computers, transportation and many other services. The government is telling these women to figure out a way to look after the problem themselves because it is not its problem.

This is a sad day in our country. Canada has shown the way around the world in many different ways through our international development agency, as I know from my time there. We have advocated for women's equality. We are ensuring that other governments in the world, like South Africa, have women's equality in its constitution. Africa actually has a champion for all women's policies. We have been aggressive and strong around the world, and then we do not even do it in our own home. It is a disgrace.

[Status of Women, February 7th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I am completely shocked that the member representing the government would even suggest that this time could be used for other important issues and that this is wasting time. It indicates very clearly the attitude and the mentality--

[Chinese New Year, February 7th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to offer warm greetings to Canadians across this country who are celebrating the Chinese New Year. I welcome everyone to the Year of the Rat.

The Chinese New Year is the most important of the traditional Chinese holidays, with festivities to ring in spring until the rising of the full moon. It includes customs that date back thousands of years.

This celebration has become an important part of our cultural landscape. It should remind us that the Canada we now have today would not be the same without the role played by Chinese Canadians. This is a time for all Canadians to appreciate all that multiculturalism brings to this nation and to remember that our diversity is our strength.

On behalf of the Liberal Party, I wish everyone a Happy Lunar New Year and may the new year bring health and good fortune to all.

[Manufacturing Industry, February 1st, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, the greater Toronto area is Canada's largest manufacturing region with about 400,000 employees. Recently, plant closures and layoffs have cost the region more than 1,900 jobs a month. The Conservatives' response was laissez-faire, “We do not care”.

The government talks of structural adjustment, but has provided no vision for overcoming the challenges facing our economy and no plan for strengthening our industries. Is it that it is incompetent, or is it, as usual, engaging in petty partisan politics by trying to punish Toronto for not electing any Conservatives in the last election?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, January 28th, 2008]

With regard to sexual harassment in the federal public service including all departments, federal agencies, and crown corporations: (a) what number of sexual harassment cases were reported by women; (b) what number of sexual harassment cases were reported by men; (c) in what percentage of the cases was the accused reprimanded; (d) what steps have been made to raise awareness about sexual harassment in the public service; (e) what department had the highest percentage of sexual harassment cases reported based on the total number of employees; (f) what department had the lowest percentage of sexual harassment cases reported based on the total number of employees; (g) what are the difference in sexual harassment prevention policies between (e) and (f); (h) has the number of sexual harassment cases in the public service increased or decreased in the last ten years; and (i) what was the percentage increase or decrease of ‘(h)’?

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, January 28th, 2008]

With regard to pay equity and the initiatives proposed by the government that include education, specialized mediation assistance, and compliance monitoring: (a) what educational materials on pay equity have been produced; (b) which federal departments, agencies, and crown corporations were such educational materials sent to; (c) what site visits have taken place to further inform the employers, chief compensation executive, compensation analysts, and employee representatives of their statutory obligations; (d) has pay equity training for conciliation or mediation officers taken place and, if so, how many officers underwent training, when did it take place and how long was it; (e) have monitoring visits been conducted throughout the implementation process to reinforce and encourage voluntary compliance and collect information and, if so, how many have occurred and where did they occur; (f) has the Labour Program consulted with key stakeholders to gather their views on the effective implementation of these equal pay measures and, if so, what are the names of the stakeholders consulted and when were they consulted; (g) has the Canadian Human Rights Commission been invited to participate in these consultations; and (h) has the Canadian Human Rights Commission participated in these consultations?