Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet

[Housing, March 7th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, over one-third of the women who go to shelters go there repeatedly, and too many women must suffer violence and accept dangerous living conditions to avoid becoming homeless. Why are the Conservatives doing nothing to help more than one million Canadian women—and their families—who do not have access to affordable housing?

[Housing, March 7th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, HRSDC estimates that over one million households in Canada do not have enough money to cover housing costs, and for women the risks of housing insecurity and homelessness are higher than they are for men. Forty percent of single-parent families headed by women are living in a precarious housing situation.

When will the Conservatives start working with the New Democrats to find a solution to the lack of affordable housing in Canada?

[Homelessness Partnering Strategy, March 4th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, the federal HPS, in collaboration with Canada's various regions, helps prevent and fight homelessness.

A recent study showed that in the province of Quebec alone, over 70,000 people have benefited recently from this financial support. In Quebec City, the three new stakeholders in the Café rencontre du centre-ville have fed, counselled and supported 3,000 people. In Montreal, the Anonyme mobile intervention unit has provided education and prevention services to 1,000 men and 500 women, including a number of youths.

In my own riding of Hochelaga, the CAP Saint-Barnabé alone has renovated a rooming house for women and welcomed, fed and supported 1,800 people, and it is about to open a respite centre for homeless men and prostitutes.

The HPS is the only program to fund facilities. Its survival and enhancement are essential. The government must commit to this in its next budget.

[Criminal Code, March 1st, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I would like to thank the member for Ahuntsic for introducing this bill. Although it requires a few amendments from a constitutional point of view, it is a step in the right direction in terms of the fight against exploitation and human trafficking. I believe that the will to consider it in greater depth in committee should provide an opportunity for unity in this Parliament.

Let us remember that, just like arms trafficking and drug trafficking, human trafficking is highly lucrative. In 2005, the United Nations estimated the total market value of human trafficking at $32 billion. It would be foolish to think that Canada is exempt from this kind of vile exploitation.

Its clandestine nature makes it difficult to find out exactly how many people are victims of trafficking and how it happens. However, we do know that the majority of victims are women and children. Victims of human trafficking are linked primarily by factors such as poverty and ethnocultural origin. Social and economic vulnerability and the lack of strong support networks make the traffickers’ lives easier. They find it all too easy to lure their victims using manipulation, threats and violence. With increasing unemployment among young people and the rise in the cost of living, we can foresee unfortunately that a number of young Canadian women will be easily recruited by criminal organizations that will force them into the sex trade.

In Canada, aboriginal women are overrepresented among victims of trafficking. In certain areas, they may account for up to 90% of women who are trafficked for sexual purposes, although they make up only 3% to 5% of the Canadian population. I am saddened to see the cuts made by this government to the budgets for native women’s groups. It is essential that they play an active role in the fight against trafficking of young aboriginal women. I hope the government will correct the situation.

Considering that the impact of our colonial past on aboriginal peoples is still strong, Canada’s attitude to the damaging reports by the United Nations is shameful. It is high time that this Parliament took real action to improve living conditions on reserves. They are the primary reason for the trafficking of aboriginal women, who are looking for an escape by any means possible from the conditions on reserves shaped by the contempt of successive Canadian governments.

Canada is also affected by international trafficking. Although it is not the subject matter of this bill, I cannot ignore the systemic barriers to the fight against international human trafficking generated by our immigration system. With the tightening of immigration criteria, more people are turning to human smugglers or so-called agencies offering so-called migration services, and migrant women are undoubtedly more vulnerable to the traps set by organized crime. Given their justifiable fear of being sent back to their native country, migrant women who are the victims of trafficking find themselves all the more enslaved by those who exploit them.

Our immigration system must be revised to protect potential victims of human trafficking so they will testify against the persons who traffic them. On that point, a report by the Institut de recherches et d'études féministes at UQAM recommends that Citizenship and Immigration Canada work with police services to protecting victims. The researchers also recommend that a special category of refugees be created for victims of human trafficking.

I am shocked to see how commonplace this phenomenon has become. Imagine my surprise when I learned that Montreal was a hotbed of sex tourism. We need only glance through the classified ads in any newspaper to see that they are full of possible sex trafficking dens. The first individual convicted of human trafficking in Canada was prostituting teenagers through advertisements on Internet sites, in full view of the entire world.

Sexual exploitation is often connected to organized crime, and too often takes advantage of the vulnerability of women and girls who want to escape from hardship and earn substantial incomes. In Canada, the stakes are estimated to be between $120 million and $400 million U.S. per year. A single woman forced into prostitution by a criminal organization in Quebec brings in around $1,000 a day for the organization, or at least $250,000 a year. I am sure that this is not the kind of economic policy this government wants to encourage.

I think that passing this bill at second reading will give us an opportunity to come to a strong consensus in the House because we all want to help and protect the victims of human trafficking. We will have to build on this bill with a solid action plan that combines human, police, electronic and materiel resources so we can tackle the problem at its root, help the victims and support the work of law enforcement agencies.

I have spoken several times in the House about the drug-related prostitution that afflicts my riding. The proposed solutions are very controversial, but we all agree that we must protect women forced into prostitution. Amendments to the Criminal Code of Canada are important, and the institutional and community resources that provide front-line services to these women are essential tools in combating exploitation.

Indeed, the launch, in the coming months, of the community organization Dopamine in Hochelaga's red light district, and the opening of a respite care centre for prostitutes will allow us to take concrete action. These initiatives are the first cornerstones of a neighbourhood strategy to help people dealing with drug-related prostitution, homelessness and substance abuse. I want to say that this was made possible thanks to the federal government's commitment through an investment under the homelessness partnering strategy, the HPS. Therefore, I am taking this opportunity to encourage government members to renew, in the upcoming budget, this HPS initiative, which is a critical program for many communities in Canada, including mine.

I also want to mention the tremendous work done by stakeholders from many organizations in my riding, including CAP St-Barnabé, Stella, Anonyme, Dopamine, the Concertation des luttes contre l'exploitation sexuelle, Tandem Hochelaga—Maisonneuve, the CSSS Lucille-Teasdale, and the SPVM community police station No. 23. These stakeholders, who work every day with Hochelaga's prostitutes, deserve to be thanked personally.

Despite the hard work of police and community organizations, improving women's socio-economic conditions is one of the most effective way to fight commercial sexual exploitation by unscrupulous individuals.

It is absurd that today women still only earn a portion of men's average salary, that they do not have access systematically to the EI program like young people, that they are overrepresented across the country among minimum wage earners, and that a majority of single parent families are headed by women and are significantly poorer partly because of the serious lack of affordable rental and social housing units.

Bill C-400, introduced by the hon. member for Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, offered a glimmer of light at the end of the tunnel, but the Conservatives chose to ignore this reality. The recent EI reform directly hits people who earn less money or who work part-time. Again, that group includes a lot of women.

As we approach International Women's Day, which is exactly in one week, I call for greater mobilization in this House to pass this bill. Together, we have the power to make it possible to live in a world where exploitation and trafficking in persons, including many women and children, will become a thing of the past. Let us not be afraid to make Canada again a champion of human rights protection.

[Not Criminally Responsible Reform Act, March 1st, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I gather the Liberals will oppose the bill. Since the Conservatives have a majority, however, it will surely pass at second reading.

I would like the Liberal member to describe the amendments his party would like to include in the bill in committee.

[Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, March 1st, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives have so blurred the line between politics and public services that they do not even know where it is anymore. A month ago, they posted partisan attacks on CIDA's website, breaking Treasury Board rules. Now they are at it again. The Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation commented publicly on opposition bills.

Will the government stop using public officials as Conservative Party agents? Will they let public servants work in peace?

[Business of Supply, February 5th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier, in my riding, there are bus drivers and people who work in the tourist industry. There is the Olympic Stadium and the Botanical Gardens. There are a lot of schools and people working in school cafeterias. These people need their income. Obviously, there are no cafeterias open in schools in the summer because the schools are closed. Employees of these cafeterias will be forced to reapply, year after year, for employment insurance.

Hochelaga is not a suburb for the wealthy. Residents of this neighbourhood are seeing their incomes drop, and they will not have enough money to make ends meet.

[Business of Supply, February 5th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I am particularly concerned about this issue because I myself fall into this category.

In times gone by, there were programs in the employment insurance system to train older workers and workers in general. There are fewer and fewer training programs.

In addition to making changes that have damaged the employment insurance system, the government is allocating less money to training programs. In my opinion, it should be doing the opposite. One of the reasons why it is no longer possible to provide as much training is that governments have, too often, dipped into the employment insurance fund. The money that belonged to workers and business people has disappeared.

[Business of Supply, February 5th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, there is a basic principle that the Conservatives do not seem to understand.

First, not everyone can find full-time work. Second, when someone is looking for part-time work, it is sometimes difficult to find anything else.

Let us take the example of the museum where I worked for a long time. Of about 20 guides, 17 worked part-time. It was not because they did not want full-time work, but because full-time work was not available for 20 guides because the work depended on youth visits. So they worked on call.

These guides received 35 hours of training. When new guides are hired, they must undergo the 35 hours of training. That costs the employer a lot. When the guide does not work—when the young people do not visit, for example—the guide must resort to employment insurance to make ends meet. So the guide becomes a frequent claimant and will be penalized by being required to accept another job at 70%—

[Business of Supply, February 5th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with my colleague, the member for Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine.

Today I rise in the House to speak in support of the motion tabled by my colleague from Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, who is the NDP employment insurance critic.

A number of my colleagues representing different parts of Quebec and Canada will be speaking to this motion today. I would like to join them today in underscoring the devastating effects of the Conservative government’s EI reforms on the Montreal area.

Since the cuts announced by the Conservatives took effect last month, I have received hundreds of comments from my constituents in Hochelaga. They deplore these measures that jeopardize the welfare of their community, which has already been hard hit by unemployment and announcements of plant closures.

Over the next two years, hundreds more well-paying jobs will be lost, especially when the Mabe plant is shuttered.

What does the minister intend to tell these specialized, well-paid workers in East Montreal? To leave Montreal for a job in Fort McMurray? To accept a job at Tim Hortons?

The changes to the Employment Insurance Act fail to take into account the realities of regional labour markets and seasonal industries and adversely affect workers and communities.

Although there are not as many such workers in my riding as there are in eastern and northern Quebec ridings, Hochelaga has its share of bus drivers, substitute teachers, construction workers, daycare workers and botanical garden employees who work seasonally and who, as frequent EI claimants, will be affected by the Conservative reforms.

Montreal is also home to a large number of tourism industry and museum workers. I know something about this. They will be labelled frequent EI claimants and suffer the resulting consequences.

These workers, who typically claimed three times as many EI benefits and received these benefits for more than 60 weeks over the past five years, will have to look for similar work that pays 80% of their previous wage. Once they have received EI benefits for six weeks, they will have to accept any job for which they are qualified and that pays 70% of their previous wage.

Even though the reforms are mostly aimed at frequent claimants, all workers will be affected.

By forcing all unemployed persons to accept a lower-paying job than their previous one, the government is putting downward pressure on wages, something that will adversely affect the country’s economy as a whole. By forcing unemployed workers to accept jobs far from home, the Conservatives are asking them to choose between travelling a long way to work or losing their benefits.

Asking a person who is unemployed and who cannot afford a car to buy a vehicle in order to travel to a job a long way from home and to accept a pay cut to boot defies logic.

The real problem is that there are not enough jobs.

As recently as yesterday, in response to a question from my colleague from Parkdale—High Park about the widening social inequality gap and our government’s poor record on fighting poverty, the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development had this to say:

...the best way to fight poverty is to create jobs and to have skilled people fill these jobs.

Government ministers should really avoid making statements of this nature just to hide their own incompetence. In actual fact, 300,000 more people in Canada are out of work today than during the 2008 recession.

The Conservatives would have us believe that they have created countless new jobs, but the facts speak for themselves. Today, there are over 1.4 million unemployed Canadians for approximately 270,000 available jobs, or five unemployed workers for every available job.

Overall, 14.1% of Canadians between the ages of 15 and 25 are unemployed. Currently, only four out of every ten unemployed workers receive EI benefits. The numbers are at a historic low. The situation is worse than it was under the Mulroney, Chrétien and Martin governments, the uncontested champions when it came to wreaking havoc on the EI system and plundering the EI fund. The situation is truly unacceptable.

Whatever the minister would have us believe about the changes introduced by the Conservatives in their mammoth bill, we need to be clear about one thing: tightening EI eligibility rules and forcing workers to accept any job, be it one in another geographical area or one that pays less than their previous wage, is what she calls EI reform.

As if that were not enough, we learned just last Friday, February 1, that Service Canada inspectors must now meet EI cost-saving quotas.

Last Friday, I put a question to the Minister of Human Resources in the House and reminded her that Service Canada employees are supposed to help claimants, not track them like criminals. All the minister had to say in response to my question was this:

...as for the EI system, it is very important to note that, once again, the NDP is supporting the bad guys.

So then, if I understood the minister correctly, when the NDP asks her to stop treating unemployed workers like criminals and characterizing them as fraudsters in order to find savings at their expense and at the expense of their families by giving Service Canada inspectors quotas to meet, the only response she has is that the NDP is supporting the bad guys.

I would therefore like to remind the minister at this time that the NDP will always be there to defend Canadian families and to oppose Conservative policies that, by destroying the country’s social safety net, hurt more people than they help.

The minister’s response shows the arrogance of the Conservatives and the government’s lack of respect for the unemployed and for workers. Their punitive reforms clearly reflect the negative, stereotypical view the Conservatives have of EI recipients.

And there is more. When asked by reporters about the fraud penalty quotas given to Service Canada inspectors, the minister replied that there were no quotas as such, but rather targets. Does anyone here in the House really see a difference between a quota and a cost-saving target? I thought about this all weekend long and I really do not see any difference. It is merely a question of semantics.

Another worrisome trend that we have observed with this government is the off-loading of costs onto the provinces. Even though the federal government is responsible for employment insurance, last-resort compensation programs fall under provincial jurisdiction.

So what happens when the federal government restricts EI eligibility by imposing unreasonable conditions on EI recipients who want to keep their benefits and by giving Service Canada inspectors quotas to meet? Well, the provinces ultimately end up having to pick up the tab.

After its omnibus bill on Criminal Code reform and its refusal to pledge to renew long-term agreements for social housing, the government is now refusing to compensate people for the unemployment it has created, sticking the provinces with the bill.

I cannot say it enough: employment insurance is insurance, and workers must be able to turn to it if they lose their jobs. It is a social safety net that workers and companies have paid into. The money in the employment insurance fund is not the government's money.

I encourage all members of the House to vote in favour of the motion of my colleague from Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, and I hope the government will finally listen to reason regarding its management of this file. Otherwise, the NDP will cancel these callous reforms imposed by the Conservative government when it leaves the Conservatives unemployed in 2015.