Raymonde Folco

[Business of Supply, October 19th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, it would help us all out if the party opposite would decide who its enemy is. Its enemy is not on this side of the House.

When we reformed that program, which is an excellent program, I was involved in making some slight changes to the formula for how we gave out the money and whom we gave it to.

That being said, the number of students who received bursaries for the summer stayed the same and in fact increased.

[Business of Supply, October 19th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, it is hard to answer that quickly.

It is hard not to try to make people see what the reality and the truth are. I am talking about my experience, in my riding of Laval—Les Îles. I can tell you that the Laval Women's Group is not going to Hawaii or Vancouver or wherever to have a good time. This is a group of women who work hard, day and night. The vast majority of them are volunteers who do everything they can to help people acquire literacy skills.

I think it is an insult to the women to say that they are travelling around the country having a good time. We know perfectly well that these women are volunteering or are paid part-time but working full-time. Without these women, all those people would not be able to read and write and it would be up to this Conservative government to do the job, which in fact it does not want to do.

[Business of Supply, October 19th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I would first like to thank my colleague the member for Yukon for sharing his time with me. I rise today in the House of Commons to give my support to the motion presented by my colleague, the member for Markham—Unionville.

I am sorry that the people on the other side of the House who speak English are now leaving. I believe when someone speaks in French in this House it is just as interesting as when someone speaks in English, especially since we have simultaneous translation.

Canada’s history did not begin yesterday. It was built brick by brick by women and men from every part of the country who fought for the right to equality. Yet, with one stroke of the pen this new Conservative government has wiped out all the gains made as a result of those hard struggles for equality.

The irony in all this is that the government opposite is using women to do this dirty work. The women sign and the men give the orders. Here we are at least 100 years later and women still have to fight for equality in the shadow of the men who continue to exercise the power.

Yesterday, Persons Day was celebrated on Parliament Hill. The reception took place here in the Parliament buildings. The event took the form of an exhibition highlighting women, some better known than others. All those women had their heads severed above the neck, the mouth or the forehead. The message was powerful: women still feel cut off from society. This is what comes of the cuts by this government because as of now, from what we have heard, they are going to do away with recognition of women by the UN, by Canada, and they are going to cut strengthening of equality under the Canadian Charter of rights and Freedoms.

Here is one example among many others: the Canadian Research Institute for the Advancement of Women is a national institute that focuses on research and promotion of equality for women, and that, no doubt, will lose all of its funding of nearly $300,000 because this institute falls into the category of organizations that will no longer be funded by the government, since its mandate includes research and promotion of equality for all women.

Could it be that an $18 million cut from the literacy skills program is considered fat trimming by the government? That is a lot of fat in administrative surplus. Why is it we do not yet have the details of these cuts? Let us be transparent. That is what the opposition had asked us. Is the government afraid Canadians will find out the true ideological agenda of the Conservative government?

While the Conservative government talks about working with businesses to support the integration of newcomers, shortly after it took office in January it put on hold the entire $3.5 billion in funding that the former Liberal government had committed to labour market partnership agreements with the provinces and territories. These cuts were made despite the fact that our agreements had already been signed. These dollars would have expanded apprenticeship programs, literacy essential skills programs, workplace skills development programs and would have improved labour market integration of recent immigrants to Canada.

This will increase the inequality of newcomers by denying them access to apprenticeships and other skills development programs. Despite an apparent lack of skilled immigrants to this country, the Government of Canada has now made $18 million in new cuts to training and literacy.

In addition, it has cut $83 million from public service human resources programs. In my riding, Laval—Les Îles, the Laval Women's Group recently received a letter from this new Conservative government announcing that several million dollars would be cut from funding for literacy programs for 2007. In other words, this letter told them that they could no longer count on the roughly $80,000 they were receiving every year for their programs.

Another organization, the Table de concertation de Laval en condition féminine, is also extremely concerned that its funding, which supported its work for women's advancement, is now threatened.

This organization works to prevent violence and to effect social change in the local community. Last Monday, it launched a DVD as part of its education program. The Table does not know whether its members will be able to continue their work with women.

I am also thinking about the shelters in Laval and the Regroupement des familles monoparentales et recomposées de Laval, which will inevitably and unfortunately be affected by this government's cuts.

Violence against women has not decreased. We still regularly read horror stories about women who are murdered.

The newspapers today reported that the remains of a decapitated woman had been found in the Rideau Canal as workers were preparing the canal for the winter. This is terrible.

What we are witnessing today is the dismantling of programs that benefit newcomers, that benefit small and medium sized businesses and that benefit vulnerable Canadians who have a difficulty reading and even understanding product labels. These are Canadians who, through whatever circumstance, had to postpone their education at a very early age.

Even when the past Liberal government began cleaning up the fiscal debacle left by the previous Conservative government and we had to make tough fiscal decisions, the Liberal government never dismantled programs for vulnerable Canadians. Yes, we may have frozen program increases, but we never went so far as to dismantle programs on the scale that we are witnessing today.

The speech from my colleague from Yukon and my own, speak from two parts of Canada that are wildly different, the Yukon in the far north and my riding of Laval—Les Îles where I see people who come from the cities.

People also come from outside urban areas. There are two kinds of people, but they are all Canadians. All these Canadians will suffer and are already suffering as a result of this Conservative government's budget cuts.

[Older Workers, October 19th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to know what the forest industry has to do with the textile industry in greater Montreal. In my opinion, the minister is reading from his paper without really thinking about what he is saying.

We see the lack of communication between the Conservative minority government and the Government of Quebec. That is patently clear.

The critical mass of the textile industry is located in the Montreal area and includes not only older workers, but also many women from Montreal's multicultural community.

Why is the government abandoning these women from the multicultural community?

[Older Workers, October 19th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Minister of Industry assured us that the Government of Quebec was more than satisfied with the Conservative government's so-called assistance program for older workers. But Quebec's minister of employment and social solidarity, Michelle Courchesne, has said very clearly and very publicly that this is not true.

How can Quebec be satisfied with a program that is supposed to help textile workers, for example, but excludes the very region where textile jobs are concentrated? Can the minister explain that to us?

[Canada's Citizenship Week, October 18th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity during Canada's Citizenship Week to welcome and congratulate all new Canadians.

Canada's Citizenship Week is a national annual celebration to recognize the value of citizenship and the privileges, rights and responsibilities that go with it.

My thoughts go out to the new citizens in the riding of Laval—Les Îles.

Every year, roughly 150,000 people acquire Canadian citizenship.

Every year new Canadians affirm their commitment and dedication to Canada's laws, our democratic process, rights and freedoms. Economically, socially and culturally, new Canadians are playing an important role in building a better Canada.

As the official opposition critic for citizenship and immigration, I am calling on the current government never to make a distinction between natural-born citizens and naturalized citizens.

[Business of Supply, October 5th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I would just like to say that I think this is not the time to discuss the whys and wherefores of something that happened in the past.

In addition, I would tell my illustrious colleague to pose the question to the party on the other side of the House and ask why there are no longer any programs to help seniors. That is the real question.

[Business of Supply, October 5th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I will be very brief.

I said at the very start—unless I forgot—but I think in my speech I showed my enthusiasm for the Bloc Québécois motion and I certainly intend to vote in favour of this motion.

[Business of Supply, October 5th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I really do not see where the question leads us.

The Liberal government met the needs that existed in the past and that still exist now. When such needs are non-existent or few, we adjust accordingly.

Clearly, the Liberal government's program and pilot projects were indeed Canada-wide initiatives, so as to have the flexibility to adjust to the various conditions prevailing across the country.

Now, I doubt very much that there are regions where older workers have absolutely no problems at all. In my riding of Laval—Les Îles, the City of Laval is a thriving community where people work and raise families, and where many jobs are available. Yet, I know of hundreds of workers who wanted to continue to work but could not do so because they were over 55.

[Business of Supply, October 5th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I will split my time with the hon. member for Halifax West.

I am rising today to take part in the debate on the motion presented by the hon. member for Chambly—Borduas.

As was mentioned by the member who spoke before me, the Liberals support the underlying principle of the motion. The official opposition supports the motion, because we believe in the fundamental rights of all workers, and particularly the rights of Canadian workers who are over 55. These workers get laid off more frequently, their jobs may become obsolete because of new technologies, or they may find themselves out of work because companies are going bankrupt in some sectors of the economy.

Many workers who are over 55 face prejudice when they apply for a job, because employers feel they are overqualified. These workers are not hired because the experience that they have gained over the years works against them.

According to a study released by Statistics Canada in May 2005, 39% of workers aged 56 and over are less likely to find a job than Canadian workers in general. I know that the member opposite does not think that a 55 year old person is old, but many employers do. This anomaly can be explained partly by the fact that employers may discriminate against older workers and may prefer to train younger people, so that the investment made will benefit them in the much longer term.

Members from both sides of the House will agree that holding a job has a significant impact on people's dignity and self-confidence, particularly when they have a family. Being part of the labour force is important to an individual, because it allows him to understand his environment and, to a lesser extent, the world in which he lives.

That is precisely why, from 1999 to 2005, the previous Liberal government invested $55 million in initiatives involving pilot projects for older workers. This was meant to be the basis of what could have been an income support program that would meet the needs of a very vulnerable group.

The Liberal government undertook these national pilot projects because we discovered upon taking power that the programs were not very well thought through and unfair to older workers. The programs instituted by the previous Conservative government under Mr. Mulroney applied only to sectors in which there had been a lot of layoffs. The needs of the country as a whole were totally ignored because not all provinces and regions could access the programs, despite regional disparities in the supply of jobs for older workers.

Studies show that retirement may now be a thing of the past. Canadians may have to work until they are 70 years old, not because they want to, in some cases, but because the gaps in the workforce will be so large that employers will no longer be able to engage in the kind of discrimination against older workers that I was talking about earlier based on the fact that they may be overqualified or do not have the technological knowledge or the tools to function in what is increasingly a knowledge-based society. Older workers want retraining. That is why the Liberals had these pilot projects.

Innumerable men and women have knocked on my riding office door in Laval—Les Îles to tell me that they had been let go. In some cases, they held quite senior management positions. Now, unfortunately, they found themselves unemployed and did not know where to turn. They tried to retrain but still were not offered any jobs, even though they had a lot of experience.

Of the 125 projects across all of Canada, 74 were in Quebec. This means that 60% of all the subsidized projects for older workers were in my province. We got about $21 million of the funds allocated for new training and other employment needs. However, the Liberals did not just ignore the rest of Canada, as the Conservatives are doing, because we work for all Canadians, regardless of where they live.

Last year, the Liberal government allocated $5 million to extend the program until May 2006, for a total of $55 million. Now, unfortunately, this program no longer exists. The Conservative government also has not given any indication of how it is going to use the results of the Liberal pilot projects and put them toward longer-term projects, even though the Conservative government promised to do so in the last throne speech.

We on this side of the House still hope that the new Conservative government will undertake a well-intentioned study of these pilot projects before eliminating them. People do not want a program that will not meet the needs of all Canadians.

If I still have a few minutes, I would like to speak briefly about other Liberal investments in working people. Among other programs, I would like to speak very, very much—because it is so important—about the Canadian workplace skills strategy. The Liberal government instituted this strategy in 2004 to help working people upgrade their knowledge in order to keep up with a workplace that is constantly changing, we must admit.

In the 2005 budget, the Liberals added new credits of $125 million, over a three-year period. Today, the new Conservative government announced a $17 million cut in the funding for the Canadian workplace skills strategy, as part of its $1 billion budget cuts. And then, as the Bloc Québécois member pointed out, there is this other $17.7 million. This is that much less money available for literacy programs.

Earlier this week, I mentioned in the House that in Quebec, according to statistics, almost 50% of Quebeckers aged to 16 to 65 do not have the reading skills required to fully function in our society. This is despite the fact that the government has surpluses in excess of $13 billion. Once again, older workers may end up being ignored by this government.

Is this the Conservatives' idea of a responsible government? Is this the Conservatives' idea of standing up for these people?

I will conclude by asking Bloc Québécois members to elaborate on their vision of an income support program for older workers. While the purpose of this motion may be laudable, and I agree that it is, its wording is not specific enough regarding the workings of such a support program.