SoVote

May/31/22 10:02:58 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the fourth report of the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food entitled “Main Estimates 2022-23”.

31 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 78 - May/31/22

Mr. Kody Blois (Kings—Hants, Lib.)

May/31/22 12:32:42 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I have the privilege of rising today to speak to an opposition motion. I will be sharing my time with my hon. colleague from Vaughan—Woodbridge. I usually get the text of an opposition motion the night before the debate and take the time back at the hotel to read it over and review the principles. Two weeks ago, I got the text of the Bloc Québécois's opposition motion on the prayer in the House. When I shared my thoughts on that motion, I said that I thought it was weak. The issue was not very important compared to the war in Ukraine, climate change or affordability, which are all important issues worthy of debating in the House. I saw the same problem yesterday when I got the text of today's motion. The motion itself is not a problem, because the Bloc Québécois has the privilege of raising issues in the House, but, once again, this motion does not deal with issues of concern to Canadians and Quebeckers. With the war in Ukraine still raging, the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food will be looking at the importance of food safety and the importance of supporting our allies and supporting Ukraine. Ukraine is very important for grains and various commodities. With the Russians targeting critical infrastructure, this is a very important issue. What is the best way for the Government of Canada and our allies, including NATO, Europe and the United States, to address this issue? Well, no, today we are talking about the Canada research chairs program. Of course, the research program is very important in terms of innovation, science and the various programs designed to improve our economy. I agree with that principle, it is very important. I will read the principles of the motion. That: (a) the House denounce all forms of discrimination; I agree with this principle. I think that most, if not all, members and all Canadians do too. The motion goes on to say: (b) in the opinion of the House, (i) research is necessary for the advancement of science and society in general, I just expressed my point of view on that so, of course, I completely agree. Research is very important for Canada's future. Next, the motion says: (ii) access to the Canada Research Chairs Program must be based on the candidates’ skills and qualifications; and I agree with this principle as well. In fact, I find the Bloc's position interesting. The text implies that some of Canada's research chairs have the required skills. I think the members of the Bloc Québécois need to stand up in the House and explain their position. Do people think that some research chairs in Canada and Quebec have the necessary skills? I have confidence in the skills and qualifications of those who are in those positions right now, but I think perhaps the Bloc has a problem with that. The motion concludes by stating: (c) the House call on the government to review the program's criteria to ensure that grants are awarded based on science and not based on identity criteria or unrelated to the purpose of the research. These criteria are primordial in order to assess the person's qualifications and understand the purpose and importance of their research for solving certain problems in society. However, I think that it is also crucial to encourage diversity and to make sure that some people have the same opportunities as others. For me, this is where the text of the motion is problematic. I think it is very important to outline the history of the program. Established in 2000, the Canada research chairs program, or CRCP, is a key component of a national strategy aimed at making Canada one of the best countries in the world for research and development. It invests approximately $311 million annually to attract and retain a diverse group of top researchers in order to strengthen research and training excellence at Canada's post-secondary institutions. In 2017, a court order required the Canada research chairs program to meet the mandatory equity, diversity and inclusion objectives of a 2006 Canadian human rights settlement agreement. The government naturally supported this equity, inclusion and diversity plan, but a court also ruled that the program was problematic and that the government needed to change the way it selected research chairs. The outcome of that decision is very important. From 2016 to 2021, the percentage of women who received CRCP funds rose from 28.9% to 40.9%, the percentage of visible minorities receiving funds rose from 13.4% to 22.8%, the percentage for people with disabilities rose from 0.3% to 5.8%, and the percentage of indigenous recipients rose from 1.3% to 3.4%. These numbers are statistics, but they represent much more: They are opportunities that have been offered to certain people. Therefore, they are not just statistics. This is important for diversity and for ensuring that everyone across the country has a chance at success. We need to make sure these jobs are open to all. It is important, and research shows that diversity can lead to better results. Yes, we can put a lens on diversity and inclusion and trying to be equitable, but we also want the best results from what we do. As I mentioned earlier in French, the Bloc Québécois motion reads as though individuals who are currently being appointed to these chairs are not qualified. I take issue with that. The parliamentary secretary before me said the same thing in that same vein. At the end of the day, as has been illustrated, diversity is important in leading to teamwork and driving better results.

982 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 78 - May/31/22

Mr. Kody Blois

May/31/22 12:43:39 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his question. I am a bit confused, because when I read the text of the motion, I did not see anything about provincial jurisdiction. I think that Quebec probably respects the principles of diversity and inclusion. If the goal is for the federal government to work with Quebec to incorporate the principles of inclusion and diversity into the field of research, then I think that this is another matter. However, that is not in the text of the motion. I thank the hon. member for his explanation, but that is not in the text of this opposition day motion.

107 words

Context: House Hansard - 78 - May/31/22

Mr. Kody Blois

May/31/22 12:45:14 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I will respond to that with a couple of things. Obviously, as I mentioned, the tribunal had suggested the government had to do a better job of trying to drive diversity and inclusion. The hon. member mentioned that some people, such as women in indigenous groups, have a double challenge. At the end of the day, what I take notice of in this Bloc Québécois motion is that it almost reads as though it is a type of discrimination to encourage individuals who are under-represented to have more status in these chairs. I disagree with that principle. I think it is also extremely important for universities and that culture to play an important role there. I would like to commend Acadia University. They are doing really important work in this domain. They have great research chairs, some of whom are supported by us, some of whom are being driven by themselves. To answer her question, institutionally it is important, and to her point, these types of principles need to stay.

177 words

All Topics

Context: House Hansard - 78 - May/31/22

Mr. Kody Blois

May/31/22 12:46:58 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I think the parliamentary secretary has hit it right on the head with the question. I will certainly just elaborate a little bit further. Regardless what profession might seek to take on in the future, one wants to see oneself reflected and have mentorship in that role. Whether or not that is the diversity that the parliamentary secretary talked about, or indigenous communities or handicapped individuals who have been finding their way here, that is extremely important. That matters in research chairs, and that matters in politics. That is why we are certainly trying to get even more women involved in politics and more women involved here in Parliament. It extends far beyond the research programs that we are talking about, but he does make a very good point.

131 words