SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 78

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 31, 2022 10:00AM
  • May/31/22 11:01:11 a.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech. We all agree that we need to increase representation within our institutions for visible minorities, women and people with disabilities, but we have to do it the right way. Does my colleague not believe it is better to engage in positive discrimination based on a criterion that, for equal or comparable qualifications, favours certain minority candidates rather than disqualifying certain candidates outright? I feel it is important that we address this fundamental issue. The problem we have today, with all due respect to the House, is that certain candidates are being disqualified outright. In my view, you cannot right a wrong by creating another wrong. I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts on that.
126 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/31/22 11:02:42 a.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, one of the things I have noticed over the years is that it is often the appointments of minorities, whether they be of ethnic origin, women or people with disabilities, will inspire younger people in those different areas to get engaged and be more inspired to do what is before them. I am wondering if my colleague could provide his thoughts regarding how, as a society, we benefit when we get the types of appointments that reflect our nation and the inspiration that is provided directly and indirectly to future generations, which enriches our nation.
97 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/31/22 11:26:39 a.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, the member made reference to research chairs from UBC, where he said that more than 50% are now female. If that is the case, it kind of sets the example and proves that as a society we need to do what we can to ensure there is a higher sense of equality and fairness. Actions need to be taken in order to encourage that to take place. As an example, I would just look in the front benches of government, where 50% of cabinet is female. It is a specific action. When we see wider participation, whether it is females, visible minorities or people with disabilities, it does inspire others to take on that larger role. In particular, I am focusing on young people. Could the member provide his thoughts on that?
134 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/31/22 11:43:40 a.m.
  • Watch
I apologize, Madam Speaker. We need to do some collective soul-searching. Why is it that women make up only 20% of corporate boards and only 25% of senior management in Canada? According to an Osler report, a university professor looked at 2,000 senior management positions in Canada. Of the 2,000, he found seven indigenous people and six people with disabilities. That is it. Among senior managers, women's salaries are 56% lower than men's. Visible minority women earn 32% less than white women. That is huge. The gaps are enormous. It makes perfect sense to try to do something to fix this and ensure that women, indigenous people, members of visible minorities and people with disabilities take their rightful place within our institutions, including universities.
129 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/31/22 11:56:45 a.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like to ask my colleague a very simple question. Competent researchers from visible minorities do not have access to research chair funding because they do not meet the criteria or do not want to meet them. If that is not discrimination, then I do not know what to call it. There is already discrimination against people who are under-represented and do not meet certain criteria of the Canada research chairs program. What is my colleague's opinion on this?
84 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/31/22 12:16:31 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, we hear about all kinds of averages and the Canadian average. Research facilities do not reflect society perfectly. They have evolved with the times. We need to be very careful about all the statistics used to apply averages to this, that and the other thing. That does not work. My colleague is right. It has been harder for minorities and women for many years. Scholarships have been created and efforts have been made to increase inclusion awareness. This has been the case in Quebec and at Quebec universities. There is still progress to be made and work to be done to encourage more people like Marie Curie and Amartya Sen, magnificent Nobel Prize winners. Imposing conditions today and preventing Quebec universities from hiring professors will not improve the quality of research. It is the Liberals, not us, who are playing politics with inclusion. It is important to note that they are actually hurting inclusion in the long run with this, because they are directing their energy to the wrong place.
172 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/31/22 12:27:45 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, a member of the House indicated earlier that it is unfortunate the Bloc has brought forward this particular motion, maybe even suggesting that it could have used a different motion today. I look at the motion a little bit differently. I see the motion as something that, at the end of the day, I do not believe is in the best interests of Canada, primarily because I see the true value of Canada's diversity. Often when we get the types of appointments that are necessary, they can be inspirational for younger generations. This allows us to build a healthier and richer society. I am wondering if the member could reflect on the province of Quebec in its entirety, whether it is the rural part or the city of Montreal. Does he believe that his attitudes toward ignoring women, minorities and other ethnic—
146 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/31/22 1:30:10 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Fredericton. I rise in the House today to talk about the undeniable fact that the people of Quebec and Canada are increasingly diverse. As a society, we are being called upon to ensure diversity in all sectors. In 2016, 22.3% of Canadians reported being members of a visible minority and 4.9% reported being members of the first nations, Inuit or Métis. In addition, 70% of these people indicated that they had been born outside of the country. There are more than 250 ethnicities represented in Canada. Statistics Canada estimates that by 2036, visible minorities will represent between 31% and 36% of the population. In spite of these statistics, indigenous peoples, Blacks, racialized communities and minorities are subject to racism and discrimination on a daily basis, at work, when applying for jobs or a promotion, or when renting or buying a house. The notion of systemic racism and discrimination refers to an organizational culture, policies, directives, practices or procedures that exclude, displace or marginalize racialized communities and indigenous peoples. This creates unfair barriers to real options and opportunities, which means that non-racialized groups end up being prioritized over others. In recent years, our government has worked hard to address systemic racism and discrimination, in particular through Canada's anti-racism strategy. We have also focused on including diversity and indigenous peoples across all government policies. When it comes to the research environment, it is important to recognize the need for ongoing and sustainable action to address growing inequalities. Our government is taking important and necessary steps to build a more inclusive society, notably by developing a national action plan on combatting hate and by increasing funding for Canada's new anti-racism strategy. Budget 2022 announced $85 million over four years, starting in 2022‑2023, to support ongoing work to launch a new anti-racism strategy and a national action plan on combatting hate. This funding will support community-based projects that ensure Black and racialized Canadians and religious minorities have access to resources so they can fully participate in the Canadian economy, while raising awareness of issues related to racism and hate in Canada. Fighting racism and discrimination also means working to ensure that this diversity is better represented among our scientists and researchers. After decades of neglect, our government has reinvested in the scientific community. Budget 2022 provides $38.3 million over four years to add new Canada excellence research chairs. The Canada research chairs program aims to make Canada one of the world's top countries in research. This requires us to ensure better representation, and we have a long way to go. In 2016, visible minorities were about 13%; today, this figure is just over 22%. For new researchers, especially those from diverse backgrounds, it is very difficult to find their place in the scientific community, because historically the scientific community is a white Western community based on white knowledge. This refers to a white elite that has grown up in conscious and unconscious privilege. There is a lot of work to be done to ensure that we include diverse communities and indigenous peoples in the scientific community and to break out of historical white paradigms that do not represent multiple perspectives. Today we need to work toward a multiplicity of knowledge. Paradigms are diverse, and the multiplicity of knowledge helps give people a greater understanding of the world, an understanding that is more open to different perspectives. Research criteria and scientific rigour are the same for everyone. I find it dangerous to claim anything else. We need to recognize the challenge that indigenous and diverse peoples face when taking their place in the scientific community. It is a real challenge. It is critical because, once again, a multiplicity of knowledge brings diverse perspectives. It provides a broader spectrum of knowledge, and fosters a broader and more inclusive understanding of the world. This multiplicity of knowledge is expressed through the diversity of researchers who have experienced the realities of racialized communities and indigenous peoples. Otherwise we end up with a single world view in a monolithic identity, and that is the danger looming over Quebec. If you are from a diverse background or indigenous, that means you are not white. Wanting to be sure that we include these diverse perspectives is in no way indicative of a lack of scientific rigour. I would like to point out that if the Montreal police force had not been using hiring selection criteria to ensure that the police looked like their community in the 1990s, we would not see this much diversity on the police force today. While we have a strong legislative framework that supports diversity and fights discrimination, including the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, we have witnessed some troubling events here and abroad in recent years, which tells us that the charters and laws are not enough and that better representation of diversity and indigenous peoples in the scientific community is part of the work that remains to be done. Eliminating racism and discrimination is part of the government's responsibility—it is everyone's responsibility, in fact—to support a society that brings out the best in its members and treats them with dignity and respect. Treating people with dignity and respect means acknowledging that scientific rigour is not the issue. The issue is equal opportunity to ensure that our research chairs represent Canada's and Quebec's population as a whole. All Canadians, along with all Quebeckers, have a duty to do their part to fight all forms of hatred, discrimination and systemic discrimination, including at the research chair level.
958 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/31/22 3:05:05 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Québécois believes that research funding should be allocated based on skill. The federal government thinks it should be allocated based on diversity. Visible minorities represent 51% of the population in Toronto and only 2% of the population in Rimouski, but both regions are subject to the same criteria. Our universities are scrambling to recruit and reflect diversity, but we have to be realistic. Why not trust the universities and fund scientific research based on scientific capabilities?
84 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/31/22 4:24:12 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I am happy to hear someone say Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie correctly, without making puns or jokes. I am very comfortable with diversity ideology and believe that our institutions should reflect the diversity and representativeness of different groups. Does my colleague not see that there is a fundamental problem when only 6% of researchers or professors are members of visible minorities, even though visible minorities account for twice that percentage of the Quebec population? This means that change is not happening, or that it is happening much too slowly, and that more proactive measures are needed.
99 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/31/22 4:41:43 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with my friend and colleague, the member for Waterloo. I want to address the Bloc's opposition day motion. I am somewhat surprised by the position it is taking on this issue. I thought it would have been a little more progressive to be open-minded to what I believe is a policy that has been fairly effective over the years. We should be looking at ways in which we can enhance opportunities for minority groups and women, who make up a majority of the population in Canada. This is often not reflected in many different sectors in our society. I was very proud of the Prime Minister when we took office in 2015. He made a very clear statement about women in politics, and 50% of the cabinet is made up of women. We have a healthier, more progressive government as a direct result of this. Women play very strong leadership roles within our caucus, and in particular in our cabinet. Whether we talk about the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, the Minister of Foreign Affairs or the former minister of justice, we have done some incredible work in the past number of years. It is quite encouraging when we see women leading in many different ways. I do not think it is an issue of trying to find qualified women. The qualifications are there. We have to ensure that barriers are being taken down. I represent the riding of Winnipeg North where, and I will give some ballpark percentages, just under 40% of people are of Filipino heritage. We have about 20% indigenous. If we factor in other communities, such as my Indo-Canadian community and so forth, we get a sense of why the issue of equality and taking down systemic barriers is so critically important to me as the member of Parliament for Winnipeg North. For many years, we have talked about issues such as systemic barriers that are in place, and trying to get credentials recognized. We have Ambassador Robles here from the Phillippines, and he has been raising the issue with members of Parliament in regard to getting credentials recognized here in Canada so, for example, nurses can be practising here. There are some gender issues related to that. When we talk about the importance of diversity, we say that one of our greatest strengths in Canada is our diversity. If we look over a group, or neglect to take the actions necessary to support inclusion and ensure that people are provided the opportunities to take on many important roles in our society, we do a disservice to the whole issue of diversity. We should be taking ownership of it, promoting it and encouraging its development in all aspects in different sectors of our society. In terms of science and research and the importance of the Canada research chairs program, let there be no doubt that we have before us a government that understands the importance of research and science. We have invested literally hundreds of millions of dollars. If we look at the research chairs position, we are talking about tens of millions of dollars allocated annually and providing well over 2,000 opportunities. Our post-secondary facilities are capable of attracting the best people in the world to ensure we are getting the research and development based on science that will enable Canada to succeed into the future. I truly believe that it is so critically important that our institutions, whether they are academic or other forms of public, especially those with public dollars, or those in the private sector, be reflective of our nation. If we make that effort in our institutions, we will have a healthier nation. I remember Dr. Romy Magsino from Manitoba, a person of Filipino heritage who went on to play a very prominent role at the University of Manitoba in the department of education as its dean. Through that, Romy inspired many within the community. There is no doubt he had the expertise and the talents and so forth, but he inspired many others, including minorities who go beyond the Filipino heritage community, and I think that does a great deal. What message do we send if we are attaching significant amounts of public dollars to an area, such as the chairs of our research, and we are not encouraging and promoting that diversity? I think it is absolutely critical for our youth to see that first hand. That can be very inspiring. We see mentorship programs grow from that. I think there is so much more to do, in making and taking the sacrifices necessary in order to be able to have the diversity that reflects our overall population in Canada. I look at the University of Manitoba, and it is one of many post-secondary facilities that has greatly benefited by the federal government taking an interest in supporting research here in Canada. Through those dollars, our post-secondary institutions are better able to retain and ultimately educate some of the smartest people in the world, and the research they have done has led to incredible inventions. A number of years ago, the University of Manitoba played a critical role in the development of agriculture with canola, and I take a look at the role canola has in the world today compared to 30 years ago. The University of Manitoba and the research that is done at our universities are what enables much of the exportation and transferring of knowledge to many different industries. On that particular point, when we talk about investing, we recognize that our post-secondary institutions have a leading role, but often we will see partnerships. It is just not the public sector that invests in research and science. I look at agreements with places such as Red River College and Magellan Aerospace. We will see classrooms from a college being put into private sector institutions to advance research and technology.
1001 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/31/22 5:28:03 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Berthier—Maskinongé for agreeing to share his time with me. I am pleased to speak to the Bloc Québécois motion concerning post-secondary studies and research chairs, even though this is a jurisdiction of Quebec and the provinces. As the critic for status of women, I am perfectly aware that this group is still under-represented and that more work needs to be done. However, the debate we would like to have is not about the concept of positive discrimination in general, but about the specific policy of the Canada research chairs program, and its requirements and practices concerning equity, diversity and inclusion. We are not against equity. We are not against diversity. We are not against inclusion. I am pleased to note that once again, Quebec is working to raise awareness of such matters. Today I will be speaking about what is already being done in Quebec, I will come back to Ottawa's paternalistic approach, and I will conclude by speaking about the importance of being proactive, especially in the case of women, but also in the case of indigenous peoples, people with disabilities and minorities. First, we must speak about what is already being done in Quebec. The right way to promote equality, diversity and inclusion would instead be to apply a preferential hiring policy, meaning that for equally qualified candidates, preference would be given to certain people. That is what many Quebec universities have already done with respect to women, and it has worked well. We are not directly opposed to all current, future or possible policies aimed at promoting equity, diversity and inclusion, especially since these exist in Quebec. We are starting a debate on the matter, a societal debate which has not yet taken place, but which is necessary and desirable. I do want to say that in Quebec, there are also CEGEPs. Today, we are talking a lot about universities and research chairs, but we must not forget about CEGEPs. There is no university in the riding of Shefford, but there is an excellent CEGEP in Granby. It may be training future researchers. We must not forget them in the post-secondary education continuum, whether it is for pre-university studies or technical courses. That is why I was delighted to present female science students with certificates to recognize their academic excellence as part of Hooked on School Days. I also talked with Yvan O'Connor, the director of the Granby CEGEP, who told me about his institution's projects and development and the problems related to foreign student visas. If the federal government wants to contribute to education, it should work on matters under its jurisdiction. For example, it could provide adequate funding for science, which it is not doing at the moment. We are opposed to a federal policy that is specific, ill-conceived and tainted by ideology. It creates paradoxical situations, anomalies or inequities. Moreover, it represents federal interference in an area under Quebec and provincial jurisdiction. Section 93 of the Constitution Act, 1867, expressly confers jurisdiction over education on the provinces. It is generally known and accepted that education is a Quebec matter. Quebec's universities belong to Quebeckers, and they are funded through taxes paid by Quebeckers. In fact, it is a direct intrusion into provincial jurisdiction, because the influence of the Canada research chairs program goes beyond simply funding research. In fact, it acts as a professor hiring program. The federal government is dictating hiring conditions to universities. This is unacceptable. The program must be reviewed. The federal government can use its spending power to finance research, but it cannot, in any way, use this approach to change the way Quebec's universities function. Yet, that is what is happening because of the excessive constraints imposed by the Canada research chairs program, particularly because of its unreasonable equity, diversity and inclusion requirements. In addition, through the requirements it imposes on its research funding programs, the federal government is undermining the autonomy of universities. There is no excuse for the government dictating the conditions for hiring professors. If the government wishes to appropriate the ability to spend on education, it must do so with no strings attached. It is unacceptable for the federal government to impose targets on Quebec universities under threat of sanctions. Quebec universities are perfectly free to develop programs to address diversity and inclusion without having the federal government dictate the terms and conditions under threat of having part of their funding withheld. Federally imposed requirements are unacceptable and illegitimate impediments to their independence. It is possible to have a policy that fosters hiring from certain groups of equal qualifications. That is true and it is already being done for women in some Quebec university departments, for example. However, to apply an equal opportunities policy, you must have candidates who are available and interested. The federal EDI policy on academic research funding is an ideological drift that creates absurd situations, and it must be abolished. If we want the academic workforce to be more diverse and representative of the Canadian population, the solution is not to impose arbitrary quotas at the time of hiring, because the most important criteria should be the excellence of academic records and the value of scientific research projects. The solution should be proactive instead, so that at the time of hiring, the pool of candidates is already more diverse and representative of the general population. We are therefore being asked to collectively reflect on how we can find positive measures that will promote equal opportunities by stimulating interest in the arts, science and all spheres of society. In all cases, this will be a Quebec discussion, as education is at the heart of our social model. The federal government's responsibility is to stop interfering in the management of Quebec universities and to improve the granting agencies' research grants for students. Yes, quotas create certain effects. They are unequal. To put it bluntly, the CRC program's current policy prevents some researchers from applying for research chair positions because they are not part of the designated groups. They are automatically excluded, despite their qualifications, even if that means some chairs remain vacant. The unequal effects of the hiring targets for the four designated groups, namely women, persons with disabilities, indigenous peoples and visible minorities, came under public scrutiny when Laval University posted an ad for a job in the biology department in the winter of 2022. There was also an interesting column by Jean‑François Lisée, who denounced the incongruity of setting targets using the Canadian average. With its Université du Québec network, Quebec made the choice to set up universities in the regions. That way, knowledge is not concentrated in the major centres, and this contributes to the social vitality of our regions. The current CRC policy requires our universities to recruit not only outside their walls, but well outside the regions in which they are established. The CRC policy directly hinders Quebec's vision. This is very important to me because it hurts our communities. The federal government's position is rigid and ideologically driven. What is more, it constitutes interference in provincial jurisdictions. It is also an attack on the autonomy of universities. The federal government should review its research funding policy and allow the universities to determine their own hiring policies. In Quebec, these criteria are evaluated based on the efforts made by the candidate to promote EDI, not on hiring quotas that exclude qualified researchers. We must not forget the important issue of university autonomy. These requirements prove that the federal policy does not respect the autonomy and independence of universities. The federal government's approach is extremely authoritarian and high-handed. I would also add that, in the context of a labour shortage, it can take time to renew this pool, as requested by the federal government, given that many years of study are required for this process. That is the quandary faced by universities when they are required to fill positions with people from designated groups, except for women. Setting aside the issue of hiring quotas and the curious fact that women, indigenous people, people with disabilities and ethnic minorities are put in the same boat, this temporary excitement among elected officials and the media gives us an opportunity to again point out a fundamental fact about universities and their autonomy. We should remember that this is not about discussing the legitimacy of certain appointments from specific groups, because, in the case of women, that has been happening for more than 20 years. Instead, we are noting that the requirements imposed by the federal program are not being condemned by universities as an illegitimate and unacceptable restriction on their autonomy. However, is this not a striking case of the denial of their management autonomy? In other words, these prejudices will be eliminated not by excluding certain people, but by improving selection processes. For example, universities could anonymize CVs or establish standard exams for a position. This is being discussed as a means of promoting the hiring of women. These are points to ponder, because, beyond the debates on these exclusive criteria, I would like us to have a calm, healthy debate on proactive measures we can take. What barriers need to be broken down? Why are women still under-represented as entrepreneurs? Why are there still fewer women in politics? Why do we have to work harder to recruit female research chairs, especially in economics? I was reading about that this summer in Hélène Périvier's excellent book about feminist economics, L'économie féministe. I highly recommend it. At the end of the day, I want little girls like my little Naomie to aspire to do the work they want to do, no matter what they choose. Let us give them the choice. Let us give our universities the choice to operate the way they want.
1685 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
  • May/31/22 5:40:24 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her excellent and well-articulated speech. I enjoyed it. After listening to the speeches earlier today, I want to remind members that there is one people in Canada that is particularly susceptible to discrimination, the people my grandparents called French-Canadians in Lower Canada, now known as Quebec. We were discriminated against because of our language. There was even a time when some institutions did not think that we were smart enough to work for Hydro-Québec or hold senior civil engineering positions. As my colleague from Thérèse-De Blainville pointed out earlier, the big unions, which were early proponents of equality of opportunity, responded to this sentiment. That is why women, members of visible minorities and other minorities are prioritized when they are equally qualified. Quebec has made a lot of progress in this arena, and this principle is now a given. Does my colleague think that the government is going too far and that it should simply apply this old philosophy in universities, which are looking for qualifications?
183 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border