44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 31, 2022 10:00AM
- May/31/22 10:22:08 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, at first blush, when I listened to the member, I had a grave concern for how important it is that we recognize the diversity that exists in Canada. Recognizing it is more than just acknowledgement. We have to have policies in place to ensure that there is a higher sense of fairness and a more level playing field.
I am wondering if my colleague could provide his thoughts in regard to the importance of diversity to the province of Quebec. He makes reference, for example, to Quebec City, but one could equally make reference to the city of Montreal. How important, for that member, is diversity of population in the province of Quebec?
115 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/31/22 10:23:03 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I think that my colleague from Winnipeg North misunderstood my speech. The debate is not about the importance of diversity. We recognize the need for diversity, inclusion and, of course, equity.
What we are saying is that the basic criterion that must take precedence when selecting candidates for Canada Research Chairs is excellence. This criterion should not be based on identity, which sometimes has nothing to do with the context of the research.
75 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/31/22 10:23:43 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, as somebody who spent almost 20 years teaching in academia, I can tell members that the last thing we need to be fighting for is more white males in power. In fact, I would argue that we did not get the best and the brightest because all of the focus and prestige was given to white males in power.
I would say that we are at a time in history when we need diversity. We certainly need gender parity, and I would ask this: Why is the Bloc fighting so fiercely to keep white males in positions of power, to the exclusion of others?
106 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/31/22 10:57:09 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, to begin with the Naylor report, I have read the Naylor report quite carefully, and I have had extensive discussions with researchers in my riding about it over a number of years since it was completed. In fact, they are often reminding me that one of the key findings and recommendations within the Naylor report is to improve diversity, equity and inclusion. That is what we are focused on doing.
On the point of researchers being left out, it is very clear from some of the studies I mentioned in my remarks that our ability to innovate and conduct world-leading research is improved when we have a much more diverse and inclusive research ecosystem in Canada. That is what the tri-council is focused on. That is what the Naylor report prescribed, and that is what our government is working hard to accomplish.
146 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/31/22 10:59:20 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, many years ago—in 1988, to be precise—I was recruited by the spectacular scientist who headed The Royal Society of Canada, which is Canada's premier scientific body. He was Dr. Digby McLaren, and he realized they had a problem. The Royal Society had fellows, and they happened to mostly be fellows, so they asked this question: Why do we have such a high proportion of men? This was the beginning. It is hardly diversity and inclusion to recognize that white men dominated everything. Bringing in more white women is an improvement, but our society has overwhelmingly failed to have institutions that look like Canada.
In the context of this debate, the research councils and the tri-councils have made it a priority to look at diversity and inclusion. Was that their decision or was it politically dictated by the Liberal Party, as some have suggested in this debate?
154 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/31/22 11:01:58 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I agree with the member that the ultimate goal is to get the best researchers possible in place and achieve the best possible outcomes. The notion of positive discrimination is a very tricky one. We are operating in a Canadian society that admittedly has systemic barriers to the advancement of people who do not look like me. Let me just say it that way. We need to change that, because it is the diversity of people from all backgrounds that will strengthen our research community, and it is incumbent upon us to create those pathways.
97 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/31/22 11:32:00 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I think it is unappreciated by some in this place that the barriers to entry for women are quite significant and that they will not be broken down unless the first step is to ensure what used to be called affirmative action. That is just recognizing women like me, who are women of privilege by the colour of our skin. If we are going to also want to ensure diversity, inclusion and equity, we need to do more.
I am reminded of one of the really good things that the Prime Minister did, which was to appoint a gender-equal, balanced cabinet.
I vividly recall listening to conservative media commentators. By conservative, I do not mean capital-C conservative: that was not a partisan comment. They were on the national news saying, “Oh, are we now going to have less qualified cabinet members because the Prime Minister is forced to find 50% of them as women?”
It was so insulting, but it was so ingrained that the cabinet ministers in this country, the members of Parliament, are all supposed to be white men, and they were from 1867 until Agnes Macphail was elected.
197 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/31/22 11:46:38 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, indeed, I do think that progressive movements have always worked to achieve equity and equality. Sometimes that requires restrictive measures.
That is okay, because what I am hearing from the Conservative Party and the Bloc right now makes me think of Margaret Thatcher when she said:
There is no society; there are only individuals.
However, that is not how it works. I feel that, as parliamentarians and elected officials, we have to take responsibility and foster meaningful action that moves society forward for all Canadians, making it possible to achieve better representation of our diversity.
99 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/31/22 11:47:19 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I want to pick up on a theme we heard from a previous speaker about this apparent distinction between equality of opportunity and equality of outcome. I cannot think of how we can define progress if we do not look at outcomes. I think that often equality of opportunity is used as an excuse for not doing anything.
I wonder if my colleague can think of any institutions in Canadian society that have achieved diversity that is reflective of the population without proactive equity measures.
87 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/31/22 11:58:15 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, qujannamiik to my hon. colleague.
I have the same thoughts that the member shared about this motion. With such limited opposition days, it is quite interesting to me that this one was selected as the issue to be debated today.
It is a bold move to make such a statement about whom we want in these positions. Can we all agree that these are highly educated, highly experienced individuals who made this decision to ensure that equity and diversity are included in this process? Are we kind of jumping ahead of ourselves here, not letting the potentially beneficial outcomes for these institutions to be seen before we criticize it, before we look again at these concepts of a dystopia? I think that was mentioned in a different version, as if there is going to be a reversal of The Handmaid's Tale should we allow these kinds of actions to take place.
I am wondering if the member could comment on that. Why are we sounding the alarm before we even know how beneficial this could be?
179 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/31/22 12:12:31 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I listened to my friend opposite's speech intently and I have some underlying concerns. First and foremost, the implication is that when we look at diversity and inclusion as an issue, it precludes those who are qualified and intellectually capable of a job, so there is a premise I reject.
What the member is trying to say, I believe, is that there should be no measures put in place at any level, whether in academia, government or government jobs, that set particular criteria, whether they be for someone who is indigenous or racialized, for women or, in a case when the Government of Canada hires people, for people who are bilingual. Those may not be criteria we set forth.
I am wondering if my friend could reflect on that and tell us why he fully rejects the notion of any form of personal characteristics being incorporated into the jobs—
153 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/31/22 12:31:53 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, let us be clear. Education and the funding of universities and university research fall under provincial jurisdiction, and thus are Quebec's responsibility.
Judging from the questions from the other side of the House, there would be no inclusion and diversity in Quebec unless Ottawa imposed conditions. It is as though they are saying that letting Quebec do its job results in racism and exclusion.
I would like my colleague to comment on the government members' perception of Quebec.
81 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 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
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/31/22 12:57:33 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Rivière-des-Mille-Îles for his question this afternoon.
In society today, we must recognize that there are obstacles or systemic barriers for people in advancing and receiving opportunities. We must continue to break down the barriers that certain communities face in Canada. At the same time, we must encourage diversity within our Canada research chairs. There are ways of doing that. We have identified ways to continue to diversify them while we continue to break down the systemic barriers that exist for particular communities that are marginalized here in Canada.
101 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/31/22 1:10:55 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I fully support the notion that institutions of all kinds should be representative of and reflect the extraordinary diversity of the societies in which we live.
Today's debate is not about inclusion. It is about the need to resist the temptation to exclude people, the need to avoid discriminating, even with the best possible intentions, against people who can make a significant contribution to knowledge, science and the betterment of society.
74 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/31/22 1:13:49 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am being told that I refuse to address the root causes of injustice, whereas I am suggesting that we take a positive approach, not a negative one. I am suggesting that we take an approach that will rally people around this diversity. I am suggesting that there be a set of incentives, including financial ones, to help ensure this extraordinary diversity is better represented.
Discrimination and intimidation is out there now, with stickers on doors, calls, attempts to exclude people from faculties, research projects being impeded. I do not think this contributes to anything positive.
98 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/31/22 1:24:54 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am wondering if the member could provide me with his idea of what systemic racism looks like and how we could address those barriers without concrete measures like this. This is a measure that the university administrators took upon themselves in order to take a concrete step toward ensuring more diversity and inclusion. They are going to see how it works. We should give them the space to do that work as autonomous institutions.
What does your understanding of systemic racism look like, and how do we address it without measures such as these?
97 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/31/22 1:50:31 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I get the impression that there was a very superficial or cursory reading of this bill.
Our motion is absolutely not about discrimination. We are all in favour of equity, diversity and inclusion. I would ask my colleague, who focused on women in her speech, which is great since we would all like there to be more women, what she thinks about the fact that, right now, 70% of the medical students at the Université de Montréal are women.
Should there be criteria for reducing the number of female medical students at the Université de Montréal?
104 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/31/22 1:55:40 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like to mention that I will be sharing my time with the ever‑charming member for Manicouagan.
This is the best time of day, right before question period, when no one is listening and we can say stupid things, although I will not do that.
I would like to begin with a reflection on the issue of positive discrimination. When research chairs are being selected, should positive discrimination be applied? I would like to come back to what positive discrimination means. Sometimes, in the workplace and in access to education, there are biases that can favour certain people. Yes, men can be favoured for certain jobs, people of different ethnic identities can be favoured for certain jobs, and we have to accept that positive discrimination is a mechanism that allows us to restore some equity.
Can that be done in the university framework and context? I do not think so, and I will explain why. First, we need to agree on something. University research means a university is involved. In my opinion, the simplest definition of a university, one that has been around since the Middle Ages, is a place where all knowledge is permitted. That is because people quickly tried to make a distinction between certain ideologies and the development of knowledge outside the confines of certain ideologies and religions. I want to start with that, since I think it is rather crucial.
I want to tell the House about some of my first loves. I was an avid reader of Michel Foucault. In a short but very interesting book called The Archaeology of Knowledge, Foucault says that, during any given time period, there are things that we can know and things that we cannot. He called this an episteme. According to Foucault, an episteme is a form of rationality in a given time period. Knowledge of medicine could not advance in the Middle Ages because the body was considered sacred. Anyone who dissected a body would meet the same fate, but at the hands of religious authorities, so medical knowledge could not advance.
Academia was created based on this idea of leaving every possible field open to various kinds of knowledge. I wanted to emphasize that because I have the impression that what is really going on here is simply an attempt to limit the advancement of certain kinds of knowledge by including criteria that ensure access to research chairs based on identity issues. Research chairs are usually awarded based on how applicants' peers view their projects and their work. Now, if another criterion is added that has to do with identity, the pool of applicants who can apply for research chairs will be seriously limited. Research chairs are not awarded based on the notion of resolving any flagrant inequity or the fact that there are fewer people from a particular group, such as the LGBTQ community or people of a certain faith or from a certain cultural community.
The goal of awarding research chairs is advancing knowledge. They are not earned based on any particular identity. In chemistry, physics and all of the pure sciences, knowledge is developed by people who have the skills to advance in their particular fields. As we can imagine, there is some degree of competition involved in earning these chairs, which does not really correspond to the idea of requirements around equity, diversity and inclusion.
570 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 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!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
