Status of Women Committee on March 8th, 2010

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

It's okay Madam Chair, I forgive you.

Today is International Women's Day, and I would like to wish all the women here today an excellent International Women's Day.

That being said, Madam Chair, I do hope that we will have enough time for a thorough talk with the Head of Agency for Status of Women Canada because we are not acquainted with her. We know that she is part of the internal bureaucracy, but I'm sure that this does not mean that she lacks proficiency.

We would like to know more about her opinions and her beliefs. We would also like to have a more in-depth discussion with her about the challenges Status of Women Canada is faced with, as well as about our opinions and the position that Status of Women Canada means to adopt in the future. A full two-hour meeting would be essential, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

All right. Thank you.

So you're both speaking against the friendly amendment, so to speak.

Cathy.

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Madam Chair, if I recall, it usually takes about an hour to do the supplementary estimates. If we combine them in one meeting, with Suzanne Clément staying for the additional hour, I think we could meet the needs.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

If we understand that, shall I call the motion? Do we need to have the amendment attached to the motion or is it an understanding--

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

--that it will be as soon as possible.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Okay, as soon as possible.

[Anita Neville, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

As long as there's an understanding that they are two separate activities.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

All right. Those in favour of the amendment? Those against?

(Amendment agreed to)

Now we have one from Madame Demers.

The motion in French reads as follows:

Conformément à l'article 108(2) du Règlement, qu'il soit fait rapport à la Chambre, à la première occasion, de ce qui suit:

Que le Comité tienne une cérémonie de commémoration, le 5 décembre de chaque année, ou la journée la plus rapprochée de cette date si les députés ne siègent pas le 5 décembre, en souvenir de la date à laquelle le projet de loi C-68 (Loi concernant les armes à feu et certaines autres armes) a reçu l'approbation du Sénat et la sanction royale en 1995.

So it reads:

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), that the following motion be reported to the House at the earliest opportunity:

That the Committee hold a commemoration ceremony each year on December 5, or on the day closest to December 5 if the House is not sitting that day, the date that Bill C-68 (An Act respecting firearms and other weapons) was passed by the Senate and received Royal Assent in 1995.

Madame Demers.

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Madam Chair, “in remembrance of the date” is missing from the English version, following the text “is not sitting that day.”

You may remember...

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

It says “a commemoration ceremony”. You would like to add “in remembrance”.

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Yes: “That the Committee hold a commemoration ceremony each year on December 5, or on the day closest to December 5 if the House is not sitting that day, in remembrance of the date that Bill C-68...”.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

All right.

Does everyone have that or shall I read it again? In English, it says:

That the Committee hold a commemoration ceremony each year on December 5, or on the day closest to December 5 if the House is not sitting that day, in remembrance of the date that Bill C-68 (An Act respecting firearms and other weapons) was passed by the Senate and received Royal Assent in 1995.

Madame Demers, would you like to speak to your motion?

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair. You may remember that on the last day of our fall session, we moved this motion, which was agreed to by the Committee.

Unfortunately, as we did not sit after that, and then there was prorogation, the motion was not brought forward to the House; therefore, we can assume that it died. This is why I would like us to agree to it today—that is, that we agree to it once more—in order to ensure that it can be put forward to the House.

I spoke about it earlier with Ms. Edward, the mother of one of the victims of the École Polytechnique Massacre, and she is very glad that we are putting this motion forward.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Yes. I think the only thing different here is that you wanted it to be reported to the House.

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Obviously you would have to do that if you were going to have a commemorative ceremony each year.

Any discussion on this?

Ms. McLeod.

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Certainly I want to acknowledge the very strong feelings my colleague has regarding this issue, but I also hope that if we are looking at doing things that are commemorative in nature, and remembering... This is the status of women committee, and we need to recognize and value that not all women share her feelings on this issue. Certainly many of my constituents, both male and female, have very different views in terms of this.

So with all due respect to her feelings, I would hope that if our committee is doing something commemorative and in remembrance, it could be something that we believe is very widely shared throughout the country.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Any further discussion?

Anita.

[Anita Neville, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

I think we have to acknowledge that in part there's going to be disagreement. Just before I came over here, I read a column that polled Canadians on commemorative activities. Certainly some of the issues that were raised in the Speech from the Throne the majority of Canadians do not support in terms of commemoration.

I think we put it out there. If there is a will to do it in Parliament, we do it. If there's not, so be it, but it reflects the majority in this committee. We've experienced it before. There is a significant difference on a number of issues that may come forward for commemoration, but I don't think it's inappropriate to put forward the majority will of a committee.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you.

Mr. Calandra.

[Paul Calandra, Conservative, Oak Ridges—Markham, ON]

I wonder if we might also contemplate the fact that right now there is a bill that did pass the House, where the will of the majority of members of Parliament, from all sides of the House, was to repeal the long gun registry. I wonder if we might just wait on this until the House has spoken yet again on this issue. As I said, it was something that was passed by a majority of the members of the House--the Conservative, Liberal, and NDP members; I don't recall any of the Bloc members.

I think it's a bit premature for us to talk about doing something like that until we hear what the will of the House is in the days ahead.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Mr. Desnoyers.

[Luc Desnoyers, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

As Nicole pointed out earlier, before we left for Christmas holidays we had supported this motion. Everybody was made aware of the debate. At that time, we were already aware of diverging opinions, but there is nothing stopping the Committee now from adopting a clear position regarding whether or not the Committee should hold a commemoration ceremony. The motion was clear. At that time, we held a debate, as the Members may recall, and I don't believe that it is necessary for us to start all over today.

We know that this is a sensitive issue and that a great number of people have differing points of view, but here, the majority of people support this initiative.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Madame Demers.

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

It is somewhat presumptuous to believe that a bill will necessarily be passed by Parliament or the Senate simply because it is a private members' bill and it was agreed to at second reading.

I moved this motion in the hope of also making people remember the event that took place on December 6, 1989. We are reminded that this tragedy was the primary reason why Bill C-68 was adopted in 1995, following repeated requests over several years by the parents of the victims, protest groups and people who were unfortunate enough to lose loved ones on December 6.

I think that it is rather appropriate to want to celebrate the day when the Parliament showed much wisdom in passing a bill that recognized the importance of establishing a firearms registry, which is still used by law enforcement agencies 5,000 times a day.

Madam Chair, I wish to restate my motion and my suggestion that we put it to a vote.