HUMA Committee Meeting

37th PARLIAMENT, 2nd SESSION

Standing Committee on Human Resources Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities

EVIDENCE

CONTENTS

Thursday, December 5, 2002

Á

1115

The Chair (Mrs. Judi Longfield (Whitby—Ajax, Lib.))

Hon. Claudette Bradshaw (Minister of Labour)

Á

1120

The Chair

Mr. Reed Elley (Nanaimo—Cowichan, Canadian Alliance)

Á

1125

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

Á

1130

Mr. Reed Elley

The Chair

Mr. Reed Elley

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

The Chair

Mr. Gurbax Malhi (Bramalea—Gore—Malton—Springdale, Lib.)

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

Mr. Gurbax Malhi

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

Á

1135

Mr. Gurbax Malhi

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

The Chair

Ms. Monique Guay (Laurentides, BQ)

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

Ms. Monique Guay

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

Ms. Monique Guay

Á

1140

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

Ms. Monique Guay

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

Ms. Monique Guay

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

Mr. Neil Gavigan (Director, Labour Standards and Workplace Equity, Department of Human Resources Development)

Ms. Monique Guay

The Chair

Ms. Diane St-Jacques (Shefford, Lib.)

Á

1145

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

Ms. Diane St-Jacques

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

Ms. Diane St-Jacques

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

Ms. Diane St-Jacques

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

Ms. Diane St-Jacques

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

Ms. Diane St-Jacques

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

The Chair

Ms. Libby Davies (Vancouver East, NDP)

Á

1150

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

Mr. Neil Gavigan

Ms. Libby Davies

Á

1155

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

The Chair

Mr. Eugène Bellemare (Ottawa—Orléans, Lib.)

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

Mr. Eugène Bellemare

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

Mr. Eugène Bellemare

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

Mr. Eugène Bellemare

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

Â

1200

Mr. Eugène Bellemare

The Chair

Mr. Eugène Bellemare

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

Mr. Eugène Bellemare

The Chair

Mr. Reed Elley

Â

1205

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

Mr. Reed Elley

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

Mr. Reed Elley

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

Mr. Reed Elley

The Chair

Mr. Raymond Simard (Saint Boniface, Lib.)

Â

1210

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

Mr. Raymond Simard

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

Mr. Raymond Simard

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

Mr. Neil Gavigan

Â

1215

Mr. Raymond Simard

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

Mr. Raymond Simard

The Chair

Ms. Monique Guay

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

Ms. Monique Guay

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

Â

1220

Ms. Monique Guay

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

Ms. Monique Guay

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

Ms. Monique Guay

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

Ms. Monique Guay

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

Ms. Monique Guay

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

Ms. Monique Guay

The Chair

Ms. Libby Davies

Â

1225

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

Ms. Libby Davies

Â

1230

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

Ms. Libby Davies

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

The Chair

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

The Chair

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

The Chair

Mr. Gurbax Malhi

Â

1235

Ms. Claudette Bradshaw

The Chair

---

CANADA

Standing Committee on Human Resources Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities

---

NUMBER 006

l

2nd SESSION

l

37th PARLIAMENT

---

EVIDENCE

Thursday, December 5, 2002

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Á  (1115)  

[English]

    The Chair (Mrs. Judi Longfield (Whitby—Ajax, Lib.)): Good morning and welcome to the sixth meeting of the human resources development committee.

    Today is a special day for the committee, because we have with us the Honourable Claudette Bradshaw, the Minister of Labour. Madam Bradshaw is here to review the government response to the committee report on promoting equity in the federal jurisdiction, Review of the Employment Equity Act. Madam Bradshaw has with her a gentlemen we saw a great deal of when we were reviewing it, Neil Gavigan, the director of labour standards and workplace equity. Welcome to both of you. It's a great honour to have you.

    Madam Bradshaw, you've been before the committee before, so you understand our procedure. The first five to ten minutes are opening remarks, and then we'll turn it over to questions from the committee.

    So again, welcome to the committee.

    Hon. Claudette Bradshaw (Minister of Labour): Thank you very much, Madam Chair, for welcoming me to your wonderful committee, which I made work so hard. I guess you save me for November, because the last time I was here I believe was in November, right before Christmas. You worked for me for almost nine months, and now I'm back.

    I was pleased to receive your invitation and I am glad to meet with the committee again. This is a welcome opportunity to follow up on the government's recent response to the committee's recommendations. The last time I was here I said we wanted to work with the committee and support your efforts in every way we could. I would like to reaffirm that commitment today.

    My officials and I appreciate the hard work you have done and the quality of the report you produced. When I was reading your report, it was amazing how much it was like reading a book. You wrote it in a language that any one of our four groups could read, which was really impressive for me, because in Ottawa very often you read reports with words that are not in the dictionary, you wonder where they got those words, and you have to reread them. But your report was written so clearly, so well, and you really were thinking of the four target groups when you did it. So I want to congratulate you for that.

    Your report has really helped to solidify the business case for employment equity. Even if every committee member did not agree on how to proceed, there was clear agreement on the principal objectives. I think employment equity and the work of this committee are central to our government's agenda as stated in the last Speech from the Throne. The Employment Equity Act is Canada's inclusive legislation. It is about fairness and equity for all, about skills, about making Canada a magnet for investment and talent. Through the removal of barriers, employers are tapping into the skills and talents of all workers. So when it comes to the goal of improving employment equity in the federal jurisdiction, there is no doubt that we have the same goals in mind. The next challenge is to determine how we can best work together to achieve them.

    I don't have to tell the committee about the complexities of the Employment Equity Act. You understand the shared mandate and the need to coordinate the work of the three federal agencies responsible for administering, interpreting, and enforcing the act. Even when we are pulling in the same policy direction, there are many operational considerations to take into account. There is the added challenge of looking for new resources through the federal budget process. It's a process that requires patience, determination, and a coordinated effort. I see the process to improve equality in the workplace in much the same way. We have been working on this matter for some time and will continue to do so.

    The good news is, we are making progress, and it's real progress. In some areas we are even coming close to achieving our goals, especially with respect to the employment of women and members of visible minority groups.

[Translation]

    Another notable achievement is that employers have begun to relalize that workplace equity is good for business.

    Many of the employer groups that came before the committee spoke about the positive benefits of employment equity and expressed their support. It seems that we have made real progress in that area.

    However, the next challenge is to provide the advice and guidance employees need to reach employment equity goals in their individual organizations.

    The committee recommended that the Minister of Labour take concrete action to meet that need. I am taking that action.

    We have already begun restructuring our operations in the labour program so that we can more effectively meet the needs of employers for practical advice on employment equity issues. At the same time, we have created a new website and are offering new employment equity tools to employers including information data bases and workforce analysis guides.

[English]

    The committee also called for better accountability in implementing employment equity, and we are moving on that front too. For example, we have developed a regulatory framework for employment equity in federal institutions like CSIS, the RCMP, and the Canadian Forces. We have begun restructuring the federal contractors program to help employers increase their representation of designated groups.

    I can initiate solutions like these within the labour program. In other cases we need assistance to implement changes. There is still a lot of work to be done to achieve the kinds of results the committee is looking for, and on that the government has agreed to work. In particular, I am referring to improving access for aboriginal people and persons with disabilities. Speaking for the labour program, we are already working on issues like these, as well as many of the others identified in your report. We will continue to do our part to build on the progress we are making on employment equity in this country. I realize we still have a long way to go, but I want to reiterate that my officials and I are fully committed to continuing to work with this committee and other groups, so that together we can meet our shared objective.

    I also agree that we need to do more to educate people about employment equity. There is a clear need to increase awareness, and I think this is something we can do together. There are many employers and unions who are making strong progress and creating good results on employment equity. I think this is something we can learn from. I would ask the members of this committee to go out and visit some of these employers, unions, and workplaces, and then report back on the best practices you have seen. I felt really strongly, after doing what we've done in employment equity, after reading your report, after seeing everybody who came to see you, you could really be of help to me, because you travel. How important it would be for the employers and the employees if, when you do travel, you went to see some of our companies and the best practices they have, possibly did a video or took a picture. Imagine what it would do for them, because the best companies we don't always recognize, and we don't always give them credit for doing good stuff. I'm throwing that to you, and I would be willing to come back and speak to you more about it. This would not only create another positive report, but your very response would help the progress of employment equity. I hope you will give this some thought.

    Please accept my thanks for the opportunity to be here with you this morning.

[Translation]

    It is important that we continue working together to make progress in employment equity. I know that this is an issue that is close to your heart and one that you believe in, as shown by the report you submitted to me. I hope that we will continue to focus on the needs of Canadians.

    Once again, Madam Chair, thank you very much.

Á  (1120)  

[English]

    The Chair: Thank you.

    I have Mr. Elley, Mr. Malhi, and Madame Guay. This will be a seven-minute round.

    Mr. Reed Elley (Nanaimo—Cowichan, Canadian Alliance): Thank you very much, Madam Minister. It's a pleasure to have you appear before our committee to respond to the report we put together in the spring of this year.

    I know you're aware that my party has put in a minority report and we do have some differences with the government over employment equity. I want to make it very clear that the Canadian Alliance believes there is a strong role for government in educating employers and the business community across Canada to be aware particularly of the need to have hiring practices that will help the disadvantaged and those who may be somewhat at a disadvantage in our society in achieving jobs. However, we are not in any way, shape or form assured that hiring practices based on quotas or equity in respect of gender and race and characteristics like that are necessarily the best way to do it. We have always believed the final decision should be based on a person's ability to do the job, which, of course, is based on merit. Both in promotion and in hiring practices merit should have the final say.

    I want to bring you an example that has come to me just in the last week. A constituent brought a complaint to my office. Other committee members will recall that I brought this up when we were going through some of the witness responses when the member of the RCMP was here. This is another complaint from a young man in my riding, a Caucasian in his mid-twenties, who has gone through, over the last year and a half, the process of application to join the RCMP. He passed all the necessary tests; he passed the physical and fitness tests and all those things. He finally got his interview, which would be the determining factor as to whether he would be allowed to join the RCMP. He came away from that interview very disappointed, because he really felt he would be allowed to join the RCMP. The reason they gave him was that he had accumulated a debt load of $11,000 during his post-secondary education in an institution of higher learning, and because of this debt load, he might be a candidate for bribes, so he should divest himself of his debt load and come back in a year and apply again. You can imagine the frustration and disappointment of this young man at being told this was the reason he was disqualified.

    Some of us might be slightly cynical and a little bit suspicious that this may have had more to do with what some of us believe is discriminatory hiring practice in the RCMP, because it basically uses a quota system. It denies that, but in practical application, I've had several instances where things seem to be different from what it is telling us. I don't know how, as minister, you address that situation. We want our young people to get employment, to get the very best in our government services, but then they run up against something like this. I'd be very pleased to have your response.

Á  (1125)  

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: Let me put my member of Parliament hat on. I've received many people in my office who have applied for the RCMP and told similar stories. For different reasons, the criteria to get into the RCMP can be pretty tough. So on that one, that's what I would answer you. I have no idea what their criteria are.

    Coming back to employment equity, I have to be honest with you and say, when I became Minister of Labour, with my background, I was quite surprised at the employer support we had for employment equity and the working relationship between the employers and the unions on employment equity. One of the groups in particular that I met many times was the Canadian Bankers Association. It really surprised me that they were so involved with us on employment equity. Fedco were very involved with us on employment equity. I was like you, on the outside looking in. There were a lot of myths, a lot of wondering how people really feel. I finally realized, after meeting with the Fedco companies and meeting with the Bankers Association, that there has never been any question of quotas. It's not a matter of quotas at all with them. When I have so much support, as a minister, coming from our biggest company in this country, working so much in partnership with Neil and his staff, the people we have on the ground, I've got to tell you that it made me feel good to be a Canadian.

    To answer you, we're not interested in quotas, we're interested in working with the employers and the employees. You had many of them come and make presentations to your committee. Hats off to them. When I became minister four years ago and I got the first annual report, my question was exactly the one you asked; How do employers feel about having to do all this? The response I got was that they're okay, because it makes them see where they're at, it makes them see where they need to do more work with their employees. They've seen the benefit of it.

    I don't know if that answers you or not.

Á  (1130)  

    Mr. Reed Elley: Do I have any time left?

    The Chair: Not if we're going to have a second round.

    Mr. Reed Elley: Okay. I will, perhaps give a brief response to that in my second round. Thank you.

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: Sure, that's why I'm here. I need to learn.

    The Chair: Okay.

    Mr. Malhi, and then Madame Guay, Madame St-Jacques, and Ms. Davies.

    Mr. Malhi.

    Mr. Gurbax Malhi (Bramalea—Gore—Malton—Springdale, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair.

    Madam Minister, what is being done to create coordination between the labour plan and the Canadian Human Rights Commission? As a minister, what are you going to do for this in the future?

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: We're now developing a memorandum of understanding with CHRC. This will create a framework of close cooperation. In your report are many things we wanted to do. I don't say that because I'm coming here and I'm trying to be nice to you, okay? If I didn't like the report, I would tell you. If I didn't feel good about the report, I would tell you. You have no idea how many doors you have opened to us because of your report. This is one area where you've really opened up the door for us, and the communication has already begun. My officials are meeting with the Human Rights people. We're working on the issues and the recommendations you had in your report.

    Mr. Gurbax Malhi: What are you planning for persons with disabilities? It seems to me they have not achieved their goals, whatever they want to achieve in the future.

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: There's no doubt the two groups we have to do a lot of work with are the aboriginal groups and the people with disabilities. Let me go through some of the things.

    With respect to the workplace strategy for persons with disability, you know Minister Stewart and HRDC are doing a lot of work. Again, you've opened up the door for us with employment equity. When you're into the labour program, you always try to find an opening to work in partnership with the different departments, because it's really about issues that touch people. So as we're there with employment equity, we can now play a role with Minister Stewart in the work she's doing on disability.

    I would like to see a workplace integration approach modelled after the ILO code of practice on managing disability in the workplace. We're proud of the key role Canada played in helping the ILO adopt this code, and I think we need to be able to continue those practices. What we need to do as a government is start bringing in the different ministers with their different responsibilities and work together. Your response on employment equity has opened up those doors.

    Is it going to be enough? No. There's a lot more work we'll have to do. But at least it's opened up the door for us with the HRDC, where now , whenever they speak about disability, they've got to look at employment equity.

Á  (1135)  

    Mr. Gurbax Malhi: So far we are dealing with four different groups in this report, but is there any reaction, positive or negative, from the business community on this report?

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: I told you, when I came into this portfolio, I knew we would have the support of the employees, I didn't have a problem with that, but I was pleasantly surprised at the employers' support in all of our employment equity areas. And hats off to the employers of Canada that they're so involved with us, because they're going to be the ones, with the employees, who have the solution.

    The Chair: Thank you.

    Madame Guay.

[Translation]

    Ms. Monique Guay (Laurentides, BQ): This is my first committee, and I am pleased to see you here today.

    Madam Minister, thank you for your presentation.

    Obviously, not everyone sitting around this table is of the same opinion, but I do think, in our report, that we tried to achieve a consensus as far as the legislation is concerned. Some things that are important to us may not necessarily be found in the report. First of all, I will talk about the list of recommendations.

    In the first recommendation, we had asked that the government reinstate the Employment Equity Positive Measures Program and the Enabling Resource Centre. Do you recall this file, Madam Minister? I had asked you to reinstate this centre because it is a priority for the people who need this type of service.

    Could you tell me whether or not there is any hope whatsoever that the centre will eventually be reinstated?

    That is my first question.

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: As you know, Ms. Guay, the centre is under the purview of the President of the Treasury Board. Would it be possible to modify our responsibilities and the legislation so that we could have our own centre? We could look at the matter.

    Ms. Monique Guay: Madam Minister, I'm going to change my question.

    Do you intend to try to convince the President of the Treasury Board to maintain this resource centre? This centre is the only one that really provides services to accommodate persons with disabilities; this centre is extremely important for the people who need it.

    I will therefore ask you again to exert some pressure so that this happens. Should you require our assistance in reinstating this centre, we will do all that we can.

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: I can tell you that we are about to begin studying the issue and our staff will be participating.

    Ms. Monique Guay: We were told that every department was capable of providing these services. This is false and several departments have confirmed this to us. Some departments don't have any resources whatsoever to assist the disabled.

    As you know, the centre provides services and tools, such as computers, that are specifically designed for the disabled. All of this is available at the Enabling Resource Centre but departments cannot provide this type of service. This is a very important point. Please note, Madam Minister, that this is recommendation 1. I would like you to get back to us on the matter.

    I will now ask you my second question. We learned through the report and the witnesses that there are now a greater number of women in the labour market. Although those women who enter the labour market under the Employment Equity Act may be greater in number, they are not paid as much as men. I would like to know whether or not you have an action plan on this matter.

    I will ask of my questions one after the other and then you can answer them. I would like to know whether or not you're open to the idea of establishing an employment equity enforcement commissioner, a resource person such as the one that now exists for the environment or other sectors. I will ask my other questions during the second round.

Á  (1140)  

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: Neil will provide you with more details about the discussions we have had pertaining to the centre; this is a file that we have taken very seriously.

    Ms. Monique Guay: We have as well.

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: We intend to study the matter.

    As for women, there is still a lot of work to be done, and this cannot be done overnight. We initiated a study on pay equity that is currently underway. I'm taking the matter seriously and I would like the study to be completed.

    As for your idea of a commissioner, I would be prepared to talk about it, but I must confess that when I see the work done in my department, both by employees and employers, and when I read the annual report, I feel pretty good because we are well represented, we do this job, and particularly, we have the option of establishing a committee.

    The way I see it, the HRD Committee which involves the participation of the Department of Labour, is a start; I am planning to come back to the committee and to give you other tasks.

    It is important that, as parliamentarians, we work together. I really appreciate the help of the liberals, but also appreciate the support of the opposition. For these reasons, I have a great deal of admiration for the committee.

    I would not want to study all of these issues with the same group. It is important to hear everybody's ideas and opinions. As the Minister of Labour, I have a national jurisdiction and therefore I work with all of the provinces and territories.

    In a nutshell, in order to answer your question, Ms. Guay, I would say that I am prepared to examine the issue, but I would like to point out that the staff and the department are already doing a very good job. I am not sure that a commissioner could do any better.

    Ms. Monique Guay: It could only improve the situation, Madam Minister.

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: Perhaps.

    I will ask Neil to answer your question about the centre. We are currently involved in meetings and he can brief you on the issue.

    Mr. Neil Gavigan (Director, Labour Standards and Workplace Equity, Department of Human Resources Development): At the Labour Program, we work with our colleagues from the Treasury Board since it is the Treasury Board that manages the centre and which is, as the employer, subject to the legislation. We are currently working very closely with them in to find ways to improve employment equity within the government.

    They have a national committee, the National Joint Council, which represents government unions and managers. The purpose of this committee is to assist the Treasury Board in managing equity problems within the government. They are doing some studies on the centre and some very meticulous follow-up work to ascertain whether or not this centre should remain open.

    To date, the Treasury Board is of the opinion that the centre should not be kept. The tools exist, but they feel that they need to do a very in-depth analysis on the need to eventually reinstate such an organization.

    Ms. Monique Guay: I would like to make a very brief intervention, Madam Chair.

[English]

    The Chair: Sorry, your time is up. Perhaps in a second round.

    Madame St-Jacques.

[Translation]

    Ms. Diane St-Jacques (Shefford, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair.

    It is always a pleasure to see you again and have you with us, Ms. Bradshaw.

    In your comments, you talked about the new regulations for federal institutions such as the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and the Canadian Forces. I would like to have some more details about deadlines for enforcing the regulations.

    The recommendations talked about including Parliament and the Library, but I have the impression that it is still not possible to do so. Could you provide us with some details as to why these two groups cannot be included.

Á  (1145)  

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: To answer your first question, this was done as of November 21^st.

    Once again, thank you for your good work.

    As regards Parliament and Library employees, you have opened the door for discussion. This is an important matter that we must indeed look at, but ultimately it will not be up to me to make the decision.

    Ms. Diane St-Jacques: What restrictions prevent us from including them?

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: I asked them the same question. I do not want to get into the details because apparently there are a lot of legal matters associated with this issue.

    Officials are currently discussing the matter. So the door is open for debate on employment equity. We will see what comes out of these discussions.

    Apparently, this is much more complicated than you would think.

    Ms. Diane St-Jacques: I have one last question. You also referred to the fact that reached accessibility objectives for aboriginal people and the disabled have not been reached. If I recall correctly, in the recommendations we suggested redefining the expression, because in providing such information, these people were at a disadvantage. It would appear that this recommendation has been turned down. What are the main reasons for doing this?

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: I read your report and recommendations very carefully. If I understand correctly, we are still in the process of reviewing the definition.

    During the course of discussions that I have had with employers and employees, this whole issue has struck me, once again, as being a bit difficult. In all honesty, I feel that a decision should be made before too long. How long can we go on saying that we should change the definition? I think that our employers and employees must agree on a definition. However, we are going to have to pay attention: if we really want to foster pay equity, we have to ensure that is not us but rather the employers and employees who make the decision. I am firmly convinced about that.

    Right now, they are discussing and studying the issue. Once again, your report opened the door. I would like a decision to be made shortly.

    Ms. Diane St-Jacques: Quickly.

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: I get the feeling that people have been telling me for a long time that this matter is being reviewed. I came here four years ago, and for the past four years, I have been meeting with employees and employers about definitions. I am an Aries, and at times I don't have much patience. Four years is a long time.

    Ms. Diane St-Jacques: Yes, that is a very long time.

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: People are waiting for these decisions, and I hope that these decisions will be made before long.

    Ms. Diane St-Jacques: We will always be here should you need our support, Madam Minister.

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: Thank you.

[English]

    The Chair: Ms. Davies.

    Ms. Libby Davies (Vancouver East, NDP): Thank you very much, Minister, for being here today.

    This actually was a very good report to work on. I think the committee worked very well together, and hopefully, we made good recommendations--it sounds as though you're fairly positive about them. There are a lot of questions that could be asked, but I want to come back to the question Madame St-Jacques raised, which is really the question of our own backyard.

    I really was very surprised, when we engaged in this debate about whether or not the Employment Equity Act should be applying to the Library of Parliament, as well as to employees of the Senate and the House of Commons, excluding members' staff, that this question of parliamentary privilege came up. It seems to me there are a lot of contradictions. It's very difficult to go out into the workplace, even within the federal civil service or the private sector, and defend employment equity, saying everybody's got to do a much better job, when we basically exempt ourselves under the cover of parliamentary privilege. When you respond today and say it's a lot more complicated than we thought, I suppose that debate could go on endlessly, and things can always become more complicated, but it seems to me there's a very important principle here. It has not been in any way rationalized how parliamentary privilege actually applies to the Library of Parliament. This was not actually dealt with in your government's response.

    Second, with employees of the Senate and the House, the committee only went so far as to recommend that they be covered by annual reporting and compliance orders, which are basically unenforceable. So it would not get us into the realm of a tribunal or anything dealing with that. I was very disappointed in the department's response on these two questions. I think the government's really fudging it. You can use parliamentary privilege cover for everything, but the reality still remains that people basically have no protection.

    So I would ask you today if you agree with the principle that the Library of Parliament should be covered and whether you will make a commitment that your department will now work this through in a timely way and find a mechanism to allow that to happen. And with employees of the Senate and the House, will you give further consideration to the idea that the annual reporting and compliance audit is something that could easily be addressed? These are not earth-shattering things that are going to upset the whole environment, don't you agree?

Á  (1150)  

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: With the local media behind me, I'm going to be very careful about what I agree or do not agree on, but I will say this.

    Yes, you did give us recommendations, but just as importantly, as I said to you a while ago, you've opened up many doors of discussion for us. As you know, they're not under the Canada Labour Code either. We will be working very closely with the Library of Parliament. We are doing that now. We are also speaking with Justice on the issue. We can do those things because of your report, because of the recommendations you've given us. I can assure you that we are doing those two things. If you'd like Neil to be a little more specific about who they're speaking to and the issues, he can certainly go into that with you. It was an area of interest to me when I read the report and your recommendations. As I said, when you do reports like this, it's interesting for us, because you not only give us recommendations, but you do open doors, and that is one door you have opened.

    Mr. Neil Gavigan: To follow up, even though at this stage, as the minister indicated, they're not covered, we intend to offer the services--support service, data service, counselling service--we provide to all employers, and we'll make sure the Library of Parliament and any other institution of Parliament has an opportunity to take advantage of those services.

    As to the very legal question of whether or not the Minister of Labour could have the authority to use the Employment Equity Act to cover the institution of Parliament, we can't give you a definitive answer. We're talking to our PCO and Justice colleagues, because it's not just the Employment Equity Act, and certainly, when the act was passed in 1995-96, this issue was there then. There is a legal framework that defines what one minister can apply to others or what one regulatory branch or executive branch of government can apply to the legislature. We are pursuing that, and we will try to have a stronger, definitive legal answer for you.

    Ms. Libby Davies: I think the committee was very careful in its deliberation and tried to offer a way this could be accommodated. So I hope, when you say the door is open for discussion, it means more than providing tools and support, and you will actually recognize that there's really no legal impediment with regard to the Library of Parliament and that the annual reporting and compliance audit for other employees of the House and the Senate is again something that would be unenforceable. At least it's moving us in that direction. So I would hope very much that your discussion will lead to that outcome. I would like to ask if you would be prepared to come back to the committee to report on what you've been able to do, say in six months or a year, so that we can actually monitor that. We're talking about our own environment here, and we should be willing to make some changes, I think. I hope the minister would agree.

Á  (1155)  

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: I don't have a problem with that at all. I'm going to be working with you as a committee, I think I've indicated that I really want to do that, because of the respect I have for the committees. I sat on so many of them through my time in community work, and I was in front of these committees as a witness a lot when I was in community work. So I have absolutely no problem doing that. Don't even hesitate to write to me; it's always good for you to put it in writing, because it gives me something to give to the officials. As important as it is for us to have the annual report, so that employers and employees can see how they're doing, it's important for the minister to hear from the committee members once in a while, to make sure I'm on top of it too.

    The Chair: Mr. Bellemare.

[Translation]

    Mr. Eugène Bellemare (Ottawa—Orléans, Lib.): Ms. Bradshaw, I will ask my first question in English for the benefit of Libby Davies.

[English]

    Madam Davies brought up a very interesting point on the library, a point I totally support, and I am pleased with your answer. Are you aware of the Quigley case? I will expand if you're not. This is very important.

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: Yes, I'm very aware. You're talking about my home riding.

    Mr. Eugène Bellemare: For the benefit of those who are not aware, this gentleman wanted to hear CPAC in the language of his choice, which happens to be English, and he can only hear it in French. He's taken legal measures to get a positive response, on which I totally agree with him. However, the Speaker of the House indicated that what happens in the House of Commons is the House of Commons' business and it overrides laws, if I may give that interpretation. It is now in a court of appeal; I'm not sure if it's the Ontario Court of Appeal or the New Brunswick Court of Appeal.

    Do you suspect that we could have a similar response from the Speaker of the House--with all the respect I have for him--regarding the Library of Parliament and your insistence on having employment equity applied?

    And as a by-product of my question, will there be someone from your department observing what is happening with the Quigley case?

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: Yes, we're following the Quigley case quite closely, because it is one of my constituents and I have a lot of respect for Mr. Quigley and what he has done. I want to try not to talk about Mr. Quigley's case too much, because I understand there's a possibility of appeal, so I've been--

    Mr. Eugène Bellemare: It is being appealed.

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: But anyway, I will say this to you; it answers Ms. Davies' question a little bit and it'll answer a little bit of yours. When you're with the labour program, one thing you realize quite quickly once you get into that department--and it's quite unique, I believe--is that they're used to working with different groups and they don't say, this is the way it is and we're going to do this. That's not how we work in the labour department. If you look at the Canada Labour Code--and I don't want Ms. Davies to jump me on this one--it took us eight years for part one of the code. Why did it take us eight years? Because we sat with the employee and employer groups and made sure the code belonged to them. That's why it took a long time, and a lot of people were frustrated and complaining, but I'll tell you the effect that it has. We settled 95% of our disputes last year without a strike or lockout. Why? The Canada Labour Code belongs to the employee and the employer, not to my staff, and not to the Minister of Labour.

    To answer your question, you've done more than make recommendations, you've opened up doors. How long is it going to take? I'll report back every six months. I'm sure Ms. Davies is going to send letters every three months to find out how we're doing on this question, but at least you've opened a door for us to speak to the staff, to start speaking with the employer, to start speaking with the employees. Let's see where it's going to bring us. And if it's that big an issue, maybe the political will on the Hill should also start working on this issue. I have no idea if there is political will, I have no idea what the politicians are doing on these issues, but when I read your report, it was quite obvious to me that you had a lot of concerns about this. When I read the questions coming from the library, a lot of them were based on this.

    I can tell you quite honestly that it was one of my first questions: They're not under the Canada Labour Code? I was quite surprised to hear that when I became Minister. Will the Speaker answer me as you said he would? I doubt it, because we're going to be working so much with them and their employees that I can't see them closing the door on us on this issue. I think they'll listen to us, I think they'll have discussions with us, and I think we'll be able to play an important role. I hope we will be able to play an important role, because when you speak about employment equity, you speak about the employees of this country, and it's a pretty important issue for me. So I'm hoping the door will be open, we will have good discussions, and the Speaker will not answer me like that.

[Translation]

    Mr. Eugène Bellemare: You give us a glimmer of hope, Madam Minister.

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: Thank you.

  (1200)  

    Mr. Eugène Bellemare: I will ask my second question.

[English]

    The Chair: You have one minute, which means you have to split it between you and the minister.

[Translation]

    Mr. Eugène Bellemare: Very well. On page 2 of your presentation, Ms. Bradshaw, you said that in certain sectors, you have almost attained your objectives, particularly with respect to the employment of women and members from visible minorities. Could you tell us what these objectives were?

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: Our objective was to achieve numbers demonstrating that employees and employers had taken the issue of employment equity seriously and that tangible progress had been made. It is therefore important that we receive their report every year so that we are able to verify, on a regular basis, whether or not they are sensitive to our four groups. According to the figures, we can see that things are progressing very well in certain categories, but not so well in others.

    Mr. Eugène Bellemare: Thank you.

[English]

    The Chair: Mr. Elley.

    Mr. Reed Elley: There's another subject I think many Canadians are now starting to feel very concerned about. We face some very real crises in this country. One I think we're going to face--and you're aware of this, of course, as Minister of Labour--is the whole question of the labour shortage. As we move towards seeing the baby boomers, of whom I'm one, retiring within the next 10 years, we're going to have a huge labour shortage in this country. We are now starting to see it in a number of areas, in my province and across the country. One of the recommendations we made was the streamlining and tightening up of credentials for foreign workers. I had, again, a situation in my riding, where a Filipino doctor emigrated to Canada. She was let down by immigration services before she came over here. She was told she would have a position. When she got over here, she was working at Pizza Hut. How must she feel as an immigrant to this country with those credentials? I found, as I investigated, that the B.C. medical association played with her, and it was awful. This is just one of many examples we have in this country.

    What I'm concerned about is not only the streamlining of that. Is there a definite strategy being worked on that coordinates Immigration, Labour, other government agencies, so that we have something to say to Canadians, that this crisis is going to be met and we're going to do something about it?

  (1205)  

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: I couldn't agree with you more. When I finished my six-week trip on homelessness, I made my presentation to caucus. I met my deputy minister when I arrived, and I said to him, you know, Warren, I'm concerned about homelessness, I know I can do something about it, but I'll tell you what I'm really concerned about, the labour shortage. It's anywhere you go across Canada. If you want to make the argument, it's the other reason we should take employment equity so seriously. We should be really aware of what's happening in the workforce. Our annual report can play a role in that.

    On the other side of that, I've been working closely with the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. He and Minister Stewart and Minister Rock had their big summit in Toronto. So they're really aware of it. The minister was in my province last Thursday and Friday, and I had a discussion with him on Monday. At least now we're really starting to discuss things with the provinces, because a lot of it is also provincial jurisdiction. So finally, our governments are working together better. We have to speak to the provinces on these issues. Some provinces are better than others, some provinces are more advanced than others.

    When I had multiculturalism, the number of people I met who said to me.... One dad said to me, the week after he had done it, I drove to Niagara Falls, and I was going to kill myself. He drove from Toronto to Niagara Falls, and he was going to kill himself, because here he was, a person who had I don't know how many degrees, driving a taxi.

    Mr. Reed Elley: Can I interrupt you just for a moment to get down to the real question I asked you? When a constituent asks me if there is a plan to meet the crisis in the labour shortage that's going to hit us so severely, can I tell them the government has a plan and they will soon see it?

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: Well, you've got three ministers who held a summit in Toronto, where they brought in all the stakeholders to discuss all these issues. I don't believe you would have seen that two or three years ago. We are sitting with the provinces . So I would say to you, I feel much better today than I did when I first arrived here.

    Mr. Reed Elley: When will we see the plan?

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: Get to the Minister of Immigration and Citizenship and ask him how his meetings are going with the provincial counterparts, because that's really the big issue.

    Mr. Reed Elley: Okay.

    The Chair: Mr. Simard.

    Mr. Raymond Simard (Saint Boniface, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair.

    Welcome, Madam Minister.

    You spoke in your notes of improving access for aboriginal people, and that really strikes a nerve with me, it's something I have a particular interest in. My riding of Saint Boniface is right in the heart of Winnipeg, and I believe within 8 years fully 25% of the workforce in Winnipeg will be aboriginal, so it's obviously something that is close to us. I'm a firm believer also that our workforce should be a reflection of our society. There are a lot of stereotypes out there with regard to the aboriginal people that we've developed as a society, and you spoke earlier of increasing awareness. I really feel we must have a focused strategy specifically for these people, and I'm wondering if you've developed a communications strategy whereby, for instance, you're trying to make the employers aware of the advantages of hiring aboriginal people and, moreover, making the aboriginal people aware of their rights under the employment equity program.

  (1210)  

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: I'm going to give you an update on what we've done since your committee has come in, because a lot of things have been happening. As you know, because of my homelessness file, I have a special interest in all the aboriginal issues--if I don't solve this, who's going to do it? If we don't do it for homelessness, what's going to happen? So I'll give you the different points, and then Neil, if you wish, can go on.

    Mr. Raymond Simard: Yes, absolutely.

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: The staff have met with representatives of HRDC's aboriginal relations office, as well as representatives from the Aboriginal Human Resource Development Council of Canada, to develop a workplace strategy for aboriginal people. If we can, as the ministry of labour, bring the other groups together and say, let's all work together on this thing, that would be good. I'm a believer in that. We can no longer work alone, we've got to bring the groups together, so we're starting to do that a bit, to be a facilitator. The strategy we built on the existing aboriginal human resources development agreement between HRDC and aboriginal community organizations. I think the homelessness issue has been so good because the communities have come together. So if we can play a role, because of your report and your recommendations, in coordinating the different programs, then going to the communities and bringing them in to work with us, hopefully, we're going to start seeing some movement.

    We're considering a proposal that would link the Aboriginal Human Resource Development Council of Canada to the employers. If we can accomplish this, it is going to be a really good breakthrough for us under the Employment Equity Act. If we can look at what everybody is doing and bring our employers in and sensitize them--it's actually what I'm doing with the homelessness file--hopefully, we're going to see a difference.

    There's no sense in our asking you to do a report, there's no sense in our doing annual reports if we don't have a plan in place. We've had enough reports, we've talked enough about it, what about some action? Your recommendations have enabled us, in some areas, to become a facilitator. Hopefully, when I come back, you'll see some results.

    Mr. Raymond Simard: I just find that a lot of stuff falls through the cracks. I had the opportunity to visit a centre where they were training 20 young aboriginal kids in environmental studies; this course was accredited with the University of Manitoba, and it was funded, I believe, by Human Resources and Indian Affairs. But in the middle of the program both those departments cut the funding, because they said education is a provincial thing. So they were training all these kids and these guys were going to U of M and getting their master's degrees, and all of sudden they cut the program in the middle. So they fall through the cracks somehow. There has to be some kind of coordinating of the departments so that doesn't happen.

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: And that's what we intend to do.

    Neil.

    Mr. Neil Gavigan: As the minister indicated, the real strength of what the Employment Equity Act does for us in this instance is in giving us a mechanism to work directly with companies across the country. Part of the strategy we're looking at here is with the Aboriginal Human Resources Development Council. It is, in effect, a sector council, managed by aboriginal people with government support. They provide cross-cultural awareness, they provide training, they provide support to companies to help them become sensitized and to put together aboriginal hiring plans. They also link the companies across Canada--in Saint Boniface and Winnipeg, across the country--to the employer community. They're a very small sector council at this particular point. We've asked them to develop a proposal that would see them expand their service to target the companies under the Employment Equity Act, because we feel, again, that what we can do here is bring the employer and the community together.

    When we were doing our consultations prior to the hearings of this committee, we were in Winnipeg, among other cities, and it was ironic for me to be standing among employers, union representatives, and community group organizations, with four or five key businesses implementing employment equity, and to have in the room a representative of the aboriginal community, whose job it was to help aboriginal people find employment. These employers implementing employment equity and this aboriginal person met for the first time in our consultation. We think we can bridge that gap.

  (1215)  

    Mr. Raymond Simard: I just want to make one last quick comment. I've had the experience of witnessing your homelessness program in Saint Boniface, and it's been a real success. It's a grassroots movement that's having a very direct impact, so I want to compliment you on that.

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: And I think we can do this with all four groups, but especially with our aboriginals and disabled. I think we can put the same process in place. At least you've given us the tool, as a committee, to put the people together. But again, don't hesitate to give me a note for Neil if you come up with any ideas. Because it's always good for our staff to sit with real people--politicians are real people, believe it or not, and you know your constituencies. It wouldn't be a bad idea for us to be able to sit with you once in a while individually, not always in committee, where we are under a time limit So don't hesitate if you want to see one of my staff. Feel free to do that, because you're my tool.

[Translation]

    Mr. Raymond Simard: Thank you very much.

[English]

    The Chair: Madame Guay.

[Translation]

    Ms. Monique Guay: Thank you, Madam Chair.

    We could discuss matters for hours, but in the committee, there are some things that we must state for the record, as you say in English.

    Despite everything that has been said, I would like to again raise the matter of the Enabling Resource Centre. Madam Minister, the fact that the Enabling Resource Centre closed its doors at the exact time that we were reviewing the Employment Equity Act was, in my opinion, absolutely irresponsible and showed a total lack of regard for the work of the committee. You can understand that for the members of the committee, this was totally unacceptable.

    While we were in the process of reviewing the Employment Equity Act, we found out that the Enabling Resource Centre for the Disabled was to be shut down. And it was not shut down because it cost too much money; it had a budget of $554,000 per year.

    I know that you are not the one who shut it down, however, I know that you are the minister, and as such, you can shake your ministerial colleagues a bit and demand that they show some respect for the work being done in the committee.

    As far as I am concerned, Madam Minister, the fact that this was not done is rather regrettable. The committee wrote to the President of the Treasury Board. We all made public presentations asking that this centre keep its doors open, but the work was not done within the department. Or at least, if it was done, we did not hear about it.

    I would hope that this type of thing does not happen again, that another attempt is made to review this file and that we will be able to say that this resource service for the disabled will again be offered. Currently, the departments are not prepared to deal with the problem.

    That being said, I will not ask you to respond immediately; I am merely making you aware of the issue.

    In our report, Madam Minister, we also pointed out that the Canadian Human Rights Commission was taking a great deal of time to complete its first phase. We were wondering if this was due to a lack of funding and resources. I would like to hear your comments on the matter.

    There is also the situation of immigrants who come to Canada and have difficulties getting their credentials recognized. I know that this question comes under both federal and provincial jurisdiction and that we have to develop some agreements. The various ministries of education have a say in the matter. Some training is provided to certain groups, including doctors, to help them have their credentials recognized and be able to work in various provinces of the country.

    Is the government currently looking at the possibility of accelerating the credential recognition process for these individuals?

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: I want to talk to you about the centre because I believe that it is important. It appears that they were given money for four years and these four years have come and gone.

    Madam Chair, given that you do not have a minister sitting on your committee and that, as a minister, I know the employment sector, you could send me a letter on behalf of the committee to ask whether or not I would be prepared to meet with the President of the Treasury Board about the centre. If you are prepared to write me, if you want to discuss the matter with your committee and everyone is in agreement, as a minister, I would be prepared to represent you and discuss the matter with the President of the Treasury Board, because I believe in it. If I can help you, I will do so.

    As for the finances of the commission, I have had two different answers since yesterday. If I understand correctly, they are in the process of preparing a budget. They are in the process of presenting a budget.

    Ms. Monique Guay: A new budget?

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: A new budget. Once again, I do not think that you realize what impact your reports can have. There are a lot of people in our communities who do some very, very good work. It is just like the Speech from the Throne: everybody is trying to find something for him or herself in it. I, for example, try to see if it contains something about labour or again about the homeless. You had the same impact with your report.

    The other groups with whom we work very well read your report and it had an impact on them. Right now, we are negotiating a memorandum of understanding to better oversee the process from making the assessment criteria that are used to determine whether or not employers comply with the legal standards clearer and more coherent. The idea behind this is to provide employers with a more accurate picture of their obligations and of the actios they have to take. We are working very, very closely with the commission.

  (1220)  

    Ms. Monique Guay: The commission does good work; it is simply that the process is extremely long. We have to find a way to speed up the way it works.

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: Once again, Monique, you could write Neil on a regular basis asking that he keep you informed about our discussions with them, so that you will know how things are progressing.

    Ms. Monique Guay: We have already done that.

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: We will continue to do this.

    Ms. Monique Guay: And what about the acknowledgement of credentials, Madam Minister? I believe that Mr. Manley has often raised the question in the committee. The recognition of credentials in his region is a significant problem. It is not so important in my riding, but it is a big issue elsewhere.

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: Monique, could you tell me a little bit about what you mean by credentials?

    Ms. Monique Guay: Well, it's the whole issue of—

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: Foreign credentials. O.K., I thought it was that, but I wasn't sure.

    I answered that question earlier, Monique. Personally, I am encouraged by the fact that our department is meeting with the provinces. We have been talking about this issue for a long time; the discussions on the issue did not start yesterday. In my opinion, the doors to the provinces are now open. The fact that the Department of Industry and HRDC are working together with our Minister of Immigration and Citizenship leads me to hope that something will happen. Everybody wants us to do something.

    Ms. Monique Guay: Could we ask you to send us some information from your department on the status of the issue? Has the committee been struck? We will need this information in order to work, to find out where we should be exerting pressure and what we will need to try to change.

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: No problem.

    Ms. Monique Guay: Great, thank you.

[English]

    The Chair: Okay.

    We've completed the first and second rounds. I'm going to break the tradition and give Ms. Davies another go under the second round before I go to the Liberal side.

    Ms. Libby Davies: Thank you, Madam Chair.

    The question that I wanted to raise, Madam Bradshaw, concerns recommendation 16 in our report, which dealt with the relationship between employers and employees. We did have some very good representation from the CLC. The act says consultation and collaboration is required, and I think their position was that they felt it was very superficial. So our recommendation to the government was to look for ways to strengthen the requirement for consultation and to look at whether this issue of consultation and collaboration should be included as one of the functions the Human Rights Commission would examine when they're considering an employer's compliance, so they'd actually use it as one of their measures.

    Your reply was sort of vague, and it didn't specifically look at it. You do talk about the fact that there's a joint employment equity committee through the public service. The sense I had from listening to the witnesses is that many of the union reps were putting forward this idea at a more local level, departmental level. So while you may have this overall committee--and I don't know how well it functions--it did appear that there's a need to look at strengthening the consultation and collaboration between employers and employees, and that may be even more true in the private sector.

    I wonder whether you could comment further on this. In your report you're saying you will explore measures to clarify consultation and collaboration. Is there anything further that you can offer on what you might be doing to follow this up, particularly at a departmental level or a more local level, so that there really is more meaningful involvement from employee groups and union representatives?

  (1225)  

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: You see, as a minister, how important it is to have you do the work you've done and bring in the witnesses you have. Because we can claim we've got this great program and it's working very well and everything is great and we're talking to the employees and employers, but.... When I read your report, that was one of the areas that took me aback. I wanted to see what we had done and why this was. The Labour people have already met with the business and union representatives and discussed this committee recommendation, and we're going to be planning further meetings.

    Sometimes, when you put committees in place, you hear just a certain number of people, and it's always the same people who are on these committees. You know that and I know that. But do we really get to the need of the grassroots person we mean to help? I'm not always sure we do. So it's good, I think, that you brought it up. I wasn't very happy with our response, to tell you the truth. This is an important issue. I can come here to speak to you and tell you, oh, yes, the labour program, we speak to the employees and the employers, but if it's not happening at the grassroots.... I can be friends with Fedco and CLC all I want, but if it's not down to the company, it's not being very effective. So I will be watching this one like a hawk to see how we're doing and what we have put in place.

    Ms. Libby Davies: I could follow up on that, but maybe I'll go to another question.

    I think pretty well everybody we heard from agreed with employment equity. You've heard from our colleague from the Canadian Alliance, and they have a different opinion. There is a myth still out there. There is a lot of misinformation about employment equity, that it's about quotas, about unfair hiring, about giving people special advantages. This is all completely wrong. It does seem to me--and we heard this from many people, both employers and equity-seeking groups--that the government needs to do a really good, sustained job of providing education. As you pointed out, I think, when you came to the committee the first time, the private sector, such as the banks, have been doing a very good job. They've actually, in some ways, been doing a better job than the federal government of meeting various targets with employment equity-seeking groups.

    What proposals does your department have to provide really good information about the value of employment equity, to show that diversity makes for a better workplace, that it's not about hiring people who aren't qualified, it's not about setting quotas, that this is good employment management practice? I think we could do a lot better in getting that message out, and doing it, actually, with the private sector. I wonder if it's on your agenda anywhere to do that in a more sustained way.

  (1230)  

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: My reaction to the staff after reading your report was the same as what you just said. I said, we have to get out there, we have to talk about best practices, we have to talk about employment equity, people need to know. There is a shortage, but we have to start opening our doors.

    I don't know if this can be done through the committee; I have to sit with your chair. I've spoken with Minister Stewart, and I said, how busy are you going to keep the committee? I think it would be an excellent thing for you to take over and do something a little different, go out, meet the companies and employee groups that are doing very well on employment equity, and give them a pat on the back. We don't do that enough. We come here, we talk, we try to change things. With a package of films or pictures, with your talking to people, I could possibly have a good PR package. I think the parliamentarians have a role to play. A lot of committees visit a lot of places to do a lot of stuff, but we very seldom, as parliamentarians, go out to say to somebody, we're here to thank you for the good job you've done and we want to use you on a national level as a model, because we need to do more. I would love to see a committee accept something like that. That's why, in my speech, I said I was very serious about it. I can hire a firm--if I can get the money, because I have to go through HRDC--we can do PR on employment equity, but imagine the effect it would have if a parliamentary committee decided to do that, the message it would give.

    Ms. Libby Davies: I think it's more than PR. It's really education, both within and without--

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: It is, but what better way to do education than to have you go out? When you're out, you always do PR, you always do radio stations, you always do news, people follow you. You can arrange all of that, I see it done. If employment equity is that important to you, then why wouldn't we do it? That's my argument. It's very important to me. I wish I had the time to go and visit the companies that are giving me best practices. It's something I will be discussing with the chair, it's something I put in my speech, it's something she will discuss with you. I'm throwing it out. To me, employment equity is a serious issue that we should do something about.

    The Chair: So you're going to come with me to the Liaison Committee to fight for the budget?

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: You could have CPAC with you, for God's sake.

    The Chair: Imagine the parliamentary committee that had the authority and the proper finances to do those kinds of things.

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: Let's see. I'm willing to go to bat for you.

    The Chair: Your parliamentary secretary has asked for one final short question. I'm going to allow that, and then I will give you a couple of minutes to wrap up.

    Mr. Gurbax Malhi: Thank you, Madam Chair.

    Since I became parliamentary secretary to you, I have had a chance to talk to so many people from different parts of the country, especially from your province. When people come and they ask me who I work for, I mention your name, and you are very popular at the grassroots. I think you're the person who can take the lead on two issues.

    First, I met with five different groups in the last four or five weeks, from the auto industry, the chemical and plastics industries, trucking, and the construction companies. Everybody said, we have a shortage of labour. I think you can take the lead on this very important issue, not just for one group, but for different groups. That's very important for the whole country.

    Second, within the last so many years more than 1.7 million people came to Canada as new immigrants, and most of them are professionals. I've raised this issue so many times, the recognition of their foreign credentials. I don't think anything has been done so far, but if you take the lead on that one with the provincial and territorial governments, HRDC, and Citizenship and Immigration, that would be a good step towards helping those people who come here for professional experience and to work in their profession. They are driving taxis, they are delivering pizza, they're working in factories, and they're not getting the benefit of their education and experience from back home. When we have a student from here, we spend thousands of dollars for the student to have a graduation, then the medical courses, but those people have already spent the money outside and they have their degrees and their experience. We have to do something with the provincial and federal governments. This is a demand of most people across the country. I think you can take the lead, you are the grassroots person.

    Thank you.

  (1235)  

    Ms. Claudette Bradshaw: Thank you very much. When somebody tells you you're very popular, you know they want something afterwards. I will see what I can do.

    I'm not going to speak very long.

[Translation]

    I am very sincere when I say thank you, from the bottom of my heart, for your committee report. You have changed things and opened doors, which will enable us to do our job.

[English]

As you know, we can only work as far as doors are open to us and people are willing to work with us. You can bring a horse to water, but you can't make the horse drink.

    I'm also going to meet with your chair because I have other ideas I would like you to work on with me. We can't tell you enough how impressed we were with your report. Any minority, any aboriginal, any woman, any handicapped or disabled people could take your report and read it. The fact that you did it like that tells me who you all are and tells me I want to work with you. If you're willing to work with me, as long as I'm there, I have other ideas for you.

    I really want to thank you on behalf of all the Canadian people for the work you've done on this one. Don't ever hesitate to get in touch with my staff, please, and not only in letters. Once in a while Neil is allowed to go for lunch with you at the parliamentary dining room. So if you have an issue or something you really want us to work on, I'm not the type of minister who says staff cannot speak to politicians. You have every right to speak to Neil, he's your employee as he is mine, and I invite you to do that at any time.

    I will be sensitive to what you've asked me. I know how dear it is to your heart. Foreign credentials were brought up by a lot of members this morning. I will take that back very seriously and have some discussions.

    So once again, thank you.

    The Chair: Now that you've offered Neil to go to lunch with us, I think it's incumbent upon me to suggest that if we're going for lunch with Neil, we each pay for our own meal. It's not on an expense account that's unlimited.

    With that, thank you, Minister. We will chat much more in the future.

    Meeting adjourned.