HUMA Committee Meeting

Notices of Meeting include information about the subject matter to be examined by the committee and date, time and place of the meeting, as well as a list of any witnesses scheduled to appear. The Evidence is the edited and revised transcript of what is said before a committee. The Minutes of Proceedings are the official record of the business conducted by the committee at a sitting.

For an advanced search, use Publication Search tool.

If you have any questions or comments regarding the accessibility of this publication, please contact us at accessible@parl.gc.ca.

Previous day publication Next day publication

37th PARLIAMENT, 1st SESSION

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

EVIDENCE

CONTENTS

Tuesday, May 7, 2002

1205

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

Ms. Bradshaw

1210

1215

1220

1225

The Chair

Mr. Monte Solberg (Medicine Hat, Canadian Alliance)

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw

1230

Mr. Monte Solberg

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw

Mr. Monte Solberg

The Chair

Mr. Larry Spencer (Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, Canadian Alliance)

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw

1235

The Chair

Ms. Raymonde Folco (Laval West, Lib.)

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw

1240

The Chair

Ms. Monique Guay (Laurentides, BQ)

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw

1245

Ms. Monique Guay

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw

Ms. Monique Guay

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw

The Chair

Ms. St-Jacques

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw

1250

Ms. Diane St-Jacques

The Chair

Mr. Peter Goldring (Edmonton Centre-East, Canadian Alliance)

1255

Ms. Bradshaw

The Chair

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

1300

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw

Mr. Gurbax Malhi

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw

Mr. Gurbax Malhi

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw

The Chair

Mr. Larry Spencer

1305

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw

Mr. Larry Spencer

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw

Mr. Larry Spencer

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw

The Chair

Mr. Alan Tonks (York South--Weston, Lib.)

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw

Mr. Alan Tonks

1310

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw

Mr. Warren Edmondson (Assistant Deputy Minister, Labour, Department of Human Resources Development)

Mr. Alan Tonks

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw

Mr. Alan Tonks

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw

1315

The Chair

Ms. Monique Guay

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw

1320

The Chair

Mr. Pat Martin (Winnipeg Centre, NDP)

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw

Mr. Pat Martin

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw

1325

Mr. Pat Martin

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw

The Chair

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw

The Chair

Ms. Raymonde Folco

1330

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw

The Chair

Mr. Peter Goldring

1335

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw

The Chair

CANADA

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

NUMBER 063

1st SESSION

37th PARLIAMENT

EVIDENCE

Tuesday, May 7, 2002

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Â (1205)

[English]

The Chair (Mrs. Judi Longfield (Whitby--Ajax, Lib.)): Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. I'd like to call to order the 63rd meeting of the Standing Committee on Human Resources Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities.

This morning we have with us, to discuss the main estimates for human resources development, the Minister of Labour, the Honourable Claudette Bradshaw. With Minister Bradshaw today we have Warren Edmondson, the Assistant Deputy Minister of Labour; Susan Scotti, the Assistant Deputy Minister for the National Secretariat on Homelessness; and Guy Tremblay, the Director General of Financial Services.

Minister, we welcome you and your officials to our committee, and we look forward to your introductory remarks. You were a long-standing member of this committee, so you know the drill. After your introductory remarks, we'll open it up to questions and answers with the members.

Hon. Claudette Bradshaw (Minister of Labour, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair, for inviting me to appear before the committee.

I welcome this opportunity to bring the members up to date on the recent achievements of the labour program and the National Secretariat on Homelessness as well as on our plan for progress in the coming year.

Before I begin, I would like to say how much I value the work of the committee. Your insights, advice, and support on a broad range of issues have been instrumental in helping the labour program meet our objectives.

[Translation]

As you know, Canada's Labour Program is now in its second century of existence. We are part of a long tradition of excellence. We are proud of our history and we are proud of our role in building a better workplace.

Today, technology and globalization are transforming the workplace. And these changes present both challenges and opportunities for the future. This government is committed in providing Canadians with the tools they need to succeed in the new economy. And the Labour Program is an important part of that commitment.

Through the modernization of our programs and services, and through our work with clients and partners, we are committed to protecting the rights and well-being of Canadian workers.

[English]

Let me highlight just a few of the achievements in what has been a very productive year for the labour program.

Over the year the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service handled a total of 331 collective bargaining disputes, and well over 90% of the disputes were settled without a work stoppage. This illustrates the skill we bring to the resolution of contentious disputes, especially in the busy transportation sector. Key agreements were renewed in all parts of Canada's transportation sector last fall. Significant settlements were also reached in broadcasting, communication, and mining.

Positive relations between trade unions and employers were also fostered through the labour management partnership program. The program helped the Western Transportation Advisory Council host two conferences last year on the critical shortage of skilled workers in Canada's transportation sectors. Another project funded the study of sick leave at the St. Lawrence Seaway Management Corporation, and was instrumental, according to the Canadian Autoworkers union, in averting a strike during bargaining talks in October of 2001. These are just two examples of the many joint management projects we have been working on.

Given the importance of globalization, it is imperative not only that the labour program promote the rights and well-being of workers at home but also that it strive to improve the working conditions and living standards of workers everywhere. Today, when we look at the shape of our international responsibilities, we see countries that share many values looking to us for support. This is a role I expect will continue to grow in the future.

What we are doing internationally is central to our goal for improving the conditions for all working people. I cannot think of a more important challenge. We are accomplishing this through our work with the Organization of American States and through participation in the International Labour Organization. We do this through the Inter-American Conference of Ministers of Labour, which I had the privilege of chairing in Ottawa last October.

This conference was an important first step in delivering on the action plan of the third summit of the Americas. It was Canada's second time attending and its first time chairing the conference. I am proud to say that it had one of the highest rates of participation of labour ministers in its 40-year history. Moreover, representatives from both labour and business were involved in developing a plan of action to improve the lives of working people throughout the Americas, another first for Canada and the labour program.

Â (1210)

[Translation]

Follow-up activities are already underway. A few weeks ago, I met with Chilean delegates under the Canada-Chile Agreement on Labour Cooperation. We exchanged views and shared information on the tools needed to improve the conditions of working people in the digital era in such areas as occupational health and safety and industrial relations. We must take advantage of information technology and the communication revolution to promote improved working conditions and living standards. This is our challenge.

The move to create the Advisory Committee on International Labour Affairs is further proof of our commitment to international labour issues. The committee will focus on the emerging issues, such as the social dimensions of globalization. It will be a vital forum to discuss broad issues affecting Canada's Labour Program, including the Free Trade Area of the Americas and other trade agreements, as well as our participation in international organizations such as the World Bank, the International Labour Organization and others. As Labour Minister, I will rely on the committee's advice for policies and positions on many of these issues.

[English]

Getting back to the domestic front, we hosted a very successful meeting of federal, provincial, and territorial ministers of labour early this year. We are now at work on several key areas the ministers identified for action. They include promoting labour standards under international agreements, occupational health and safety for youth, wage-loss protection for workers in the event of bankruptcy, and fostering a better work and life balance.

We also held a round table on modernizing labour policy within a human capital strategy, inviting labour managers, academics, and experts to create a more comprehensive workplace strategy. As part of the efforts, the strategic policy and international labour affairs directorate is researching such issues as work and life balance and aging in the workplace.

I also want to acknowledge the important contribution of the workplace information directorate in providing valuable information to our clients in the field of industrial relations. We cannot overlook the value of this information in promoting effective discussions and research within the Canadian workplace.

Since recent amendments to part II of the Canada Labour Code, there is a growing need to make employees and employers more aware of their rights and obligations to improve health and safety. We are not only meeting informational needs but also actively working in workplaces across the country to organize, monitor, and further ensure they are safe and equitable.

We also need to make Canadian workers aware of information concerning contract negotiations and labour standards.

A recent survey shows the campaigns are working. More than 80% of the groups we work with said they are satisfied with our service. Not only are we meeting Canadian information needs and helping to raise awareness on key issues, such as health and safety at work, it also complements national events, such as the North American Occupational Health and Safety Week being held across Canada this week.

Despite our progress on many issues, there is still work to be done. Our efforts to modernize the Canada Labour Code continue as we review our labour standards, including hours of work, minimum wages, equal wages, vacation, maternity and parental leave, sick leave, termination, and sexual harassment.

I have also been closely following the work of the committee during its hearings on employment equity. I am encouraged by the level of support being expressed for the Employment Equity Act. The overall impression is that our government was correct in amending the act in 1995. It was particularly encouraging to hear the support from many organizations, including FETCO, the Canadian Bankers Association, the Canadian Labour Congress, and the Fédération des travailleurs et des travailleuses du Québec, to name a few.

I am anxious to hear what you have to say in your report. I understand many witnesses have called for greater investment by the labour program in the areas of marketing, public education, and support to employers, unions, and community groups, as they try to implement employment equity.

As Minister of Labour, I do feel strongly that new workplace strategies are needed to address the poor results for persons with disabilities and aboriginal people. I have asked officials to look at various options.

Â (1215)

Employment equity is about the fundamental Canadian values of fairness and inclusion. It represents an opportunity to ensure that the skills of all Canadians are employed in our new economy. We will continue working to ensure that all Canadians reach their potential as contributing members of society. We will work with departments and agencies to encourage a spirit of inclusiveness in our government policies and programs.

In my role as the federal co-coordinator on homelessness, I have made a pledge to work with communities across Canada on the issue of homelessness. There are many reasons people are on the streets. Some have addictions or mental health issues, and for others it's because of unstable family situations, unemployment, or any number of other social or economic reasons.

The face of homelessness has changed. Many people think that homelessness occurs primarily among single men. However, this is no longer the case. Vulnerable members of our communities who also find themselves at risk of homelessness may include single-parent families, victims of family violence, our young people, the working poor, and aboriginal people. We must not allow these Canadians to fall through the cracks. Rather, we must ensure that we all work together so that no one is left behind.

Â (1220)

[Translation]

Because homelessness occurs all across Canada among various segments of the population, the problems vary from one community to another. When I travelled across the country in the summer of 1999 to assess the situation, I recognized the need to develop local solutions to local problems. Each individual community that has to deal with homelessness has its own unique ideas on how to best address the issue.

That is the thinking behind the National Homelessness Initiative. It is the Government of Canada's commitment to invest more than $750 million to work in partnership with all levels of government, private sector and not-for-profit players to develop local solutions to homelessness. Federal resources are important—even more so when placed in the hands of communities who can develop solutions that are tailored to their unique problems.

[English]

The supporting communities partnership initiative is the cornerstone of our strategy, under which we have allocated $305 million to 61 communities across the country. We often hear people say that homelessness is a big city problem, but this is not the case. Within the communities that received funding, 51 of them are smaller cities that can now develop local supports to ensure that they can help their neighbours locally.

All 61 communities have worked very hard over the past couple of years to develop and complete community plans to help identify their local needs and possible solutions to homelessness. We have heard from communities that the development of the plans was truly an enriching experience, as local groups who may have never collaborated before were working together for the first time to reach a common goal.

In addition to showing leadership in the development of community plans, communities are also instrumental in making funding decisions directed towards supporting priorities identified in their plans.

Our approach to fostering partnerships and action at the community level is working. Thousands of homeless Canadians are getting more of the help they need with a safe place to stay and the services to help them rebuild their lives. The supporting communities partnership initiative truly is a community-led partnership, a partnership that is working.

One example of how this initiative is working includes our investment of $92 million, which has generated an additional 5,600 beds in shelters and transitional houses. And this is just the beginning. Communities are continuously sharing the results of their projects, and I will be reporting on these successes to Canadians in the coming months.

Communities continue to create and strengthen partnerships among the public, private, and volunteer sectors in an effort to secure commitment, resources, and other funding streams. In fact, under the supporting communities partnership initiative and the youth and aboriginal component of the national homelessness initiative, we have leveraged additional funds totalling $580 million.

This is an impressive show of support from our partners, demonstrating that all sectors are concerned about homelessness and we are all committed to devoting the resources needed to help care for those in need.

Â (1225)

[Translation]

In addition to helping those who are homeless, our efforts over the past couple of years have also helped to raise awareness and inform others. We recently launched a very informative website to help Canadians access information about the work underway in their communities. The media has also been key in communicating the good news that local groups are undertaking projects to help strengthen their communities. The community planning process has also broadened the knowledge and understanding of homelessness issues and potential responses.

As the National Homelessness Initiative is scheduled to sunset in 2003, we have begun discussions with our community, provincial and municipal partners to assess the progress to date and to identify what more needs to be done. The great work I have told you about today is just the beginning, there is much more to be done to ensure that no one goes to bed at night without having had enough to eat.

To continue our efforts we must support the power of community networks and partnerships. This is the best way to achieve our common goals. It also means anyone can be part of the solution. Everyone has the capacity to make a personal contribution to alleviating homelessness. Any one of us can touch the life of a homeless person in a way that shows we care.

The National Homelessness Initiative is truly making a difference as we help communities reach out to help those who need it most.

[English]

In my role as labour minister and federal coordinator on homelessness, I strongly believe we can make more progress when we work together on issues of shared concern. I believe we have a responsibility to show leadership on issues of concern to Canadians. Together we can make a difference.

Merci beaucoup. Thank you very much.

The Chair: Thank you, Madam Minister.

Now, to members of the committee, we're going to have six-minute rounds. I'm going to be very strict in keeping to the six minutes. I will give you a signal at five minutes.

That includes, Minister, both the question and the response, so I will cut you off the same as I cut off members of the committee. We'll be equal and fair here.

Mr. Solberg, I understand you may be splitting your time with Mr. Spencer.

Mr. Monte Solberg (Medicine Hat, Canadian Alliance): That's right. Thank you very much, Chair.

Minister, thank you for coming before us. I'm going to have to apologize ahead of time, because I'm not going to be able to stay for very long today. But I do want to ask one question.

The current contract at the port of Vancouver is up at the end of December of this year. My question really flows from a question that my colleague, Dale Johnston, asked last year about a review of part I of the code, section 87.7. At that time, he asked if you would honour a commitment made by your predecessor. Just reviewing the transcripts, it wasn't clear whether or not you intended to do that. Are you prepared to do that?

My second question is, will you put in place measures to ensure that bargaining continues while keeping goods and services flowing, at the same time, through the port of Vancouver? It's critical to all kinds of industries in the west that this happen.

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw: When we deal with a dispute we always have to be very optimistic. The Port of Vancouver is now meeting with our conciliators, so we're optimistic that we'll be able to settle this without a strike or a lockout.

As for the movement of grain, as you know, we must make sure that the grain will move, and we will guarantee that also.

Â (1230)

Mr. Monte Solberg: And the internal review? Will you undertake an internal review?

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw: We settled the last one, as you know, and it wasn't easy. We're hoping that this time, because they settled the last one without back-to-work legislation, and because it's so important that both parties can sit down, put their issues on the table and settle it.... We didn't have to bring in back-to-work legislation. They were able to work out the issues they needed to work out.

We're hoping this time it's going to be a much easier process with our conciliators. We'll see. We don't see the same problems as were there before.

I have no problem doing a review, but because the last one was settled, and in this one they're at least talking to the conciliators now, we're hopeful that it will be settled. If there is a need for a review, certainly I have no problem doing that, but if it's settled, there will be no need for it.

Mr. Monte Solberg: Thank you.

The Chair: Mr. Spencer.

Mr. Larry Spencer (Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, Canadian Alliance): Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, Madam Minister.

Workplace injuries in Canada are unacceptably high. During Occupational Health and Safety Week, we heard that each year in North America we spend an average of $5 billion to compensate workers injured on the job or to the estates of those killed, which amounts to $82,500 for each working moment. If we combine that with the cost of days off work, replacement workers, and the number of other things, that doubles to about $10 billion.

So my first question is, what real steps will you take through this review to address those huge costs?

Secondly, workplace injuries are devastating. A total of 77 recommendations came out of the OC Transpo incident, and many more from the Westray mine disaster.

I recently had a conversation with the wife of one of the deceased OC Transpo persons. She had received absolutely nothing, no compensation of any kind. She had to pay the funeral expenses and all of that herself.

So I want to ask you also, will you be bringing in legislation to comply with the recommendations of these reports and do something for situations like that of OC Transpo?

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw: There are a couple of things. One, I thought the number was $10 billion. And when I say that I always say, “Read my lips, it's not $10 million, it's $10 billion.” I understand that this year it went up to $12 billion.

We amended part II of the Canada Labour Code, which took us six years to do. In these negotiations the employee group and the employer group had to sit together, because if it belongs to them they're going to take health and safety a lot more seriously. So we're serious about doing a lot of education in the workplace and we're finding more and more companies wanting to work with us on that.

Another concern we have on health and safety is the whole issue of youth, and one-third of the injuries and deaths were youths. Last year, when we celebrated our 100th anniversary, we had a conference for youth. So we're working a lot with youth groups but we're also working a lot with the employee and employer groups.

On the recommendations, I met yesterday with the ladies from OC Transpo. I had met them in November or December, at which time I told them that we would look at this issue and that I would meet with them again. We've hired somebody full time to look at it for them. I met them yesterday with the final report, and we talked about the recommendations. We've put our recommendations in place. We've given them a list.

The only ones we haven't were recommendations 1 to 18, which involve violence in the workplace. We've put a full committee in place. It's in part II of the Canada Labour Code. But we need the regulations, so we have employee groups and employer groups working on recommendations on violence in the workplace. Once that is ready, we will be able to add it to the recommendations done at OC Transpo.

Â (1235)

The Chair: Thank you, Minister.

Madame Folco.

[Translation]

Ms. Raymonde Folco (Laval West, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair.

Welcome, Madam Minister.

I would like to talk about the homelessness program. It is one of the most visible programs in your department, and we know that your personal involvement, as Minister of Labour, has been very significant in this area. I must also point out that in my riding of Laval West, for example, we have greatly benefited from this program. There were a lot of needs to be met, and we were able to look after them.

I would like to ask you if there is a link between the issue of homelessness and the Employment Equity Program. For several weeks, we have been studying the Employment Equity program, and we have noticed that among the four groups targeted by this program, or the designated groups, the aboriginal peoples do not benefit from it very much. As a result, there are very few aboriginal persons in large corporations and in government, in the public service, etc. I have also noticed that aboriginal people are very well represented in the area of homelessness. In other words, there's a high percentage of aboriginal people who are homeless.

First of all, is there a link between the two? I assume that there is. Is there a link between not being present enough in the workforce and not having a place to sleep at night? I assume that there is quite a strong link between the two.

Secondly, what is your relationship with the Quebec government as regards homeless aboriginal people, and how has the Quebec government contributed in this area?

So my question is twofold.

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw: Thank you very much.

On the issue of the homeless, some provinces have far more aboriginals in this category. In some provinces, 33% of the homeless people in the street could be aboriginals.

We are looking at all sorts of problems. Let me give you the example of a group of aboriginals whom I visited. There were 23 young aboriginals in a centre, and I asked how many of them came from the city where we were. Only 2 of the 23 told me that they were from that city. I asked the other aboriginals where they were from. The other young people looked at me and told me that they did not know. I asked them why it was that they did not know where they were from. They told me that they had been in so many foster homes and to so many institutions that they did not know where they were from. These were all young aboriginals.

Many young people who are on the street, and not just aboriginals, are in exactly the same situation, they are from foster homes or institutions. It is true that they need housing, but they also need a housing service. The organization I visited provided the service, but it had no housing. We were able to assist it in getting housing.

Another major problem is fetal alcohol syndrome. This is another problem that must be studied. We talk about the workplace and employment equity. That is very important, and the companies are with us in this respect. They want to be made aware of the issue. They want information. They want to give jobs to young people, but when we put young persons with fetal alcohol syndrome into the workplace—aboriginal or non-aboriginal—we have to work with the employer. There is a link between the work we do with the homeless and the other things I do as the Minister of Labour, and this works very well. We have to work with employers and tell them that if they hire a young person with fetal alcohol syndrome, they have to understand that this young person can do only one thing at a time, because of the damage done by this syndrome. We have to explain to the employer not to put the young person in a position requiring him or her to do two things at once.

You are studying initiatives that are very important for the future of our young people, and particularly our young aboriginals. That is why your work is important. I see them on the street, and I worked with them in the community for 33 years.

As you know, initially, our negotiations with Quebec were rather slow, but we learned a great deal. Once the process was established, the regional boards did an outstanding job. It is true that the money for the homeless was slow in coming, but when I look at the percentages allocated to the various provinces and the speed with which the money was provided, I note that Quebec got 70.6% of the money we could provide. It took time, but sometimes we have to start by building a good foundation. I think we built a very good foundation with Quebec and the regional boards have been outstanding. They helped us work with the communities on the issue of homelessness.

Â (1240)

[English]

The Chair: Thank you.

Madame Guay.

[Translation]

Ms. Monique Guay (Laurentides, BQ): Thank you, Madam Chair.

I would like to thank the minister for rearranging her schedule so that she could be here with us today. We greatly appreciate that.

That said, the minister knows there are a number of matters I am working on and very concerned about. These have been talked about for years.

The first matter of utmost importance is the Enabling Resource Centre for Persons with Disabilities. The Employment Equity Act review is now fully underway, and during the review period, the Treasury Board decided to close the Enabling Resource Centre for Persons with Disabilities. Madam Chair, so the minister is fully informed, I would say that this centre is of the utmost usefulness. That sums it up.

First, there are only five out of forty-odd departments that are able to offer the necessary resources to persons with disabilities. The other departments do not have the means. The centre costs only $554,000 per year. We are talking about minimal amounts. I asked that the President of Treasury Board come and explain to the committee why she made that decision, and a number of other questions were asked, but we did not get any answer. The minister herself acknowledged on December 11, 2001, that persons with disabilities were very poorly served and constituted the group that had benefited the least from the Employment Equity Act. I think she could use her influence to see to it that the centre not be closed.

We were told it was a temporary centre. That is not true, as it has been around since 1983 in various forms. So this is a priority issue, and I would like to have an answer.

I have two other questions, which I will quickly ask.

There is the whole issue of part III of the Canada Labour Code. The minister made me a promise when part II of the Canada Labour Code was amended. She knows how hard I have worked for the precautionary cessation of work for pregnant and nursing women, but there have not yet been any positive results on this front. When will part III of the Canada Labour Code be reviewed? Will precautionary cessation of work be part of that review?

That is clear and simple. I expect answers.

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw: It is clear and simple.

With respect to the first question, thank you for bringing that to my attention. I will definitely discuss that with the President of Treasury Board.

As for the second part, I promised you at last year's meeting that I would take your question seriously, because it is serious. In Quebec, your legislation is somewhat different from ours. As you know, the provisions regarding pregnant and nursing women are in part II of the Labour Code, but you wanted us to go a bit further, and I promised we would see what we could do.

We struck a committee, which studied the question to see what could be done. You will be happy to know that we hired someone full-time two weeks ago to work on what you asked me for. We are expecting an answer in September.

That said, you know that to work on part III of the Labour Code, you have to work with employees and employers. We wanted to make sure we had all the necessary information on your requests to present to employee and employer groups. So I have taken your requests seriously. We have examined the situation and hired someone two weeks ago to work on that. I will have an answer in September.

Â (1245)

Ms. Monique Guay: Are you saying part III of the Canada Labour Code could be reviewed in September?

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw: We will have a report on the question you asked me in September, but as for part III of the Labour Code, let's not kid ourselves: we know it will take time. We think there are some things that could be studied quite quickly and that employees and employers will agree on. However, there are some other things we know will take a bit longer. As you know, it took eight years to amend part I and six years to amend part II.

Ms. Monique Guay: Let's hope it does not take 10 years to amend part III.

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw: That is why we wanted to do the work you requested.

Ms. Monique Guay: I will give you an example. It is very important.

I flew back from Israel last week. On the plane, the young flight attendant was over six months pregnant. This young woman was doing an 11-hour flight. Eleven hours, when you are six months pregnant, is quite a lot. Don't forget that flight attendants are under federal jurisdiction. I asked the young woman why she did not stop working and go on employment insurance. She told me she could not afford to do that because she would only get half her salary, with a child on the way. Had she been under Quebec jurisdiction, she could have done a precautionary cessation of work and received 90% of her salary, but since she is under federal jurisdiction, she is not entitled to do a precautionary cessation of work and is jeopardizing her pregnancy and her baby's life.

In 2002, it is inconceivable that the federal government, with its surpluses of over $30 billion, cannot at least make this benefit available to pregnant and nursing women. Madam Chair, I will not give up on this until we win.

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw: As I said, I took your request seriously and a report is being drawn up. We expect to have the report in September, and it is definitely a matter that will be taken seriously. We are expecting answers that we can present to employees and employers for the review of part III of the Labour Code.

[English]

The Chair: Thank you.

Madame St-Jacques.

[Translation]

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

Mrs. Bradshaw, it is always a pleasure for us to have you in committee. You should come more often.

I want to come back to a comment you made in answer to Ms. Folco's question on homelessness in Quebec. You said, and we all know, that the process was very lengthy. I think it took a long time to put in place. You were saying that things were going smoothly now. I would like to know whether there are still implementation problems in Quebec. I would also, for the benefit of those listening, like to know the position of the Government of Quebec on our National Homelessness Initiative.

I have one last question. We know that in Quebec—I don't know whether the same thing happened elsewhere—regions were targeted. In your presentation, you said that this should end in 2003. Do you think it will be possible to target other regions under the initiative, or will it just be the same regions that were targeted in the very beginning?

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw: Are there problems in Quebec? I would say no more than elsewhere. Things are going well. The work is being done properly. Our regional offices and our Ottawa office have good relationships with the regional boards. The reaction from communities and elected officials has been positive. So I would say there are no more problems in Quebec than elsewhere. There are always little problems that need working on, but there are really no more problems than elsewhere.

Since the agreement was signed, Quebec has been working very closely with us. So I have only good things to say about homelessness, the community and our relationship with the Quebec government and regional boards.

In terms of the date, the money is now in place and the communities are currently building their projects. I try to visit as many small communities as I can. As you know, it was supposed to be in 10 big cities. I decided it didn't make sense just to go to big cities. There are now 51 small communities benefiting from that. The facts and the application of the program are currently being evaluated, then I will report to my government and we will see what happens after 2003.

Should the program continue after 2003, would it extend to other communities? Personally, I have to tell you that I am more than delighted with what is happening in our small communities. I just got back from Red Deer. It is incredible what is going on in that small community. I visited Brandon, and it is the same thing. There are many small communities in Quebec that are not involved in the program and would like to be.

Should the program continue after 2003, were it to be redone, I would not allocate 20% to our small communities. I would allocate 40% to them. My thinking is that as long as we just help the big cities, people will keep moving to the big cities. People in small communities have told me that they wanted to help the local homeless, that they wanted them to stay there, and that they needed them there.

As you know, rural communities are trying, as much as possible, to encourage people to stay in those communities. So if I am given the choice and the program extends beyond 2003, I will strongly recommend that small communities be given not 20% but 40%.

Â (1250)

Ms. Diane St-Jacques: If you need help and support to extend the program beyond 2003, I will be there to support you. Thank you.

[English]

The Chair: Thank you.

Mr. Goldring.

Mr. Peter Goldring (Edmonton Centre-East, Canadian Alliance): Thank you, Madam Minister, for your report and for appearing here today.

Minister, the report mentions the homeless several times, and it gives some commentary on who the homeless are. I would certainly imagine that the homeless would be those who are living in the emergency shelters, and I would think that it shouldn't be necessary to say so.

Yesterday I had a talk with one of the homeless persons in front of a shelter, someone who lives there. He's very dismayed, as are several I've been talking to, that in Edmonton there have been some 20 projects approved for funding initiatives, which claim anywhere up to 350 bed spaces created, when, in actuality, if we look at the numbers, break them down, and see what we have actually done, it works out to well under 50 new spaces being created, because there's an awful lot of renovating going on in the city of Edmonton.

In Calgary they have even gone to homeless high-rises, two brand-new homeless high-rises for $40 million, that had a net gain of some 150 bed spaces.

The concern or dismay in Edmonton seems to be that the truly homeless people in these shelters haven't been helped. They can't move from those shelters, and the reason is very simple. Of the 20 projects that have been funded in Edmonton, all non-profit ones, not one of them is for independent living homes. They are shelter projects, non-profit projects, and not one of them is geared to take the people from the shelters who are virtually the ones on the street.

My question, Madam Minister, stems from the fact that in my determinations over the last year and a half in Edmonton, I have had literally a dozen private, taxpaying corporations come to me saying that they are being rebuffed, being turned down. They have offered apartment construction and literally hundreds of rooming house rooms, but they have been turned down one after another from this Housing Trust Fund, from the fund for the homeless.

Isn't that homeless funding there to help create homes, and if so, why are we ignoring the one largest factor, the people who do want to help, namely the private enterprise people? Why are they being locked out from this while at the same time these homeless people who could have been helped with homes have no place to go? Yet we're building bigger and shinier shelters. As I said, it has even gone to the extent in Calgary where they have homeless high-rise shelters.

Why is this? Why are the for-profit tax-paying corporations that want to help being denied assistance, and why are they being locked out of the loop?

Â (1255)

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw: Thank you very much.

Are you giving me only seven minutes on this, or are you giving me the rest of the time?

The Chair: You have three minutes.

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw: Three minutes?

Let's talk fast.

As you know, they're community entities. Both in Calgary and Edmonton, they're community entities, if you look at it seriously. I have here the names of the people, if you wish.

In those groups of community entities, where the money goes, they decide where the money goes. In Calgary, you have the Calgary foundation, where you have some of the biggest business people in Calgary. In the Edmonton Foundation, you have the Home Builders' Association, accountants, and architects.

In both entities, in both cities, that are some of our best groups, you have the business community deciding where the money is going to go. They're in the business community themselves.

Now, as I've offered before, if you would like to meet, I would encourage you to meet the business people who sit on the community entity in Calgary and on the community entity in Edmonton.

When we looked at what was needed for the homeless, we had three priorities. The first priority was that homeless people need beds to sleep on. It had to be beds you and I wouldn't mind sleeping on if we were homeless. There didn't need to be cots on the floor. They didn't need to be afraid of where they were going to stay overnight.

The first priority, then, was to make sure there were enough shelter beds in this country so that if anybody died on the street, it wasn't due to the fact there were not any shelter beds. That was our first priority.

Our second priority was food banks. The homeless people have to eat. We wanted to make sure the food banks have the money and facilities they need to feed the homeless.

Once the two things were accomplished, we said what you are saying. My work in the community for 33 years was to always help the ones who want to help themselves afterward. When you look at the shelters and food banks, they have all kinds of organizations that give a service.

We wanted to make sure...and that's why we were into transitional housing. I couldn't get into affordable housing--I'm not the minister of affordable housing--but I could get into transitional housing, where they'd still need the service, but they're housed. They're not on beds. They can go on.

When I did the housing task force report in 1986, I told myself my main priority: “Before I die, I will get rid of every slum landlord in this country.” I don't know if you know any slum landlords; I don't know of any who are poor in the community. I've studied this since 1986.

Now I'm asking the non-profit organizations, “Why can't you, since you give the service, build transitional housing? You can make a profit and you can hire staff to give services to the people who need it.”

That said, it's the private sector like you, it's the business people like you, who are building these. It's the private sector like you, it's people like you, who believe in housing, believe in the need, and are deciding what's going to be built. It's not only the groups. It's the communities themselves deciding this.

The Chair: Mr. Goldring, you may have a second one, and we're not going to have an argument on it.

Mr. Malhi, please.

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

The strikes and lockouts have the potential to cause grief for many Canadians. As the Minister of Labour, what are you going to do to help employers and unions settle their differences without resorting to work stoppages?

· (1300)

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw: As you know, if there's a statistic that we're very, very proud of...and two things happened to help us do that. One of the reasons that we had 90% of our disputes settled last year without a strike or lockout is that the Canada Labour Code belongs to the employee and the employer. As you heard me answer in response to a question from Madame Guay, it took a long time. It took us eight years to be able to do that. But we did it, and now it belongs to them. It's their Canada Labour Code. So when they do collective agreements, they know what's in that and they know what it is they need to work on.

That said, the one thing we're really proud of that we've done is to put groups in the different businesses for alternative dispute resolution. One of the groups that's very happy with that are the banks, because we are going in and training the employer and the employees on how they can resolve small disputes. As a result, when it comes time to big disputes, they're much better at resolving their problems.

Our staff is always meeting with them, always finding out.... I guess if we're strong on anything in labour, it's the whole issue of training. I believe that's why you see us having such a success rate of 90% of our disputes being settled without a strike or lockout.

Mr. Gurbax Malhi: I have a second question. We need what action to improve the coordination of activity between the departments, the provinces, the municipalities, and the community organizations so that the homeless people don't have to wait long?

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw: One of the things we knew for sure when we started the whole issue on homelessness was that if we didn't have all three levels of government, the process was not going to work. That's why, when I travelled for the six weeks, I made sure that I visited every province.

I have to say to you that three weeks ago, I was supposed to go to Alberta, and to Trenton, and I had to cancel the trip. I had two provincial ministers who were going to come with me. I was going to fly on a good Conservative plane, with two Conservative ministers from Alberta. So the provinces have really come on board on this process.

When I started, I worked really closely with FCM, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities. So the municipalities are really involved in this.

As you know, if you look at all our identities, the private sector has really bought into the whole homelessness initiative. It's really been a good partnership with the provincial governments, with the municipalities, and also with the private sector.

The Chair: Mr. Mahli, you still have a minute or two left.

Mr. Gurbax Malhi: Thank you.

A bill is being presented to implement the Employment Equity Act with a view to eliminating the four delegate groups and the obligation for employers to establish numerical goals to correct underrepresentation. What is your position as the Minister of Labour on that issue?

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw: That's a question that we've been asked; it's a question that's always on the table. It's going to be interesting to see what recommendation you're going to give me on that one.

There are certain issues that I have to deal with as Minister of Labour and I have to make decisions about sometimes, as Minister of Labour. If you saw, I think, page 2 of my speech, I said how much I appreciate the work you're doing. Well, that's one question that I'm hoping you're going to answer for me, because I can't wait to see what work you're going to do for me on that. I made sure that it was on page 2.

I want to thank you for your question. I'm really anxiously awaiting what recommendations the committee is going to give me on that.

The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Mahli.

I'll go back to Mr. Spencer, then Mr. Tonks.

Mr. Larry Spencer: Thank you, Madam Chair.

Madam Minister, I want to follow up a little bit on the workplace injury situation with a question. How is it possible, the way things operate today, for any family suffering the loss of a loved one through a workplace or work-time death to be left to fall through the cracks without any compensation or assistance from anywhere? How can that happen?

· (1305)

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw: We have the Workers' Compensation Board in place. Whenever there's an accident, there's always.... Under federal jurisdiction, the person who has passed away, who has died in the workplace, would have a pension most of the time. The person would have insurance most of the time, especially under our laws. I don't know about the provincial laws. So there are benefits there for them, for the family.

Besides that, I don't know; Warren might have something to add on that. When we look at our federal jurisdiction and the protection we put in for them, is it enough if you lose a loved one on the job? No--

Mr. Larry Spencer: Well, no amount is ever enough, of course, to compensate for the loss of a loved one--

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw: That's right.

Mr. Larry Spencer: --but it should at least be enough that they can pay a funeral expense. Something has been missed there somewhere, it would appear to me, and I would like to hear you commit to checking into that aspect of the department.

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw: The workmen's compensation is a provincial issue. As you know--well, I don't know if you know, but I'll tell you--our government compensation act has not been reviewed for 50 years. We've been speaking a lot to the provinces on workmen's compensation, on exactly what you're talking about.

Since we've been having discussions with the provincial government on workmen's compensation, I felt very strongly, as I told my staff, that after 50 years we should address the whole issue and look seriously at our own government compensation act. So we will be reviewing the act in that regard, and as soon as it's done I will gladly give you a copy of that report. That's not a problem at all.

Mr. Larry Spencer: Perhaps I could ask one other short question and make an observation here. In the estimates we only have three pages from your entire department, and only four lines here that deal with financial issues. I think we'd like to ask you for a commitment to give a little bit more detail in the next estimates to give us an opportunity to comment rather than simply four lines of financial information and a couple of other pages. Could you address that, please.

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw: As you know, it's not the labour department, it's the labour program, so when you receive that information we're part of the big picture of HRDC. You have to admit that our budget is not very big for all the work our people do. I wish that I could come here with a lot more pages to give you, and that we would have more money in our budget, but sure, any information that you would like to have on our finances, we'll gladly forward that to you.

The Chair: Thank you.

Mr. Tonks.

Mr. Alan Tonks (York South--Weston, Lib.): Madam Minister, on this Conservative airplane that you were flying with the Conservative members, I trust that you'll make sure it isn't Conservatively fueled--just on the lighter side, that is.

I would like to follow up on Madam Guay's question but put it a little differently. Would the minister, and the ministry, and the government give consideration to amending the Canada Labour Code such that those who are pregnant and nursing could avail themselves across the country of provincial occupational health and safety legislation?

You can in Quebec. No?

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw: Do you want to explain that, Warren?

I'm not sure that this is what Madam Guay would like us to do at all.

Mr. Alan Tonks: No, as I said, I was putting it a little differently.

· (1310)

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw: No, it wouldn't be to your advantage to do that. If you'd like more information, Warren can certainly clarify that a little bit more for you.

Mr. Warren Edmondson (Assistant Deputy Minister, Labour, Department of Human Resources Development): The only thing I would add is that what would make it a possible problem for us in this jurisdiction is the fact that so many corporations under the federal jurisdiction are national in scope. Companies like Air Canada, Canadian National, and Canadian Pacific have employees working of course in more than one province, and I would suspect that most employers would want some consistent human resource policy that would apply equitably to all employees. Therefore, the practice of paying a different form of compensation in one province from what they pay in another--for example, Quebec versus British Columbia--would present challenges.

Mr. Alan Tonks: You talk about equitable treatment in terms of this universality being a challenge, and I understand that.

Madam Minister, with respect to your role in the Inter-American Conference of Ministers of Labour, congratulations to you on chairing that. In the plan of action, was the issue of the mobility of qualifications with respect to professions and labour skills on the agenda? We have heard in our hearings continuously how important it is to productivity to have skills and so on, in particular in a global economy, and yet we have this huge problem with people who cannot acquire professional qualifications and so on and so forth. Would this be something you would struggle with in the capacity of that organization, of that entity?

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw: Thank you for asking the question. What we do internationally is so important to me, as is the meeting of the Americas. If we're going to have free trade, I feel very strongly that we have to have a strong labour component to the free trade.

When we had our meeting in Ottawa--I'm going to be chairing that for the next two years--my comment to the minister was that I had the impression very often that at these meetings we put a lot of nice words and we come out with beautiful documents. But how much of that is really put into action? I said that if we're going to work and if we're going to make a difference, we need to make sure we serve our working people well within our countries.

So what we did is we formed two committees only. We didn't say we were going to form 50 of them; we said we were going to form two of them. As you know, at that meeting, for the first time ever, we had the employee groups and the employer groups sitting at the table with us.

These two committees will have the different countries of the Americas. They'll have the employees and the employers, plus ourselves. We're going to look at globalization and what effect globalization is going to have on the working people. I think that's something we need to seriously look at with everybody sitting at the table. So that's going to be one of the working groups. The other working group is going to promote the ILO declaration. On that one, there are four aspects to that, so it answers you also: the right to have unions and to organize, protection of children, no forced labour, and no discrimination in employment.

I felt that if we took those two, with everybody sitting at the table, we would have a very good working group and we would be concentrating on something that's important, not only to us but to the employees of the Americas. Brazil will be chairing after us, and the President of Brazil has taken this very seriously. He is going to be giving us six people to work with our people so that whatever we haven't had time to do in two years, Brazil will continue that work afterwards.

I'm really excited and I feel very strongly that these are two components we can work on and we can really see something put into action. The most important thing is that everybody will be at the table.

Mr. Alan Tonks: Just to leave that for a moment, with respect to the 10% that were not successfully mediated, what sector were they in? Did you learn anything from them in terms of being able to even reach some conciliation through the third-party mediation process?

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw: Right now we have Radio-Canada, which has been out five weeks. Nav Canada is meeting with a conciliator. Air Canada is meeting with a mediator. We don't know if those are going to be settled or not.

Basically it can be in any field. I don't believe there's one that would strike more than another one, depending.... As I said a while ago in answering a question, at the port of Vancouver, we didn't legislate them back to work, and they sat down and they agreed to collective bargaining. This time they're sitting with the conciliators, and I have to tell you we're confident that they're going to be able to do that with the work they've done.

So it's not just when there's a strike. That's why you always hear me say in the House that sometimes it can be very frustrating. Let the process work. Let the collective bargaining continue.

· (1315)

The Chair: Thank you.

Now we'll go to Madam Guay.

[Translation]

Ms. Monique Guay: Thank you.

With respect to precautionary cessation of work, Quebec already has legislation. Precautionary cessation of work is included in the Quebec Labour Code, but not in the Canada Labour Code. Were the federal government to include it, all women under federal jurisdiction would be entitled to it. As for the other provinces, the federal government would just have to set the example. The other provinces would just have to follow suit then. I think the minister is well aware of that, and that would be a big step forward.

That said, we are currently drafting a report on employment equity, and I hope we will manage to have a unanimous report. In any event, the report will be tabled in June. I would like to know whether you plan to entertain major amendments to the Employment Equity Act.

There are two other little things that are very important to us. You know that Quebec has anti-strikebreaker legislation that greatly encourages negotiations between management and labour. The negotiations are much more serious and produce results much faster with legislation like that. Are you contemplating similar legislation federally?

Minister, there is also the whole question of young people and orphan clauses. Something is going to have to be done for our young people entering the labour market, who are disadvantaged even before being hired by a company. We must absolutely find a way to completely do away with orphan clauses so that our young people can be hired and get good jobs like their predecessors did before them.

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw: Madam Chair, the Bloc Québécois member is always interesting. She always has a lot of questions, but she never gives me much time to answer. I'll try to answer her as quickly as possible.

As far as employment equity is concerned, as you are aware, I asked you to do this job. I will take your recommendations seriously and we will work on them. I also hope that things will go well with your recommendations. The whole issue of employment equity is one of my priorities, particularly as I am also responsible for multiculturalism. I think this is a national priority.

As regards the Canada Labour Code you asked me a question in the House last week. The Labour Code states that, when there is a labour dispute and the employer hires someone else to do the job of the unionized person, and the union feels that the employer is not negotiating in good faith and has hired that person to break the union, the unionized employee can plead his or her case before the Canadian Industrial Relations Board.

You asked me a question about Cargill. That is exactly what happened there. The employees felt that the employer had hired other people and they appeared before the Canadian Industrial Relations Board. The board said this was indeed happening. Therefore, now the employees are all union people. So this remains open.

As regards orphan clauses, which we've discussed at length, when we negotiated part I of the Labour Code—as I was saying, this took eight years— employees and employers never put the issue of the orphan clause on the table. Madam Chair, I have said several times that if employees want to discuss orphan clauses during negotiations, they can always try and find a way to make this part of their collective agreement. This is always a possibility.

· (1320)

[English]

The Chair: Mr. Martin.

Mr. Pat Martin (Winnipeg Centre, NDP): Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, Minister, for the opportunity to speak with you here at the committee.

I'm sorry to be late, but as you may know, history is being made at another standing committee today. The justice committee is dealing with the Westray bill. I think it's very fitting and appropriate that as we approach the 10th anniversary of the Westray mine disaster, the House of Commons is finally seized of the issue of corporate accountability.

My question is, given that we seem to be seized of the issue of workplace safety and health, given that this falls under your mandate, and given that you've made comments in your brief--I just found the paragraphs where you do make reference to part II of the code and the enhanced Canada Labour Code provisions--how is that going to translate into a budget line? How are you going to increase in concrete terms the commitment to workplace safety and health through officers and inspections in the field? How are we going to bump that up to a top-of-mind issue in Canadian workplaces within this budget year?

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw: When I first became Minister of Labour and we legislated part II of the Canada Labour Code, you know, you just have to go to.... Well, there are two things. You sign the papers when somebody dies on the job, and you go to the day of mourning. We had the youth conference, as you know, on safety and health for youth, and our staff has been doing a lot of work. We did go to Treasury Board, and we did get some more money for inspectors. It's always an area where we're trying to better ourselves.

You weren't here earlier when one of the Alliance members mentioned that we lose $10 billion a year, and I said, no, this year we've lost $12 billion from health and safety issues across the country. It's certainly a priority for us as a department. We continue working with the employee and employer groups, and now we're starting to look to see what companies we should be visiting more often. Are we able to identify the ones we're getting more complaints about, the ones we should be going in and doing more investigation on?

Mr. Pat Martin: At the current rate and with the current number of people in the field today, you could visit each workplace once every 12 years. How many more bodies did we put into the field? Frankly, that's all the employer cares about. I've worked on job sites, and I know that when the workplace safety and health officer comes on site, the foreman shakes in his boots and cleans up the site. Meanwhile, all the leaflets and all the videos that are sent to them gather dust. It's only guys with a hard hat going out and inspecting workplaces that stimulate a response from the employer.

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw: I'm not going to deny that we could use more staff for that. But as you also know, we've really concentrated, especially after we did part II of the Canada Labour Code.... We had both parties sitting at that table, and it took quite a while. You know that better than anybody. I believe part II took us six years. There was a lot more respect from the employee and employer groups, and they took this very seriously.

They have to accept some of the responsibilities as well. We can't be everywhere all the time. For me, the training we do is very important, as are the committees we form. We need to tell more companies that this is not a social problem, it's an economic problem. Not only are we losing lives and not only is someone possibly going to be handicapped for the rest of their life because of an injury in the workplace, we're losing $12 billion a year. We need to take this very seriously.

We try to do a lot of the education part of it. We try to work very closely with our committees. You know that a lot of our time is spent on cases where we do get a complaint; we go in and investigate the complaint. If there's a company that has a lot of complaints, then that will give us less time to do the inspections we would like to do. Again, depending on the area you're in, it can really depend on how many inspections we can do.

I'm not going to argue with you about how serious it is and how much work we have to do, but I'll guarantee you that we're going to continue working on it.

· (1325)

Mr. Pat Martin: I also think we'll have some more tools shortly, because if the board of directors knows they could be charged with a criminal offence, not just an offence under the Occupational Health and Safety Act, for gross negligence or a wilful blindness to workplace safety, I think that corporate board will be more motivated to make sure they're at least doing the bare minimum in their workplace. So I'm looking forward to what comes out of the justice committee.

You mentioned the situation of aboriginal people, mostly in the context of the homelessness file that you deal with. I'd like to raise it in the context of skill shortages in the country and a gross underemployment issue amongst aboriginal youth.

Is there not a role for your department, or in cooperation with other departments, to make the natural match between serious skill shortages--in the building trades, for instance--and this huge pool of underemployed aboriginal people flocking to the inner cities looking for a better life? Shouldn't we have a national human resources strategy that's trying to meet the needs of industry and the social needs of an underemployed segment? Is that an issue that you would like to see in the coming year?

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw: You know it.

Minister Stewart and Minister Rock are going to be coming to you with a strategy on skills training.

The interesting thing, though, on the homeless front, is that we've had the unions come to us and say, we have a shortage; we want to be involved.

I'll just give you one or two examples. There was a big building being finished in Toronto, and the union brought in the children at risk off the street and gave them two weeks training on the equipment that they would be using. The construction company hired them. To their surprise, they were so good at construction that they hired them all. So they had to bring in another group.

In another community--I can't exactly remember which one it was, but it might be yours--a retired school teacher said, these children are good at something; you can't tell me they're good at nothing. So she decided they could drive a car, because a lot of them had been a driving car since they were six years old. But who was ever going to give them a legal car? So she got a car and taught the children at risk. She brought them into a centre and worked with them, got them housing and continued working with them, and got them their driver's licence. Would you believe 92% of them are working now? They're no longer on the street. They're not on welfare. They're working.

So you're absolutely right. Through working with the community, working with the people we are working with, there are all kinds of different things, little things that we can do. I couldn't agree with you more.

The Chair: That's a good place to stop.

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw: I could talk about this all day. Thank you for the question. I really appreciate it. But we'll have to wait for Minister Stewart and Minister Rock to come out with their national program of skills training.

Mr. Pat Martin: Thank you.

The Chair: Minister, I have two other questions, a very brief one from Madame Folco and one from Mr. Goldring, and then we'll conclude.

[Translation]

Ms. Raymonde Folco: Thank you, Madam Chair.

If I may, I would like to move to the international arena. I would like to hear your comments on the North American Agreement on Labour Cooperation. We know that the Department of Human Resources Development will continue to develop and administer these agreements, which are of course combined with the free trade agreements.

The free trade agreements, as we are all aware, have given rise to several disputes with the United States, particularly on the issue of softwood lumber at the moment. We're in the process of pleading our case before the international court to see if we might come out the winners rather than the losers.

First of all, as the Minister of Labour, are you satisfied with how the North American Agreement on Labour Cooperation is working? Secondly, what sorts of difficulties and conflicts have we experienced in relation to this agreement, and how can they be resolved? Could you give us an example?

· (1330)

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw: What I find interesting is that when we sign a free trade agreement, we will also have a labour agreement. This has opened several doors for me, and I will give you a few examples.

When I went to Mexico, I did not only visit the minister. Because we have the agreement, I was able to ask for a visit to one of their businesses. This is something I might not have been able to do in the absence of a labour agreement.

Therefore, this has opened several doors. Earlier on, I answered a question concerning the meeting of the Americas. Canada will be chairing this meeting for the next two years and we were able to choose the issues we wanted to work on. There are two.

I feel we have to start taking a global view of the situation. We are doing good things for our workers in Canada. We still have a lot of work ahead of us, as you can see by the questions being asked, but we can lead by example because the Labour Code was drafted by employees and employers. This is unheard of in many countries.

In regard to the Americas meeting, we did a great deal of work to ensure that the 34 ministers coming to our conference would be bringing unions and employers with them. It was a first.

In my opinion, the whole international agenda opens doors for us that will allow us to help others and also to learn. Over the last two weeks, there was a Chilean group here observing the computer work that's being done at the Department of Labour. We are working in partnership with them.

It is important that we have free trade, but it is also important that we have an agreement with the ministers of Labour.

[English]

The Chair: Thank you.

Mr. Goldring, you have the last four minutes.

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw: You'll have to split them with the minister, if you want a response.

Mr. Peter Goldring: Yes, Madam Minister.

I hope you understand my intentions when I talk about what I believe to be a terrible need for the thousands and thousands who are still, in my mind, locked up in social emergency shelters. I believe there are solutions to the problem.

I don't want to diminish the non-profit efforts for what they've been doing. I sincerely believe there's a necessary role for both for-profit and not-for-profit. So far today, I'm seeing that it's 100% one way and zero the other way. I have great concern. It indicates, to me, there's a lack of consultation and entertainment of the for-profit projects. I can repeat it time and time again.

Another project here has been identified by three developers for developing the old federal building in Edmonton. Again, three out of three have been turned down because they were for-profit or tax-paying corporations. The representative from the housing trust is hoping a non-profit will put in a proposal on this. In my mind, it indicates quite directly that the for-profits are being purposely excluded in the hope that the non-profits will somehow take on this project.

This project is by no means on its own. There are projects after projects.

It really does bother me when I visit the shelters, whether I'm serving Christmas dinner for the people in the shelters, meeting them on the street, or delivering the Our Voice street newspaper and talking to them. It bothers me that, time and again, the people who live in the emergency shelters say they are not able to access any of the housing. They are not invited to move across the street into the new developments that are being funded. They are being kept in the shelters. In short, the problem is the people in the shelters are not being invited to partake in the new projects that are planned. It concerns me greatly when we have such circumstances.

I was going to put in a motion, but I understand 24 hours' notice needs to be given to put a in motion. I'll read it anyway. I think maybe it's a situation we should have. Obviously, by the dearth of attention from the seats opposite, it really indicates that we should have provisions for putting in motions.

I would put in a motion that independent living, rooming-house rooms, and apartments by private developers be given priority in funding on all future homeless funding initiatives. Do you not think this would be a very valuable motion to make? Isn't there a need for rooming-house rooms and self-contained units to help people move out of shelters?

· (1335)

Mrs. Claudette Bradshaw: Again, Mr. Goldring, in answer to your question I will say again that we have different community entities, and they're the ones who decide. I do not dictate who is getting the funding in the homelessness file. It's decided by community entities.

I will say again that Edmonton and Calgary have more business people and that in Edmonton they have the Home Builders' Association sitting on the board. I invite the honourable member once more to go sit with both groups and speak to them about the importance of having for-profit organizations receiving money for the homeless.

Again, they make the decision within their community as to whether they need shelter beds or whether they are ready for transitional housing. Our goal is that nobody dies on any Canadian street because there was no bed available for them. Once a community has met those needs, I encourage them not to build too many shelters but to begin more of the transitional housing units.

I would invite the honourable member once more to go meet the entity within his community and to see if they would be interested in putting some homelessness funding into for-profit building of housing for the homeless. It's up to the community.

The Chair: Thank you, Madam Minister, and thanks to your officials who joined you today. On behalf of the committee, we again thank you for your work not only in the labour program but with the homelessness secretariat. We look forward to your visiting with us again sometime in the future.

The meeting is adjourned.