Publication Search

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I want to thank all the witnesses in attendance or joining us by video conference for their contribution to our study.

My question is for Ms. Connolly.

On your website, I saw that you have an exemplary career and that you have received some 20 honours and awards for your work. Do you think grants or higher wages for women in STEM would be an effective way to encourage them to go into those professions?

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Ms. Lahey. I would also like to ask you a question.

Women in STEM occupations have lower incomes than men. We know that is the main obstacle preventing women from entering skilled trades.

Why wouldn't the income splitting included in the 2015 budget support those women who already have a fairly low income?

Thank you, Madam Chair.

First I would like to thank the witnesses who are here with us today.

My question is for you, Mr. Montpellier. In 2011, you published a report entitled “Changing the Face of the Canadian Mining Industry.”

In your presentation, you described three obstacles. Are they a part of the conclusions of that study?

I see.

Among these obstacles, you mentioned the lack of information about women. I suppose we will need money to remedy that. You referred to a culture and an environment that is not inclusive, and is dominated by men. So money will have to be injected there. Moreover, on the topic of career advancement opportunities, you said there was no mentoring, and no parental leave. Money will be required for that as well. However, in Budget 2015, there is nothing that furthers the participation of women in the skilled trades sector.

Does that not worry you, since you want to change the face of mining industry? If the government is not behind that objective, how are you going to manage to attract more women?

I listened to Ms. Jennifer Flanagan's presentation.

I was happy to hear about your initiative with young aboriginal girls aimed at encouraging them to take an interest in computer science, which is currently the basis of the whole industry.

I would like to know what the word “Actua” stands for. Does it mean “actualité”? I don't know what it means. Could you explain it?

That is interesting.

What do you think of this initiative? I know that you have reached a lot of girls, some 48,000 throughout Canada. Will this be an ongoing project?

Thank you, Madam Chair.

First, I would like to thank all the witnesses who have come here today to enlighten us about women working in STEM fields. The abbreviation lets me save a little time.

From current data, we can see that the wage gap between men and women exists everywhere in both traditional and non-traditional fields.

Ms. McInturff, you stated that the salary gap in Quebec is smaller than in the other provinces. So how can we import that model across Canada? We know that the daycare program in Quebec is outstanding. Can you tell us how that kind of program could encourage women all across Canada to become involved in science, technology and mathematics?

Madam Chair, could we have the text of Ms. McInturff's presentation?

Yes, but perhaps we can have them translated into French so that we have them available before we start drafting the report.

Madam Chair, I would like to have a minute before the end of the meeting to raise a point of order.

I did, Madam Chair. Thank you.

I would like to raise a point of order about some remarks by our colleagues.

I think that they are relatively new compared to other colleagues of ours. Because of the respect that is owed to our guests and to ourselves, I find that comments of that kind are tantamount to a gratuitous attack on our chair, who is neutral in the extreme, and respectful.

In my opinion, this kind of partisanship should have no place in a parliamentary committee. I feel that we should trust and respect our chair and those who are assisting her.

I have a point of order, Madam Chair.

During the presentation by the representative of FIRST Robotics Canada, I perused the document. I appreciate the effort that was made to translate the document, but unfortunately there is a page on the impact of schooling that has not been translated, and of course, the appendices have not been translated into French. I would like to ask that the next time this be done more rigorously

I would appreciate things being done at the same time.

Okay, I have a brief question.

I would first like to thank the witnesses for coming here to shed some light on this issue, which I assume will never be resolved with the way things are going.

I am puzzled by the table I am looking at. It provides the radiofrequency exposure limits in different countries. I know that Health Canada has made some efforts from 2009 to 2015, but let's compare our data with Russia's, a large country like ours. For example, how do you explain that, for a frequency of 900 MHz, the threshold is 0.10 W/m² in Russia, but it is 2.7 W/m² in Canada? Could you give us more information on that data?