:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
I should start by introducing my colleagues at the table. Of course Jean-Pierre Blackburn, Minister of Labour, is with me; his deputy minister, Munir Sheikh, is here, as is my deputy minister, Janice Charette. Next to Janice is Hélène Gosselin, associate deputy minister responsible for Service Canada; next to Hélène is Karen Kinsley, who is the president of CMHC; and next to Karen is Sherry Harrison, who is the comptroller for the department.
Mr. Chair, I am pleased to appear before this committee to talk about the 2007-2998 main estimates and the report on plans and priorities of my department.
[Translation]
I am accompanied by my esteemed colleague, the Minister of Labour, the Honourable Jean-Pierre Blackburn, who will talk about the activities and plans of the Labour Program within Human Resources and Social Development Canada.
[English]
Of the $84 billion in planned expenditures for my department, nearly 93% will be in direct benefits. They range from child care, student support, and skills development to employment insurance, the Canada Pension Plan, and old age security.
The HRSDC main estimates exclude employment insurance—$16 billion—and the Canada Pension Plan—$28 billion—for benefits and administrative costs funded from those two accounts.
The 2007-2008 main estimates total $40.5 billion, a net increase of $5.1 billion over the 2006-2007 main estimates of $35.4 billion. The increase is primarily due to new funding for the universal child care benefits, the lump-sum payments recognizing the impact of Indian residential schools, and increases for statutory programs, which include old age security, guaranteed income supplements, and allowance payments.
Mr. Chair, I have recently had the opportunity to cross the country and see firsthand how our department touches the lives of Canadians and helps them fulfill their potential. Service Canada is central to my department and to the broader government, touching the lives of millions of Canadians. Service Canada is about improving service to Canadians. I'm proud to say that Service Canada provides access to more than 50 Government of Canada programs and services over the Internet, in person, or by telephone.
I'm also proud of our expansion into rural and remote areas. Over last year, our government added 170 points of service. Residents of Fort Resolution on the shores of Great Slave Lake in the Northwest Territories, for example, recently got help accessing programs and services, thanks to several Service Canada employees who made a 320-kilometre round trip from the local service centre in Hay River, rather than waiting for the residents to come to them.
Residents of the communities of Grise Fiord and Resolute and Nunavut also recently had a chance to find out about our programs through two trade fairs organized by Service Canada employees and the Baffin Chamber of Commerce. Some Canadians are now receiving their first direct contact with the federal government. Citizen service agents are providing scheduled outreach visits to several communities along the James Bay coast in northern Ontario that are only accessible by plane. Plans are also under way to begin offering services in Cree.
[Translation]
Many more Canadians are getting the services and benefits they need. Providing Canadians with excellent services is no longer just a goal, but a concrete reality.
[English]
Let me now outline for you some of our government's actions to support Canadians in their family life, at work, and in their communities. Mr. Chair, today is International Day of Families. Every day Canadian families face challenges balancing work and family responsibilities and making decisions on how to raise their children. That's why our government has now presented two budgets aimed at providing choice for Canadians. These measures are making a difference, Mr. Chair.
In fact, this year we will be providing nearly $5.6 billion—three times the previous government—in direct spending, tax measures, and transfers to support early learning and child care. Universal child care benefit provides $2.4 billion a year directly to families, and now with Budget 2007, we have committed $250 million per year to create new child care spaces through the Canada social transfer. This comes on top of the $850 million we already provide to the provinces and territories in support of early learning and child care programs. Budget 2007 announced further support for families with children, including a 25% non-refundable tax credit to support businesses in creating new child care spaces in the workplace.
I recently had the opportunity to attend the opening of an innovative employer-sponsored child care centre at the University of Waterloo in Ontario. The centre sets up contracts with employers to supply full- and part-time care for children up to 13 years old, as well as temporary child care when the need arises. I can see Canadians working together to create effect choices in child care. I'm very encouraged when parents tell me that they have more choices for their families as a result of our programs and policies.
We have continued to follow through on our commitment to families by recently proposing in the budget a child tax credit for up to $310 per child under the age of 18. More than three million Canadian families would see their tax burden reduced. We have also proposed a new measure, similar to the registered education savings plan, that will benefit families who have children with severe disabilities. I'm sure that every one of us knows someone who faces the daunting financial challenge of caring for a child with a disability. The registered disability savings plan is designed to help ease that financial burden.
[Translation]
We have also done a great deal on behalf of seniors.
[English]
At the beginning of this year, the Prime Minister appointed the Honourable Marjory LeBreton as Secretary of State for seniors. In March, we announced the creation of a National Seniors Council to advise the government on issues of national importance. Budget 2007 had an increase in the age credit amount and pension income splitting. The recent passage of Bill will make it easier for seniors to apply for and receive their benefits.
This government also believes that investing in post-secondary education today will help bridge the skills gap, so future generations can access learning and employment opportunities of the future. That's why Budget 2007 proposed to increase the lifetime contributions and the annual contribution limits of registered education savings plans, as well as increase the Canada education savings grant. In addition, Budget 2007 proposed the biggest investment in post-secondary education since the inception of the Canada social transfer, an increase of more than 40% in transfers to provinces and territories in this area.
We are also delivering policies and programs that help bridge the gap in the labour market between employers who need workers and Canadians who need jobs. The budget establishes a new architecture for labour market policy, the centerpiece of which is a $500 million a year contribution in new funding for the provinces to help get training for those who are not eligible to receive EI. Our goal is to create the skilled, adaptable workforce Canada needs. In the final analysis, this translates into opportunities for individual workers to create Canada's knowledge advantage.
We live in a very special time in the history of the Canadian economy and its labour force. The challenge used to be people seeking jobs. Now we have jobs seeking people, especially when it comes to skilled workers.
Last January, for example, our government launched the apprenticeship incentive grant. Up to 100,000 apprentices will be eligible for grants to help cover the cost of tuition, travel, and tools. I was recently in Edmonton, Mr. Chairman, where I had the opportunity to present the first $1,000 cheque under the apprenticeship incentive grant at a steel fabricating plant, Wayward Steel. The smile on that young rig technician's face told me, Mr. Chairman, that we were absolutely on the right track with this new grant.
Our government is also producing programs that encourage employment for under-represented groups such as recent immigrants, persons with disabilities, and aboriginal Canadians.
[Translation]
Immigrants now account for a much larger proportion of Canada's population growth. We need the skills of these newcomers.
[English]
In the past year I announced enhancements to the temporary foreign worker program, including regional lists of occupations under pressure, and working groups in Alberta and B.C. that are designed to alleviate worker shortages.
In Calgary, last March, I announced funding for a program that will develop an online tool to help immigrants before coming to Canada upgrade their essential skills to meet the requirements of the Canadian workforce. We've also targeted other groups to help ensure that they can bring their skills to the workplace to help us bridge the gap.
When I was recently in Digby, Nova Scotia, I met a woman whose disability had made her feel that she was unemployable. With the help of the skills link program, she found a position with a retail chain. She was pretty thrilled about making a contribution to her community and the positive impact that the job would have on her life. Mr. Chairman, she told a very touching story at that time, and I couldn't help but feel a personal sense of pride in the skills link program that was helping her.
[Translation]
Mr. Chairman, there are many more stories like this one.
[English]
For example, when I visited a youth project in north Regina, I met a young aboriginal man who had experienced some pretty tough times. Participating in a youth program had motivated him to work towards creating his own business of renovating houses and flipping property.
We've also reached out to support aboriginal people. I'm very pleased that our recent budget proposed to double the investment under the aboriginal skills and employment partnership program. We propose to add another $105 million to this program, and I'm sure we'll see more success stories like these in years to come.
Last year the government invested some $175.5 million to support over 1,140 homelessness-related projects. We also committed $269.6 million over the next two years on a new homelessness partnering strategy. This strategy will work to find more effective and sustainable solutions to prevent and reduce homelessness, and improve the quality of life for Canada's most vulnerable citizens.
We also recently announced a two-year extension of CMHC's renovation programs, worth $256 million, to help bring housing for low-income households up to basic health and safety standards.
CMHC is spending $1 billion per year to create affordable housing through bilateral affordable housing agreements with the provinces and territories. It also spends about $1.8 billion to support some 633,000 existing social housing units across Canada.
The 2006 federal budget also provided $1.4 billion for affordable housing, northern housing, and housing for aboriginal people living off reserve. Along with my colleague, Minister , I recently announced the creation of a $300 million first nations market housing fund. This fund follows through on the 2007 budget commitment to develop a housing market in first nations across this country. It also represents a fundamental shift in how Canada's new government supports housing on reserve. Up to 25,000 new housing units over 10 years could be provided through this fund.
Mr. Chairman, I cannot emphasize enough the importance of the contributions made by the individual employees of my department.
[Translation]
Through their hard work and dedication, we are making an impact on the lives of Canadians.
[English]
Mr. Chair, this committee will note that in the report on plans and priorities, we have made a commitment to Canadians, to our own employees, and to taxpayers. We will use their money wisely to achieve results and value for money.
When I travel the country and see a human face on the results that we achieve, I know we are on the right track. We are reaching people; we are helping them fulfill their potential.
I would be pleased to welcome the committee's questions.
Thank you.
:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee.
This is the third time I have had the honour of coming before you. Today I will also have the opportunity to update you on the changes and progress that have taken place since our last meeting.
Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I would like to recall the fact that Canada's workplace is where our nation's wealth is generated. It's where most citizens spend a considerable part of their lives. It is also where creativity and innovation take root. The quality of a workplace is therefore fundamental to the economic and social quality of life of citizens. So it is crucial that we focus on the quality of that workplace. Here's how we do that.
First, as members know, one of the main sectors of activity of the Labour Program is labour-management relations. We provide assistance for dispute resolutions. This assistance includes mediation and conciliation services in settling collective bargaining and other industrial disputes. Second, we must ensure we have the right laws, regulations and rules governing the workplace—developed to be flexible to the meet the needs of a changing world. Third, we achieve our objective through compliance and enforcement of these laws, regulations and rules.
The role of our conciliation and mediation services in successfully assisting unions and employers in resolving their collective bargaining disputes is clear: 97% of all Canada Labour Code collective bargaining disputes finalized in 2006-2007 were settled without a work stoppage.
The context for modern laws, regulations and rules is that the nature of the Canadian workplace is changing. For many workers in western industrialized countries, this is a world that has been absolutely transformed in roughly the span of a single generation. Consider this: the percentage of women in the workforce increased from 42% in 1976 to 58% in 2004. Immigrants represent 70% of current population growth—up from 20% in 1976. Self-employment, autonomous workers, telework, casual employment and job sharing have all risen dramatically. The laws that govern our workplace have to keep pace with all of this change. Through modest steps, we are meeting this challenge.
The report entitled Fairness at Work: Federal Labour Standards for the 21st Century, prepared for the Government of Canada, makes a series of legislative and administrative recommendations on how to modernize key sections of the Canada Labour Code—fundamental legislation governing federal work standards and workplace conditions. This government continues to seek the views of business and the labour before we decide on a course of action.
Another component of our approach to modern legislation is the Employment Equity Act. In December last year, I was pleased to be informed that this standing committee will be undertaking the five-year review of this act. As mandated by law, this will be the third such review to be carried out since the passage of the act in 1986, when I myself was a member in the House of Commons. Your direction is required. Our government looks forward to working with you in this endeavour.
And here's another example of modern legislation: second-hand smoke in the workplace. I announced today that the government's decisions to amend the Non-Smokers Health Act to ban smoking rooms in federally-regulated workplace. Upon assuming the Office of the Minister of Labour, I asked the department to conduct testing of the quality of air outside smoking rooms in federally-regulated workplaces. I found to the government's satisfaction that there was no leakage of second-hand smoke. I took things a step further and asked the department to test air quality inside the smoking rooms, before people came to work, that is before they went in to the smoking rooms in the morning, when they were on break and a little later during the day.
These tests showed that the air quality inside smoking rooms was very poor—to say the least—even when they were not in use and deteriorated to dangerous levels as smoking increased in the room.
Mr. Chairman, amending regulations to ban smoking rooms will take time but I strongly encourage employers to close their smoking rooms as soon as possible and not wait for the new regulations to take effect. Perhaps you will have questions to ask me about this. If it is your wish, I can expand on this later.
The Wager Protection Program Act is another example of modern legislation. This important new program aims to protect workers who are the most vulnerable in a bankruptcy. The government will provide for the payment of unpaid wages and vacation pay of up to an amount equalling four weeks' maximum insurable earnings under the Employment Insurance Act, or approximately $3,000, to employees whose employers go bankrupt.
This government is moving forward on technical amendments to the legislation and is keen to have Parliament approve these amendments. So I urge the members of your political parties to move forward in reaching consensus on these amendments. We all know how important this legislation is for working Canadians, and we are ready to move ahead on its passage. As soon as there is a consensus, we will be able to move ahead quickly, in order to give the bill three readings and to refer it to the Senate for further consideration.
Allow me to give you one more example of the kind of new rules we need. New directives have been developed to deal with "refusal to work" situations which provide clarity and consistency in Labour Program decisions. Refusal to work is an essential right of federal workers when facing work situations that could be considered dangerous. The directives follow a three-step process.
First, parties should determine the normal conditions of employment. Second, inspectors should determine if there are deviations from that norm. And third, if there are deviations, inspectors should then determine if it constitutes a danger, thereby justifying the refusal to work. Additional initiatives based on modernized regulations are being developed and include new violence prevention measures and ergonomic regulations.
Before turning to our approach to modern enforcement, let me mention the importance of the need for consensus among workplace parties on new legislation. Even a carefully-crafted law or regulation can prove counterproductive if it is seen as one-sided. Good laws are therefore effective when they are backed up by effective enforcement. But it has also been shown that the most effective approach is to undertake the combination of activities aimed at gaining employers' compliance voluntarily before using the enforcement provisions of a law.
International responsibility, labour management collaboration, and self-regulation are the best tools we have in the modern workplace for achieving compliance with legal obligations. In this context, the role of government increasingly shifts away from blanket coverage by inspectors, and towards education, dissemination of best practices, dispute resolutions, audits, and inspection activities that are more actively targeted to high-risk workplaces and industries.
An example of our approach to modernization is the new Racism Workplace Strategy. One of the most effective ways to gain compliance of employers with legislation is to provide them with the information and the assistance they need to implement certain legislative requirements. For example, employers subject to the Employment Equity Act tell us they are having difficulties achieving the goal of equitable representation of visible minorities and aboriginal people, when members of those two groups experience racial conflicts in the workplace.
That is why we have introduced the strategy to provide information and assistance to employers in removing barriers and in recruiting and retaining members of those two groups in their workforce. I personally have been traveling across the country, meeting employers and employees and I saw the progress first-hand and encouraged continuing efforts to address the issue of racism in the workplace.
Recently we acted on federal pay equity. The government decided to improve compliance with existing requirements for pay equity. Rather than spending a lot of time discussing and attempting to reach consensus on new legislation, we believe that what is most needed is an effective strategy to ensure that employers are fulfilling their obligations.
My approach therefore is to provide information and education for employers, to offer assistance and facilitation for employers who need help, and to carry out the follow-up and monitoring of compliance. As a last resort, enforcement activity will be undertaken by the Canadian Human Rights Commission and tribunal.
Most employers under federal jurisdiction readily comply with their obligations under the Canada Labour Code to pay appropriate wages and overtime rates as required. However, sometimes this is not the case and employees file a complaint with Labour Program officials claiming that there are wages owing to them.
For example, in 2006-2007, the Labour Program assisted nearly 2,000 Canadians to recover their entitlements. In 2007, after investigation, it was determined that there was a total of $3.7 million in unpaid wages owed to employees. Once these employers were informed of their obligations, they voluntarily paid nearly $2 million of those unpaid wages. Where employers did not voluntarily comply, labour inspectors used the enforcement provisions in the Code and recovered almost $800,000 of the remaining unpaid wages for Canadian workers.
In the context of increased competition in the production of goods and services in a globalized economy, the effective enforcement of labour laws internationally is vital to ensuring Canada's competitive position. We are proud of what we've accomplished in Canada and we have an obligation to help out internationally. The Labour Program is providing technical assistance to partners in the Americas to help strengthen their administration of labour laws.
Our international commitment is reflected in Canada's ongoing active role in the International Labour Organization. And it is what guides our efforts under the international labour agreements we have concluded with Mexico and the United States, Chili and Costa Rica. We are currently working to finalize agreements with Korea and Singapore and we'll be pursuing similar agreements with other trading partners in the Americas.
I have highlighted for you Canada's efforts, through providing mediation and conciliation services, legislation and modern enforcement, in building a quality workplace.
We're working hard at getting it right because good labour laws mean safe and healthy work conditions and modern enforcement means fewer injuries at work and less absenteeism. Labour laws based on consensus mean fewer disputes and work stoppages. People can take pride in their workplace, be more creative and innovative.
All of this is done with a simple objective: enhancement of our quality of life in and outside of work, both on the social and economic fronts.
As always, I am pleased to work with the committee to meet the challenges of the dynamic, ever-changing workplace. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
:
I hope the minister is going to cooperate and keep his answers short.
I want to begin by thanking both of the ministers for appearing before the committee along with their officials.
I want to get into questioning. As the Minister of Human Resources and Social Development, you spoke about the importance of putting a human face on stories. In my question I'm going to put a human face on perhaps a struggle and a challenge that so many Canadian families have come to me with.
I'm sure as a minister you are aware that about 75% of Canadian parents in this country have their children in some form of child care. In talking to many of these Canadian families, you mentioned that they were encouraged. I can tell you, from the picture I have seen and the words I have heard, that this is certainly not the case. They are upset, they are frustrated, and they feel like they have been left scrambling.
You may ask, why is that? They are upset and frustrated because of the fact that they were counting on Stephen Harper and the Conservatives to keep the promise to create 125,000 child care spaces. They were hoping that you would keep your promise to invest in early learning and child care. Instead, they feel that the Conservative government, and you as the minister who took over the portfolio, have really failed those Canadian families and kids. They were so upset that many of these organizations, and one of the largest child care advocacy organizations in the country, were compelled to issue a report card. I'm sure that Stephen Harper brought forward this report card, as would anyone who had received a report card, to the cabinet table to tell you of the outrage that Canadian parents and families feel.
Looking at the report card, I hope no child ever takes home a report like this. There was an F for universal child care; a D-minus on parent choice; an F on balancing work and family; and an F on honouring agreements, where it says that Stephen Harper doesn't play well with others.
On behalf of all of these Canadian families and parents who are so upset at the fact that the Conservative government broke its promise, I simply want to ask you....
Before I do, I'm going to read to you what was written in Hansard: “We also will be creating 125,000 new spaces at work, at home and in the community.”
Do you know when that was said, Minister? In 2006, on April 25. So it's been a year since this statement was made in the House. It's been 15 or 16 months since your Conservative government was elected. How many child care spaces has this Conservative government created?
:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Good afternoon, ministers.
First I would like to tell you how disappointed I am to see you here together. I do not understand why you did this. Your government has boasted about being transparent and being willing to answer questions. Yet it has become evident in all the committees, and in may ways, how far you will go to hide, including during an information meeting like this one, where we have two ministers in two hours rather than having each one for two hours. There has been discussion about day cares and summer jobs. I want to talk to you about bankruptcies. You can see that this makes no sense.
That being said, I am also disappointed about the paragraph on the Wage Earner Protection Program Act, spoken by the Minister of Labour. I am disappointed but also a bit fed up. This was Bill , that was tabled in the House in May 2005 and that contained two parts. First, it overhauled the Bankruptcy Act, and second, it provided for an assistance program, wage protection for workers in the event that their employers went bankrupt. The bill was not perfect but it was so satisfactory and so counted on that in November 2005—I believe it was the 25th of November—all parties in the House passed it unanimously. This was just before the 2005 election campaign. The bill was also passed quickly in the Senate, through the fast-track procedure.
When your government was elected in January 2006 you said that there were some technical problems that had to be resolved. We said that was fine, that we understood. It took approximately one year to resolve those technical problems, especially with respect to the overhaul of the Bankruptcy Act. To the Minister of Labour, you tabled this bill last December. In fact, you tabled a ways and means motion on the 8th of December last. That was five months ago. Now you're telling us: "I urge the members of your political parties to move forward in reaching consensus on these amendments."
Minister, that is not how one proceeds with a bill. If you want us to discuss your bill, then put it on the table, let's give it consideration, let us vote on it at second reading, refer it to committee, and make the necessary changes. The change that is difficult, at least for the Bloc Québécois but also for other political parties, is the one involving a clause in the Bankruptcy Act that states that RRSPs will be liable to seizure, which runs counter to the Quebec Civil Code, that states that RRSPs are not liable to seizure. Minister, I think that you have to compromise on this point because you stated that the purpose of this is to protect RRSPs, to prevent someone from putting too much money in RRSPs knowing that they will be bankrupt the next day. Your legislation already has a provision stating that you're not allowed to do that. Therefore, an individual's RRSPs would become liable to seizure, if it could be shown—and it's often easy to do this—that this step was taken in order to protect some money during an eventual bankruptcy.
Minister, when are you going to table this bill?
Thanks for coming, Minister Solberg and Minister Blackburn. We appreciate this opportunity to talk with you about issues of great concern to us and the people we represent.
You noted, Minister Solberg, that you've travelled the country over the last while to see firsthand how your department touches the lives of Canadians. I commend you for that.
I've also travelled the country over the last nine months, looking at the question of poverty. I have seen some things that were alarming and quite troubling, particularly in this land of plenty. We have great prosperity--nobody will argue with that--but on the other hand we have people who aren't participating.
We obviously have some differences of opinion on what programs are working and on approaches to actually resolving that kind of thing. In its wisdom this committee has agreed to actually have some hearings in the fall on the issue of the prosperity gap and poverty to see if we can't, in a non-partisan way, come up with some real solutions to some real issues out there.
Studies have indicated that the average income gap is $125,000 a year between the richest 20% and the poorest 20%. That's too much. There are 650,000 working poor. We can debate the definitions of poverty until we're blue in the face, but I think the opportunity in these hearings is to break through that to determine, by way of poverty indicators, basic rights, necessities for all Canadians, recommendations for a national plan.
This is something I spoke of in the House and that you actually listened to recently and responded to. We didn't agree at that time that we should actually have a national anti-poverty strategy. Perhaps these hearings will get us to a point where we agree that there are some things we might be able to do together.
I'm suggesting that we look at other jurisdictions in Canada. Newfoundland and Labrador and Quebec have laws and programs to reduce poverty, as do countries such as Britain and Ireland. For example, Ireland has reduced its poverty from 16% to 5% over the last ten years.
What I'm looking for is your ministry's approach to that. Would you support that initiative? I would like your thoughts on it.
:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Sir, I deplore the fact that you, as the Minister of Labour, are taking advantage of the situation to spread disinformation regarding the positions of the political parties.
The role of this committee and of all the other committees consists in advising the House of Commons. Therefore, we must come up with answers that are as brief and, of course, as accurate as possible.
I was also hoping to get an answer regarding the number of child care centres created by your government. Mr. Minister, you spoke of 15,000 spaces. Just recently, the committee heard witnesses from Ontario, who told us about the successful creation of spaces in child care centres through a long-term program in that province. Ontario, and specifically the Toronto region, is where the most spaces in child care centres have been created. And this has nothing to do with the Conservative Party's strategy.
I think that I still have the same question: How many spaces in child care centres have you created?
However, there is another issue about which I insist on getting answers from the ministers, especially from Mr. Solberg. I am talking about the Summer Career Placements Program. Although you changed the name, it is still the same program. You changed the venues for the choices: they would be made by non-profit organizations in each provincial capital and by private organizations in Ottawa. Thus, the people on the ground in each riding no longer know what is happening, who made the requests and who got what. Mr. Minister, although your government says that it wants more transparency, this file says otherwise.
Do the choices have to be made today? Have they been made, Mr. Minister? Will you send the list of the organizations to which you awarded positions, along with their number, to this committee, if not to each riding? This would enable us to compare with what was done last year and see whether you were right in saying that you would save money. Above all, we want to see how effective your actions have been.
:
Your government's decision regarding this matter was announced in public a few hours ago. As the Minister of Labour, I am in charge of health and safety at work. There is also legislation regarding the health of non-smokers.
Over the years, our department has worked to ensure that there be no second-hand smoke, to protect non-smokers in federal buildings equipped with smoking rooms. A few months ago, I became interested in the presence of second-hand smoke outside the smoking rooms. Some people told me that it was present.
To begin with, we checked 11 smoking rooms at random. Only one of them did not have adequate ventilation, and it was closed down. There was no second-hand smoke outside the 10 remaining smoking rooms. However, we wanted to go further. We checked 12 more smoking rooms and the results were the same, there was no second-hand smoke outside. Therefore, our Non-smokers' Health Act was adequate and companies were enforcing it properly.
I went even further to find out what happens in smoking rooms before people go to work in the morning and when they are full of employees who smoke during their break. I wanted to find out about the air quality. This led to very surprising results.
In the morning, before the employees went into the smoking room, there were 27 times more fine particles than in the adjoining room. When people went to smoke during their breaks, there was 245 times more fine particles in the smoking room than in the room next to it. Thus, to follow a good principle, we protected non-smokers by putting the smokers in one room, without any regard to what happened in there.
Let met give you an idea of what 245 times more fine particles represent. The air in that smoking room is six times worse than the air on the worst day of smog or pollution in Montreal or Toronto in the summer time. At that point, we had to make a decision, and we thought that the best thing to do was to change our regulations and close down the smoking rooms.
We are asking employers not to wait for the regulations to change, because it will take a few months. Because of the high particle rates that we discovered, they can go ahead right away.
The statistics showed that we had to intervene. The fine particles of second-hand smoke contain 4,000 chemical products, 50 of which are carcinogenic.