Mr. Chairman, I, too, will be voting in favour of this motion. This is precisely the kind of thing that we expect our relatively newly minted Human Rights Commission to do, is bring forward progressive ideas that we can engage in in the interest of individuals. There is certainly an aspect of care to be taken in tying the hands of employers, Mr. Chairman, in being able to choose wisely the type of employees they wish to have. But in committee's presentations, and anecdotally now and then, it seems to be perhaps a bit of a trend here that employers are using criminal record checks and anything on anybody's past as a potential cause for not hiring them. That would certainly be something that on a blanket policy is not something that I think I would be prepared to condone. That is why I think this is a progressive piece of work. The way it was, at least the sense that was presented to committee, Mr. Chairman, was that employers would still be able to have some scope in their choice of how they could discriminate, but that we would want to make sure that the door was open where unrelated convictions would not be an allowable ground of discrimination. So with that, Mr. Chairman, I look forward to voting in favour of this motion. Thank you.
Bill Braden on Committee Motion 2-15(5): Recommendation To Review Implications Of Amending Human Rights Act To Prohibit Discrimination, Carried
In the Legislative Assembly on June 2nd, 2006. See this statement in context.
Committee Motion 2-15(5): Recommendation To Review Implications Of Amending Human Rights Act To Prohibit Discrimination, Carried
Item 19: Consideration In Committee Of The Whole Of Bills And Other Matters
June 1st, 2006
Page 106
See context to find out what was said next.