Evidence of meeting #16 for Status of Women in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was human.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:45 a.m.
Coordinator, Status of Women Canada
I'll take your question in one way, and perhaps Jackie can add....
We have to make a distinction. The terms and conditions of the women's program apply to the $10.8 million that goes into funding; they do not apply to the rest of the activities of Status of Women. We work toward a number of objectives, and those were not changed; it's just the strict terms and conditions of the funding program that were modified.
On the effect, perhaps, Jackie, you can go into it a little more.
11:45 a.m.
Director General, Women's Programs and Regional Operations, Status of Women Canada
I think the important point is the one you've made, that the terms and conditions relate to the grants and contributions program—and I'm just reinforcing what Florence has said, that we will be providing support for activities falling within those terms and conditions within the same level of budget. So there are no changes from a budget perspective, in terms of the impact of the cut.
11:45 a.m.
Liberal
Anita Neville Liberal Winnipeg South Centre, MB
Have you done an analysis of the programs you currently fund that will no longer be eligible under the changing mandate of the program? Before you answer, let me just preface this by saying that I met this week with, quite literally, several dozen women in my community about the impact of the changes to their organizations. We are gathering information at the moment, but I'm wondering if you have done an analysis of what the changed criteria are going to mean.
11:45 a.m.
Director General, Women's Programs and Regional Operations, Status of Women Canada
We haven't done an analysis per se. I think the focus, from our perspective, is on looking at the submissions that groups will be coming forward with and determining what fits into the activities we support. I think we have a very broad framework; there are many things we will continue to be able to fund. There may well be groups who have received support in the past and for whom certain components of their activities may no longer be eligible, but I would expect that in many cases there will be other aspects of the work being done by the groups, keeping in mind the emphasis on the direct participation of women, the direct impact on women. I think this is something that has always been at the forefront of the approach the program has taken. So as I say, given the scope of the work being done by groups, I would anticipate there will continue to be activities.
Perhaps I can take this opportunity to go back to a comment made by one of the other members with respect to research. I just want to underscore the fact that we're not interested in research for the sake of research. If women are working on an issue and some work needs to be done that is relevant to the issue and will contribute to achieving a concrete result related to the issue, it will be considered as part of the global strategy the groups are carrying out.
11:45 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
Thank you.
Mr. Stanton.
By the way, can I say, Mr. Sweet, welcome. I should have welcomed you earlier.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
11:45 a.m.
Liberal
11:45 a.m.
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
Bruce Stanton Conservative Simcoe North, ON
Just as an aside, when we hear witnesses in this room, I always find it ominous to sit here right across from the leaders of the New Democratic Party and the CCF, going right back to the early days, and deliberate on policies that affect certain segments of our society. I don't know whether it is by design or not that we sit across from these men and women who have been champions for the most vulnerable in our society.
My first question is a specific one. In appendix III, and I presume on the votes today, the total funding is $24.6 million, of which $11.8 million is specifically for designated core programs, including the $1 million for Sisters in Spirit, leaving about $12.8 million in funding. But on the vote sheet today, under vote 110, the vote amount is $11.489 million, or approximately $11.5 million.
Could you explain the difference between the $11.489 million and the $12.856 million? Is it anticipated that between now and March there will be some savings? I'm sorry to have you scurrying for details; I've had the chance to sit here and get this ready and you have not.
11:50 a.m.
Coordinator, Status of Women Canada
I think the difference between $11.5 million and $12 million something—I can't find it in my papers—is the employee benefit plan. That's something that everyone must fund, but it does not count in our operations, per se.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Bruce Stanton Conservative Simcoe North, ON
It is part of the $12.8 million, with respect to total funding?
11:50 a.m.
Coordinator, Status of Women Canada
Yes, that's how you get the $12.8 million.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Bruce Stanton Conservative Simcoe North, ON
We're still on track, then, to keep program spending at $12.8 million.
11:50 a.m.
Coordinator, Status of Women Canada
The $12.8 million is a total number, but the real number of our real operations is $11.5 million. The difference, the $1.3 million, the employee benefit plan, is something we have no control over. We cannot change it. Reducing our workforce, though, would have an impact on it.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Bruce Stanton Conservative Simcoe North, ON
But it still forms part of the overall budget for Status of Women Canada.
11:50 a.m.
Coordinator, Status of Women Canada
It's an amount calculated in the total budget.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Bruce Stanton Conservative Simcoe North, ON
Correct.
With the impending cuts and reduction in expenditures mandated by Treasury Board and the government, as we move forward with six more months to go in this fiscal year, is there some capacity to realize some of these savings between now and March? In other words, even though the $5 million was intended to be over two years, we're halfway through the current fiscal year. Is there any capacity to begin to accommodate some of these savings between now and March, as opposed to rolling it all into the next fiscal year?
11:50 a.m.
Coordinator, Status of Women Canada
Treasury Board has indicated to us that the cuts don't apply to this fiscal year. They only apply next fiscal year. This year the budget remains intact. That will give us the flexibility to make the adjustments that will be needed to meet the requirements of Treasury Board.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Bruce Stanton Conservative Simcoe North, ON
In all of the documentation we have received, we don't have any of the historic numbers. If we go back to fiscal year 2003-04 and 2004-05, say, in the last three or four years, what has the historic level of funding been for Status of Women Canada?
11:50 a.m.
Coordinator, Status of Women Canada
If you look at the last five or six years, there has been a considerable change. In 2000, the government approved the agenda for gender equality. With that, Status of Women's budget was increased. I'll give you the final year. These were incremental increases, and I don't have the details with me today. At the end of the five years, which was in 2005, it meant that the granting program had $2.5 million more than it had in 1999. For its operations, Status of Women had $2.5 million more than it had in 1999. There was an incremental increase in the total program of Status of Women of $5 million. The amount put into Status of Women in that agenda has gone into our A-base and is part of the $24.6 million we now have. There was over the years an increase in the women's program of $2.5 million together with $2.5 million in the operations.
