Status of Women Committee on Dec. 12th, 2007

[Glen Pearson, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

I understand what Mr. Stanton is saying. I work in human rights and I was a firefighter, so my knowledge of finance is fairly limited. I really agreed with Madam Minna, Madam Demers, and Ms. Mathyssen about having somebody to guide us through the process, because I think it voluminous.

I wonder if you can explain a bit more why you thought that was not the best way to start. I'm trying to understand what you meant.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Mr. Stanton, sure.

[Bruce Stanton, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

Thank you, through you, to my colleague.

I'm not sure it's not such a bad way to start. I'm just looking at the overall work that we potentially have in front of us. And I'm not disagreeing out of hand that we have some additional help to guide us through. I think that's potentially a good idea. I'm still not sure why we need a consultant for each party, if we've agreed that it's without a partisan approach. I'm not so sure we need that. I don't disagree. I would be interested to see what the mandate of that would be. I'm still having a hard time just visualizing how we're going to take some steps ahead here. We all know generally what lies in front of us.

The other point is, Mr. Pearson, that I wouldn't suggest for a minute that we would want to leave Finance out of the equation. I just think there are other departments that actually work these things up before it gets to Finance. Especially in those key departments, I would still want to have a sense of what steps they're going through...to not only consider the gender implications of the programs, but also to see what they have on the back end of it to measure it.

If we wrote up the mandate or the terms of reference for that consultant and put it on paper, I think it might be easier to understand what we're looking at.

So I'm not in disagreement. I just think there's a compendium of work here, and the better we can scope it down and get some focus to it, the better.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

I think what Ms. Mathyssen was starting to say was, has the budget consultation process begun? And we have no idea, because that would be a primer for us to figure this out. If the government is interested in consulting, then who is it consulting? And what is its trend going to be? Is it going to give a tax credit? Is it going to give a tax deduction? Perhaps we don't know. Everything is up in the air. Perhaps a consultant could say, a reduction in tax--for example, a 1% reduction in revenue from an income tax perspective--would benefit women in this group or that group.

In my mind, I think that's something we should be able to give the consultant. What happens if? It's a “what if” scenario. There are tax cuts, tax credits, and impacts on social programs. But we can ask the analysts to help us devise a mandate for consultants.

Here is what the analysts are telling me. We have had a lot of evidence given. We don't have a summary in front of us, so our memories might be relapsing into what it was that was said. In January, if we have the evidence before us, then we say, here is an area in which we would like a consultant to guide us. And perhaps then we won't be putting the cart before the horse, and perhaps we can logically say what it is we will move forward on with the consultant, and then how the consultant will help us ask the Department of Finance. How can we determine that a pension credit is beneficial, that they have done a gender lens? We don't even know how to ask the question. We have no idea. We're not experts on pensions. We're not experts on anything.

So we are here to help understand, and that person, hopefully the economist, will help us say, here are the types of questions you will ask the Department of Finance; here are the types of questions on which you will know that you are not being told the truth, or yes; here are the performance indicators you need to look at; and here are the performance measurements you must have. And perhaps that will help us achieve what we are trying to achieve.

Yes, Ms. Minna.

[Maria Minna, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

I would just like to clarify a little.

What you're saying is absolutely true. Also, to be exact, let's say we're coming into a spring budget, as an example, or a new piece of legislation, I don't know. Given the way the finance committee uses them, the consultant would be able to look at that, and they should have access to information from Finance and be able to advise this committee that gender budgeting was done properly and here's where it succeeded, or gender budgeting was done, okay, but it missed, and this is where it missed. This is to advise us, to give us information, so that we know how to some degree to monitor and also work with...and be able to make sure we can do certain things.

That's how, to some degree, the other one at Finance also works. Yes, it's specific to that, but it's also, in a way, to be able to work with this committee for maybe a year or so, as we get into gender budgeting and as the government starts to do it more seriously, to work with us so that we can monitor and see how it's going. It's a back and forth situation. This committee then is in a position to be able to put in questions and so on. Otherwise we can say that this is what we want to get done, and the government will say...and I'm not saying this government or the others. We've been at it for 10 years now. We're going to do this. But we don't have the mechanism or the ability to then meet with them and ask, is it working? How do we know that it's working or not until such time as a third party does an analysis and tells us, as we just heard in the last couple of weeks? Well, actually they were doing it, but it was not really done in the appropriate manner. So I think it's good for us to have.

And to Mr. Stanton, as I said, I was only using the finance committee as an example. They had more than one consultant. It doesn't have to be that. I don't see the need for us to waste the money. It can certainly be one individual we all agree on who can do the work for us. It doesn't have to be more than one, or it may be two we agree on. I'm not interested in spending a whole lot of money unnecessarily, but I do think it's helpful for this committee to have at least one or two people who work with us, as we move forward on this in the next several months or close to a year, because I think we'll be on this issue for a while, back and forth. It's not something we're going to do once and then forget. That's my sense.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Mr. Stanton.

[Bruce Stanton, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

There was one part of the question that came up from Mrs. Mathyssen with respect to the budget cycle that we're in right now. Obviously, as all members know, there's no set date, or if there is, we certainly aren't party to it. It'll be some time in the spring. We all know that, but my thinking is here, in terms of timing.... We're back the end of January. I'm sure the department is going to be well into preparations for the budget. What we're working on here is more on the culture and system of developing budgets, so it's beyond budget 2008, certainly. I don't see that our recommendations are going to specifically impact on this particular budget cycle. If we get work and we have something that comes up in February that we can forward along, then that's great. But we all know that budgets typically come out in late March, early April, and my gosh, by the time we get back into committee and are taking evidence here, things will be well along, I would suspect. I don't like to speculate about these things, but our impact in terms of budget 2008, I think, will be minimal.

But certainly our recommendations are going to be based around improving the way the Government of Canada conducts its budget work. That's the goal here. It's not about getting a specific measure into next year's budget. At least that's the way I understood it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

I think it's a sustainability of getting the gender links into budgeting. That's what we want. It's a systemic issue.

Madame Demers.

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Madam Chair, I was listening to Mr. Stanton, and I said to myself that we could be in for surprises. I do not think that we will have a significant effect on the 2008 budget, which must be already prepared in large part. But I am sure that the Department of Finance knows that we have begun to study gender-based budgeting. I feel that we are perhaps in for surprises and that the budget will likely contain some of the things that concern us.

So it is even more important to know how the various subjects and the various areas will be addressed. In that way, we could also get an idea of what has already been done, and be able to tell ourselves that we are making progress. That could be quite satisfying. Sometimes, we get the feeling that we are working in a vacuum.

Like Ms. Minna, I am sure that all successive governments have tried to start to do it but have not necessarily succeeded. Now that it is known that people are interested—I am convinced that the Department of Finance knows of our interest—perhaps a greater effort will be made as the budget is being prepared and we will be pleasantly surprised.

An expert would help us for sure.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Ms. Neville.

[Anita Neville, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

I was checking my remarks before I made them.

I was listening to Mr. Stanton comment about this budget cycle and the fact that what we're doing may be too late for it. But what I've learned in other things I've been involved in is that often the process of doing something alerts those responsible for making the decisions and doing it sensitive to the issues.

So while they may not be formally integrating a gender bias or a gender lens, I guess is the word, into the budget development process, the fact that this committee is studying it, talking about it, that it's becoming part of the discussion, will give them a sensitivity--or I would hope it would--to what they're doing.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you.

I am mindful that the minister should be here in 15 minutes, and we have another item on the agenda, which is the court challenges program--

[Anita Neville, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Madam Chair, we're getting notices of votes coming through.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Yes.

I am summarizing what I have heard here and what I'm hearing is yes, we want to have a consultant. We will first get the summation of all the findings or all the witnesses telling us, then we will determine the parameters we would want to provide the consultant, so the consultant can guide us in the right way. Our main aim is to ensure that the culture of gender lens is sustained within any government.

Then we will choose a consultant, whether it's from the Library of Parliament or whatever. After we've done that job, as Ms. Neville says, it might trigger people to do their work, because they will know somebody is trying to push that agenda now.

Have I got the right process in order?

[Maria Minna, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

Excuse me, Madam Chair, do we need a vote on the consultant or not?

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

At the moment we have said to ourselves that this is the process we're going to follow. The analysts are going to give us a summation of findings when we come back in January. From the summation we will determine what we need the consultant to do for us, so we will give the analyst a template of what our...because before we hire the consultant we have to prepare a mandate for the consultant.

We, the committee, will determine the parameters for the consultant, and at that meeting we will also determine who we should choose. So bring in a few names, and that should be fine.

[Maria Minna, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

All I'm asking is if this concept of having a consultant needed a motion. But if there's agreement, there's no need.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

There's a consensus that we have to have a consultant.

Yes, Ms. Davidson.

[Patricia Davidson, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Madam Chair, is it a budget issue? Is there enough budget?

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

We'll find out how much a consultant would cost us. I've been a consultant, so I cannot tell you I will charge you $10,000 when I don't even know what your parameters are. So we need to give the consultant parameters.

[Patricia Davidson, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Then we'll have to do a budget request?

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Exactly.

Agreed?

[Bruce Stanton, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

But not to hire anybody yet.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

It does not require a motion.

[The Clerk of the Committee, Ms. Danielle Bélisle]

And there's nothing in the minutes.