Status of Women Committee on Feb. 12th, 2009

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Thank you very much.

[Helena Guergis, Conservative, Simcoe—Grey, ON]

Do you have another question on that side?

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

You've got another three minutes.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Three minutes.

I'll split my time with another member. I don't have a question in my mind.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Ms. Davidson.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Minister, thank you very much for appearing here this morning. We certainly appreciate the perspective that, as a former member of this committee, you bring to this portfolio. I think that can only be a plus for all of us. You've seen the struggles we've had in some instances in trying to move the issues forward, so hopefully we will see a bit more sympathy and support because of that.

I know you told us you had done community consultations. I'm guessing it was across the country—I'm not really sure—but maybe you could comment on that a little bit, too.

Could you tell us some of the things you heard when you were out there and how we can address them? I know we've talked a bit about employment insurance and, rightly so, you have said you're not the minister responsible for that. But I know that the minister who is has told us that 80% of the people who pay into that insurance fund are able to collect from it. So, I mean, that leaves 20%. And I think we all know that there are some of us who pay into it who can never collect, such as all of us sitting at this table. So you know, there is a reason why there is a 20% there.

I know there have been changes too, that the eligibility criteria for the number of weeks can change, as well, because of area issues and unemployment issues.

Can you comment on any of those things, as to how they might impact women, and just some of the issues you've talked about with women, with economic security and prosperity and what Status of Women Canada might be doing to encourage that?

[Helena Guergis, Conservative, Simcoe—Grey, ON]

With respect to economic security, we all know that women are at different stages in their lives and we all have different levels of skills. Sometimes we've come from abusive situations where we haven't had an opportunity to even manage our own finances in our home. Then there are those who have a higher level of financial literacy. A lot of the funding is supporting programs for women at those many different stages throughout their lives--those who have come out of abusive situations who need the basic skills, those small-business women who are looking to expand their businesses.

Putting political stripes aside, there are a couple of great opportunities that I can't share at this table, but I think you'll all be pleased. In the coming weeks we'll be announcing some really exciting opportunities for small-business women to create greater market access. But what I heard was that women are at different levels and there is not one size fits all. We have to address that. We have to ensure that there's something available for women at the different stages and the different literacy levels.

I wish I had more time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you very much.

Ms. Mathyssen.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Minister, for being here. I certainly appreciate both your time and Ms. Beckton's time.

I have a number of questions. I'm going to go one at a time.

First of all, Ms. Neville raised the issue of gender-based budget analysis. You indicated it's sort of a pre-training. Is there any plan for the status of women department to do a post-analysis in regard to impact of the 2009 budget. If so, how do you plan to do it without the policy research branch?

[Helena Guergis, Conservative, Simcoe—Grey, ON]

I will definitely let Clare address some of this, but on gender-based analysis, our role is clearly for training. When the ministries ask us, officials will support them in training on how to do that. I have been told that it has been done since 2006 for the Department of Finance.

I will have Clare answer more on the technical question you asked.

[Clare Beckton, Coordinator, Office of the Coordinator, Status of Women Canada]

We always look at budgets and the impact of them on women.

In terms of our research and our capabilities, we have access to a lot of statistics, which are really what is important. There's a lot of research being done, both internationally and nationally, with other departments we have access to, as well as the tremendous research that Statistics Canada does. But we don't do gender-based analysis for other departments. We help them build their capacity, and we also help them with the training so they can actually do the gender-based analysis.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

I understand that, but my concern in looking at this budget is that its negative impact on women is quite significant. For example, if you look at page 110, there's a chart and this discussion about changing and modifying the child tax credit and child benefits. Families earning less than $20,000 receive nothing. Families in the $35,000 range get something like $35 a month. It's not until you get into the $150,000 range where you see anything substantive, and it's something in the neighbourhood of $800.

That would seem to be something we should be very, very concerned about. It has a profoundly negative impact on women and their families. Why on earth wouldn't the department be concerned about that?

Also, I'm very concerned about the impact of the so-called pay equity legislation that's embedded in the budget implementation act. It's going to be a collective bargaining process, and the Human Rights Tribunal is excluded. Now any complaints go to the Public Service Labour Relations Board, which has no expertise in regard to pay equity, unlike a human rights tribunal.

I come back to the concern that pay equity is a human right that cannot be bargained away. It should never be a bargaining chip. And the fact that there is no commissioner....

The fact that this has been very clearly part of the budget process brings me back to a concern that this committee should have, and I think the department should have, despite the technicalities about training. It seems to me we have an obligation to women in this country, and we're failing.

[Helena Guergis, Conservative, Simcoe—Grey, ON]

I'll first address the issue of pay equity. I know that the honourable member knows that I am not the lead on pay equity. You are more than welcome to invite Minister Toews to have a conversation about that. He is in charge of the collective bargaining process, and he is the lead on the legislation.

What I think is really important to point out is that it's time for a more modern approach. It is time for a proactive approach, and that is exactly what we intend to do. As to any suggestion that we don't have women and their best interests at heart in this process, I dare someone to suggest that, because we do have women's best interests at heart.

The last settlement took 15 years, and it was in 1999. Women are waiting 15 years, 10 years, to receive pay equity. I think it's important to note that the Supreme Court ruled and said that the fundamental right to collective bargaining is a fundamental human right, as well. Why wouldn't we negotiate at the front end as to what women should be paid from the very beginning going forward?

What I heard from women is that they want a more modern approach, and they'd like us to proceed with this, and we will proceed with this. If you want further conversations about this piece of legislation, I strongly urge you to speak with Minister Toews. I know that he'd be more than happy to talk to you about the progress we will be making on that.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Thank you, Minister.

I have spoken with women's groups, and of course pay equity took 15 years because the Government of Canada kept appealing the decisions.

My last question is in regard to applications, specifically an application that was made by the Elizabeth Fry Society of Thunder Bay, I believe. They faxed and mailed their application. It's a very important application, inasmuch as this is the only E. Fry organization in northwestern Ontario, and they want to address the issue of young women and girls and their problems with the law. It's preventative. They received information that the application was lost or never received. I'm wondering if we could follow up on this, since it's a very important application.

[Helena Guergis, Conservative, Simcoe—Grey, ON]

Absolutely, Irene, we're happy to follow up on that. But I can confirm for you, with respect to the Elizabeth Fry Society, that I did support and approve I think it was two or three applications across the country on that one. We're happy to look into that and see what the status is. If you give a few more details, that would be appreciated.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

We'll send that along.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

You have a little less than a minute to go. You have about 30 seconds.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Thank you.

I wonder about the progress being made on the action plan and about who you consulted with. You indicated that you consulted with about 30 groups. I would like very much to know who you talked to. If a list of that consultation could be provided to the committee, I would appreciate that.

[Helena Guergis, Conservative, Simcoe—Grey, ON]

I have it somewhere here, and I am happy to provide it, but it's by no means complete.

Madam Chair, you have to let me do this one. They want to hear this.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

I haven't allowed other members.

[Helena Guergis, Conservative, Simcoe—Grey, ON]

I'll stay another couple of minutes if I can answer. Is that fair?

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Could you answer this when Madam Mathyssen comes back in another round?

I want to present a problem we're facing to the committee. We only have about 15 minutes left in the minister's time. The next round should be five minutes each. That means that we will never be able to do it. Did you want to decide that you'd rather ask more questions in less time, or will the minister wish to stay an extra 15 minutes?

[Helena Guergis, Conservative, Simcoe—Grey, ON]

I don't know about fifteen, but I could probably get in an extra five minutes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

You can stay an extra five minutes, but still, the committee needs to decide if it wants to go with the five, because if you do, only three people can go, or you may want to cut it down. I'm at your pleasure.

Do you want three minutes each?

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Madam Chair, first of all, I would like to know if Ms. Beckton will be staying with us.