This bill is from the 41st Parliament, 2nd session, which ended in August 2015.
Anne-Marie Day NDP
Introduced as a private member’s bill. (These don’t often become law.)
Defeated, as of Feb. 5, 2014
(This bill did not become law.)
This is from the published bill.
This enactment amends the Financial Administration Act to achieve balanced representation in the number of women and men serving as directors on boards of parent Crown corporations by establishing the minimum proportion of each sex on those boards.
All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.
Bill numbers are reused for different bills each new session. Perhaps you were looking for one of these other C-473s:
Canada Business Corporations ActGovernment Orders
November 25th, 2016 / 12:40 p.m.
Conservative
Len Webber Conservative Calgary Confederation, AB
Mr. Speaker, I am a new member. I was elected on October 19 into my first term. I would say that Bill C-473 was before my time. Therefore, I do not have any idea what the reason for that was.
I look forward to progressing forward with this bill that we are discussing here today. Bill C-25 is at the table right now. Let us deal with that. I am happy to support that bill to its fullest.
Scott Duvall NDP Hamilton Mountain, ON
Mr. Speaker, the 2015 budget introduced the “comply or explain” provision, which is in this bill. It is meant to enhance the gender diversity on boards and in senior management.
Why, then, did the Conservatives vote against the NDP's Bill C-473 in 2014, which sought to achieve gender parity on the boards of crown corporations within six years?
Anne-Marie Day NDP Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Mr. Speaker, women in Canada have never been more educated. They hold the majority of positions in fields such as business administration, law and health.
However, women are still under-represented in senior management positions. It does not make sense to me that in 2015, being a woman is an obstacle to career advancement.
I was embarrassed for Canadian women when every member of the Conservative Party voted against Bill C-473, which called for gender parity in federal crown corporations.
If this trend holds, gender parity in senior management positions in Canada will be not be achieved until 2097. That is shameful. I am ashamed of the Conservative government for refusing to launch an investigation into the murder and disappearance of more than 1,000 aboriginal women.
Canadians deserve better. The NDP will promote women in leadership and call a commission of inquiry into the missing and murdered aboriginal women.
Financial AdministrationPetitionsRoutine Proceedings
November 27th, 2013 / 3:10 p.m.
NDP
Anne-Marie Day NDP Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Mr. Speaker, I would like to present a petition concerning my Bill C-473, which would increase the number of women and improve their representation in decision-making positions, where ministers appoint boards of directors. The bill will be discussed on Friday in the House.
Anne-Marie Day NDP Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Mr. Speaker, as we know, ministers are the ones who appoint the presidents of crown corporations. At present, there are 84 crown corporation in Canada, and 16 of the 84 presidents, or just 19%, are women. With Bill C-473, we are asking for a better balance.
Anne-Marie Day NDP Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Mr. Speaker, I would like to present a petition concerning the House of Commons. This petition seeks changes to the Financial Administration Act in order to have equal representation of men and women in federal crown corporations. That is the intent of my Bill C-473, which many Canadians support.
Anne-Marie Day NDP Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Mr. Speaker, I am truly pleased to speak for five minutes today to Bill C-473, which would amend the Financial Administration Act in order to improve the representation of women on boards of directors of crown corporations.
I would like to reiterate that gender equality must be a priority for Canadians. In its Constitution, Canada recognizes that men and women are equal under the laws of Canada. However, when it comes to economic independence, equality in decision-making, violence against women, pay equity and other issues, there remains a great deal of work to be done in order for men and women to be equal in economic, social and political terms in Canada.
In the last hour of debate, my colleague from York West raised a number of points that should be clarified for the benefit of all members of the House.
First, I would like to speak about the percentage mentioned in the bill's preamble. The data were provided by the Library of Parliament and indicate that women represent a mere 27% of directors on boards of Canada's crown corporations.
It is the responsibility of parliamentarians to enact legislation on this matter. This morning, the member for Calgary Centre-North spoke about private enterprises, whereas I am referring only to crown corporations. They are two completely different matters, and we must not mix them up.
She also spoke about aboriginal peoples. I would remind the House that when we are discussing women, fairness and representation on boards of directors, the appointment of aboriginal women will also be welcomed.
There were also questions about how to go about this. It is so simple that we could provide ministers with a basic guide on how to appoint women to boards of directors. I would humbly remind members that the minister has people from the crown corporations managed by his or her department make these appointments.
Competency must remain the basis for recruitment. As I explained earlier, it is merely a question of ensuring that male and female candidates are presented for each position. There are enough talented, competent and experienced women in the areas of management, finance, law and engineering to ensure that 50% of the positions are filled by women.
I would remind the House that many appointments are made based on the “old boys' club” model. We all know or have worked with someone who approached us to do some lobbying, for instance. Then, when the time comes to appoint representatives, we think of that individual.
People often go as far as relaxing the qualification criteria, in order to appoint a male candidate rather than a woman who has the required skills. I would also remind the House that, since the late 1980s, more women than men have been graduating with degrees in public administration.
I want to reiterate once again that Bill C-473 deals only with crown corporations. It imposes absolutely no restrictions on private corporations, which is why it is so important for the government, as an employer, to set an example and hold itself to higher standards of female representation among executive ranks.
There is absolutely no downside to this. In Quebec, women make up over 50% of boards of directors of crown corporations. This has no negative impact. Quebec crown corporations have not been altered because they have appointed women as leaders.
Lastly, Bill C-473 aims to achieve gender parity in six years. Why six years? Simply because Quebec managed to achieve it in five years. We therefore believe that the federal government can achieve it in six years.
The NDP has always been a strong advocate for women's rights and always will be. We have an opportunity here to make a significant gesture in support of Canadian women and to allow them to take their rightful place in the decision-making processes that govern our democracy.
In closing, let us not wait 150 years.
Christine Moore NDP Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to speak to Bill C-473, An Act to amend the Financial Administration Act (balanced representation), introduced by my colleague from Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles.
Gender equality is still an issue for Canadian society today. Progress has been made, but we need only look at the membership of the House to see that we still have work to do.
This bill seeks to achieve balanced representation of men and women serving as directors on boards of crown corporations within six years. It should be noted that it applies only to crown corporations and not private businesses.
First, we must understand that gender equality, in my opinion, is the responsibility of a proactive government. If government sets an example, hopefully others will follow.
Women are still under-represented on boards of directors of crown corporations in Canada. Most of these corporations have more men than women on their boards, and it is estimated that women make up approximately 27% of these boards.
Many Canadian women have the skills and experience needed to serve on these boards of directors. I think that women should have the same opportunities as men to be appointed to these boards of directors.
Equality in how our crown corporations are managed is an important issue, since these corporations offer a window into our country and how it manages gender equality. The fact that there are still too few women leading our political institutions, businesses and crown corporations is a problem that we should be looking at if we want to set an example as a society with equal rights in terms of gender representation.
Of over 200 crown corporations, agencies, boards of directors and commissions, only 27% of all available positions are held by women. Furthermore, fewer than 20% of chairs of these boards of directors are women.
Many people tend to celebrate the achievements made in recent years regarding women's rights. However, I do not think we should fall into the trap of taking gender equality for granted. We must continue to work. A lot of work remains to be done to make more progress and to protect what some may want to take away.
To those who say that appointments to senior government positions must be based on merit, I agree. I do not think this bill will change the fact that people are appointed based on merit. However, we must not forget that there are highly skilled female workers in Canada. There are enough women with the skills required to fill these positions and who deserve to be there. What we primarily need to change are the mindsets and the stereotypes that are perpetuated.
As the member for Mississauga South said, research shows that businesses with more women on their boards are more profitable. These businesses generally outperform other businesses with fewer women.
According to the bill's proposed roadmap, the implementation will be gradual. We are talking about 30% women after two years, 40% after four years and 50% after six years.
The bill also stipulates that:
105.2 Any appointment of a director of a parent Crown corporation in violation of section 105.1 [in other words, the percentages I just gave] is invalid and the vacant position shall be filled without delay by the appropriate Minister, with the approval of the Governor in Council
Therefore:
105.4 (1) Five years after the coming into force of sections 105.1 to 105.3 and every five years after that, a comprehensive review of these sections and of their operation shall be undertaken by such committee of the House of Commons or of both Houses of Parliament as may be designated or established by Parliament for that purpose.
Therefore, there will be a review after this bill is implemented to ensure that we stay on track. This is quite important. According to the Conference Board of Canada, without a quota, gender parity will take over 150 years to achieve. Even I will not be able to live that long. It will take 150 years to reach parity in important positions. I am not sure that waiting one and a half centuries is really the best solution in this case.
Moreover, when a gradual gender representation quota is imposed on the boards of crown corporations, people in charge of recruitment and appointment recommendations will be compelled to expand their recruitment efforts and extend their search to candidates with the required skills in non-traditional or less traditional recruitment pools.
In addition to seeking more women, organizations will also look for women who may have different backgrounds, more varied experience and different visions, which can only help enrich the boards of our crown corporations. Studies have shown that a higher percentage of women in senior management can generate tangible benefits for businesses. This will then foster economic growth and help develop our country to its full potential.
Of course we want peak performance from our crown corporations. We have known for some time now that female members of corporate boards offer Canadian companies a different and valuable perspective.
We can work with crown corporations to institute change and raise the bar for corporations that belong to Canadians and play a leading role. This is our opportunity to ask crown corporations to show leadership and say that women should play as great a role as men in managing them.
Drawing from a wide talent pool instead of accessing the assets of only a portion of Canadian society, as we are doing now, would be logical and beneficial. Gender parity will truly benefit Canadians both socially and economically. Bill C-473 can take us one step forward in that direction.
I sincerely believe that those who see impediments to this bill are mistaken because we have seen over and over that there are plenty of competent women. Maybe they are just shyer.
Recently, several people have written about female representation on boards of directors and in companies, suggesting that they might be shyer. They might not stand out as much or express their interest, but they are still there. Some of them need a little encouragement, a few compliments on their work. Maybe they need to hear that people have been admiring the quality of their work since they have joined a particular company or crown corporation and that they would make an excellent board member. Recruiting such women and helping them reach their potential would be good for both our image and for our crown corporations.
Canada should have high-performing crown corporations. Consider Canada Post, which is dealing with some major challenges at the moment. I think that such a corporation would benefit from having more women on the board. We must enable women to progress. If we do, we will all win.
I am pleased to have had the opportunity to speak to this issue in the House and to highlight, once again, how women can help enrich Canadian society. I sincerely hope that all members of Parliament will agree and will enable our crown corporations to move forward because it is clear that we cannot afford to wait 150 years. I would really like to see this happen in my lifetime. Fortunately, I am pretty young, so that gives us a lot of room to manoeuvre.
We cannot stand back and let things happen or merely encourage women. We have to be more aggressive if we want to achieve this goal.
Laurin Liu NDP Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak today about Bill C-473 to help achieve gender parity on the boards of directors of crown corporations.
I would like to start by congratulating my colleague from Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles for her efforts on this file. I know that this issue is important to her and she works very hard to promote gender equality.
Despite the progress women have made over the past few decades to take their place in the workforce, in certain settings they are still grappling with a glass ceiling that prevents them from reaching the highest levels in some organizations. In spite of their progress, women continue to be under-represented in the executive ranks and earn 70% less for every dollar men earn.
For this situation to improve, we must act by using tangible measures such as those proposed in the bill. This bill provides a logically sound and effective mechanism to help increase the number of women in the executive ranks of Canada's crown corporations. This proposal should be relatively simple to implement and has the potential to help improve the situation of women across the country.
I would like to give a few examples that really illustrate the scope of the problem related to the under-representation of women in decision-making roles. At this time, over 2,000 Canadians occupy executive positions in more than 200 crown corporations, organizations, boards of directors and commissions across the country; yet women occupy only 27% of senior management positions. In addition, only 16 of the 84 presidents of crown corporations are women. That is only 19%.
Canadian women are also under-represented on the boards of directors of private corporations. According to the Catalyst 2010 study, women occupied only 16.9% of senior management positions in Fortune 500 companies. Worse still, over 30% of those companies counted no women among their senior officers.
In December 2010, Anne Golden, chair of the Conference Board of Canada, appeared before the Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce and noted that, “At that rate, it will take approximately 151 years before the proportion of men and women at the management level is equal”.
In light of these troubling statistics, clearly, we need to take action to promote fair gender representation in the business world. Bill C-473 aims to achieve gender equality on the board of directors of crown corporations within six years by establishing criteria to ensure that women occupy 30% of positions within two years of the bill's coming into force, 40% within four years, and 50% within six years of its coming into force. Implementing these requirements will guarantee gender parity.
In addition, this legislative measure will indirectly force crown corporations to expand their search for qualified, effective candidates and to target non-traditional recruitment pools.
It is important to note that, compared to other countries, Canada is falling behind. According to the World Economic Forum report on the global gender gap, Canada has fallen seven places since the first report was published in 2006, currently ranking 21st. Catalyst Canada noted that the proportion of women on the boards of companies listed on the stock exchange had increased by only 0.1% between 2007 and 2011, rising from 10.2% to 10.3%.
Unlike the Conservative government and previous Liberal and Conservative governments, numerous countries have introduced legislative measures to address the fact that women are under-represented in the boardrooms of various types of organizations. For example, Norway, Spain, France, Iceland and the Netherlands introduced legislated quotas to increase the number of women on various boards of directors, while Australia, the United Kingdom, the United States and Finland have implemented mandatory disclosure and transparency initiatives.
In some countries such as Australia, Germany and the United Kingdom, corporations have been urged to close the gender gaps on their boards under the threat that quotas could be introduced if voluntary measures are seen to be ineffective.
In that same vein, I would like to dispel a perverse myth that exists within the Conservative government. The government is proposing a voluntary approach to ensure increased representation of women on boards. I am thinking, in particular, about the member for Mississauga South who, on April 23, stated in the House that legislating a quota system to increase the proportion of women on crown corporation boards “is not acceptable”. She said that legislated quotas are rigid and arbitrary thresholds that would adversely affect the appointment process for board members. The member for Winnipeg South Centre said that efforts to promote qualified candidates in the business community and to recognize and encourage business leaders are more effective than legislative measures.
Basically, the Conservatives believe that we can attain parity by using a laissez-faire approach. However, Norway provides us with a case study that puts an end to the far-fetched myth of voluntary parity. Norway was the first country to legislate gender balance on the boards of public limited companies.
The legislation applying to state-owned companies came into force in January 2004. The government had originally tried to negotiate voluntary quotas with the private sector to reach 40% representation of women on boards, with an ultimatum that restrictive legislative measures would be introduced should the desired gender representation not be attained by July 2005. This voluntary measure did not achieve the desired effect.
A survey by Statistics Norway showed that by the July 2005 date, only 13% of companies complied with the voluntary quotas, with women representing only 16% of board members. As a result, legislation was applied to public limited companies. The legislation came into force in January 2006, giving the companies in question two years to comply with the targets. To illustrate how effective a legislative measure can be, in Norway, the representation of women on the boards in question has been more than 40% since 2008.
For progress on similar gender equality measures, we can look at our own successes here in Canada. In 2006, the Government of Quebec introduced Bill 53 in order to set criteria for state-owned enterprises so:
(1) that the boards of directors of the enterprises as a group [would] be composed of members whose cultural identity reflects the various segments of Québec society; and
(2) that the boards of directors of the enterprises as a group [would] include an equal number of women and men as of 14 December 2011.
Although this legislation still has not fully achieved its objective, the numbers are impressive. In December 2011, which marked the end of the five-year period by which crown corporations were to have achieved gender equality, 141 women and 128 men held positions on the boards of directors of 22 Quebec crown corporations. All that remains is to ensure balanced representation in the number of women and men appointed to the board of each crown corporation subject to the act.
The Conservatives' unwillingness to achieve gender parity in the public service is symptomatic of their general attitude toward promoting gender equality. Let us not forget that in addition to deleting the words “gender equality” from Status of Women Canada's mandate, the Conservatives closed 12 of the 16 offices of the only federal agency devoted to promoting gender equality.
Hon. members will also recall that the Conservative government cut funding for the court challenges program, which was created to defend equality rights cases guaranteed under the Constitution of Canada.
The Conservative government's dismal record on gender equality is attested to by the fact that Canada ranks 21st in the World Economic Forum's gender gap index, after countries such as the Philippines, Latvia, Cuba and even Nicaragua.
It is obvious that, in reality, Canadian women cannot count on the Conservative government to promote gender equality.
Therefore, I want to reiterate my support for Bill C-473, and I urge my colleagues in all parties to vote for it.
Finally, this bill clearly shows that the NDP has real measures to achieve balanced gender representation when it comes to the management of public finances and thus to better reflect the Canadian population.
Gerry Byrne Liberal Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL
Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to rise and speak to Bill C-473. It is clear to the House that the intention of the proposed act is to amend the Financial Administration Act to provide some method of balance. It is a laudable goal of a Canadian just society to ensure that gender equity is not a slogan but a commonplace action within our society.
The fundamental goal, recognition of equality and respect of everyone, is very commendable, and so I am pleased to speak to some of the strengths of the bill. There are some issues that need to be addressed, obviously. The bill does not prescribe any method of attaining the gender equity it attempts to achieve. There is no method laid out as to exactly how this statutory provision would be enacted, controlled and monitored.
That said, I will speak to the general parameters of the bill.
It has been a long-standing and well-established practice that we move, wherever reasonable and possible, to bridge the gap, to prevent an unjust or unfair and disproportionate imbalance in gender within our own federal jurisdiction. We have long moved toward gender equity with pay equity issues. We have seen the value of ensuring that there is gender equity and the recognition of gender equity within hiring in the federal public civil service. Therefore, it only stands to reason that we would also incorporate gender equity within the governance of our major crown corporations, which are governed by the government and accountable to this House through various ministers.
Primarily, Bill C-473 proposes to require that the composition of the boards of directors of a parent crown corporation shall be such that the proportion of directors of each gender is not less than 30% the second year following the coming into force of this proposed section, not less than 40% the fourth year and not less than 50% the sixth year following the coming into force of this section. The proposed bill clearly outlines these requirements and stipulates that the aforementioned numbers may vary when the board of directors of a parent crown corporation consist of no more than eight members, and so there is latitude and flexibility built into the bill.
For example, in such instances, it is proposed that the difference between the number of directors of each gender may not be greater than two. For small governed boards, obviously it is a little more difficult at times, such as in the immediate aftermath of the coming into force of the proposed legislation, to be able to reconstruct the board, and the bill does provide that flexibility. However, there are no specific requirements or criteria as to how this would get done exactly. We would like to see a little more detail on that.
It is worth noting that Bill C-473 is premised on Bill C-407, but this new legislative proposal seeks to elevate the percentage to 50% from the current of approximately 30% non-legislated average commencing in the sixth year.
Prior to endorsing Bill C-473, we would like to better understand whether or not the breakdown of gender numbers cited in the legislative preamble are indeed accurate and if there is an appropriate reason for the current levels. However, these issues would come out if the bill were to be passed at second reading and sent to committee.
We would like to know what the real-world impact would be on business if mandated quotas of this nature were established within the timeline suggested, 30%, 40% and 50% within two, four and six years respectively.
We would also like to know what specific penalties would be imposed upon non-compliant boards and agencies. Legislation that is absolutely toothless just merits a public rebuking and does not go beyond that, with no scope of arbitration, no scope of determination of whether or not proper compliance requirements are being met and if not, what the consequences are of such decisions.
It becomes a bit of a fool's errand in the sense that we actually institutionalize non-compliance, even though we could enact laws to prevent this. If it is absolutely baseless and there is no consequence whatsoever except for a public rebuking, which may or may not be scoffed off by those who have been cited, the legislation becomes somewhat worthless. It speaks to a platitude but not to an action. That is really not where we necessarily need to be.
If concrete proposals could be brought forward as to how this could be done and what the consequences of this being done would be, greater comfort would be provided to all of us, I am sure. We should be prepared to say here and now that the concept is not only valid but that it is necessary. It is necessary to work toward gender equity at the highest echelons, in the most prominent and largest profile of organizations within the federal jurisdiction.
We have not had very much feedback from stakeholders at this point in time; in fact, very little. One of the opportunities at second reading is to be able to receive input from stakeholders as to how exactly they feel about this, what they would offer in terms of strengthening and criticizing and in terms of impacts, and receive their other views about the nature of this legislation and what it would do. That would be extremely helpful.
There also has not been a huge amount of feedback in terms of the real-world analysis of the consequences of this. There are many organizations that can offer that. We look forward to hearing from them so that we have a better idea of exactly what the legislation could present to us.
Finally, it would be helpful at this point in time for the parties within the House to pronounce where they stand on the general principles of the bill. I have pointed to the fact that there are obviously some inherent issues, some concerns, some information that is not contained within the bill, which may be necessary for the enactment of legislation, in the opinion of some. If we are going to pose a statutory requirement on somebody to do something, that statute should also lay out a process as to how that would be done and what the consequences of not adhering to it would be.
While we can all recognize that there are some issues surrounding this, it would be helpful if we could understand a bit better whether or not the parties within the House support the concept of gender equity within the governance structure of our crown corporations, boards and their directorships, instead of just simply saying this is not a piece of legislation that can be supported. That would be very helpful.
I appreciate the work done by the mover of this particular piece of legislation. I look forward to hearing the debate. I also look forward to, hopefully, having this piece of legislation before committee, so some of these questions can be given proper answers.
The House resumed from April 23 consideration of the motion that Bill C-473, An Act to amend the Financial Administration Act (balanced representation), be read the second time and referred to a committee.
Niki Ashton NDP Churchill, MB
Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to present two petitions today.
The first petition I am presenting in the House of Commons is in support of Bill C-473, introduced by a colleague from Quebec.
The petitioners are calling on the House of Commons to pass this legislation, which aims to achieve balanced representation in the number of women and men serving as directors on boards of crown corporations.
This bill reaffirms the NDP's position on gender equality in all aspects of our society.
Anne-Marie Day NDP Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Mr. Speaker, my last petition is about Bill C-473, which seeks to achieve gender parity in federal crown corporations where ministers appoint individuals.
Joyce Bateman Conservative Winnipeg South Centre, MB
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to speak about the government's position on Bill C-473, concerning the balanced representation of men and women on boards of directors of federal crown corporations.
This government wants to see women fully participating, not only in the senior ranks of crown corporations, but also throughout the public service and the private sector.
In a modern, progressive democracy like Canada, women contribute in every respect to corporate enterprises and it has long been acknowledged that the presence of women on corporate boards brings a different perspective and a very important voice to Canadian corporations.
It makes perfect sense that increasing opportunities for women to sit on boards of directors would be good for Canadian women, for Canadian companies, as well as for the economy and economic growth. Not only does it make sense, but it is also the right thing to do.
However, we know that, despite the ever-increasing numbers of women with higher levels of education and significant professional experience, they are under-represented on boards of directors and in senior leadership positions in Canada.
That is exactly why we have taken concrete action to change the situation.
On April 5 the Minister for Status of Women announced the launch of the Government of Canada's Advisory Council on Women on Corporate Boards. This advisory panel will include such notable Canadian women as the president of Sun Life Québec, Isabelle Hudon; Venture Communications CEO Arlene Dickinson; former Ontario finance minister Janet Ecker; Canadian Federation of Independent Business chairwoman Catherine Swift; and Senator Linda Frum.
This panel will advise the minister on how industry can increase the number of women on corporate boards. It will also be asked to find the best way to measure the participation of women on boards and in senior management positions and whether the government should be involved. What is more, it will be asked to suggest ways of recognizing or rewarding companies that have met their own targets for increasing the representation of women, and it will report back with its recommendations this fall.
We welcome the minister's announcement. We applaud it because we support equitable representation of women at all levels in the workforce and broader diversity on corporate boards.
Of course, as economic action plan 2012 confirms, we have committed to supporting the creation of opportunities not only for women but also for all under-represented labour groups, including visible minorities, aboriginals and people with disabilities.
Having said that, Bill C-473 would achieve its objective of enhancing gender balance on boards of directors and in crown corporations through legislated quotas.
Here are the facts about Bill C-473.
Bill C-473, as proposed, would amend the Financial Administration Act to impose gender quotas for the boards of directors of crown corporations. The rollout would be 30% in the second year, 40% in the fourth year and 50% in the sixth year and onward. For boards of eight members or fewer, the difference between the number of directors of each sex could not be greater than two.
The bill also states that appointments that violate these quotas would be invalid, and the responsible minister, with the approval of the governor in council, would need to fill the position immediately in order to respect quota levels and ensure boards have the required number of members for decision-making purposes.
In addition, we believe Bill C-473, when combined with the existing provisions of the Financial Administration Act, could provide grounds for rendering decisions of boards invalid, with the potential to disrupt crown corporations' operations.
There are a number of problems with legislated quotas. The most obvious is that legislated quotas are rigid and arbitrary thresholds that would negatively affect the appointment process. The appointment process has to remain flexible enough to attract qualified men and women who have the range of skills, expertise and experience needed by the boards of directors to effectively fulfill their mandates. The process also has to be flexible enough to allow us to fulfill our commitments to reflect Canada's linguistic and regional diversity on these boards.
Yes, we want to advance the representation of women on boards, but we are also committed to fair treatment for all under-represented employment equity groups. That includes not only women but also visible minorities, aboriginal people and people with disabilities. Legislated quotas may constrain our ability to meet our goals in these areas.
There is a better way to achieve gender balance on the boards of crown corporations.
Key Canadian groups that promote gender equality on boards of directors—for instance, groups like the Canadian Board Diversity Council, the WXN community, the Institute of Corporate Directors and Catalyst Canada—do not support legislated quotas. I repeat, those groups do not support quotas. They believe that efforts to promote qualified candidates in the business community and to recognize and encourage business leaders are more effective.
Allow me to reiterate our position in this matter. Women are truly essential to the business success of the country's corporations, in both private and public sectors. That is why, in economic action plan 2012, we created an advisory council to promote and boost the participation of women on corporate boards in the private and public sectors.
However, in the public sector, legislated quotas are not in the best interests of women or the corporations they would serve. It is always interesting when legislation and private member's bills of this nature come forward and it is clear that the solution that has already been taken by government was voted against by the presenting member.
Niki Ashton NDP Churchill, MB
Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to stand in the House and speak to the important work that my colleague, the member for Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, has done to present this private member's bill.
I thank the member for the work she has done on this issue and also for her leadership and vision on gender equality. She shows us how to increase management opportunities for women from all walks of life.
Based on the work this member did before being elected to the House and the work she does here, it is evident that her vision is based on experience, including Quebec's experience. She has shown that it is possible for women to have leadership roles in crown corporations.
We can make a change to increase opportunities for women to hold these jobs.
We have seen so many examples of the bar being raised by the many feminist women who have come before us, women who have really changed the quality of life that women and men have in our country.
I want to pick up on one of the important points my colleague raised, which was the argument about how long it will take, if everything stays the same, for women to play a greater role on corporate boards, on boards of our crown corporations and in the upper echelons of business.
The Conference Board of Canada and others have said that it would take, I believe, 150 years for women to have an equal position at such a level. That is clearly unacceptable. Not only that: the response of the government in failing to provide leadership in this area and using this language about consulting and waiting and trying to figure out some way instead of actually taking direct action on quotas or bold goals when it comes to women on corporate boards is reminiscent of what women have been up against in this country for a long time. Whether it is on the right to vote, on choice, or on pay equity, women have often been told to wait.
The issue here is that through crown corporations, we have an opportunity to effect change and to set the bar high for corporations that are ours as Canadians, corporations that do critical work in terms of basic services or research or foundational work in Canada. We have the opportunity to give leadership to crown corporations and to say that women ought to play an equal role in the management of these corporations.
That is really what we are talking about today, the opportunity to take leadership. Unfortunately, the government has dropped the ball when it comes to women in Canada time and time again.
In fact, today I had the opportunity to be in the Standing Committee on the Status of Women, where we saw the government try to impose paternalistic legislation on indigenous women in Canada through Bill S-2. We saw it some months ago, when members of the government repeatedly wanted to reopen the abortion debate in Canada. We have seen it in the cutbacks to Status of Women Canada and in the elimination of funding for research and advocacy by women's organizations. We have seen it through the removal of the mandatory long form census that provided key research when it comes to women's positions in Canada. Unfortunately, we are seeing the government drop the ball for women once again through its remarks with regard to this bill.
Thankfully there is a chance for them to change their minds on this. We are at second reading. Obviously today there will be some debate and I hope the government will choose to seize this opportunity, be bold and set the bar high like other countries have done.
Often on this side of the House we talk about the equality that women enjoy in Nordic countries. Once again, Nordic countries have beat us to the punch on something as important as the place of women on boards.
Norway was the first country to legislate gender balance on boards of public limited companies with its 2003 gender equality act. That, of course, was 10 years ago. The legislation applies to state-owned companies, and it entered into force in January 2004.
The government had originally tried to negotiate voluntary quotas with the private sector, with an ultimatum that legislative measures would be introduced if the desired gender representation were not attained within two years.
A survey of these companies by Statistics Norway showed by the July 2005 date, only 13% of the companies complied with voluntary quotas, with women representing only 16% of board members. As a result, legislation was applied to public limited companies.
Since its introduction in 2003, the number of women on boards in Norway has reached 40% as required by law.
It can happen. Norway has made it happen as have Spain, France, Iceland, Germany, the Netherlands. In fact, on April 18, just earlier this month, after much debate and even reluctance, Germany legislated a binding quota of 30% women in boardrooms starting in 2020.
These are countries we look to on common issues. Why not on this issue? Other countries have carved the path. Norway, as far back as 10 years ago, set the bar high for all of us. Instead of following suit, Canada is once again not just trailing behind, but actually running backward.
Here we have an opportunity to change that direction, to say that today, and through Bill C-473, we have the opportunity to be leaders. Our hope is that the bill will come into effect, that the government will support it and that crown corporations will be able to show the rest of corporate Canada what it means to have highly qualified, intelligent, competent women working with men of the same calibre to take businesses forward, to take our country forward and really to show that this can happen.
As a young woman, I also want to recognize how important this legislation is to so many young women looking at career opportunities in business, in management, in working in crown corporations. The reality is that the glass ceiling still remains. We see a lot of gains have been made in many workplaces. Women have reached senior management levels in many sectors, but the higher up women go, the power remains with men.
A lot of women my age in my generation know a lot of challenges have been overcome, that change has been made, but they are still seeing that the glass ceiling exists in certain sectors.
This is an opportunity for us as a Parliament to say that we want to change this for young women in Canada. We want to ensure there is a clear message that young women looking ahead have a key role to play at all levels, including the upper echelons of our crown corporations and in the corporate sector.
We believe this is not the time to tell women to wait again. We believe this is not the time to continue the pattern of going backward, as we have seen the Conservative government do when it comes to women's equality in Canada. We believe this is the time for Parliament and the government to stand with the NDP, show leadership and carve out the path for women to be equal in all areas of our society.