Public Accounts Committee on Oct. 19th, 2009

[Louise Levonian]

We feel that the gender-based analysis is more appropriately done where the policy is developed. That's where the expertise lies. We're training all our analysts to be able to do appropriate gender-based analysis. That's where they know the data; that's where they know what the measure is supposed to do. We feel that it's most efficient that those analysts be the ones who conduct the gender-based analysis.

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

Yet there's this gap. In 2008, the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives produced an alternate budget that included a gender analysis in every chapter. Why haven't we seen that from the Canadian government in our federal budget? Is there a reason?

[Louise Levonian]

Gender-based analysis is one of the many lenses the department looks through when analyzing specific measures. The department considers impacts on the environment, various sectors, and the economy as a whole. It provides all this information to the minister and decisions are made on that basis. At the end of the day, the budget documents put forward the fiscal and economic projection as well as the funding for specific budget measures. It doesn't elaborate on how all those measures are going to impact the environment, seniors, or women. It puts forward the measures. It would be inappropriate to focus on one specific area in the budget.

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

So we're right back at the minister and whether the minister is listening to the advice.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Ms. Mathyssen, your time is up.

Mr. Weston.

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

I would like to welcome Ms. Fraser and the other witnesses to our committee.

Thank you for the honest approach, which has characterized everybody's testimony today.

I was trying to put this in terms my nine-year-old daughter would understand. Madam Fraser, you do a good job of that. You said early in your testimony this was about how policy might ultimately impact men and women—and, I might add, boys and girls. If we could boil this down, it seems that a 1995 initiative, which for many years bore little fruit, has finally started to show signs of life.

First, Madam Fraser, am I understanding correctly that you have significantly more access than you did prior to February 2006, based on the developments we've heard about?

Second, we often talk in this committee about best practices. Madame d'Auray, you mentioned in your testimony that you identified an excellent practice at INAC. I refer to paragraph 1.30 of your report, where you say that In 2007 INAC appointed a senior assistant deputy minister to be its GBA champion. The champion acts as an advocate for GBA-related activities within the department and ensures that policy analysts and all employees are informed of any news and developments. INAC is clearly a leader in gender-based analysis.

Third, we heard from Madam Dwyer-Renaud that this very department has created the Family Homes on Reserves and Matrimonial Interests or Rights Act, which has improved gender-based equality in the whole country.

So there are three parts to my question. First, are we getting better access? Second, Madam Fraser, or perhaps Madam Dwyer-Renaud, are we seeing some best practices modelled by this government? Third, Madam Dwyer-Renaud, are we seeing results?

[Sheila Fraser]

On the question of access, I must say that I don't know that we had less access in the past. The new order in council that came out in 2006 was to address an interpretation that severely limited our access earlier that year. I don't know, going back, if that interpretation would have been true in the 1990s, but we certainly had a very serious issue of access to Treasury Board Secretariat documents in late 1995 and early 1996. That was what that order in council clarified afterwards: that we did have access. I don't have the comparators going back further than that.

It is true that in this audit we do point to INAC as being clearly a leader among government departments, in that they have all the elements of a framework that we would have expected to see, and in particular had actually evaluated their practices within the department. They were the only one of the seven that we looked at that did so.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[Hélène Dwyer-Renaud]

Best practices results are basically the objective of this action plan that we've tabled with the committee. You will see that we are using an approach of self-assessment and identification of initiatives, because we do need to see the evidence. That is one way that we will be able to see if departments are indeed using GBA in the development of their policies and programs.

We also want, even from the best practices, to look at the results. We are asking departments to report in their RPPs and DPRs so that that there is a reporting of the evidence that is coming forward, a reporting of results, when they are using GBA in the development of policies of programs. These are aspects that we did not have before; these are new aspects. They are accountable aspects, and that is the kind of information that we really have not had access to in the past because of the volunteer aspect.

Best practices have always been there. We have an interdepartmental committee, and there is a sharing of best practices between the more established departments and the ones that are less.... Even in the leaders there are different degrees of leadership, but we're hoping that once we have more experience and more established departments with results, then we're going to have a better baseline of results that we can use and also share with what we would call the non-initiated departments.

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

How much time do I have left, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

You have time for one last little question.

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Given that I have three first nations in the riding I represent--Sechelt, Sliammon, and Squamish--isn't it especially exciting, if not encouraging, that the department that is supposed to help vulnerable women--and I'm thinking vulnerable aboriginal women--is a leader in this area? You are particularly negative on this one, as has been pointed out, and I'm looking for you to see the signs of improvement, progress, and leadership that can be evidenced in your report.

[Sheila Fraser]

Mr. Chair, we are always very pleased to note when departments are implementing and meeting government commitments, and we are particularly pleased to have a report in which we signal that Indian and Northern Affairs Canada is actually a leader. As the committee knows, we have many reports in which the results are not quite so good. I think this is obviously very important to this department. It is, I think, very encouraging to everyone, and it shows that it can be done.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you, Mr. Weston.

Ms. Crombie, you have five minutes.

[Bonnie Crombie, Liberal, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Bill C-47 died on the order paper because of an unnecessary election call, and I don't believe it has been reintroduced. I'm looking at you. My question is for the Auditor General. Why have HRSDC and the Department of Justice stopped performing GBA? The Department of Justice had at one point been a leader and a pioneer.

[Sheila Fraser]

I think the explanation we got was that they had integrated. They had a separate unit; they disbanded that separate unit and integrated it into their activities throughout the department.

As for HRSDC, I'm not sure. I think it was in part because of the reorganizations of the departments. I think that had an impact upon that activity.

[Bonnie Crombie, Liberal, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

It's clearly a loss.

I want you to comment on this impasse we're at. You've made a clear recommendation that the agencies document their challenge function and they've clearly said that they will not. You've obviously seen the need to formalize the challenge function. Do you feel it's an important tool? Where are we at? How will we overcome this?

[Sheila Fraser]

Clearly, government disagrees. Quite frankly, when we make a recommendation I would rather they disagree and say they disagree than say that they agree and then do nothing. I think this is showing honesty in the response. I guess we will have to try to work with government officials to try to be able to see some evidence of challenge functions going forward.

Quite frankly, if all the memoranda to cabinet and all the Treasury Board submissions had included all of the information about gender-based analysis, why it was or was not done, we might not have put so much emphasis on the challenge function. But given the fact that half the memoranda to cabinet make no mention of it, we have to question why the challenge function is not picking that up and rectifying it. That's how we got more into the challenge function. It's the same thing with a third of the Treasury Board submissions. They did not meet their own guidelines.

[Bonnie Crombie, Liberal, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

Do you feel that you should have the ability to access these documents, or at least those portions of them?

[Sheila Fraser]

We do not ask to see recommendations to ministers, nor discussions of cabinet. I think that is appropriately not available to us. But we do think we should be able to have some kind of documentary evidence of what people are asserting to us has occurred.

[Bonnie Crombie, Liberal, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

I think Mrs. Tapley made the comment that you took an informed common-sense approach to GBA. What does that mean, and how does that differ from the traditional analysis as we understand it?

[Catrina Tapley]

Thank you for that.

This was an approach we took. Dr. Olena Hankivsky is a professor at Simon Fraser University and she's a leading expert in gender-based analysis. It was recognized that there were times when it may not be appropriate to see gender-based analysis in a specific initiative or program, but that most times it was. So how do you go about performing a common-sense test that said we might not see it here, but we should see it here, and then peel back the layers a bit and ask the questions we should ask that may even surprise us with the results?

She helped us produce a pamphlet that we use with our analysts as a desktop tool that shows some of the questions that I should pose on specific initiatives. If my common sense tells me I might or might not see it, then there are some additional questions to either say it should have been there and perhaps I'm looking at other things, or indeed this was the right approach or what I expected to see.

[Bonnie Crombie, Liberal, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

Do you think that process should be more formalized?

[Catrina Tapley]

We do have a fairly formal process with our own analysts in terms of how we train, the questions we ask, and the tools that are provided to them to take a look at it. It's one of the things we've done with the guide to Treasury Board submissions. We've made it more explicit on what we expect departments to include in Treasury Board submissions with respect to gender-based analysis. Then we point departments to Status of Women Canada for further information on how they can enhance their own training and understanding around GBA.

[Bonnie Crombie, Liberal, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

Thank you.

I'd like to ask the Status of Women Canada some questions.

What role should you have in helping the government fulfill their commitment to implementing GBA?

[Hélène Dwyer-Renaud]

We very much have a capacity-building role. We have had that role since 2000. Basically within the departments we try to increase both the individual capacity to be able to do the practice and also the capacity at the organizational level. It has been demonstrated internationally that the practice can only be sustained if there are certain key organizational elements in the department. We help them obtain these elements and build their frameworks so that there's a sustainability to the practice within the department.