Public Accounts Committee on April 19th, 2016

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

I now call the meeting to order, dear colleagues. Good morning.

This is meeting number nine of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, Tuesday, April 19, 2016.

I remind everyone that we are televised today, so we should take our cellphones and put them on silent mode or shut them off.

Today we are continuing our consideration of the fall 2015 reports of the Auditor General of Canada. We are studying “Report 1—Implementing Gender-Based Analysis”.

We have two groups of witnesses, a full house today. The first group will have up to seven minutes to provide us with opening statements and answer the questions from the members of Parliament on our committee.

The second group of witnesses are also here. They're sitting in some of the chairs just in behind our witnesses, and they're also available to answer questions should you have any.

I'll take a moment to introduce all of our witnesses. From the Office of the Auditor General of Canada, we have Richard Domingue; from the Privy Council Office, we have Les Linklater, deputy secretary to the cabinet, operations; from the Treasury Board Secretariat, we have Renée LaFontaine, assistant secretary, corporate services and chief financial officer from the amended section; and from Status of Women Canada, we have Meena Ballantyne, head of the agency.

The witnesses available for questioning are the following: Department of Industry, Mitch Davies, assistant deputy minister, strategic policy sector; Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, Nicole Kennedy, director general, strategic policy, cabinet and parliamentary affairs; Department of Employment and Social Development, Jacques Paquette, senior assistant deputy minister, strategic and service policy branch; and from the Department of Natural Resources, Neil Bouwer, assistant deputy minister, science and policy integration.

I welcome you all here this morning. Most of you, maybe, have already appeared before committee.

We'll begin with the Office of the Auditor General.

Richard Domingue from the Office of the Auditor General, please begin.

[Richard Domingue, Principal, Office of the Auditor General of Canada]

Mr. Chair, thank you for this opportunity to discuss our 2015 Fall Report on gender-based analysis.

Gender-based analysis (GBA) is an analytical tool for assessing the gender-specific impacts of policies, legislation, and programs on women and men. This tool is intended to help policy makers consider gender issues and support decision-making. Implementing gender-based analysis can help integrate social, economic, and gender differences into policy development.

At a United Nations conference in 1995, the Government of Canada committed to analyzing gender-specific policy impacts on women and men before making decisions. Our audit focused on the implementation of GBA, an area we first examined in 2009. Our 2015 audit included Status of Women Canada, the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, the Privy Council Office, and four departments. At the time, they were known as Employment and Social Development Canada, Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada, Industry Canada, and Natural Resources Canada. In our audit, we selected and examined a total of 16 recent policy initiatives from the four departments.

In our audit, we observed that gender-based analysis was still not fully deployed across the federal government, although 20 years had passed since the government had committed to applying this type of analysis to its policy decisions. In other words, gender considerations, including obstacles to the full participation of diverse groups of women and men, are not always considered in government decisions. This finding is similar to what we found in our 2009 audit.

We also found in our 2015 audit that a gender-based analysis framework was not implemented in 6 of the 25 departments and agencies that had committed to implementing the 2009 government-wide departmental action plan on GBA.

We found that the analyses conducted by the sampled departments were not always complete nor of consistent quality. A complete GBA was performed by the four departments for half of the 16 sampled initiatives. In examining the family violence prevention program at Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada, we found evidence that the completion of GBA contributed to program development.

We found that Status of Women Canada, the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, and the Privy Council Office made progress in promoting and supporting the application of gender-based analysis in the federal government. For example, Status of Women Canada developed guidance, documents, tools, and online training materials for departments and agencies. It also drafted a new GBA strategic plan. The secretariat and the Privy Council Office clarified their expectations about what information on gender issues needed to be reported in cabinet documents.

Despite all these efforts, departments and agencies face barriers to including gender-based analysis in policy development. These barriers can include the absence of mandatory requirements to conduct GBA, tight deadlines for developing policy initiatives, and limited review by senior management of the completeness of GBA.

The central agencies and Status of Women Canada have agreed with our recommendations and have prepared an action plan to address them.

Mr. Chair, this concludes my opening statement. I would be pleased to answer any questions the committee may have.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you very much.

We'll move to Ms. Ballantyne from the Status of Women, please.

[Meena Ballantyne, Head of Agency, Status of Women Canada]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good morning everyone. I am very pleased to be here with you today.

Thank you for the invitation to appear and to talk about our response to the fall report of the Auditor General of Canada.

I believe the committee has received copies of the action plan that was developed by Status of Women Canada, the Privy Council Office, and the Treasury Board Secretariat in response to the Auditor General's report. It covers the next four years, from 2016 to 2020.

The Government of Canada has a longstanding commitment to implementing gender-based analysis, or GBA, throughout federal departments and agencies. GBA is important because it helps us advance gender equality by ensuring the federal government considers women and men's different experiences when we create new policies, programs and legislation.

All federal departments and agencies are expected to incorporate GBA into their decision-making processes. As an agency, Status of Women Canada has a specific role in supporting the use of GBA across federal organizations. We act as a centre of excellence or expertise on gender issues within the federal government. This includes providing departments and agencies with the training tools and guidance they need to effectively incorporate GBA in their decisions.

The government's support for GBA as a priority is reflected in our minister's mandate letter and was underscored by budget 2016, which provides for increased investments in Status of Women Canada over the next five years. These new resources will enhance the agency's capacity to implement our GBA mandate, which is central to helping galvanize action across federal departments and agencies.

As I indicated earlier, we welcome the Auditor General's report. Status of Women Canada along with the Privy Council Office and the Treasury Board Secretariat will continue working closely together to respond to the Auditor General's recommendations. In a few moments you will hear from my colleagues about their respective actions.

With your indulgence, I will highlight a few of the actions that Status of Women Canada is taking to respond to the AG's recommendations.

The first one is enhanced tools and training. Beginning this year, Status of Women Canada will begin working with PCO and TBS to identify, analyze, and address barriers to GBA implementation as a way to understand what tools, training, and other resources are needed to better implement GBA.

This process has started by consulting with other federal departments and agencies at all levels, including at the deputy level, on current barriers that are preventing more consistent use of GBA in the development of new government initiatives. Based on these findings, we will be working with PCO and TBS to address these barriers by enhancing our GBA tools and training. This includes developing new training for different sectors such as the science and security sectors, or functional communities across government, such as the research community or the evaluation community. It also involves updating and modernizing our online tools and resources that other departments can use in their own capacity-building.

Second, we'll also be strategically influencing some key government initiatives. The three of us, Status of Women Canada, PCO, and TBS, will work together with the departments and agencies to provide greater focus to intervene very strategically to provide gender advice on some of the key government initiatives moving forward. This will include working with the central agencies to identify in which areas GBA is particularly relevant.

For example, when an initiative has a potentially significant impact on women and/or diverse groups such as health research, or when it is related to one of our agency's priorities—our priorities are preventing violence against women and encouraging economic prosperity and leadership among women—or when it's a government high-priority initiative, such as infrastructure and shelters for women fleeing violence, which I'll expand on shortly, we'll identify priority initiatives in collaboration with our colleagues and other departments. We'll work together on GBA collaboration for these and provide whatever support is needed. Also, internally within Status of Women Canada, we'll have analysts who will be assigned to various departments, portfolios, or issues and really drill down deeper into some of those GBA issues.

I have a couple of practical examples of how we're playing this role.

For example, we worked very recently on the federal government's social infrastructure strategy. We provided some data that showed how many women and children are turned away every year from shelters, which then led to a greater investment in shelters and transition housing to better meet the needs of women and children. We're also working very closely with the Canadian Armed Forces, which has recently released a directive integrating gender perspectives into military planning and operations, with the understanding that operational effectiveness is enhanced when diversity is considered. These are just a couple of examples of concrete actions where we were able to work with the relevant departments and impact programs and policies to reflect the realities of women.

Our third area of focus is going to be on monitoring and reporting on progress. We're going to continue to work with PCO and TBS to develop and implement a more robust framework for monitoring progress in GBA capacity and implementation across government. We need to put enhanced structures in place so that we can more systematically monitor and reflect on our progress.

Some of the actions to support this initiative will include surveying all deputies on an annual basis to collect information on GBA implementation. In collaboration with my colleagues, I've recently sent out a letter to all deputies asking them to identify issues, such as what are the barriers to implementation, what are some of the training and tools they're working on or need help with, and what are some of the initiatives that they are going to apply to GBA to in moving forward.

We're also going to be looking at indicators. This is work that is just beginning in terms of how we are going to define success and how we are going to attract progress as we continue to monitor and report. Again, the Auditor General's office did the audit in 2009 and then in 2015, and now it's up to us to report on progress within the government. We're looking at various ways of doing that at least periodically and certainly in the next five years.

One of the key reasons for improving our ability to report progress on the application of GBA is to demonstrate to Canadians how doing so can improve the decisions government makes, which in turn can make a real difference to their lives. This is true whether we're talking about a program, a policy, or a piece of legislation that is related to security, safety, health, the economy, or another area.

Better monitoring and reporting will also provide us with practical examples of GBA success stories that we can share with Canadians, provinces and territories, and our international partners, many of whom look to Canada and the federal government for leadership in this area. The plans we are describing today reflect the federal government's renewed commitment to supporting the full implementation of gender-based analysis.

Through continued collaboration with all our colleagues in PCO, TBS, and across federal departments and agencies, using a whole-of-government approach, we will be better able to meet the needs of all Canadians while advancing gender equality across our country.

Thank you very much. I'm happy to answer any questions.

I'll turn it over to my colleagues.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you, Ms. Ballantyne.

Mr. Linklater, please.

[Les Linklater, Deputy Secretary to the Cabinet, Operations, Privy Council Office]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, for the opportunity to speak with you today about this important government commitment.

I also wish to thank the Auditor General of Canada and his office for their report and recommendations.

Thank you also to my colleague from Status of Women for outlining the overarching framework under which we will work collaboratively together, and with all federal departments and agencies to improve the implementation of GBA across government.

As was noted, we are seeing a renewed commitment to GBA within the federal government. This is evidenced in the Prime Minister's mandate letter to the Minister of Status of Women, which instructed our departments to work together to ensure GBA is applied to proposals for cabinet decision-making.

With this renewed commitment, the recommendations of the Auditor General's report are coming at an opportune time to provide an assessment of the progress we've made as well as the challenges that remain to fully implementing our GBA commitments across government.

The Privy Council Office supports cabinet decision-making through providing leadership, coordination, advice, and analysis on policy, program, and legislative proposals. In this role, we play a critical challenge function in ensuring that departments and agencies take into account all relevant factors, including gender, in the development of policy and program proposals being submitted for consideration by cabinet. This is done to ensure that the impacts on diverse groups of women and men are given due consideration in decision-making.

While the audit found that we have made efforts to promote and support GBA, and to clarify our guidance to departments and agencies in this respect, the audit also provided us an opportunity to reflect on how we can do better. You will have seen our proposed actions in the plan we've distributed.

My colleague from Status of Women has highlighted a number of areas for joint action, so I will focus on some of PCO's specific commitments. As she mentioned, one area we are looking at is enhanced tools and training.

Acknowledging the need to build our internal capacity with respect to GBA, we have already moved forward on making GBA training mandatory for all PCO employees who are tasked with playing a challenge function, as well as for executives. This will ensure that PCO employees are able to meaningfully engage with departments and agencies on GBA, making sure that the gender and diversity impacts to proposals are clear, that these inform policy options, and that any appropriate mitigation strategies are identified.

To support this work, we've committed to further strengthening our guidance on the inclusion of GBA in proposals to cabinet. We will ensure that departments and agencies are linked to relevant tools from Status of Women, and encourage their use.

The process of the audit also made clear to us that we can improve the documentation of GBA and PCO's challenge function. To this end, we are developing a policy consideration checklist, which will include GBA as a mandatory section. Rather than a checking-the-box exercise, we see this as a tool to help departments walk through the key considerations required when drafting policy or program proposals. Our goal is that this will be used to identify gender and other diversity impacts early in the policy development process, when they can meaningfully inform the development of options, mitigation strategies, and advice.

Finally, we are committed to continuing to work with Status of Women to identify good practices in GBA, as well as to identify departments and agencies who are struggling to meet their GBA commitments. For these, we will continue to link them with the support required—for example, by reaching out to Status of Women on key policy files—as well as to encourage them to build their internal capacity, recognizing the strong and renewed mandate for implementing GBA moving forward.

Strong and effective GBA practices have guided government over the years to ensure greater equality between women and men in all areas of government programming. We will both continue and strengthen our efforts to ensure that policy and program proposals are meeting the needs of all Canadians.

Thank you for your time. I will now turn to my colleague from the Treasury Board Secretariat.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you very much.

Ms. LaFontaine, please.

[Renée LaFontaine, Assistant Secretary, Corporate Services and Chief Financial Officer, Treasury Board Secretariat]

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the invitation to appear before your committee.

I'm delighted to speak to you today on behalf of the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat. I'm also pleased to be here with my colleagues from Status of Women Canada and the Privy Council Office.

The government recognizes the importance of conducting gender-based analysis because it informs decision-makers of the impacts government policies, programs and initiatives could have on the diverse groups of men and women that make up Canada today.

In light of the Auditor General's fall 2015 report on implementing gender-based analysis, I would like to take this opportunity today to update you on the progress TBS has made in challenging federal departments and agencies to use gender-based analysis and our plan of action going forward.

GBA+ is the analytical tool that helps us understand why certain groups are not benefiting from our programs and services in the same way that other groups may be. It's only after knowing why this is happening that we become equipped to adjust our policies, programs, and services to achieve the gender parity we're seeking.

As you know, ministers seek Treasury Board approval for their proposals of new policies, programs, and services through Treasury Board submissions. The Auditor General talked about that in his report.

As part of the challenge function performed by TBS program analysts on all aspects of these proposals.... What I mean by that is that they assess whether the costs to implement the program are complete and accurate. They actually look at the capacity of departments to deliver the programs that are being proposed to Treasury Board. TBS staff, during this challenge function that they perform, also ask departments if there could be a negative gender impact on the program being put forward, and whether there would be any implications for the Canadians who are supposed to benefit from those programs.

As the Auditor General observed, TBS has been supporting federal organizations to implement GBA+ by clarifying our expectations of departments and requirements for conducting gender-based analysis where applicable, and by providing guidance throughout the development process for Treasury Board submissions.

Detailed guidance to federal departments and agencies for considering GBA+ when drafting Treasury Board submissions has been posted on the secretariat’s website so that departments understand what we're expecting. Training for TBS analysts and their executive directors, who work directly with departments on this every day, is refreshed every year to help better identify gender impacts of policy and program proposals through casework, best practices, and lessons learned.

In 2011, TBS conducted a baseline survey of the degree to which gender-related issues were identified and addressed in the departmental submissions considered by Treasury Board that year.

Of the 618 submissions, about one third were selected for an in-depth review and the potential for gender impacts. Of these, only 41 had identified gender-related issues in the content of their submissions. Encouragingly, in all 41 cases the programs had been adjusted to ensure that the programs were accessible and benefited both genders.

Not surprisingly, we also found evidence that the level of adoption of conducting GBA+ as a standard business practice varied by department.

Getting at the root causes of gender issues can be difficult, in our experience. In many cases, departments did not have the gender-disaggregated information and data about the recipients or the beneficiaries of their programs. As a result of that, collecting that information would have been costly, and most likely would have delayed the implementation of a very good program. For other proposals, gender implications of the work are not immediately obvious.

Recognizing these issues, TBS enhanced analyst training to identify gender issues early in the TB submission process in order to give departments extra time to conduct full, evidence-based analyses. However, we and departments continue to struggle to make it all work.

In addition, TBS has been working closely with Status of Women Canada and PCO to promote the value of GBA+ during meetings with senior executive committees and in conferences and workshops with departmental GBA+ champions.

Going forward, we are committed to continuing to reduce barriers and build capacity across the public service to ensure that GBA+ is solidly embedded in TB policy development, program analysis, and evaluation. We will engage deputy heads to discuss progress towards public service-wide implementation, including any barriers they may encounter, in consultation with our colleagues here at the table today.

We will also review our guidance and if necessary adapt it to the needs of federal departments and agencies so that it is more helpful in achieving better gender outcomes. We are also planning to orient TB ministers on the value of GBA+ findings to inform their decision-making on relevant TB submissions.

To measure our progress, TBS will conduct another review by the fall of 2017—just like we did in 2011—of the extent to which GBA+ findings influence decision-making by the Treasury Board between September of this year and June 2017. Because we know that federal regulations impact both genders in Canadian society, we will train regulatory analysts who work for us as well and will also challenge departments and agencies to conduct GBA+ where applicable in the federal regulation development process.

Finally, as program evaluation is another effective means of assessing programs and policies, the secretariat will assist Status of Women Canada to develop guidance and tools to help program evaluators across the public service identify gender impacts when evaluating the performance of federal policies, programs, and services.

Mr. Chair, Treasury Board Secretariat is committed to working with our partners to strengthen the development of informed, evidence-based, and gender equitable policy and program options for decision makers in order to provide better results for Canadians.

We welcome any input you'd like to provide.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you, Ms. LaFontaine.

We now have heard this morning from the Auditor General's department, the Status of Women department, the Privy Council, and the Treasury Board Secretariat.

A number of other departments are not going to be giving presentations, but they were named in the Auditor General's report, both as doing some good things as well as there being areas for improvement. We want those folks to be able to answer questions you would have in regard to specific departments.

We'll begin with Ms. Shanahan, please.

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

Thank you very much to all the witnesses who have appeared here this morning.

I think I'm a little confused around who exactly is responsible for implementing, for making sure gender-based analysis happens. I think we're all agreed that the purpose of GBA+ is to produce better policy right from the get-go. I'm seeing a number of things that to my mind would make this a better case, that it would go back to the educational formation of analysts in terms of just original thinking, when somebody gets an idea to produce a program, around what elements go in there.

I'm a little skeptical about top-ending it, where at the end of all of that process it's, “Oh, wait a minute. We didn't do GBA+. Let's go back again.” It's too late there, but at the same time, somebody needs to call it and say whether or not it's been done.

I'd like to hear a bit from the Auditor General about what you found in the process, then from Status of Women about how you're finding that supporting role—I thought you all were in charge, but it's not the case—and then of course from Privy Council Office and Treasury Board. As a new MP, I'm certainly learning about the chain of command.

The other thing I want to throw in there is that I did the online test last night for fun. I didn't get 100%. I went back and I did it several times. There were a couple of questions there specifically around, as an individual, what are you responsible for? Was it all of it? Was it none of it? I couldn't get to that answer.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Mr. Domingue.

[Richard Domingue]

Mr. Chair, I'll go back to some of the issues we saw in the report. The first thing we saw was that the framework to introduce GBA was not applied uniformly across the sample departments. At the end of the report, in paragraph 1.58, we suggest a number of barriers that could explain that. One of them is that there's no mandatory requirement to do GBA.

For example, for environmental issues, they have what they call strategic environmental assessments, for which there is a cabinet directive. In this case there's no obligation to do any GBA. That's the first thing we noticed. The framework is not applied properly. This might be explained by the fact that it's not mandatory.

We also noticed that when it's done, it's not done equally. Some do it well, some don't do it well. For some initiatives it's very well done, for others it's done quickly. The challenge function by senior management is not always there. We saw one example where in a TB submission there was no gender impact reported, but there was no analysis performed to reach that conclusion.

I think what you saw today in the action plan appears to be.... We didn't assess the action plan in detail, but it looks as if it's steps in the right direction. What remains to be done, and I think the main challenge, is those barriers. Will this action plan address the challenges associated with those barriers? That remains to be seen.

[Meena Ballantyne]

First of all, thank you for taking the online course. That is great. I would encourage all of you to take it, because it really does help people think about GBA, not as a specific resource or program, but as a way of thinking about the impact on men and women.

To answer your question about who is responsible for GBA, I do it as a shared responsibility across government departments. Yes, Status of Women Canada.... I don't think we were ever in charge, but we are the ones who live it and breathe it because this is about achieving gender equality. GBA is a tool to achieve gender equality. We can provide our courses, tools, and guidance to departments.

Our colleagues at PCO and TBS can provide the challenge function. You are absolutely right that, by the time it comes to an MC or a Treasury Board submission, it is kind of late to say that we are going to go back and really look at this program differently because of that.

We are trying to work very strategically at the front end, trying to invest more resources, time, and effort to see the areas where it makes sense to look at GBA and say, “Does it have a disproportionate impact on women? Does it create barriers for participation of women?” It is not just women in general, but specific age groups, income levels, or ethnicities. That is a GBA+.

We are going to try to do that through this new action plan, but really, it is a shared responsibility because we can try as much as we want, but if there is no uptake by departments, it is not going to work.

In terms of what has actually changed this time around, first of all we have the AG's report, which has galvanized all of us into action. We have the government's commitment to gender equality. We have our minister, who has been charged by the Prime Minister in her mandate letter to pay attention to GBA, and she is very willing and active. She has written to all her ministerial colleagues, and I have written to all my deputy colleagues, to talk about some of the details on it.

We also got the investments in budget 2016. I would just like to say that it is not about resources. We could have double the resources but still not be effective. It is not about money. It is about buy-in and commitment.

We have the three of us as the central agencies, so to speak, steering this and really taking a look at it. Departments are very engaged. Now, it is basically about how we are going to monitor and report on it. What does success look like in five years? What are the indicators? What policies or programs did change because we did an effective GBA?

To me, those are all the success factors. Yes, time will tell whether we are able to do it, but certainly all the conditions we needed are there to make a difference this time.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you very much, Ms. Shanahan.

We will now move to Mr. Godin.

You have seven minutes.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I am not going to name all of you because you are quite numerous this morning, but I thank all of you for being here and for participating in this exercise with us.

Like my colleague, I would like to know who is responsible for GBA. It is an existential question and I think it is very important that it be answered.

Perhaps I will address my question to the representative of the Treasury Board Secretariat. Who is responsible for implementing GBA? I consider equity to be very important. I would also like to know who is responsible for developing the necessary mechanisms to make GBA effective.

Ms. Ballantyne, who represents Status of Women Canada, has just said that there is a shared strategy. How can we put in place measures, tools and an action plan that will be effective? We have with us representatives from three departments and the Office of the Auditor General. You are all people of good will, but you cannot impose these things. Ms. Ballantyne mentioned that you need a model and a structure more than you need resources.

What would be the best structure to ensure that GBA is effective? GBA has existed since 1995. An assessment of it was done in 2009. We are in 2016 and are now looking to 2020.

Can you assure me that measures will be put in place? In the documents I read, they always use the conditional and we find the words “we believe”. The words used are very broad, which as an MP does not reassure me. Our responsibility is to optimize the use of public funds. I would like someone to reassure me this morning by telling me what the best means would be to make this effective.

Several witnesses may reply to my question.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

How about if we begin with Ms. Ballantyne, then perhaps go to our secretariat, and then go back to the Privy Council?

[Meena Ballantyne]

Thank you for the question.

You are quite right. It is not mandatory to do these things, but I would say that this time there is a lot of commitment. The government has placed this matter very high on its priority list. There are now structures in place and committees in the three main agencies. There are also the initiatives my colleagues will describe. We are also working quite closely with the departments.

I am going to continue in English.

I'll ask my colleagues to expand on that.

With monitoring and reporting, I think we'll be able to have more focus, share more best practices across departments, and then have it out there publicly so that people will see whether they're doing what they said they were supposed to do or whether it's had an impact. With all these measures in place, I think the system should adjust.

In terms of whether mandatory is the question or not, I see these as the comply-or-explain kinds of policies that are out there in terms of leadership on boards. Instead of going to quotas, different countries are saying, “Show us what you're doing, make it much more open and transparent, and then explain if you haven't done it and why you haven't done it.” That should create the pressure in the system for us to be able to advance.

[Renée LaFontaine]

It is a very good question. In my remarks, I think I mentioned that this is complex stuff. One of the programs cited in the Auditor General's report is from the former Industry Canada. They talked about the computers for schools program. One of the challenges we're facing is the complexity of the way these program structures are designed.

So while you're quite right, in that the best way to go is to identify it in the policy research stage so that by the time the MC gets to PCO we know the gender implications of the program, and by the time it gets to Treasury Board we understand how it's going to affect Canadians—and that would be perfect—I guess one of the things that happens is that, through this process, program structures are complex. We often use third parties or other NGOs that work with us to deliver our programs and results, and sometimes the gender implications are not always obvious up front. It takes a bit of experience and understanding that the departments learn about implementing their programs.

One of the things I wanted to add to what my colleague from Status of Women Canada was talking about is that another way we can help with this is that we have a whole community of program evaluators who work in departments across government. They look at the stock of programs. Once every five years at least, programs need to be evaluated. We're going to better train that community to be able to look at GBA implications if we miss them the first time around. It's not the ideal solution, but it starts to close that circle, so that before a program becomes renewed, we can understand better the gender implications and make those corrections that are necessary if we missed them the first time around.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Mr. Linklater, did you have anything to add from the Privy Council Office's perspective?

[Les Linklater]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to add that the Auditor General's report has led to the adoption of relevant measures by the agencies responsible for developing policies as well as the departments.

I would say that the action plan that is being developed will include a broader range of activities than before and that our agencies' commitment to following up and producing reports will be very important. That had not really been done in the past.

The Prime Minister and the government have made gender-based analysis a priority. When she sits at the Cabinet table, the Minister of Status of Women has the opportunity to put forward this perspective during discussions or the development of policies. And so I believe that this action plan will bring about improved results and will allow the departments to demonstrate their commitment.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you.

We'll now move to Mr. Christopherson, please, for seven minutes.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Thank you all very much for your attendance today.

I have to say that among things that make me angry, this one is getting close to the top of the list. Twenty years ago we made a commitment at the United Nations, to a great deal of fanfare, that we were committed to this. Here we are, 20 years later, with an Auditor General report saying fail, fail, fail.

All I'm hearing, quite frankly, is, oh, we'll do better this time. I'll return to that, because that's not acceptable. That's not nearly enough. We went down that road once already, back in 2009. We're not going down that road again.

The government said, in their opening remarks.... Madam Ballantyne, on behalf of Status of Women, said, “The Government of Canada has a long-standing commitment to implementing gender-based analysis....” And we know how serious that was. She continued, “GBA is important because its helps us advance gender equality by ensuring the federal government considers women and men's different experiences when we create new policies, programs, and legislation.”

Therefore, it suggests, if this is important to gender equity and you didn't do this, then gender equity has not been a priority to any government up till now. Because you can't have it both ways. You can't go bragging and say you think GBA is really, really important to get gender equality in Canada and then not do it, because then it speaks to how strong the commitment is to gender equity. At this point, it doesn't look very strong.

Moving on, Chair, this is the stuff that really makes public accounts committees go through the roof. We've been here before. The 2009 audit found almost identical problems. What's interesting is that the recommendations are oh so similar.

I mean, in 2009, we see from the Auditor General's report, in paragraph 1.16, that the Auditor General recommended that “Status of Women Canada, in consultation with the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat and the Privy Council Office, establish a plan for facilitating implementation of gender-based analysis, and clarify expectations”, blah blah blah.

Then we have almost the identical wording, or at least the concept, in today's document, where they're saying, “Beginning this year, Status of Women Canada will begin working with the Privy Council Office and the Treasury Board Secretariat to identify, analyze, and address barriers to GBA implementation, as a way to understand....” Look, this is exactly the same thing we had last time.

I heard Madam Ballantyne say that this time we have engagement. What does that mean, “engagement”? Oh: comply or explain. Why are we dancing? We heard very clearly from the Auditor General that one of the main barriers to not having GBA in the federal government in Canada is because it's not mandatory.

I want somebody there from the government—I don't care which one of you—to give me a really good reason why it shouldn't be mandatory. Then we don't have to worry about all this engagement, and it will be different, and comply or explain.

Why don't we just make it mandatory and be done with it? Please.

Through you, Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kevin Sorenson]

Thank you, Mr. Christopherson.

Everybody take a deep breath.

Ms. Ballantyne, I defer to you first, perhaps, or Mr. Linklater.

[Les Linklater]

I think the issues that are raised are very important, and I think the fact that there's frustration with progress would flag the need for redoubled efforts on the part of all government officials to ensure that gender-based analysis is informing policy and program development.

The experience in the past I think has allowed us to learn that there are barriers to implementation across government, that departments may not necessarily have the tools and the capacity to be able to advance gender-based analysis to a level that is going to make a difference in their program and policy development—

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Please answer my question.