I am happy to respond.
Depending on the initiative and the department, I think you will find a variety of approaches in terms of the application of GBA. Some departments have the tools and the capacity to understand, from the outset, what the data collection needs are, and what the evaluation framework would be to enable them to capture the gender implications of their policy or program development.
Those departments tend to do it up front, which leads to better outcomes. The Auditor General may have views in terms of quality. I wouldn't want to speak for his office.
In other cases, as the Auditor General said, when we do get the draft of a memorandum to cabinet, there may be a line saying, “No gender considerations were assessed as part of this proposal.”
One of the challenges we have is for our analysts to be able to know when to go back to the department to engage with them and to make sure they are asking the appropriate challenge function questions, which is why, as part of our action plan at PCO, we are now making GBA+ training mandatory for our analysts, so that it becomes part of their policy development and challenge function process. It's automatic: “What are the gender considerations around this proposal”?
My sense is that, as we work together on the action plan, if we can move departments along with us to begin to take those considerations into account from the outset, that is going to lead to better outcomes, both in terms of departmental capacity and reporting to Canadians.