Status of Women Committee on Dec. 6th, 2006

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Go ahead, Ms. deGroot.

[Jennifer deGroot]

All our funding is project-based funding. We have no core funding. For this past project we received a small grant from another body, but besides that we don't know anyone else who will give us funding for this kind of work, because we don't have charitable status. It will mean closing our office and not having any staff. We may not even be able to fund our website anymore.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

Ms. Mourani is next.

[Maria Mourani, Bloc, Ahuntsic, QC]

Thank you Madam Chair.

I would like to thank you for your presentations. I have two questions for Ms. Thibault.

You said earlier that 21 % of the FFQ's budget would be lost because of these cuts. Can you give me a concrete example of the projects that you have done? The minister speaks a great deal about concrete action, but she does not seem to have found that in any of the work that has been done. Moreover, the minister no longer seems to feel that grassroots equality is a problem, since she feels that women are equal. What she has done reflects her view of the situation.

Would you, through some concrete examples of your work, demonstrate how they have contributed to women's equality? I am looking for something very concrete to demonstrate to the minister that she is mistaken.

Would you also comment on the fact that in Quebec there is only one office, in Montreal, which appears to be responsible for all of Quebec as well as Nunavut? I don't understand why it would be responsible for Nunavut and not some other region. More particularly, what will be the effect of having only one office to deal with all of Quebec and Nunavut? Also, do they really have the expertise and a proper grasp of the needs of the Nunavut groups, in Montreal? I'm not saying that these people are not competent, but, for example, I know nothing about Nunavut, and slightly more about Montreal. So, if I were to evaluate files from Montreal, I would be able to understand them better than the files from Nunavut. I have some issues with that.

Will this not once again cause delays in processing the files and in providing grants, which means that the organizations will be constantly struggling to survive? This question is for you, Ms. Thibault?

The question about concrete action is for all of you. I would like each one of you to give us some examples of something concrete that was accomplished thanks to the Women's Program, since advocacy was removed because the minister found it too esoteric. I would like you to be as concrete as possible.

Thank you very much.

[Charlotte Thibault]

I am sure you will understand that it would take me hours to answer all of those questions, but I will try to be brief.

I know it seems strange for the Montreal office to cover Nunavut, but Quebec already had a mandate for Nunavut for a number of years. So there is nothing surprising about it. I simply wanted to explain, for the record, that the Montreal office was for Status of Women Canada, and not only for the Women's Program. This office was the link with the provincial government, it was supposed to monitor what was happening in the province so as to be on top of the issues. It also provided an interface with all of the federal departments so as to promote gender integration , to inform them about the status of women and to monitor what was happening. All of that will disappear. Moreover, the Montreal office will be reduced, and the Quebec office will disappear. Those are the consequences.

Obviously, it has sometimes taken between six months to a year to process some grant applications. We are extremely concerned about the time required to process an application. We are also extremely concerned about the guidelines. We are told that elderly women, young women, women from cultural communities and aboriginal women will be taken care of. The Fédération des femmes du Québec brings together a number of these women, but it is not the specific representative for anyone of these groups. Would it be possible for the Fédération to have some help from program officers to prepare a grant application? That is what we are wondering.

With respect to equality, in my opinion, it is not something that you take out and wear on special occasions, and then put it away. Equality is something that we have been fighting for for years. We are fighting for equality between men and women and equality among all women. We are very worried about the cuts to Status of Women Canada. I am not referring to the grants, but to the operation side of Status of Women Canada. When you take away half of the staff, it is obvious that Status of Women Canada will have a harder time getting the work done.

Some of our projects were done in conjunction with young women. They told us about their needs, about what they would like and what they want to do with their lives. Among our member groups is one group that is working on pay equity. However, the unions are also working on pay equity. This is being discussed throughout Quebec. We want non unionized women to also be entitled to pay equity where they work. This group, which is a member of the federation, may non longer be able to receive funding for this type of work. A lot of this type of work will end in the coming months or within a year and a half because the Women's Program has changed its criteria.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you all very much.

[Maria Mourani, Bloc, Ahuntsic, QC]

I would like to ask the other witnesses the same question.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

You have 30 seconds.

[Maria Mourani, Bloc, Ahuntsic, QC]

Would you answer please, Ms. Martin?

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

A short response.

[Lise Martin]

With respect to projects and the information sheets that we have provided over the years, many groups use these sheets, including police officers in Calgary and a national association of Canadian priests. This information is necessary and it is provided in a way that is accessible.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you all very much.

Mr. Stanton.

[Bruce Stanton, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thanks to all of you for taking the time to attend today. I have to say that it's a great honour to participate on this standing committee, especially dealing with the kinds of issues we deal with here.

As I listened to your presentations this afternoon, I couldn't help but be struck by the fact that while you concluded by saying that these savings or measures that the government has proposed should be reversed, as I listened to you describe the kind of programs you in fact engage in on behalf of women, and then I look at the actual terms and conditions that the government currently provides for program funding under the women's program--Sisters in Spirit, of course, is added to that--the government has given strong signals that there in fact will be more dollars coming for programs that give direct support to women in their communities.

When I look at the actual design of the program and at what the women's program funds, which is essentially focused on supporting women in the areas of achieving full participation in economic, social, and cultural aspects of women in Canada, these to me are very specific things that speak right to the heart of the issues, as you mentioned, around equality.

There was some discussion about advocacy as well. While I appreciate the point, I consider that as you go ahead and as you look at these new terms and conditions, and considering that there is in fact perhaps even an increasing pool of dollars that will be available to get these kinds of programs expressly to women, have you considered how you could adapt your program proposals in a way that would essentially meet these program requirements or mandates? And would you not agree that these would be programs that would give direct benefit to women? Certainly there's a tremendous amount of wisdom here, and experience, in dealing with these issues.

I'm sorry my preamble took so long. I'll just leave it at that. If each of you could give a brief response, I would greatly appreciate it. Perhaps you would speak to the question of why these programs wouldn't in fact be very effective for women in their communities.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

I'd like to start with Ms. Chappel.

[Monika Chappell]

Thanks very much for asking the question.

I believe I did address this in my speech. I think the focus of those dollars would be of advantage to women, absolutely. I think it's time we put our money into action. Often we say amongst ourselves that we're tired of being studied. It's time to do things. This is true. At the same time, as I mentioned with regard to deaf women, there are areas that still need to be looked at. It's not true that it's all been done.

Certainly we have looked at already, albeit in not a lot of time, how we can adapt our applications for funding to meet the guidelines. I think there may be ways to do that. I at least don't read them as being totally restrictive. Rather, whatever you're doing, it must have an impact directly on women's lives. And how you say it is going to be important.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Anyone else?

[Lise Martin]

As I read the new guidelines, there is a very strong local push. A number of us here are national organizations, so I really see it as a way of squeezing the national organizations.

I really don't see within those guidelines an openness to discussing systemic discrimination, and that is part of what we do. We question things. We also bring women together, as umbrella national organizations, and there seems to be little support within the guidelines to do that.

I really think that part of what's going on also is trying to set up front line services and national. Both are necessary, I think, and part of the whole picture. This new increase is a nice little manoeuvre in that all of a sudden, this new $5 million is coming into the program now that there has been so much coming up in terms of how these cuts are devastating to women across the country.

[Charlotte Thibault]

Of course, I would never refuse to take money, even if there were $5 million somewhere earmarked for women, for example. Direct services for women are usually in education, health and social services, which are provincial jurisdictions. As a Quebec woman, I would tend to think that we will have problems accessing those areas in Quebec.

I can tell you that at this time, the women's groups are putting their heads together. They're trying to see how they will submit their grant applications. They are taking a very close look at what Ms. Oda has said so as to understand what will be eligible for funding. It isn't because we don't want to apply for subsidies, it's because things are not yet clear.

I just want you to understand something. We have realized that, in Quebec, advocacy is a real necessity. That is why the World March of Women was created and, before that, the Bread and Roses March. Women's groups realized that they were not being heard by the provincial government of the day. The women decided to walk to Quebec City to make their demands known. They were involved in advocacy, lobbying and demonstrations. This type of organization will no longer be funded by the Women's Program.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Ms. MacLeod.

[Leslie MacLeod]

Full participation of women in our society is what we all want. The way the terms and conditions are written, they certainly confuse us as to how this can be accomplished with women's program funding.

Somehow, local women through local groups are going to be given something that enables them and enhances their ability for full participation. The cynics in us ask, what is that, a bus pass? That's very cynical, and I don't mean to be rude to you, but this is the kind of conversation we're having.

The full participation of women, and at the same time—and it's blazed in our brains—the prohibition of any domestic advocacy activities.... And I have to tell you, the use of the word “domestic” in that phrase put us all over the edge altogether. That's where we decided you were trying to send us back to the kitchen. Prohibiting “domestic advocacy activities”: we can say that in our sleep.

How on earth are women going to participate fully when we cannot go at the systemic discrimination? The rules of EI, maternity benefits, access to civil legal aid; we can name all of t4he issues. Women cannot access those, unless laws and policy and programs change, and that requires systemic advocacy.

I can't see how this balances out in this plan that is supposed to help individual women in individual communities, when the solutions are systemically based.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Ms. deGroot.

[Jennifer deGroot]

Thank you for your question. I'm concerned that your question implies that we are not providing direct services. In our organization, we are providing a direct service, but it's advocacy.

We did a workshop in a women's shelter in northern Manitoba, in a small community. Some of the women in our workshop could not leave the shelter because they could not find a house to live in. Their children were not allowed to go to school, because children in women's shelters can't go to school as part of the policy.

The idea that we could not advocate for more social housing—and in this particular community there's a four-year waiting list for social housing—that we cannot advocate for that as part of our direct service to women and cannot encourage this particular woman, who probably had never met with a politician, had never written a letter to a politician; that we can't encourage her and support her in that work.... I don't understand how that works.

As to national organizations, we're a provincial organization, but we rely heavily on research from organizations like CRIAW, who provide the fact sheets on women's situation in Canada. Those are widely used in our work.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

Ms. Mathyssen.

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

Thank you, chair.

Some time ago I put forward a motion to establish core funding and a budget of $100 million for Status of Women Canada. I'm wondering what the budget of SWC should be, and were core funding to change, what could be accomplished.

[Monika Chappell]

Can you clarify: core funding for whom?