Evidence of meeting #28 for Status of Women in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was research.
A recording is available from Parliament.
6:10 p.m.
A voice
Is this question for everyone?
6:10 p.m.
Chair, Disabled Women's Network of Canada
Thanks very much. Again, these are all very good questions.
In terms of what the budget should be for Status of Women Canada, I actually don't know what the budget is right now.
6:10 p.m.
NDP
Irene Mathyssen NDP London—Fanshawe, ON
It's $23.8 million, except for the $5 million that's taken away.
6:10 p.m.
Chair, Disabled Women's Network of Canada
I certainly know that what the budget is right now is not adequate for the work that needs to be done. I realize there's probably not much appetite within the government for increasing the budget, but certainly I know, speaking for women with disabilities, that we are the primary providers of income for our families in a vast majority of the cases. I think if we got adequate help from Status of Women, we could be greater contributors to the economy. That adequate help requires, I think, a larger budget.
For us to be able to take action, we really need additional help, and part of that additional help requires being able to meet face to face to take part in little workshops like those the other witness was speaking about, and to take advantage of research that CRIAW is doing.
I would say that probably you would need to at least double, or perhaps triple, the budget that's there currently in order to really adequately fund the services.
I'm sorry, you had a second question—“Would core funding help?”, or something like that.
6:10 p.m.
Chair, Disabled Women's Network of Canada
DAWN Canada is an organization that began in 1985. Basically, we didn't have core funding for most of our existence. We had a national office that was in the main room of a woman's apartment. Her bed was above the office—she had a tiny little loft. Her walls were stacked almost to the ceiling with paper.
How do you run a national office without any core funding? Well, we're doing it right now. The office is in my home, in the place I rent; it takes up one room. Would core funding make a difference? Absolutely. We can't respond.
This is the first time we've ever come to speak here. We can't respond to requests for information; we can't respond to issues; we don't have staff to be able to analyze policies. I have to write funding applications on my own, and it's a good thing that I have a little practice at it, because we'd be in a lot of trouble.
So yes, core funding would make a very big difference.
6:15 p.m.
Project Coordinator, United Nations Platform for Action Committee Manitoba
For our organization, core funding would mean stability. We'd be able to actually think of projects as they came to us, instead of looking at the funding applications and saying, “How can we make this fit, and how can it also respond to women's needs?”
We've had several requests in the last couple of weeks around more groups wanting more training on advocacy and lobbying, which does not fit exactly, within our current mandate, into the budget.
Just in terms of office space, our office used to be located in my living room as well. Knowing where we're going to be and when, and just being able to plan long term and to think long term, and to not be constantly focusing on writing out new grant applications.... It's not to say we wouldn't still do projects; we certainly would. But it would just bring some stability in, and that would lead to more creativity.
6:15 p.m.
Member, Fédération des femmes du Québec
I also think that the danger with projects—and, incidentally, this was discussed in committee—lies in the fact that you must continuously try to drum up funding to complete the project. If Status of Women Canada provides funding, if some other department or foundation does the same then, if one of the partners decides to withdraw its funding, everything falls apart. There is no stability in terms of staff, etc.
Our federation receives $73,000 in core funding from the Quebec government. I think it is the only province that provides that type of funding.
6:15 p.m.
NDP
Irene Mathyssen NDP London—Fanshawe, ON
I have a quick question.
One of the things that I've learned is that policy in law affects women far differently from men. In terms of the change of mandate, the loss of regional offices, and the loss of support of SWC, is gender-based analysis at risk?
6:15 p.m.
Executive Director, Canadian Research Institute for the Advancement of Women
Definitely. I think the unit has been merged. When you cut 50% of the staff who were supposed to be providing leadership to the other ministries in this area, how could it not be affected?
6:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
Thank you very much.
We have ten minutes left.
We are going for a five-minute round to Ms. Stronach or Ms. Neville.
6:15 p.m.
Liberal
Belinda Stronach Liberal Newmarket—Aurora, ON
I just want to make note of the announcement on September 25 from Minister Flaherty and the Honourable John Baird, in which they announced that Canada’s new government had eliminated wasteful and ineffective programs, reduced government spending, and that they were trimming the fat. In the $1 billion of program savings identified—so they've categorized this as savings, and nowhere does it talk about reinvestment anywhere—they've listed under Canadian Heritage, Status of Women Canada, administrative savings, $5 million. Again, this is something new. Perhaps they've realized they've made a terrible mistake and are trying to backtrack.
I just say that without advocacy you're going to have the status quo, and I don't think any of us here are happy with the status quo. There is much work to be done.
I want to talk about research. Perhaps you can give us some idea of what future projects or studies were under way that you feel might be compromised, or even in the past, if research and advocacy has been eliminated, what would have never come about, to give a sense of what the future holds.
This is to Lise or Monika.
6:15 p.m.
Chair, Disabled Women's Network of Canada
Sure. I'll start with that, because we did get funding from Status of Women Canada. The funding came under the old guidelines, so we were probably one of the last organizations to receive funding. This is our first major project with Status of Women Canada, and indeed it's almost all research-based. We are doing some research on updating.... As I mentioned, the violence against women statistics don't even talk about us, while we know that violence is an epidemic in our communities. So we're going to update our statistics on violence against women.
We want to know whether women with disabilities can actually get into services like a transition house. Our research is about 10 to 15 years old, and at that point it showed, no. Has there been any difference? We want to know that. We want to look at the research on children with disabilities. Are they actually finding the violence that is happening to them, that we know exists?
There are a number of areas that we wouldn't be able to do if we hadn't got that application in.
6:20 p.m.
Liberal
Belinda Stronach Liberal Newmarket—Aurora, ON
Okay, thank you.
Does anyone else want to comment on that?
6:20 p.m.
Executive Director, Canadian Research Institute for the Advancement of Women
We're currently working on women's economic and social justice and, more specifically, wanting to look at alternative models and approaches as to what women are doing in different communities to address economic and social justice, and also looking at the issues of intersectionality. We're looking at racism, globalization--different factors--that affect women's economic situation, which is a priority under the new terms and conditions. But economic autonomy is much more than just having a job, and even when it is a job, it's so often a minimum wage job.
My feeling in terms of, again, the new guidelines, is that what comes out of it is looking for feel-good projects. When the minister, in her presentation to this committee, was asked for an example, she talked about a cultural presentation, an award presentation. That's what we've been told, but I don't think it's a question of looking at the hard issues.
6:20 p.m.
President, Provincial Advisory Council on the Status of Women - Newfoundland and Labrador
I'm just agreeing with all of that.
In terms of something that wouldn't have happened in the past, Nellie Nippard and the women of Gander would not have changed the parole board hearing regulations. Our justice system doesn't change because somebody within it thinks there's a good idea and equality is required. It only changes when people are knocking at the door, and that's advocacy.
6:20 p.m.
Executive Director, Canadian Research Institute for the Advancement of Women
The shadow reports put together by FAFIA with the information from a wide number of women's groups and presented to the United Nations would never happen.
6:20 p.m.
Project Coordinator, United Nations Platform for Action Committee Manitoba
In your opening comments you mentioned something about inefficiencies and trimming the fat. I want to address that, because we do workshops on the budget; that's what our project is about. Women know all about trimming the fat; they know budgets are about priorities.
One of the questions we ask in our workshops is whether you would pay your mortgage all in one year and not feed your children, or not let them have recreation services, or not give them running shoes. Very clearly, you wouldn't do that.
Budgets are about priorities, and there are certain things that you don't cut. Poverty and inequality, when it comes to budgets, are extremely expensive. I live in inner-city Winnipeg; I can tell you the cost of poverty is very expensive in the area of the city where I live.
