Madam Chair, ladies and gentlemen members of the Committee, thank you for giving the Regroupement provincial des maisons d'hébergement et de transition pour femmes victimes de violence conjugale the opportunity to present its views today. I speak today on behalf of 48 member facilities located in 16 of the 17 administrative regions of Quebec.
Since our group was founded in 1979, our members have given us the mandate to bring about far-reaching social change in order to gradually eliminate spousal abuse. In order to achieve that, our organization has regularly made representations to the Government of Canada, and particularly, the Government of Quebec.
Right from the start, women working for shelters clearly saw that inequalities in such areas as education, access to employment, legal status, economic autonomy and issues related to marriage and family, made women vulnerable to male domination. Providing shelter and support is not enough to help them escape the violence. Therefore, removing the objective of the pursuit of equality from the Department's mandate is something that we consider completely unacceptable and that we believe to be a clear violation of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, as well as the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, as well as other treaties and conventions signed by Canada, whether they deal with civil and political rights or economic and social rights.
For our organization and many others, the changes made to the terms and conditions of the Women's Program will have serious negative impacts. For example, without the Women's Program, we and our members would never have been able to lead the battle in Quebec for the right of abused women to access shelters, nor would we have succeeded in convincing the provincial government to make an additional $30 million commitment. Indeed, since 2003, an extra $18 million has been spent on direct services for women.
Regarding the Divorce Act, it would have been impossible to add our voice to that of other groups in order to let the federal government know that judges often do not consider violence when granting custody and access. We would never have had an opportunity to take part in the work of the Women and Justice Tripartite Committee created by the Government of Quebec with a view to improving the way domestic violence offences are treated by the legal system. And we could not have demanded and secured changes to the Quebec Civil Code so that abused women have the right to break their lease if their personal safety is at risk. These are only some of the women's equality initiatives funded by the Women's Program in recent years.
Will we now have to invest both time and money in fundraising, to ensure that abused women will be able to cope? Will we have to increase dues paid by our members in order to replace the Women's Program subsidy? That will be tantamount to removing 3,000 hours of direct intervention with women, and some years, it would even be 3,600 hours. We did not fight to secure funding just to see services cut back subsequently.
And if some organizations involved in advocacy can no longer afford this, what will happen? Will we have to pay consultants to make up for the lack of partner groups with more expertise at the federal level who can help us defend the rights of abused women with respect to divorce and where criminal matters are concerned? I am thinking in particular of the National Association of Women and the Law, better known as NAWL.
We certainly cannot expect to help abused women if we have no opportunity to let people know that they need social housing, that they need protection under the law, and that they need a decent income. Yet there seems to be an attempt to encourage us to do just that, even though those needs are in fact rights.
In addition, budget cuts at Status of Women Canada will lead to other serious problems. Cutting back the Department's budget is tantamount to destroying a mechanism that is critical for the equality of Canadian women. These cuts will result in the elimination of positions held by women and the demotion of certain female workers. The office closures will result in a lack of expertise and knowledge with respect to concrete realities on the ground, in each of the provinces, as well as much longer processing times. Because of a reduced ability to take action and influence other departments, laws and programs will no longer consider potential impacts on women. It will be just too bad for equality.
Finally, the elimination of the research carried out by Status of Women Canada or funded under the Women's Program will deprive us of important information for policy development. As is clear to us all, the budget cuts and changes to SWC's mandate jeopardize not only Status of Women Canada, but the equality of all Canadian women. We very much hope that the government will change its mind.