Status of Women Committee on Feb. 15th, 2007

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you.

We will now go on to Mr. Stanton, for five minutes.

[Bruce Stanton, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you to our panel this afternoon for sharing your insights on this important subject.

I was quite interested to hear the different remarks we've heard this afternoon, and particularly to hear the good news that, looking back at 10 or 15 years ago, and in some cases even more recently than that, we can see that the gaps have in fact closed. When you look back and consider the trend lines for where we've come since the early 1990s, and when you look at the incidence and uptake of higher levels of education--again this is for the women--and the higher level of workforce participation, all of these things seem to be converging. The outcomes seem to be projecting a trend line that in fact is very positive, or at least it seems so statistically.

I'll direct this to the Statistics Canada witnesses who are here today. I know you might have been asked this question in earlier questions from the committee, but where do we see this trend line going? Are we going to see a continued closing of this gap? We're seeing the wage rate gap, as has been clarified, sitting at about 85.7%, and a whole host of other positive outcomes here. Is it reasonable to suggest at this point that we're going to continue to see improvements? Get your crystal ball out here.

[Colin Lindsay]

Dr. Stone.

[Leroy Stone]

I think you have stated the global picture reasonably well. The problem, as you have heard, is that there are certain subgroups of the population in which there are definite difficulties and which deserve attention, but the global picture does point to a general improvement.

[Bruce Stanton, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

Thank you for that. And I agree with you, by the way.

That being the case, where do you think, in your analysis of the data that we have before us and that we've seen tracked over the last few years, the priorities should really be? If we were to concentrate on those very specific important subgroups that need the highest degree of attention, from a public policy point of view, where should we be?

I'm looking at our study, and it's on the economic security of senior women, but when I look at the data--not to say that senior women don't need to be part of the picture here--perhaps we're missing something if we just concentrate in that area.

I'll perhaps direct this to HRSDC or Madam Townson.

[Barbara Glover]

Do you want to start?

[Monica Townson]

What I was trying to get at in my presentation, and what I think we need to look at, are people who will be seniors in the future, which means looking at the younger women. As I mentioned in my presentation, the idea that the gap that's continuing to narrow will continue to narrow I personally think is overly optimistic, for various reasons. The fact that pension coverage is declining and workplace pension plans are declining—

[Bruce Stanton, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

I don't want to interrupt you, but on that point, if workforce participation is growing for women, wouldn't also the pension incomes in the future be going up as well?

[Monica Townson]

No. The point I'm making is that fewer people in the workforce are covered by a pension plan through their employer.

[Bruce Stanton, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

I see what you're saying. You're not talking about public pensions.

[Monica Townson]

No. Everybody gets the public pensions, provided they meet the conditions we were talking about earlier--that they've lived here long enough, and so on.

First, coverage of workplace pensions that an employer might provide is declining. Many women still have lower earnings, even though for those with university education the gap is narrowing. But remember, that's a minority of people. It's not a majority of women who have a university education. Many more do than did 20 or 30 years ago, but it's still only a minority. Women's earnings are still low and very often too low for them to be able to save on their own.

Second, there's still the idea that women must be responsible for families. Despite the fact that some men want to get involved in that, there's still not equal sharing of that.

Third, the fact that we have an aging population and the assumption they'll be cared for by their families will mean that more and more women will have to care for their aging relatives. Therefore, they may be forced to retire early before being able to accumulate pensions adequate for their own retirement.

There's a whole range of things going on, which I think will make it difficult for people who are coming up to retirement in the future to perhaps have the same economic security that current seniors might have. Those other issues are probably where we need to direct our attention so that we can address some of those problems.

[Bruce Stanton, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

I'm sorry, we've run out of time.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

You'll have another round.

We'll now go to Madame Barbot, pour cinq minutes.

[Vivian Barbot, Bloc, Papineau, QC]

Ms. Townson, you mentioned a report. I would like you to tell us which report that was, especially since it will be useful for our work, we believe. I would also like to know why it will not be published.

I find it a bit ironic the way we are talking about poverty among seniors. We know very well from personal experience that age comes with time. People who are poor when they are young will be poor when they are older for the simple reason that there are no real measures in place to reduce poverty. We are told that women are among the poorest, in particular immigrant women, disabled women and aboriginal women. Nothing is really being done to deal systematically with that poverty. There are just band-aid solutions. That is what was done when these women were young and it is what people are continuing to do now. There are new measures; funding is being cut left and right. The same people always lose out.

A lot of emphasis has been put on education. In your report—and here I believe I am speaking particularly to Ms. Glover—you say that women now hold jobs or are studying in areas that used to be male-dominated and that this will change the situation. Of course, it will do so to some extent. Nonetheless, women will always have to struggle to achieve work-life balance and provide help to family members. Things are changing, but women's incomes continue to be lower.

In Quebec, 60% of those going into medicine are women. They tend to take salaried positions, and therefore earn less, rather than becoming specialists. That is due to systemic factors. Until those factors are taken into account, there will always be a gap. It will tend to be narrower for women with higher levels of education, but it will still be there. So we will be carrying this burden all our lives, with the result that, generally speaking, women will never have the same status as men. I would like to hear your comments on that.

Once it is clear what the statistics show, I would like to know what measures are being taken. Are there programs or projects aimed at making young women more aware of this reality? Are they being encouraged in a particular way to develop personal strategies so that they will be able, even later on, to compete with men in this area? If not, will we have the same situation generation after generation, with people being the victims of this approach?

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Whoever takes this question has one and a half minutes to answer.

[Barbara Glover]

I'll maybe talk this time. I'll try to talk fast.

I agree with parts of what you're saying. I agree with the part that women are becoming doctors, but are becoming generalists, and even when they become generalists often don't work the same number of hours.

It hearkens back to the question of a moment ago, and the question is hard to answer. Are we going to close the gap to zero? I would answer a question with a question, which is not a good idea: does it need to?

When I was studying all my stats, I was trying to come down with a clear prediction: yes, or no, would the gap be closed? But I was asking myself whether it needs to come down to zero, in the sense of asking whether women doctors need to work the same number of hours as men doctors. I was just asking myself whether that should happen. Is it something I should tell my daughter, that she'd better work 70 or 80 hours a week?

So I just answered that question with a question.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

You have ten seconds.

[Vivian Barbot, Bloc, Papineau, QC]

Of course, it is not essential, but we need to take this factor into account on the social front: I would really like our girls not to have to work so many hours, but there is a price to pay.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you, Madame.

We now go to Ms. Mathyssen, for five minutes.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I have a question. Does HRSDC do gender-based analysis on its policies?

[Barbara Glover]

Yes.

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

The reason I asked that is not related specifically to HRSDC. One of the things I found in my riding was that women were being questioned by Canada Revenue Agency about the child tax credit. In some cases, where a woman was alone and had applied for the credit, she was being pursued, shall we say, and told she was going to be cut off. In cases where they had been alone for a number of months or years, they were told the credit would be taxed back.

It seems to me that we should have advocates in the various departments for women, so there can be something in place to prevent that kind of unfortunate situation.

These women were being asked to provide three pieces of information to prove they didn't live with a man, and three pieces were being asked from the male counterpart, to assure Revenue Canada they were indeed separated. Sometimes the partner was hostile and refused to provide that. These women were distraught. They were terrified of paying back thousands of dollars, or that they wouldn't be believed, or even worse, that their privacy was being invaded because they had to go to the landlord and ask for a letter saying that they were living alone.

I think this kind of advocacy is important in each and every department. Is it something that would work in your department? Is it something that should be a part of every department?

[Barbara Glover]

We do gender-based analysis in our department. I would say we have a lot of programs that benefit women and are focused on the labour-market challenges and income challenges of women.

I believe you have a session with HRSDC officials on the very question of gender-based analysis, where you can spend a lot of time going into exactly what we do and how we do it.

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

I haven't had a chance to ask the folks at Stats Canada anything.

You made mention of three reports: Women in Canada, The Wealth of Canadians, and New Frontiers of Research on Retirement. Were they subject to gender-based analysis? Did you look at those in terms of gender and impact on women?

[Colin Lindsay]

Certainly women in Canada is the whole focus of it.