Evidence of meeting #40 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 economic.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yasmin Ratansi
Sure. What is the will of the...?
Yes, Ms. Minna?
I'm sorry, Ms. Davidson, did you have your hand up?
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
Patricia Davidson Conservative Sarnia—Lambton, ON
I was just going to say that migrant workers and single moms were the other two things that we decided as a committee we wanted to look at.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
Maria Minna Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
Thank you.
I guess I go back to the very last discussion we had. We've had several discussions on these issues, and we've gone at different places. In the very last discussion, we decided we would then move on with economic security for women.
My understanding is that there was consensus on understanding that yes, we would be looking, as part of the study, at senior women, but from the lens that what happens to women who are in the labour force during those producing years directly impacts on the level of poverty they have when they are seniors. That was something we would be looking at.
My understanding was—and I think I missed the meeting—that we were supposed to have one session discussing what determinants we wanted to look at, so that we could help the researchers as to what things we thought we needed to look at that cause or contribute to economic issues: things like part-time work, self-employment, child rearing, compassionate leave, “time poverty”, as defined by the welfare council—identifying the indicators, if you like, looking at them, and having the witnesses add to them.
The question that would go to the witness would be broader, and we would study all of those determinants, but we could see the natural progression of what happens to women when they are seniors, given the fact that their ability to....
That's what I thought we were going to be doing. I don't know that we actually had that meeting to discuss.... Maybe not. I think we had agreed that we would do it, because it was the only way to actually give direction and be able to move forward.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yasmin Ratansi
As I look at the work plan and the theme, “How does unpaid caregiving affect the income of women throughout their lives?”—
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yasmin Ratansi
Okay.
It goes on, “Will upcoming cohorts be different from the current cohorts of seniors?”
Then the second theme was, “What are women looking for in the work-family balance?” The third was, “International best practices in work-family balance”. The fourth one was, “Barriers to spending time in unpaid caregiving and possible solutions”, and then “Income Splitting”.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
Maria Minna Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
Fair enough. What you're reading is essentially on the witnesses who deal with what we're just talking about. The only concern is the question to the witnesses. Today's witnesses think we're only focusing on seniors. The title says “seniors”, which is where the misunderstanding is coming in, I think.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yasmin Ratansi
Ms. Mathyssen, you were chairing that meeting. Do you have any additional...?
4:45 p.m.
NDP
Irene Mathyssen NDP London—Fanshawe, ON
Yes, it was my understanding that we would go beyond just the issue of senior women and we would indeed take into account the impact on women in the workforce in their younger years so that we could have a full discussion. In terms of the issues to address, there was a list, and it included immigrant women in addition to migrant women, single moms, disabled women, I think, and of course those working part-time or in a casual setting. I did envision a much broader discussion so that we could talk about all these issues.
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yasmin Ratansi
Fair enough. Since the meeting was in camera, I guess there were no minutes on it, and therefore the memory.... There will be minutes, but I guess we do not have them here. We can go and get them.
What I wanted to know was this. The committee had decided they wanted a report by June. So did you guys work backwards to see when the study should be finished and whether you could do justice to that subject?
Yes, Ms. Mathyssen.
4:50 p.m.
NDP
Irene Mathyssen NDP London—Fanshawe, ON
Yes, we did.
I think it was something like 22 days were available. There would be 15 required in order to produce a report and to make sure there was timeliness in getting the report to the House. So it seemed to me that--
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
Maria Minna Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
There were 13 meetings for preparation, or something like that. So we did discuss quite a bit. That's why I was a bit surprised today.
4:50 p.m.
Committee Researcher
Do you want to keep the title that says, “...Economic Security of Senior Women”, because that is the study that was started? It's the title that's--
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yasmin Ratansi
When we call the next group of witnesses, we will say they should talk about the economic security of women, whatever group they represent, because we're calling different groups. Is that good?
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
Maria Minna Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
They should talk about, in their view, the indicators that contribute to it.
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yasmin Ratansi
Fair enough. On the communication so far, and what I'm looking at is stuff I have received, it says, “Study on the Economic Security of Senior Women”, and it appears that the witnesses--you're right, Ms. Minna--have been told that it is senior women. So we will please ensure that the next round of witnesses are going to be addressing issues from their perspective.
Yes, Ms. Smith.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Joy Smith Conservative Kildonan—St. Paul, MB
In all fairness to you, Madam Chair, a lot of this discussion happened prior to your arrival here. We never really had a thorough consolidation of what we're talking about. We had a general discussion. Right now I think we've captured what we mean to do.
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Joy Smith Conservative Kildonan—St. Paul, MB
Yes, but we need to be aware of migrant workers, the disabled, and also single moms in that category.
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yasmin Ratansi
On the witness list, we have the Women Elders In Action, WE*ACT, and the Canadian Federation of Business and Professional Women's Clubs. So I guess you are going to get a whole mixed bag of stuff.
Madam Demers, did you want to say something on protection of witnesses?
4:50 p.m.
Bloc
Nicole Demers Bloc Laval, QC
Madam Chair, I would like to say something else before we move on. This has nothing to do with what has just been discussed.
I have been sitting on this committee for several weeks and I feel for our witnesses who come to meet with us. I wish to express my views now, while there are no witnesses present.
The committee pays for the witnesses. I believe that we should show them respect by listening to them and by being attentive to what they tell us. These last few weeks, I have seen several members use their BlackBerry in the presence of witnesses, and there really was abuse.
When there are no witnesses here, if we do not wish to listen to each other, then that does not bother me. For my part, I listen to what we say to each other. However, in the presence of witnesses, could we not at least refrain from using BlackBerrys? I find this very disrespectful towards our witnesses. It shows a lack of professionalism on our part when we do not listen to our witnesses and instead use our BlackBerry while they are talking to us.
That is what I wanted to say, but I do not want to make a big to do about it. I am simply explaining how I felt.