Status of Women Committee on April 19th, 2007

[Anita Neville, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Thank you very much.

I thank you all very much for coming. Those were all very solid presentations.

I'm going to focus my questions to you, Ms. Fast. Your information was probably more new to me than the information from the other presenters today. You gave detail to much of what we know anecdotally or what we hear out there. Those hard figures were really quite startling.

You talked about the dropout provision in the Canada Pension Plan for women who have children. I understand you're recommending it for caregivers as well. I have a number of questions. I'm just going to put them out there and let you answer.

What would you also think of a voluntary contribution to the Canada Pension Plan for women when they are forced to leave or choose not to enter the workforce, often for the kinds of reasons we've been talking about today? That's one question.

Second, I know that you do work on the economic consequences to workplaces when women have to leave the workplace or adjust their hours or whatever. I wonder if you could speak very briefly to that.

I wonder as well if you could speak to models of workplaces that, either on their own or in partnership with government programs, work to facilitate leaves for the care of family members. I guess I'm focusing on care of adult family members, but if you have time and are interested, perhaps you could add child care as well. Then I'll come back, if we have any time.

[Janet Fast]

Starting at the top, I think anything that will facilitate women's economic security later in life is worth considering. Obviously the problem with a voluntary program—one that would allow voluntary contributions to the Canada Pension Plan for women who either leave work or do not enter the labour force because of care responsibilities—is that you need to have some source of income or money to invest in that. That may or may not come from a spouse. So it has potential, but it will be a limited potential because there has to be some income there to invest in the first place.

In terms of economic consequences for workplaces or employers, yes, those certainly have been documented. We know turnover in the workplace is higher and absenteeism is higher among employees who have family care responsibilities, and obviously those things will increase employers' costs. In fact, I think that evidence is partly responsible for some of the more family-friendly workplaces that we are starting to see.

[Anita Neville, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

As you're speaking, something is twigging me.

Have you done work as well with self-employed women and the impact on them?

[Janet Fast]

Not to any great degree. Self-employed women, of course, don't have access to some of those even limited things that women who work for employers have access to, including the compassionate care benefit and so on. We know they are at greater risk because of those conditions, but we don't really understand very well how much greater the risk is. It is difficult to find those populations to study.

To return to workplaces and employers, we have seen some employers implement programs and benefits that are helpful to employees with family care responsibilities. There are some exemplary employers out there who are offering a great deal of flexibility, for example, and some services for employees who have adult dependent care responsibilities. The services, however, tend to be primarily information and referral ones. There are a few limited examples of adult day care kinds of programs that are employer sponsored, but they tend to be limited to information and referral kinds of programs.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you, Ms. Neville.

Mr. Stanton, for five minutes.

[Bruce Stanton, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair. I think Mr. Norlock is going to take a bit of my time as well.

I will just quickly follow up on a couple of items. For the purposes of our committee, perhaps we can do this later, but that labour market partnership agreement is something we should follow up on. It seems to me there was an announcement on that. I wasn't able to get it that quickly, but thank you for that.

I must say that the presentations this afternoon were terrific. You have a story that has been touched on by previous witnesses, but yours is very good indeed—and I'm being particular to Madame Fast and Ms. Diocson.

The story that you gave us today is very compelling. I know we'll have the testimony in the transcript from today's meeting, but will you ultimately be giving us a written brief on your presentation today? What I was hoping is for you to sum up, and perhaps you could do so just very briefly. While this was a very compelling and interesting text that you gave us in your message today, I couldn't really catch exactly what it is that you would like to see.

Madame Diocson, you had some very specific things to say about the live-in care program, for example, and there were some problems with that. What are you looking to see done with that?

Madame Fast, in the same way, on the kinds of issues that are facing caregivers, if you were to come up with two points that you would really like to see, what would they be?

We may run out of time here, but could you just give me thirty seconds each on those, and then we'll go to Mr. Norlock—and I didn't mean to leave you out, but this was very well done.

Thank you.

[Cecilia Diocson]

As to the live-in caregiver program, our community is actually calling for the scrapping of this program because it sets the context for the economic vulnerability of the community and so many other problems. Instead, we would like them to come with permanent residency status so that they can also bring their families over. The problem is not only for the women but also for the families who were left behind in the Philippines. We are now experiencing the impact in our second generation.

[Bruce Stanton, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

Thank you.

Madame Fast.

[Janet Fast]

I think the caregiver tax credit and the compassionate care benefits program are good starts in terms of acknowledging and beginning in very small ways to address the economic consequences. I think both of those programs should be revisited in terms of their comprehensiveness and inclusiveness, level of benefit provided, and some of those kinds of things. It would be easier to speak to this if we had the results of the comprehensive evaluation that has been done of the compassionate care benefit program, at the moment, but we don't.

Beyond that, though, I think one of the most important pieces that we have not yet addressed in any way, shape, or form is the long-term pension consequences. That's where we need to turn our attention next. That's probably the most profound consequence that caregivers will face.

[Bruce Stanton, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

Well done and on time.

Do we have some time for Mr. Norlock?

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

You have one minute.

[Rick Norlock, Conservative, Northumberland—Quinte West, ON]

Just quickly, Ms. Diocson, I was surprised when you said to scrap the live-in caregiver program. The reason I say that is that I was approached by a person in my community who was quite anxious. His wife is quite ill. She's Filipino, and they wanted a family member to come over, but a year wouldn't be sufficient. The new change to three years seemed to be of benefit. You're still quite certain that's a bad thing? They seemed to think it was a good thing.

[Cecilia Diocson]

The fundamental pillars of this program really have to be re-examined, because this is the context also of human rights violations, of this pillar. With the mandatory live-in, the temporary status, they're working under one employer, and there are many other factors that put them into very vulnerable situations.

If they're needed here, why is it that they cannot come in with their landed status, or upon arrival they can't even bring their families if they're really needed? I think that will also resolve some of the problems they're going to face when they're here.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you.

We will now go to Madame Deschamps.

[Johanne Deschamps, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Thank you, Mrs. Chair.

I will address you in French.

Statistics Canada tells us that 50% of Canadians are female and that more than 50% of immigrants are female. Ms. Konanur and Ms. Diocson, in the last ten years, did you notice in your organization an increase in the number of women who need your services, of women who are more in need and experience a greater economic insecurity? Can you say that, with an increase in immigration, the women you are helping also have more problems?

[Sheila Konanur]

Unfortunately, I have not been with my organization long enough to really speak to whether there has been an increase in the number of women we're seeing in the last ten-year period, but I can say that we are extremely busy. There is never a dull, open moment. We have a huge influx of people accessing our services. As to whether that's attributable to what you were saying, the growing numbers of immigrants over the past ten years, I would say that would be a fair assumption to make.

[Cecilia Diocson]

Our community is made up of a majority of women. Some 65% to 70% are women because of that live-in caregiver program, for the last 20 years. In terms of services, we do not have any core funding and we also do not have the same services that other immigrant service societies are delivering. We do our services through volunteer efforts of the community. We have several organizations in our community doing this, and they are supporting the women who are victims of human rights violations, of exploitation. Even for legal services, we have to look for lawyers who are giving us pro bono services in order for the community to help their members who are in this situation.

We have women who have been imprisoned here in Ottawa, so we have to look for lawyers. There are also increasing numbers of women in Toronto who are being criminalized. A few months ago we supported a woman who was charged with theft by her employer. There was no way for her to pay for a lawyer, so we had to go to the legal aid services. Also, because of the lack of legal aid funding right now and because these women are not able to get services from legal aid, it was really difficult for this woman to get the lawyer. We were able to get another pro bono service from a young lawyer who supported her, and her case was discharged. So she is still here and continuing to work as a domestic worker.

So there are a lot of cases right now. This is the reason that the community, especially the women in our community, are calling for the scrapping of this program, because it is us who are really hard hit by the situation. We are very, very much affected by the experiences of these women because we're the first ones to hear their stories.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Merci.

Ms. Mathyssen, for five minutes.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'll throw this question out to all three of you, and answer as you feel you'd like to.

Many women arrive in Canada as a family-class relative sponsored by spouses or partners, and many of them don't know their rights. They don't understand the laws and they simply don't understand their rights. As a result, if they're abused or put into a violent situation, they can't see an escape. They don't understand what is there for them.

I'm wondering what the federal government should be doing to protect these women. How should the federal government be responding to this kind of situation?

[Sheila Konanur]

I'm not familiar with how the federal government prioritizes this problem, but I know in my organization abused women account for a large number of the immigrant women we see. Actually, in almost all of the cases they're coming because they have absolutely no idea how they're going to get on their feet, because they never had financial independence when they were in their relationship. It's a huge problem; it's a huge crisis.

As I was saying before, a lot of parental burden falls on these women, so it's not just the women, it's the children who are suffering as well. It's something that needs to really be looked at, again, in a culturally sensitive way. We cannot take a western approach to dealing with these women. There are many women who would never go to a shelter, but they'll come to us because we're able to really sit with them and explain their rights—as you were saying, a lot of them don't know their rights—in a way that they're able to understand, whether it's through language or just that we have the time to do that and we're able to offer this ongoing support.

I hope that answers your question in some way.

[Cecilia Diocson]

I also would like to say that their skills and knowledge and also their education must be recognized. I think that's really very important for women in this country. This is what we want for our women: to achieve economic security, to achieve the kind of equality and also independence that we all would like to see in our country as women, as feminists. Without answering their economic issues first, we could not have a society that is also sensitive to the needs of the women.

Concretely, we would also like the Filipino nurses to be recognized, because we have a legacy in this country. In the seventies, I came as a nurse. There was a reciprocity agreement between the Philippines and Canada, and I practised my nursing profession. I must say that I had better economic opportunities than do the nurses who have come recently and who are in live-in caregiver programs.

So, clearly, this is creating division among the women and among the professionals, because we're coming from a third world country, and this is what we face. So we need to look at that.

We need to look at the conditions of the next generation of our community. They are already vulnerable. We have the highest high school dropout rate in Vancouver and the second highest high school dropout rate in Montreal. So you can just imagine the suffering of this community. But we also have a lot to contribute to Canadian society, being a community of professionals. I think it is really important to say this.

Again, the rights of these women must also be respected. We would like Canada to sign the UN convention for the protection of the rights and welfare of the migrant workers and their families. The community-based programs that we have must be supported, and we should be able to access resources, because we also contribute to the economy of Canada.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you very much. Unfortunately, our time is up.

I'd like to thank you personally and from the committee members for your very well-thought-out presentation. Your presentation confirms our belief that our study on the economic security of women is very timely.

You've touched upon a lot of inter-jurisdictional interdependency disciplines, and it's a complex issue. You've made some wonderful recommendations, and we will see, as we proceed with our study, how they fit in. Being an MP in an area where there are a lot of live-in caregiver programs, a lot of nannies, I fully understand what you're talking about.

There was a request made by Mr. Stanton for briefs. We do not demand briefs, but if you are in a position to give one to us, we would really appreciate it. It would enhance our work as well.

What I'd like to do is to give you a minute—please take only one minute—to sum up what you thought you had missed. I'll start with Dr. Fast first.

[Janet Fast]

I didn't know I was going to have this opportunity.

I grossly oversimplified the situation, I think. If you're going to be looking into these issues further, I think I would encourage you to look at some of the diversity within the situations I've talked about. The situations are different for immigrant women. They're different for different cultural groups. They're different for women of different ages. They're different for women in different kinds of caregiving situations.

There are some huge knowledge gaps as well. When I do research, that's part of what I pay attention to. We know very little about some things like the situations of people who are caring for adult children or other relatives with mental health conditions, for example. So there are some huge knowledge gaps, and there are some huge policy gaps because of that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you.

Cecilia.

[Cecilia Diocson]

Again, we need to continue to further our studies and research in our community, with your support, of course. We also need to model the type of work we do in our community-based nursing review, which has helped over 250 live-in caregivers back to the their profession, without any government funding.

I urge the status of women committee to support us, in terms of providing access to resources. This is a fundamental issue for women.

All I would like is very concrete support for Filipino women in this country.