Status of Women Committee on May 10th, 2007

[Maria Minna, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

Right. I've seen them. They're excellent, actually.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you, Madam.

We now go to Madame Deschamps for seven minutes.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Even though the room is quite warm, we will try to keep a cool head and concentrate on what you have told us. However, it feels like what rural women and women in communities are experiencing is almost like a work of fiction. If we rely on what we have been told today and what others have told us in the past, women who live in rural communities, aboriginal women and immigrant women—if I can use that term to describe minorities—are at a great disadvantage.

I represent a Quebec riding that has a rural component. I understand the problems that these women must face because they are often the engine, the lifeline and the support for their family. They are the ones who must bear the extra burden if the structure is weakened by a lack of funding. Ms. Martz said that more and more farm women must become multi-taskers, without having the benefit of any type of financial compensation or salary. Women who live in rural communities have a very tough life. In recent years there has been an exodus of people fleeing the poverty of urban centres to settle in rural areas. They think that by moving out into the country, they will manage to escape poverty, but they are then sorely disappointed because there is poverty further away from the cities, and the governments are less sensitive to it. What's more, these people are located away from the services, where access is limited.

I would first like to hear what you have to say about this, because you are aware that some measures have been implemented. You spoke earlier about access to day care. Do you believe that the government move to provide families with $100 per month for each child under six will be of any help to some families? I know, for having experienced it myself, that providing day care spaces helps women gain a certain level of autonomy and it also gives them a choice. Even if they are not employed, they still have the choice of sending their children to a day care centre and do something other than housework, which allows them to break free from their isolation. We must not forget that the farther one is from urban centres, the more likely one is to be ignored by various levels of government. It is easier to be forgotten.

[Diane Martz]

I can speak a little bit about farm women and recognition of their roles.

This is very well illustrated in the creation of the agricultural policy framework. Even though governments now have a mandate to look at gender balance in trying to develop agricultural policy, they were very challenged in getting any input from women. Even though women play a tremendous role today in the economic elements of farming--doing the paperwork and the books--they have to deal with any additional paperwork that comes to the farm.

As we develop policy we need to do a much better job of talking to women on farms. They have a little different perspective on the role of farming. The whole business of women not being recognized for their roles has been going on for decades. I'm not really well versed in the whole pension debate, but I think that has come up here. Farm women need some recognition for their roles over the long term on the farm, and pensions would be one way to do that.

The other thing I have a bit of experience in hearing about is the income support program that was introduced for the family farm. In the past year, if you had revenues of $50,000 you could qualify for some support in a low-income situation. This was beneficial. I heard positive reports on the program, and families found it useful. It was sort of a guaranteed income. The problem this year is that they're not allowing any new families to become part of it, so there are people who are going to miss out on that one.

Agriculture is a very volatile business. If we want to have farmers we need to have agriculture.

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

In view of what you have said, if the government were to correct the situation and adopt measures to support and perhaps enhance the perceived value of the role of the farm woman, could this also encourage more young people to stay on the farm?

[Diane Martz]

I don't know. I think at this point a lot of farm families are counselling their children not to go into agriculture. They don't see it as a way of life they would want to inflict on their children. But lots of kids still want to do it.

But to qualify that, I know from my work on my PhD that there are women on farms who are assuming different kinds of roles. Some women have decided that they're going to make their full-time job on the farm, and those women are acting as the major decision-makers on these farms. Those women I think feel positive about their roles.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you.

We will now go to Mr. Van Kesteren and Ms. Smith.

[Dave Van Kesteren, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Essex, ON]

We're going to share our time. Thank you.

This is the first time I've come here, so this is all new to me. When they asked me to come, I thought, wow, what do I know about that? But then I thought, especially when I saw the witnesses, I know a little about farming; my riding is a farming community.

My wife and I raised eight kids in the country, and for the first 20 years we were poor. So I know a little bit about poverty. I'm not claiming to know everything about those issues, but I understand, and it's hard to appreciate that unless you've experienced it yourself.

I'm wondering about the government's commitments to agriculture, and I think, Ms. Martz, you made some fair statements about the farm program. The reason it has been put on hold is because there was such a backlash to it. Farmers just were angry about the fact that we would suggest that there...and I think it's $25,000 that was the minimum wage and not $50,000, but we did infuse $1.5 billion in 2006 and $1 billion in 2007. You mentioned the $550 for the family options.

Just quickly, is our government going in the right direction with farming?

[Diane Martz]

Did you talk to women and ask them what they thought of that? Most of the people I heard positive feedback from actually were women who saw that as a benefit. So that might be an option, a little bit wider kind of consultation.

Do I think we're going in the right direction with farming? Well, I think we need a rural policy in this country that focuses on rural Canada and doesn't leave it at the mercy of the markets in terms of what goes on.

I think we need to figure out that agriculture is a social issue as well as an economic issue, and we have to decide if we want food security in this country over the next 50 years. So I think there are some real serious questions we have to ask about agriculture and whether we want to have it.

[Dave Van Kesteren, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Essex, ON]

I know—because, as I said, I'm in a rural community, and it's not one of the poorer ones in southwestern Ontario—there have been some struggles, especially in the grains and oils. But across Canada—and I recognize that this is a big country—where's the biggest problem? What part of the country?

[Diane Martz]

I'd say the prairies, but then I'm biased.

Certainly, with BSE—and we're doing a new study looking at the impact of BSE on farm families with low commodity prices—although things have definitely improved over the last year, whether that will continue to be a benefit with rising input prices that go along the same.... But the prairies have definitely seen some real problems, and if you look at the statistics on low income, you can certainly see it there.

[Dave Van Kesteren, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Essex, ON]

I think I probably agree with that.

I'm not trying to be cruel or anything like that, because we all want solutions. We all want to move in the right direction. A pointed question: which government has governed Saskatchewan more in the last 25 years?

[Diane Martz]

The NDP.

[Dave Van Kesteren, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Essex, ON]

I'm asking because I'm wondering if our government is going in the right direction. Which has the majority of federal seats, and why do you suppose that is?

[Diane Martz]

I think a lot of the things, though, that are impacting agriculture aren't necessarily provincial policy. Agriculture is a global phenomenon, and I think all levels of government have a role to play in this.

[Dave Van Kesteren, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Essex, ON]

But you have to agree that they're sharing. There's a contribution from the federal side and there's a contribution from the provincial side.

[Diane Martz]

Yes, I think both levels of government have discounted rural an awful lot, and we're just now starting to recognize that it exists again. So I think it's a good opportunity to do some good stuff.

[Dave Van Kesteren, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Essex, ON]

I don't know whether you realize this, but agriculture is the second largest expenditure next to defence. It has become that. We recognize the fact that there are some real problems in agriculture.

I'm wondering about the $100, and I think it was touched on. Do you think it's helping? Is the $100 they're getting per month something that farm women like? Are we heading in the right direction on that one?

[Diane Martz]

I don't think so. I think you're not going to get.... Rural people, when you ask them, would like to see licensed day care, and the $100 doesn't really contribute to that in rural areas. Partly, it's a quality and safety issue for families, but it's also a subsidy issue. If you don't have a licensed child care situation, you can't get a subsidy, and if you don't have a high income, it just doesn't pay to work and send your child to day care.

We need infrastructure in rural Canada, and I don't think the $100 contributes very well to that.

[Colleen Purdon]

I really want to say that. In our rural community, we don't need...well, people would love to have $100 in their pocket, but if you don't have a child care space, if you don't have facilities, if you don't have places for children, then it's of no benefit.

For the women in our study, there's no place for their children, and the Conservative government's child care policy is not helping build. In fact, we had a lot of plans in our community for child care spaces that have all been shelved now because of the new child care direction. There was a lot of hope that there would be a child care strategy for our community, which is now shelved.

It has not helped.

[Dave Van Kesteren, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Essex, ON]

I only have one quick question left. Why? The only way we can look at this is that it's a vote on what our policy is. Why have rural Canadians, right across this country, elected Conservative governments with those policies? How can you explain that, if that's not what—

[Colleen Purdon]

I can explain it for you. I think ours is a very conservative community in which men basically run government at the municipal level, the provincial level. There's not much consultation with women in our community about what's good for women in the communities. The politicians are not consulting with women. There's no gender analysis of how these policies impact.

Nobody in our community asked how the Conservative policy would play out for rural women in our community. It wasn't asked. I think it's a reflection of the conservative nature of the communities more than anything.

[Dave Van Kesteren, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Essex, ON]

I was supposed to split my time with my colleague.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

You have 30 seconds. Do you want to make a comment, or would you like...?

[Joy Smith, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

That's okay. Those were very good questions. That's fine; go ahead.