Evidence of meeting #56 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 benefits.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
Nina Grewal Conservative Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you for coming here today.
Some witnesses in the past have told us about the experiences of other countries, such the United Kingdom and Ireland, in reducing poverty. It could be very helpful when drafting anti-poverty policies in Canada. These countries have developed plans that include targets, timetables, and funding.
Could you please describe how such an approach could be applied here in Canada? What role could the federal government play in that?
4:35 p.m.
Director General, Economic Security and Policy, Department of Human Resources and Social Development
The Government of Canada has a number of programs and initiatives currently in place that target low-income Canadians. They also have a number of policies and approaches in place that lead to a vibrant economy. As we all know, a good economy is a good source of economic security for all, including women.
There are various programs and initiatives, such as the national child benefit, the working income tax benefit, as was discussed earlier, and the guaranteed income supplement. Those would certainly be the key elements of an approach to address poverty overall.
That said, we always have lots to learn and progress to make. It's why we look at the strategies that countries such as the U.K. have taken on.
Most recently, we've been looking at it internally. As you said, they have set targets, a focus, and indicators on how to measure progress and whatnot. They have new deals and various elements that would be similar to the types of initiatives and benefits mentioned.
I see a lot of similarity in what we're doing in Canada, as well as interesting pieces that we haven't pursued as of yet.
4:35 p.m.
Director, Social Policy Division, Federal-Provincial Relations and Social Policy Branch, Department of Finance
If I could add one thing to keep in mind, in all of these things, we must keep in mind the fact that we live in Canada. Provinces have significant responsibilities with respect to income security for their populations, as well as many of the programs that are closest to people in need of assistance and support from government. This is complicated by the fact that we do a lot of federal-provincial work. But one should not underestimate how the national child benefit and the whole system worked, because the provinces and the federal government were able to work together.
When you talk about an overall strategy, from our perspective, we would have to take into consideration that it has to be a national strategy and not necessarily a federal strategy.
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
Nina Grewal Conservative Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC
Do you have any suggestions on how the government could remove disincentives to work and allow low-income senior women to better subsidize their small earnings?
4:35 p.m.
Director, Social Policy Division, Federal-Provincial Relations and Social Policy Branch, Department of Finance
Specifically for senior women?
4:35 p.m.
Director, Social Policy Division, Federal-Provincial Relations and Social Policy Branch, Department of Finance
Well, I guess the WITB will be available for those people. That does mean there is a bit more if you do return to work. Other than that, there has been work as reported, for example, in the CPP committee, which is a joint federal-provincial stewardship committee overseeing the CPP. It has looked at whether there are, in our programs, disincentives to keep working and whether or not there should be some changes. So there has been some work in that area.
4:35 p.m.
Chief, Personal Income Tax Division, Tax Policy Branch, Department of Finance
I guess there's another small example of that from Budget 2007. The change to the RRSP/RIF conversion age from 69 to 71 at least facilitates the ability to continue working for older workers, and there was a related pension change so you can keep contributing to a pension for a longer period.
4:35 p.m.
Director General, Labour Market Policy, Department of Human Resources and Social Development
I'm going to put one fact on the table just in terms of women who are over 65, in terms of engagement in the labour force. It's about 5%. It's quite low, but if you go back to 55- to 64-year-olds, it's about 50%. So there's quite a huge difference.
4:40 p.m.
Liberal
May 15th, 2007 / 4:40 p.m.
Liberal
Anita Neville Liberal Winnipeg South Centre, MB
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
And thank you very much, and I apologize for coming in late yet again.
I have a whole bunch of questions, and I'm going to put some of them out and see what kind of time we have to answer them.
My first question is around rural women. This week we had two very compelling presentations from rural groups. We've previously heard from the National Farmers Union on issues related to family and women. I'm wondering whether you do any analysis in your departments as it relates to government programs, support programs, policies, or regulation changes, and how that impacts on rural families. That's my first question.
My second question is in a totally different area. The study that Ms. Minna was referring to was the study by Kathleen Lahey. It's called Women and Employment: Removing Fiscal Barriers to Women's Labour Force Participation, and it was actually a research study funded by the Status of Women. The interesting piece here is a schedule that shows the gender gap in incomes.
I'm not going to go through it, but in 2004 it says the income for a 25-year-old woman was $21,000, approximately; a man, $30,000. By age 50, which was 70%, the peak earning age for women, women's earnings actually fell to 67% of men's earnings by the age of 51. It began to fall further, and it concludes by saying that on only two points on the income age scale did women's incomes exceed men's in 2004: at ages 16 and 17 and again at ages 92 and 94.
I'm curious to know whether you have done any analysis on this kind of issue. We can perhaps table this report or pass it on to you for your consideration, because it's really quite an interesting report.
My other question is in the area of a working income tax benefit, but I think I'll let you answer the first two, and then if I have time I'll come back to this.
4:40 p.m.
Director General, Labour Market Policy, Department of Human Resources and Social Development
I could have more of an answer to the second question than the first. If people have more of the first than the second, they should jump.
4:40 p.m.
Director, Social Policy Division, Federal-Provincial Relations and Social Policy Branch, Department of Finance
I think I can do the first one quite quickly, which is basically to say that when we do our work as analysts in the government, as good bureaucrats, we take into account a wide range of impacts whenever we're looking at a program or policy, whether it's a change, or a new program, or otherwise, and there are all sorts of dimensions to that.
As the committee knows, gender-based analysis is a critical element of that, but so also are a number of other dimensions or implications to the program, and one of those is urban-rural. And you do look. When you are looking at a program and analysing it, you do ask whether this program is going to have disincentives or significant problems for one group or, the other way around, whether it is fair for all Canadians. So that is taken into account.
4:40 p.m.
Liberal
Anita Neville Liberal Winnipeg South Centre, MB
I asked you specifically, though, when you're looking at farm programs, farm support programs, and changes in regulations with the Wheat Board, because the farmers' union that was here some weeks ago specifically mentioned that one having a negative effect...those are the programs I'm particularly interested in knowing what kind of analysis you do as it relates to rural families.
4:40 p.m.
Director, Social Policy Division, Federal-Provincial Relations and Social Policy Branch, Department of Finance
The point I'm making is that when our people, particularly at the Department of Finance, look at these from a broad perspective, they ask the department whether or not they have done the analysis that would enable us to answer that question should it come up. Is this fair to rural? Does it have unintended side effects that are not understood or fully described?
But there isn't always a study per se or something written down that says this is it, but it is part of the policy development process to look at all these dimensions of issues like that. I know that's a bit fuzzy.
4:40 p.m.
Director General, Labour Market Policy, Department of Human Resources and Social Development
I'll talk quickly. I haven't read the report from Kathleen Lahey, although someone has found it, and I will take a look at it. I did a description about the gender wage gap on February 15, and we did this using methodology from Stats Canada—which I think gets to numbers that were different from Kathleen's—from the notes I took when you were speaking.
What we did—and Stats Canada advises to think about gender wage gap—is to try to compare hourly wages. I can't tell, because I haven't read the report, whether she has done that or not. So we do analysis in this area. We look at different cohorts: younger women, different groups, different types of work, so that we have a sense of the gender wage gap.
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
4:45 p.m.
Liberal
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
Patricia Davidson Conservative Sarnia—Lambton, ON
Thank you, Madam Chair, and thanks again to our presenters for being here today. We have heard a lot of people talk about economic security and we have heard it discussed, issues from young women to senior women. One of the things that we've heard is that women do a disproportionate amount of caregiving regardless of whether it's in the younger years with child care or whether it's in the more senior years with compassionate care for elderly parents or family members. When they do that, in most cases they have to exit from the workforce because of the numbers of hours and the energy required to do that.
That's one of the things we've been told over and over again. In the younger years, there is a maternity benefit. In the older years, is there anything? Have we put anything in place or are we looking at anything that can give them some type of a wage or an income through the compassionate care years, the more senior years?
4:45 p.m.
Director General, Economic Security and Policy, Department of Human Resources and Social Development
I'm not aware of any allowance per se, but a provision within the Canada Pension Plan allows for a dropout from contributions without losing the ability to continue to build your pension through the CPP. So you can withdraw from the labour force and not contribute to the CPP, but you are able to offset that...I'm not explaining this particularly well. Let me try one more time.
You are able to draw—I think I might be saying this incorrectly, but you're able to—
4:45 p.m.
Director, Social Policy Division, Federal-Provincial Relations and Social Policy Branch, Department of Finance
It doesn't reduce your pension—
4:45 p.m.
Director General, Economic Security and Policy, Department of Human Resources and Social Development
Your pension benefit. That's correct.
4:45 p.m.
Director, Social Policy Division, Federal-Provincial Relations and Social Policy Branch, Department of Finance
—because you were out of the workforce for caregiving purposes.
That being said, the other program is the EI compassionate care benefits, which provide up to six weeks of benefits in situations where you have a terminally ill patient who requires some close family attention. That is available across Canada and has been for a couple of years. The take-up is not high.
