Good morning, and thank you for this opportunity.
I'm speaking on behalf of the National Anti-Racism Council of Canada, a non-partisan Canada-wide non-government organization. NARCC is comprised of approximately 150 national, regional, and local community-based organizations, and 60 associates. Its membership includes aboriginal organizations. Through NARCC, these organizations provide a national voice against racism, racialization, and all forms of related discrimination and intolerance.
So who are we talking about when we talk about racialized women? As you are aware, racialized women are often described in official government terms as members of the visible minority, or the immigrant from non-western countries, or the newcomer from the underdeveloped world, intersecting with other factors such as ethnicity, language, place of origin, place of residence, disability, age, sexual orientation, plus poverty and many other factors. On that basis, cases supported by the court challenges program that interact with any of the enumerated grounds under section 15 of the charter would impact directly or indirectly on racialized women.
Racialized women oftentimes experience marginalization by their association with racialized men. As such, when racialized men are adversely impacted by laws and policies or practices, racialized women also bear the brunt of the adverse impact. In my presentation I will give examples that have as a central figure racialized men—for instance, reported cases of racial profiling—however, with the results impacting on all racialized group members. My presentation, I hope, doesn't take away or detract from my submission with a focus on racialized women.
For racialized group members, inclusion in the notion of equality before and under the law as provided by section 15 of the charter has been an issue of grave concern—for instance, on issues pertaining to employment and immigration. Access to justice continues to be a topic of discussion, and there's ongoing concern about discriminatory policies and practices and the application of such in a discriminatory manner. There's concern in gaps in legislation that is intended to protect racialized women, their children, and partners.
Due to where racialized women are situated, there's a keen interest in having the court challenges program continue to exist, because it helped fund challenges to legislation that excluded them. It helped correct gaps in legislation and supported challenges to government policies and practices that were applied in a discriminatory manner. In this vein, the areas of particular interest, I can repeat, are immigration, customs, employment discrimination with respect to hiring and promotion, racial profiling, sentencing, exclusion from funding—