Status of Women Committee on Dec. 11th, 2007

[Estella Muyinda]

I'll start with the cases that have been funded, but I'll go back a little bit.

When racial profiling used to be called “driving while black”, nobody cared until racialized group members went to the court challenges program and said there was racial profiling, but they did not have anything or anybody to confirm this. The court challenges program granted funding for research on this phenomenon. It also granted money for research for that cause, and it granted funding for a case called Richards, whereby the definition of racial profiling was first given by the court. Then it funded the case of Decovan Brown, which had to do with racial profiling of a person. That cemented it. So the courts now can accept...and people now realize what racial profiling is, and that can be traced back to its roots in the court challenges program.

In terms of funding to NARCC with respect to race, I can say there's been funding for research with respect to race as it intersects with other grounds of the charter, for instance, race and disability, race and sexual orientation, race and gender, and what are the cases with respect to the impact of section 15, the equality rights, on racialized group members and whether they have made advancement after 20 years and where they are.

One thing that is clear is that before nobody was interested, and nobody has ever been interested, in promoting issues of marginalized group members, particularly racialized group members. Through the court challenges program, people have been able to go before the courts. They have been able to go and talk about the intersectionality. They have been able to sit together, to come up with strategies that can assist in dealing with this. For instance, that's where the idea of gathering race-based data collection came from.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

It's time to cut you off. Finish it, please. Finish your sentence.

[Estella Muyinda]

Since 9/11 the face of racial profiling—I'll focus on racial profiling because that's the simplest one, but there are many other parts to this—changed to include people of Arabic descent, as well as Asian descent, as well as people based on their religion. Then there was the impact of the security legislation. NARCC was granted funding as an intervenor in the cases of Charkaoui, Harkat, and Almrei to be able to express the impact of those security measures on racialized group members. I also am aware that funding was granted because when racialized people with disabilities would go through customs after 9/11 they would be singled out.

The question was what is it about the disability and going through the machinery, but guess what, it impacted all other people with disabilities. Now the change had to happen within customs for looking at how they process people with disabilities as they go through this security check.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you.

What I would like to do is have each witness think about the one-minute closing statement that they'd like to make, because it will be one minute. We will have some time for you to close off your statements.

We'll go to Madame Thaï Thi Lac, for deux minutes.

[Ève-Mary Thaï Thi Lac, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Good morning everyone. I want to thank you for being with us today. Your testimony has been very enlightening.

It is often said that individual cases result in significant progress for the community. As regards your struggles, I believe that is very important. We have talked a great deal about rights, but I would also like to talk about protection. We simply can't ignore that rights are connected to protection. In my opinion, in order for that protection to be there, injured parties must have access to programs. It is a well-known fact that in the vast majority of cases, victims of assault are women.

I would like to know whether, in your opinion, the protection of minority groups or women will be threatened as a result of the abolition of the Court Challenges Program. I would also like to know whether you believe there is a violation of equality rights here.

[Mary Eberts]

May I begin?

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

You may be the only one able to answer at the moment.

[Mary Eberts]

The Native Women's Association of Canada has received funding from the court challenges program on more than one occasion to advocate on behalf of aboriginal women victims of violence. Indeed, research funding from the court challenges program was instrumental in getting the Sisters in Spirit program launched. The key research done for that was funded by the court challenges program.

In this area, as Ms. Jacobs will tell you, we are nowhere near equal. There needs to be a tremendous amount of work done to develop the meaning of the phrase “equal protection and equal benefit of the law”. And we were just starting—just starting with the help of the court challenges program—to develop a program of work to litigate these issues when the funding was cut off.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

We'll have Ms. Mathyssen for two minutes.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

We've heard from Ms. Muyinda, Ms. Jacobs, Captain Purdy, and Ms. Eberts about how the law treats aboriginal women, racialized women, and women who have been sexually assaulted. My question is whether we all, as a society, suffer when constitutional wrongs go unchecked.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Do you want to ask anyone specific?

We'll have Ms. Jacobs and then Ms. Purdy.

[Beverley Jacobs]

Thank you for the opportunity.

Yes, I believe that everyone suffers. We've been addressing equality issues, as an organization, for 33 years. The reason the Native Women's Association of Canada exists in the first place is because of the inequality within our own communities. We, as aboriginal people, have been in this country for hundreds and hundreds of years. Now the situation for our women is that they are the marginalized of the marginalized. So if we're to study gaps, if we're to study the impacts of all of the inequalities occurring in this country, I don't understand why this still continues and has actually worsened.

So if it's worsening for us, where is the balance? There's no balance when it comes to aboriginal women and non-aboriginal women, specifically. So everybody suffers. Everybody suffers in our community and in society when society isn't aware of all these discriminatory issues we're talking about. If we were to address it in a positive way, and court challenges helped us to do that, then it would assist everybody. Yes, everybody suffers: our community, our women, and our children.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Go ahead, Captain Purdy.

[Capt Jennifer Lynn Purdy]

Ms. Jacobs has spoken about how people in Canada suffer. A lot of suffering occurs because people are not able to reach their potential.

But I would also add that the country as a whole is held back economically to a certain extent when people who are marginalized are not allowed, for whatever reason, to reach their potential. Whether it's because they belong to a minority group or as women, often they're not treated the same as a white man. If that comes on from the day you're born—because you're governed unfairly by the Indian Act, for example—many roadblocks are put in your path that make it much more difficult to achieve equality in our society.

I was reading up about sexual assault. At the end of the day, Stats Canada suggests, it costs a few billion dollars to the Canadian economy every year in both direct and indirect costs; it's also very hard to enumerate.

That's just sexual assault. If we look at how minority groups are treated, how people such as francophones are treated at times, and how aboriginal persons and women are treated in our society, think about the economic cost. As a politician, I may not vote for something, because a lot of times politicians and people will just look at the money. If you look at the money, there's a very good reason for the court challenges program and a very good reason to continue to push for equality.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

I'll have to give you half a minute, so please take it. Then we'll wrap up.

[Carole Tremblay]

Thank you.

Yes, everyone suffers. Women are more likely to be victims of sexual assault and family violence. Their rights have been advanced through their demands. However, the fact remains that everyone benefits, including men and children who are subject to this kind of treatment. When you deprive the women's movement, feminists—whether they are raging feminists or not—of this kind of recourse, everyone suffers. And that includes children and men.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you.

What I'd like to do is reverse the order and, if you can take half a minute or one minute to wrap up, have you give us your closing remarks.

Ms. Eberts.

[Mary Eberts]

When the charter was first enacted in 1982 and in 1985, when the equality guarantees came into effect, it was the Minister of Justice at the time, Mr. Crosbie, who said that it is much better to get the laws right in the first place so that people don't have to litigate them; but if we have to litigate them, then it is imperative that the people who do not have the means to litigate these incredibly important cases will be given assistance.

That message is as good now as it was then. The court challenges program was cancelled and restored once before. It should be restored once again, because it is essential to the nation.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you.

Ms. Jacobs, would you like to say something?

[Beverley Jacobs]

Yes. I think the biggest issue here for aboriginal women has to do with the access to justice, and the court challenges program provided access to justice, however limited, to aboriginal women and girls.

On the issue of justice itself, we're dealing, in my opinion, with a legal institution that is based on Eurocentric values and principles and is also based on patriarchy. This is part of the challenge we bring as aboriginal women to those principles.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you.

Captain Purdy.

[Capt Jennifer Lynn Purdy]

I just said that a few billions of dollars annually is the cost of sexual assault in this country. The cost is obviously much amplified when we look at the indirect effects of racism and of being aboriginal in this society, etc. It all has an economic cost.

When you compare billions of dollars to the $2.75 million annual cost for the court challenges program, it's a drop in the bucket. But it was a very important drop in the bucket. There is no other mechanism in place still that will assist women and minority groups to achieve justice and equality. That's my first point.

Number two—my final point—is about what we would do if it were brought back. What I would want to see, if it were re-established, is that there be some mechanism by which, if a court challenge succeeded under the program, there would be a requirement that the legislation that was in error be changed. That would increase the positive effect upon all Canadians.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you.

Madam Muyinda, would you like to comment?

[Estella Muyinda]

Thank you.

The program funded equality and language rights, and we shouldn't forget the language rights piece of it. In this regard, I would bring up the racialized women from that group who are losing both ways: they're losing with respect to language rights and they're losing with respect to equality rights.

The cases funded by the program raised the profiles of issues of concern to racialized group members, even in the cases where the court challenges were not successful. However, there were advances made, there were negotiations that followed, there were consultations that were supported. This we're missing, because that forum is no longer available to us or to the communities.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you.

Go ahead, Madame Tremblay.