Status of Women Committee on March 6th, 2008

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

It's the chair's privilege. I asked a question when Ms. Biguzs asked me if there was anything I wanted. It's the chair's privilege to ask a question, but it has nothing to do with parties.

Fair enough?

[Patricia Davidson, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Not really, but carry on.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Go ahead, Mr. Pearson.

[Glen Pearson, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

I'm willing to give up my slot if it is the cause of a problem.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Okay.

Madame Boucher, do you have to leave early? Is that the problem? Then we'll give you the floor.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Yes.

I have a little question here, in French.

Witnesses have told us that some people are resistant to gender-based budgeting. Are you aware of this, and if so, have these people explained to you why they are resistant?

[Anita Biguzs]

I'm not aware, but I think your question should probably be directed to Finance when you meet with them next week on the budgeting process.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Okay.

[Bruce Stanton, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

Do you want to just carry on with this round?

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Mr. Stanton, I think next I'll have to go the Bloc, and they're just settling in.

[Bruce Stanton, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

We have some time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Yes, you have, absolutely. You have six minutes.

[Bruce Stanton, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

My question is really an open question to both of you. We've heard some comments to the effect that progress on integrating GBA into the practices and decision-making processes over the last couple of years has been somewhat derailed. Perhaps derailed isn't the right word. In some ways the clock has been turned back on the ability to continue to make advances in the work that's being done to make GBA an integral part of the decision-making process.

In the course of your and other witnesses' presentations, I've seen that the opposite is true. In fact, at first blush, it looks like advances continue to be made. I wonder if you could tell me if there has been any directive from the political side of the Government of Canada to in any way change or alter your respective department's approach to GBA and the advances that you seem to be continuing to make? Has there been any such directive?

[Anita Biguzs]

No. As I've said, we're continuing to always try to make our analysis and our support as effective as it can be, but there have been no directives.

[Bruce Stanton, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

Any thoughts, Mr. Wild?

[Joe Wild]

There hasn't been any directive. The approach has been continuing to try to embed GBA as part of the policy reflex of the analysts at the Treasury Board Secretariat, which I think is pretty much indicative of what most departments are trying to do. Certainly I'm not aware of any evidence or measure that would demonstrate that the quality of GBA analysis today is somehow less than it was five years ago.

[Bruce Stanton, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

In terms of the leadership for these kinds of initiatives--as with any organization, the work that's undertaken, the urgency, the priority that's given to certain initiatives in a very large organization like the Government of Canada--where does the leadership come from to make sure something like GBA considerations continues to be advanced and incorporated in the decision-making process?

[Anita Biguzs]

I think in the central agencies it's having the role of GBA champions. Certainly in PCO it's been approximately two years that we've had a GBA champion. I think that helps to ensure that there is focus and attention on it. It helps to ensure that there is appropriate training and leadership in our organizations, and the interdepartmental process that I have described, in ensuring that Status of Women, for example, is at the table in terms of the expertise that they can provide on gender-based analysis—

[Bruce Stanton, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

I don't mean to interrupt, but even if these champions and committees exist and those structures are in place, one knows that unless the leadership at the top makes sure these things are in fact adhered to and continue to make progress, they may not be given the importance they merit. Does that leadership come from, for example, the secretary to cabinet or the head of the PCO? In your case, Mr. Wild, would it be the senior administrator in the Treasury Board?

[Joe Wild]

I would say there is a minister responsible for status of women in Canada. At the highest political level, there is clear leadership there.

Within each organization--and there may be some variability in terms of the practice--but certainly within TBS the champion is an assistant secretary--so an assistant deputy minister--as are all of the champions for the various types of areas where we have a champion, like official languages, employment equity, and sustainable development. They are all at the assistant secretary level.

They are the senior executive team within the secretariat. Each of those champions is responsible for promoting that particular issue or matter within the secretariat, ensuring that the practices of the secretariat align with and meet expectations that exist for whatever that particular area may be, including GBA.

[Bruce Stanton, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

They have the full support of the leadership in your respective organizations.

[Joe Wild]

The champions are named by the secretary. They have full support not just from the secretary as the deputy of the organization, but also from the entire senior management team. That's basically the structure of what the champion role is meant to do.

[Bruce Stanton, Conservative, Simcoe North, ON]

Thank you very much. I appreciate it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Pearson, for accommodating Ms. Boucher.

I'll have to accommodate Mr. Murphy because he is leaving. Mr. Murphy, you have seven minutes.

[Brian Murphy, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

I come to this fairly new, of course, and I'm happy to be here to ask a few questions.

This may have been asked before, but it seems to me, after reviewing the material, that the emphasis seems to be on MCs, memos to cabinet, for programs. I inferred that might be, in most cases, new programs, or new spins on old programs--as we've seen in the last two years or so--with new names for old programs.

What about existing programs? There are a number of pieces of approved legislation and spending authority attached to those pieces of legislation. I think back to unemployment insurance and old age security as good examples. If these are existing programs that have already gone to cabinet--some in Louis St. Laurent's time for the first time--how is it that GBA would ever be incorporated into a consideration of their core spending?

I can understand if they're new assets or facets to existing programs, fine, but how can we be assured that GBA is considered at the very beginning in cabinet decisions respecting existing programs?

Maybe that's a stupid question, I don't know.