Status of Women Committee on April 8th, 2008

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

How is it that we are not seeing any improvement in the programs? If this works, why are the programs not being changed to take into account your analysis? I assume that in the analysis, especially with respect to live-in caregivers... There are many problems encountered by women from the Philippines. I do not understand. There has been an evaluation and an analysis, and recommendations have been made. But the program is not changing enough to meet the needs of people who come to live here. How do you explain that?

[Peter Oberle]

I would argue that bit by bit, more and more, year after year, we are seeing a change in programs. I had given you one example with language instruction for newcomers. Jeff had given a second example. In our annual reports--the most recent one and the year before that--there's a variety of other examples as well. I couldn't take the time to walk you through it; I would use up the rest of our time.

But there's no question that we have more work to do. I don't think this is a target or an end. This is an ongoing cycle of continuous improvement. We do have more work to do, but I think we can point to specific programs that are better because of gender-based analysis.

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Could you send us the list and the changes?

[Peter Oberle]

Absolutely.

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Madam Boucher, you're sharing your time with Ms. Davidson?

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

I just have a quick question, and Ms. Davidson will use the rest of the time.

You said that yours was the only department required by law to report on its gender-based analysis. I want to understand the impact that such a requirement has on your work. I would also like to know how you gather the information to carry out a proper gender-based analysis.

[Peter Oberle]

There are a couple of questions in there.

To the first part of your question, I don't think I'm qualified to comment on what's required for all departments, but again, I can reiterate that the legislation for CIC was a catalyst.

With respect to your question about data, we've been collecting data that are disaggregated by sex and by gender. We've been doing that for a number of years now--I think in previous testimony we saw that it went back about 10 years. So there's a good set of data there.

As well, if you look at our annual report on immigration, you'll also see initiatives that are there to drive out the collection of new data, where there are areas that we need to explore further. I think one of the first references in the annual immigration plan is a piece of work that does a literature review and gets input from the provinces and territories about some of the settlement challenges faced by newcomers, differentiating between gender again.

Does that answer your questions?

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

Yes.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Ms. Davidson.

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

Thank you.

Thank you very much for your presentations this morning.

We've heard from a lot of different experts in the field of gender analysis and gender budgeting. There was one thing that I wanted to ask you about, since your department is actively involved in doing the gender analysis.

We had one person testify who was doing an expert analysis of the budget. In that person's presentation, it said:

The goal of gender analysis is to eliminate existing differences in incomes, wealth, empowerment, and other indicators between women and men to promote the full and equal development of women; and to support the attainment of women's equality.

Then it went on to say:

A full gender analysis of budgetary measures seeks to determine whether each individual budgetary measure is likely to have a negative, neutral, or positive impact on the status of women as compared with men.

They went on, then, to analyze and to give us the results of the impact on different policies, whether or not they actually increased the gap between men and women, or ensured that women were no worse off, or actually improved the status of women.

And then we have had other expert presenters say that this should not be a “men versus women” issue. It definitely needs to be something that analyzes the impacts on all sectors of our society, whether it be men, women, children, whoever.

Could you tell me how your process works? Does it include the overall general analysis, or does it do an analysis of women only?

[Peter Oberle]

Maybe I'll let Julie pipe in on that one.

Let me just say up front that the way we think of the objectives is as follows: first, that there's no unintended differential effect; and second, that beyond that, our programs, policies, legislation, and services actually promote the equality objectives. That's how we think of the objectives.

Julie.

[Julie Fontaine]

I can add that definitely in our training we've included those dimensions and we reinforce with policy analysts and staff to take into consideration the impacts--unintended--on various populations. Whether it's age, culture, race, being a man or woman, these are all important dimensions that should be included in an analysis.

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

And is this type of discussion what takes place at your interdepartmental groups? Is it an across-the-board analysis? Is that the type of thing the champions are instructed to look for in the different departments?

[Julie Fontaine]

Status of Women really has the lead on that working group, so I'd prefer not to infringe on their lead on that.

What I can say is that in CIC we also have a departmental working group that looks at those components and we also do brainstorming sessions. And we put that working group in place to create more horizontality between branches and to discuss the issues that sometimes go from one branch to another. We've definitely been reinforcing that, so sometimes it is to provide general information to analysts as well as brainstorming on a particular GBA, if you wish.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

You have one more minute, if you want.

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

Do I? Okay.

We also talked a bit about the legislation, and I think you had indicated, Mr. Oberle, that some of the same results could have been received through four or five different methods. And I think you were referring to your department when you said that.

Could you make a comment on how you see these other methods, other than legislation, working for other departments? Do you think it's something that may be successful across the government, or do you think there is something specific to your department that would make these things more acceptable or workable?

[Peter Oberle]

I don't think I feel qualified to comment on behalf of other departments. But I think I can say something about the second part of your question, which is if there is something unique to CIC.

I think it's telling at CIC that gender-based analysis was under way before the legislation came along. So maybe considerations of gender are a bit more clear and present at CIC--and madam, they certainly are clear and present at CIC.

With respect to other mechanisms—Treasury Board policy, MAF—I raise those because in coming to CIC I find a department that is very responsive to Treasury Board policy and MAF. And having seen similar requirements or perhaps even more elaborated requirements in those mechanisms, my sense is that you would have seen a similar kind of effect at CIC. I can't speak for other departments.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you.

We'll now go to Ms. Mathyssen, for seven minutes.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

And thank you for being here.

I am quite interested in this idea of CIC being required to provide the annual gender-based analysis of the impact of the act to Parliament. And we're looking at some potential changes to the act in regard to ministers' powers. Have you had a chance to anticipate the impact of these possible changes, or do you have to wait until after it's a fait accompli? Do you have any kind of input in terms of anticipating impact?

[Peter Oberle]

I can give you a partial response to that. First and foremost, the requirement to report on the impacts of the act as it relates to gender continues.

Secondly, I was speaking to my colleagues yesterday, and it turns out that the former manager of the gender-based analysis unit is working right in that section, so gender-based analysis is very clear and present in their minds. And I understand they have plans to do gender-based analysis for the proposed changes.

On details beyond that, I'd have to perhaps reply afterwards in writing, as they're the experts. But I hope that's helpful.

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

Okay. And actually I would appreciate that reply. I think it would be very useful to know in terms of those changes.

In 2002 the GBA unit of CIC produced a gender-based analysis chart, and it summarized the key policy legislative initiatives and their potential impacts on women. I wonder if the department has completed all this research. If it's complete, what did you find, and is it available on the website? What light can you shed in terms of that research?

[Peter Oberle]

I'll ask Allison to respond, if that's okay, Allison.