Evidence of meeting #28 for Status of Women in the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was budget.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yasmin Ratansi
If my understanding is right, you had a discussion; you agreed to postpone it until you got satisfaction. So now I'll call the question.
(Motion agreed to)
We will now go to the next motion.
Ms. Mathyssen, would you like to read your motion for the record, please?
NDP
Irene Mathyssen NDP London—Fanshawe, ON
Thank you, Madam Chair.
It is:
That the Auditor General conduct an audit to review Canada's implementation of gender-based analysis, using Setting the Stage for the Next Century: The Federal Plan for Gender Equality (1995) as a guide, and report the adoption of this motion to the House of Commons without delay.
Conservative
Patricia Davidson Conservative Sarnia—Lambton, ON
Thank you.
I'd like to propose a friendly amendment, if I could, please—at least, it appears friendly to me, but that will be up to the mover.
I would just like to add something to it. After it says “That the Auditor General”, then put in:
taking into account all of the elements of Canada's framework for equality, including the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women and the Optional Protocol and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, review Canada's implementation of gender-based analysis using Setting the Stage for the Next Century: The Federal Plan for Gender Equality (1995) as a guide
—and this is new—
and that we look at it for the last seven years and report the adoption of this motion to the House of Commons without delay.
I would speak to that amendment, if in fact the mover would agree to it.
Conservative
Patricia Davidson Conservative Sarnia—Lambton, ON
The reason for it is that it gives some context to what we are trying to do here I think. It also gives us the timeframe to perhaps have a bit more meaningful input.
Liberal
Conservative
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yasmin Ratansi
Yes, sure.
Is there any other discussion on the amendment?
Yes, Ms. Minna.
Liberal
Maria Minna Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
Actually, it's not so much discussion on the amendment; I just wanted to ask Ms. Mathyssen—or all of us here—whether, in asking the Auditor General to do this.... I don't have a problem with it. My only question, and I'm not quite sure how we address it, is whether the Auditor General's office has the right model or way of approach.
We just heard this morning from Armine Yalnizyan and all our witnesses that what is now in the system is really not the right model or the right approach, that they're going at it from the wrong end in Finance and other places, and that we need to come up with something ourselves, to some degree, to recommend.
I guess I'm not sure whether the Auditor General's office necessarily has the right training and model for doing this stuff at this point. I have to ask that question, because if they don't, then we're swimming up a river to maybe end up with a report that isn't based on the right indicators. I'm worried about that, because it doesn't seem from what we heard this morning that, both in Finance and other places, our government systems in general have the right models in place.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yasmin Ratansi
Ms. Mathyssen, would you like to respond? Then I'll go to Madame Demers.
NDP
Irene Mathyssen NDP London—Fanshawe, ON
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I did indeed hear what our witnesses had to say, but I think this is a starting point. I have faith in the Auditor General, in that I think she brings a fresh approach. The fact that she made this offer, being quite open to looking at GBA and to auditing according to these guidelines, strikes me as a starting point.
Certainly, I think we need a new template; that's become very clear. But at this point in time, that new template is elusive and I think a distance off, because a number of us need support and to do some consultations in order to come up with it.
But I don't want to delay. I want to get started on this.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yasmin Ratansi
Thank you.
Just one second. I want to read something you wrote in your motion, before you go into a discussion. There's something that doesn't make sense, and we're going to ask you. I'll read it, so that people have an idea:
That the Auditor General, taking into account all of the elements of Canada's framework for equality, including the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women and the Optional Protocol and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, review Canada's implementation of gender-based analysis using Setting the Stage for the Next Century: The Federal Plan for Gender Equality (1995) as a guide
—and then you've put “and that for the last seven years...”.
But that doesn't make sense, because 1995 is the starting point anyway. If you start from there, this linguistically doesn't make any sense. Could we just—
Conservative
Patricia Davidson Conservative Sarnia—Lambton, ON
We've left out a word. The intent is that they go back for the last seven years to do the comparisons to see where we're going, so maybe it would be, “and review the last seven years”. It shouldn't be “that for the last seven years”; it should be....
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yasmin Ratansi
You want it to say, “...and review the last seven years and report the adoption of this motion to the House of Commons without delay”.
I'm sorry about that. We now have the right one.
Go ahead, Ms. Mathyssen.
NDP
Irene Mathyssen NDP London—Fanshawe, ON
I just wanted to finish.
I think the Auditor General can tell us whether GBA is working or not. I think that's an important piece of this, because we've heard that it's not, and she can help us I think in that regard.
Bloc
Nicole Demers Bloc Laval, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I think that when the Auditor General came to meet with us, she told us that if the committee passed a motion asking her to conduct audits, she would do so. I presume that the Auditor General has enough experience and expertise the use the tools she needs to do the job we're asking her to do. She knows what we want and I think that she will use the right tools. She talked to us about the tools that existed in other countries. I presume then that she would use the tools that already exist elsewhere. I am not worried about this at all, I know that she will do a good job.
Liberal
Maria Minna Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
I'm not opposed to the motion with respect to its going to the Auditor General, but I want to ensure something, and I'm not sure we put it in the motion.
When she was here, she made it very clear that because of her mandate, normally the scope of her analysis is to analyze projects from the point of view of whether they met the objectives the government set for them and whether moneys were spent and administration was accurate or not. Her mandate doesn't give her the ability to look at a broader policy context. Therefore, the analysis she could give us would be limited by virtue of that fact.
What I want to acknowledge somehow here is that the outcome she will come out with--not because she doesn't have the expertise, necessarily, but because of her mandate--would be limiting to a degree. What I'm trying to say is that it wouldn't have the scope that we'd want to see.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yasmin Ratansi
Ms. Mathyssen, may I make a suggestion?
The Auditor General indicated when she came here last time that she would like to mull over how she can help us. She was going to submit some points with regard to where she can help us, and we might be pre-empting something. She can do an audit; she does value-for-money auditing, but she does not do a program audit. If she doesn't do a program audit, let her tell us what the parameters are, because she's really interested in helping us with this. She was very keen on doing this. Can we wait until she gives us a parameter, and then reword the motion? Is it possible?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yasmin Ratansi
Let us wait, because she's very keen on helping us.
Go ahead, Ms. Davidson.