Status of Women Committee on Dec. 10th, 2007

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Ms. Peckford, do you believe that, as a committee, we should ask the Department of Finance to provide a summary of the various measures that could integrate gender considerations into budget preparations? Do you believe—my colleague spoke of this earlier—that we should establish a special committee to ensure that these issues are studied properly and are monitored on an on-going basis? Could this committee have an impact on the measures taken?

[Nancy Peckford]

We truly agree with what you have suggested. However, I believe that it would require, as Ms. Beckton stated, leadership at a very high level. There should be a federal cabinet committee because it is truly important that leadership be exercised at the top.

I think it's incumbent upon your committee to have the finance department here, and I assume you may at some point. I think they need to be much more detailed with you, as you say, about the measures they are undertaking. I think they may be at a loss in terms of what some of those measures are, in part because there is no defined policy framework, but with time I would expect that would emerge with the support of the Status of Women Canada and others.

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Where should that leadership come from?

[Nancy Peckford]

I think some of that leadership must be demonstrated by cabinet, and I think there has to be leadership on the part of the Department of Finance. I think the measures being undertaken by Treasury Board and the Privy Council Office are also important. I understand Treasury Board has made some recommendations that are now being incorporated, and I think those are absolutely essential. I would also argue, and this has been mentioned by this committee during the last Parliament, that leadership within the Privy Council Office is absolutely crucial to any sort of success because of their task to coordinate government functions.

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Madame Demers, trois minutes. If you want to give it up, that's fine.

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Madame Budlender, are you still with us?

[Debbie Budlender]

Yes. There is only one point I want to make. I've been a bit intrigued with the last few questions about the focus on the Department of Finance.

I don't understand how the Canadian system works, but I would be surprised if in Canada the line agencies don't have quite a lot of control over how their budget is framed. I think if one is really going for gender-responsive budgeting, the Department of Finance, perhaps with the support of Status of Women Canada, have to take the lead and set the framework and the rules within which it's governed, and the approach and format in which it's done.

Actually, a lot of the effort has to be put in supporting, urging, cajoling, and ensuring that all the line agencies do gender-responsive budgeting when they are planning their programs and when they are allocating the resources to do it. I think that's one of the things that have to be worked out--what is everybody's role? The focus can't be only on the Department of Finance. The Department of Finance is obviously the one that is responsible when there are taxes that have to be drawn up, but for most expenditure programs, it's not the Department of Finance that will be designing the policies.

That's all. Thank you.

[Nancy Peckford]

I would add to Debbie that in order for that to happen, I think the departments have to be better equipped to do that gender-based work, and that work needs to be prioritized within the departments.

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Would you say, Ms. Budlender, that one would have to first recognize that there are still inequalities before getting into gender budgeting?

[Debbie Budlender]

Certainly. I talk about the five steps of gender budgeting, and the first step is a situation analysis to say what is the position of women, men, girls, and boys in a particular country in relation to education, employment, health, or whatever you want to name it. When one does that, it's not simply women and men, girls and boys, but in my country it's black women, black men, white women, and it's rich and poor. Certainly if you can show there is no inequality in Canada, then you don't need a gender-responsive budget.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Merci.

Madam Mathyssen, for five minutes.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I would like to ask a question, but I would also like to make a motion, with the indulgence of the committee.

It's been pointed out to me that I may not have received the GBA report that I previously requested because I didn't formalize it as a motion. I would like to begin with that, and simply say that the committee for the status of women secure the finance department report outlining the GBA analysis of the 2007 federal budget.

I will send that up.

My question has to do with women's unpaid work. We haven't talked about that very much today and about how important unpaid work and caregiving activities are when analyzing a budget. Has Canada developed the measures we need? What would those measures be in terms of creating a budget that did indeed take into account unpaid work and the caregiving that women provide?

[Nancy Peckford]

Obviously one of the greatest impediments to women's full participation in the labour force is access to quality regulated child care. Certainly the employment insurance system as we know it today is often insufficient in meeting the needs of women when they become unemployed, so that's another measure. I think, in fact, the macroeconomic analysis done at the finance department often doesn't account for unpaid caregiving.

Debbie, maybe you can speak to this. There are certain notions of a false economy in which all of the unpaid caregiving that keeps that economy going isn't factored in, and I think we need to make more explicit how that work allows our current economy to thrive as it has.

Those are simply some measures, but I'd be interested in hearing from Debbie if she has some other thoughts.

[Debbie Budlender]

This is one of my pet topics, so I don't want to get started at half past midnight. But I'm really pleased that this issue has been raised, because I think it's essential if one wants a gender-responsive budget and if one wants gender equality. I think the unequal burden that women around the world bear in terms of unpaid care work underlies a whole lot of the inequalities.

I'm trained as an economist, and most budget people will be trained as economists, and economists are taught to see only money. So they simply don't see the unpaid care work, although the system of national accounts acknowledges that this is work and that it produces things. I think Canada has some polices that address this issue, but I'm sure it could do a whole lot more.

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

So we do need women talking in those pre-budget sessions?

[Debbie Budlender]

Yes.

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

Okay, thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

I'd like to thank you, Ms. Budlender. It's past midnight for you. I'd like to let you know that the clerk will get in touch with you, because you've mentioned some resources.

Before I give all of you the floor to speak for one minute to capture anything that you think you've missed out, as I understand it, the committee is trying to ask if we should go and review gender budgeting, and you've given us enough information to tell us that yes, it is important.

Time and again the witnesses have told us that we need to have a framework, because gender budgeting is really a re-prioritization or reorientation of policies, it doesn't involve a lot of money. So we'll need to ensure that we have this dialogue about whether it's tax credits or investment in social programs....

Could you give us a brief one minute on your preferences as to what we should look at, because it's too much to look at the whole government. We may look at certain specific issues.

I think that was Ms. Minna's question. Is it Human Resources? Should we look at Finance? But with Finance, the budgets grow up from different departments, so Finance is the final negotiator, saying, “I won't give you this much money.” So it is the departments that will say they'll cut this program. Where is your preference in what we should do?

We'll start off with you, Ms. Budlender.

[Debbie Budlender]

It's really not for me as a South African to say, but maybe the issue is to say, what are the big issues that are really contributing most to gender inequality in Canada? What I've been hearing from listening for the last little while is that one is the unpaid care work. So one might want to ask what programs do currently or could potentially lighten that burden or get that burden shared.

The other one is the income and employment-related ones. So for me it would be perhaps like we did in South Africa, when we said employment, HIV/AIDS, and violence against women. Maybe it's for Canada to say, these are the issues we think are most important for gender equality, and let's try to look at the departments and the programs that address those issues.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you.

Ms. Peckford, do you have any last words?

[Nancy Peckford]

I would echo some of Debbie's comments around unpaid caregiving. I also think that there have been very few strategic social investments that have benefited women over the last decade, in the midst of a plethora of tax cuts and tax credits. Therefore the whole question of social reinvestment by the federal government needs to be revisited.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Ms. Beckton.

[Clare Beckton]

I would say we just want to emphasize again that it's not just the finance department; in our view, it is all of the line departments. That is why we have been working so closely with Treasury Board and the central agencies around accountabilities and reporting, because we think that's essential to overcoming some of the challenges that were mentioned earlier about the mainstreaming of gender analysis within departments.

I think in terms of areas, certainly Status of Women's priorities have been economic security and violence against women. Those are very fundamental areas for women in Canada.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

I thank you all very much for being here.

Ms. Budlender, our great thanks to you. We can't see you, but we can hear you loud and clear. We are very much impressed by what you've told us, and we'll move forward with it. Thank you so much. Have a good night's sleep.