Status of Women Committee on April 2nd, 2009

[Tilly O'Neill-Gordon, Conservative, Miramichi, NB]

I have to go.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Patricia, do you want to pick up the time?

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

Yes, thanks.

Just very briefly, Ms. Russell, I was wondering if you could give me some clarification. In your handout, you talked about how just four in 10 unemployed workers qualified for benefits--only 40%? Where would you get that statistic?

[Susan Russell]

I've seen that figure around. Again, because we have not got as much access to research as we would like, I could only go on figures I've seen.

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

Would it have been from Stats Canada or...?

[Susan Russell]

Those kinds of figures, yes.

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

But probably not from them, because it's certainly different from the figures they gave us.

[Susan Russell]

The most recent figure I saw was that 1.4 million were unemployed and the number is growing, and only about 800,000 had benefits, so I deduced from this that a significant number are not getting benefits.

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

Then your statement isn't referring to those who pay into it? It's referring to total unemployment across the board?

[Susan Russell]

Correct.

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

Okay. Thank you.

Ms. Baroni, I was interested in your statement about the woman in your community who had to travel 40 kilometres, and thank goodness she had a vehicle to get there. She wasn't computer-literate and she didn't have a computer at home from which to access it. That's certainly not an anomaly across this huge country.

You also made the statement that it should be a service. Are concerns raised about the amount of help given to people who are applying?

[Nancy Baroni]

Yes.

Actually, the woman with whom I was speaking on this issue said.... The people had been laid off from the school. They were school techs, such library techs or teacher assistants in an elementary school, and somebody had the phone number for the Service Canada office, so they thought that was great, because they wouldn't have to go through the 1-800 system and could actually talk to a person. We've all done that. We try to avoid the teleprompters--

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Right now we're out of time. I'll cut it here, because Madam Mathyssen has five minutes.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I want to thank you for coming and bringing your expertise. I would like particularly to comment on how impressed I am when you refer to each other as sisters, because knowing that we are indeed sisters is ultimately how we're going to get the kinds of results we want.

Ms. Baroni, when you were talking about investment in women, you said that investment in women and girls has a multiplier effect on the economy and on economic growth. We heard the same thing from Madame Asselin and Ms. Diamond. This sounds like intelligent policy to me. I wonder if you could expand and explain that more fully.

[Nancy Baroni]

Absolutely. I know you've had Armine Yalnizyan and Kathleen Lahey come in, and they gave their testimonies about women's contribution to the economy, either through caregiving, unpaid labour, or paid labour.

To cut it down to brass tacks, if you give funds to people who have low incomes, whether they're women or men, they aren't going to be investing it overseas. The money probably won't find itself in a tax haven in the Cayman Islands. It will be spent on necessities in their communities and in their local economies. That has a multiplier effect, because if you're spending in your home communities, then you're supporting local economies and supporting jobs in your own communities. That's the multiplier effect.

If you give the money to people who are going to spend it on necessities, it's going to stay in their communities.

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

Would there be a health benefit too? We know that people who have lower incomes are more reliant on the health care system. Would there be savings in terms of health care too, and just general social--

[Nancy Baroni]

Absolutely.

I'll give you a basic example in terms of food costs, food security, and childhood obesity. They're saying that low-income children actually have a higher rate of obesity , because the food that's cheaper to put on the table is often high in calories and high in fat. Fruits and vegetables are simply more expensive. Milk is more expensive than pop. That's one simple example of the health differences in economic classes when it comes to investment.

There is also simple dental care. If you don't have access to a dentist because it costs a lot of money and you don't have coverage, then there's an increased risk of gum disease. The multiplier effect just continues.

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

Thank you.

I'm glad there's been reference to the need for research. You'll be glad to know that you had a respondent, the witness in earlier this week, Madam Heinrichs. She supported not only research but also advocacy and lobbying, so that call is out there.

I want to come to the CEDAW report on Canada. It indicated an alarming concern about women's access to social assistance. How does EI fit into the picture that we saw painted by CEDAW?

[Jane Stinson]

Well, if you don't qualify for employment insurance benefits or if you exhaust them for the reasons that have been described, then your next alternative may be social assistance. I think that as we see fewer and fewer women qualifying for employment insurance, we're going to see more women needing to turn to social assistance, and we know that the cuts there have been drastic. It's very hard to survive. Many women are also supporting children, so I think it highlights the importance of looking at our social assistance program and ensuring that it can provide an adequate standard of living.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Go ahead, Ms. Rose-Lizée.

[Ruth Rose-Lizée]

I'd also like to note that in order to qualify for social assistance, you usually have to get rid of almost all of your assets. If you have a home, you may have to remortgage it and use that money to live on until the equity you have in your own home is below the level set by the province. You may have to sell a second car or other things.

We know that once you get to that level of poverty, it is increasingly difficult to get out. We also know that for an adult, being two to three years on social assistance is traumatic; for children, it may change the whole direction of their lives.

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

Another investment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you very much. I would like to thank the witnesses for their patience and understanding because we did have to cut you short. Today is the last day or else we would have asked you to come back another day, but it was a 12-week study and this is the last week of the study. I think you gave us a lot of valuable information in a short time and I want to congratulate you. Whoever said that women can't cut to the chase? You did cut to the chase very well.

Thanks very much. We will now suspend this part of the meeting to deal with Madame Boucher's options. It should only take about three minutes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Madame Boucher could bring forward a recommendation or a motion that will recommend we make a recommendation to the House of Commons on this issue as a committee, if we can get unanimous agreement. Or she could also decide that one of the things the motion could ask for is that we call a press conference at which a member of each party, if we all agree to this, can speak to this issue.

Because of the timeline, she'll have to give us 48 hours' notice either way, whatever it is you choose to do. So that is fine.

At the next meeting we will also deal with Madame Demers' motion.

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Excuse me, Madam Chair, but I think she wanted to move an emergency motion, so she did not need to wait 48 hours. It was an event that happened yesterday and an article was published. I think we can deal with this immediately, since it is a current event. It is an emergency motion. It is in the news right now.