Status of Women Committee on April 23rd, 2009

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Good morning, everyone. We did such great work last week on getting through some of this. Now you have the new version. We are at paragraph 51.

Up to paragraph 51, everything we did last week, the changes we requested, etc., has been incorporated into the new document you have. I don't know if you had a chance to check and make sure that is so. If you want about three minutes, you can thumb through it and make sure it is so, and then we can start from paragraph 52.

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

Are we in camera?

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Yes, we always deal with these in camera.

[A voice]

No, we are public now.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Okay. So if you could check it out between now and when we get to start it again, we can start from 52. If you have any comments, you can make them then.

We're doing these motions publicly. I have to report to you first and foremost, before we deal with the motions, that if you recall, Ms. Neville had a motion last week that she very kindly withdrew until today. That motion was that since repeated requests for information have not been responded to, that Status of Women Canada provide the Standing Committee on the Status of Women with a list of those projects that have been approved since February 2006 to date; with the differing sets of criteria used to evaluate proposals for funding by Status of Women Canada since February 2006; and with the number of projects rejected for funding since February 2006.

We had information from the minister's office by the officials, who have said that it was in the minister's office for signature and was going to be distributed. Therefore, as a result, if you recall, Anita withdrew her motion until Thursday. We're going to deal with it today because the minister did not sign anything. Indeed, that would seem to have been erroneous information. The materials, we are now told, are still being worked on and will be given to the committee as soon as possible. This is the official response from an agency that told us that it was on the minister's desk to be signed.

I think that means that Ms. Neville is now ready to deal with her motion.

[Anita Neville, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Madam Chair, I'm not sure whether what you were speaking to is the material requested by the committee or the material requested by me.

Let me speak to the material requested by me. We received many messages that it was in the mail, that it was going to be delivered immediately over the course of two weeks, and then at the last meeting we heard that it was on the minister's desk and it would be signed.

I did receive a package from the minister. The package I received from the minister did not contain all of the information that I had requested in the motion. The material that I received from the minister was some material on gender-based analysis, those countries that the department had done gender-based analysis training for as well as the three sets of criteria that had been used in evaluating programs. I was told that I could go to the web and get the material off the web in terms of the projects that had been approved over $10,000. I'm not certain when that material went up on the web, but we have been pulling that off the web, Madam Chair.

I did not receive information as to the number of project applications that had come in and been denied. So it was sort of half and half.

I am not going to proceed with my motion at the moment because we've received half of the information, and some of it is on the web and we're currently pulling it off and analyzing it. We did not receive all of the material.

Madam Chair, I am speaking to the motion because I am really—I don't know what the word is—angry, upset—

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Disappointed?

[Anita Neville, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Yes, I'm probably disappointed at the manner in which we are not receiving information and the way information has been miscommunicated to us. We are the official opposition. There are two other opposition parties. We are entitled to have the information. And more importantly, we're entitled to have correct or honest answers when we ask for this information. That has not been the case.

So I am putting it on the record right now that we would still like the rest of the information that we asked for. We have a partial response, but it's not sufficient. I am not proceeding with the motion, but if further information is not forthcoming, I will reintroduce another motion at another date.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

That's fine.

Ms. Davidson.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Since the motion has been withdrawn until further notice, are you speaking to the motion still?

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

I'm not sure, but I want a point of clarification. The motion has been withdrawn, so I don't have it in front of me, but I would like to ask Ms. Neville if the information she was requesting was information that this committee requested. Is that correct?

[Anita Neville, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

I'm not positive whether it's the same set of information that had been requested.

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

Was that what your motion referred to? Was it the committee--

[Anita Neville, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

No. My motion was for information that I had requested in a meeting with the minister and in a meeting with the bureaucracy two weeks or so following my meeting with the minister, both of whom advised me that it would be forthcoming shortly.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

I'm afraid, Ms. Neville, we were under the impression.... When the minister appeared here many people asked for certain information and clarification at that meeting, and we were promised it. As usual, in committee when certain things are requested the chair and the clerk follow up and ask if it can be sent to the clerk so the clerk can distribute the information to everyone. The stuff that had been requested that came out of the committee meeting has not been sent to the committee, and I was under the impression that this was what Ms. Neville was referring to when this motion was brought up.

In theory, Ms. Neville, anything you requested on a one-to-one personal basis from the minister, as a critic, is really not something that was officially requested by an all-party committee of Parliament. If you wish to bring a motion that does not necessarily refer to your personal motions but refers in general to responses you are awaiting, that is something you are free to do. If you had a personal meeting with the minister where you asked for something and it didn't happen I don't think is appropriate to bring up at this committee.

Perhaps you could explain this.

[Anita Neville, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Let me explain, Madam Chair.

I had never intended to bring it to this committee. We have documented the number of requests we have made of the minister's office for that material. We did not get a response, or we got misinformation in the response. We were literally at the end of our tools to try to get that information. Therefore, I put forward a motion at this committee asking for that information.

You're talking about the information to the committee. Obviously we need 48 hours' notice, but I'd be happy to reintroduce a motion and bring it forward next week on that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

The committee requested that on February 12, and none of it has been responded to yet. We got a response saying that it's still being worked on. We have to ask ourselves that since February 12, March 12, April 12.... Do we think that two or three months is a long time to wait for something? I think this committee has to make a decision. So if you bring a motion addressing that, the committee will discuss it.

I don't believe it is appropriate for the committee to deal with personal information that you requested. As a matter of information, it's my understanding that you should go to your House leader if you do not get those things. Your House leader will deal with the other party's House leader, or the government's House leader.

[Anita Neville, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

That hasn't worked either.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

But that's something that probably needs to be dealt with in a different way.

If a committee asks a minister for information or requests information from a department and that is not forthcoming, that is a totally different issue. That is actually disrespect for a committee and does not allow the committee to do its work appropriately. Personal information is a completely different kettle of fish.

You may choose to bring a motion in 48 hours. If not, that's fine.

[Anita Neville, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

I'll bring one back next week.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Okay.

We have two other motions, both of them from Madame Demers.

Which one do you wish me to deal with first, Madame Demers?

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

We could perhaps deal with the motion on the excommunication of the young Brazilian girl.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

All right.

The motion is that the Standing Committee on the Status of Women call upon the government to denounce the excommunication approved by the Vatican of the nine-year-old Brazilian girl who had to undergo an abortion after being raped by her stepfather.

Ms. Demers.

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Madam Chair, you were absent on Tuesday when I withdrew my first motion pertaining to this matter. My curiosity was aroused by a comment made by Mr. Lemieux, who asked a question regarding the excommunication of the little girl. After having read various press releases, my impression was that the excommunication of all of the parties involved in this matter had been revoked. I however realized that it was not cancelled in the case of the young girl. It was cancelled for the mother, for the doctors, but not for the nine-year-old girl.

This is why I am bringing this motion forward today. It is truly deplorable that a little nine-year old girl who did not choose to become pregnant nor to be raped, nor to carry this heavy burden, be held responsible. We know that Brazil is a very religious country. If this excommunication is maintained, this little girl will probably suffer the consequences of it for her entire life. This is why I am presenting this motion.