Status of Women Committee on May 26th, 2009

[Helena Guergis, Conservative, Simcoe—Grey, ON]

All right. Well, my information indicates that data on caregiving and caregivers were collected and examined in the 2005 and 2007 general social surveys by Statistics Canada. I'll check into that.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Irene Mathyssen]

It is now time for Ms. Hoeppner.

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chairperson.

[Candice Bergen, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Minister, for being here with us. You're right; we've been doing a lot of work. You mentioned in your earlier comments the work that this committee has been doing. We have been doing a lot of work, and it's nice to have you here and to be able to ask you some questions.

I want to go back to something you mentioned regarding the representation you've been doing abroad on behalf of Canada. Relatively speaking, Canadian women are doing very well. We have work to do, but we are doing very well. We are more highly educated than ever before; we're earning more money than ever before. When we look abroad and see women's rights really being trampled on in so many countries, all of use here would like to see change.

So I'm wondering. When you are representing Canada—you mentioned the UN, OAS, APEC—can you tell the committee what kind of work you've been doing and also what kind of impact you think it has, that Canada, for the first time, has a minister who is solely responsible for the status of women? We're the first government to do that. We're doing gender-based analysis; we've taken action on equitable compensation for women; we are taking steps that I believe provide real leadership on a global level.

Is that something that you're seeing when you represent Canada abroad? What kind of feedback are you getting from other countries?

[Helena Guergis, Conservative, Simcoe—Grey, ON]

Thank you very much for your question.

Being the first minister solely dedicated to status of women is something that really piques the interest even of ministers across the country, but internationally definitely. They think this is something that's significant. As I mentioned in my opening remarks with respect to Ms. Garrett, appointed by President Obama, they were very interested and excited about that. They liked the machinery we have in Status of Women Canada, which they don't have, and are looking to us as an example and looking for us to share some best practices and advice across borders on how we can work closer together on issues that affect North American women.

The position for me, I think, is really an exciting opportunity to share what Canada has to offer. On the gender-based analysis side, we are still looked to as a leader as well, in terms of what we provide, and the advice, and working with other countries, and showing them how to introduce gender-based analysis into their own policy development processes. Of course, there are some challenges, because some governments don't have the capacity to do that, so having experts like Canadian officials there is key.

I'll try not to repeat some of the things that I have been doing internationally, but I was, again, really proud to sign on to UNIFEM's campaign. I'm not sure whether you're familiar with it, but it is the campaign to say no violence, and it builds on Canada's work with UNIFEM. I met with UNIFEM and the key officials there, the executive director.

The United Nations Commission on the Status of Women, in March, was an incredible opportunity to network with a number of women internationally: heading that delegation, and of course in the number of panels that I participated in.

One that I don't think I mentioned in my earlier remarks was the International Development Research Centre's side event, which was on decentralization, women's political representation, and access to public services. I participated in that and in an interactive expert panel on gender perspectives on the financial crisis. I also had the chance to intervene on the panel, as I mentioned, discussing Afghan women, an issue I am particularly passionate about. We were all thrilled, because we had an opportunity to meet five Afghan women who told us about their personal stories. I can tell you that in the room, I was the only minister there to give an intervention, and Canada and our contribution was recognized by the Afghan women on the panel. It was acknowledged for what Canada is doing for them.

I also engaged in a number of bilateral meetings with my counterparts from other nations, including Barbados, Australia, the United States, New Zealand. In a lot of those conversations, I was asking them whether they're doing gender-based analysis, wondered what stage they're at, and whether they can provide any advice on how we might be able to share best practices or, maybe even better, our processes in Canada. Perhaps they're ahead of us, but I'm finding that Canada is still very much a leader, and they're looking to me and asking me for advice on how they can improve theirs.

Again, my trip to Washington was a fantastic experience, an opportunity to develop a very positive relationship. There are some initiatives that I still can't tell you. I think the last time I was at committee there were some things I couldn't tell you but can tell you now, about the reconnect on the supplier diversity opportunities. We have the U.K., we have China and India actually now coming on board for supplier diversity, which increases the database and the network and the market access for Canadian businesswomen now, because Canadian businesswomen are a part of that process.

So those are some of the things we're doing on an international level. It's very much a moving experience, and I'm very proud of how Canada is received.

[Candice Bergen, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Thank you very much. That's all I have.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Irene Mathyssen]

All right. There's still a minute and a half.

Ms. Brown, do you have a question?

[Lois Brown, Conservative, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Minister, for being here.

I'm sitting in. I'm not regularly part of this committee, but I'm pleased to be here.

I'm a woman who has been in non-traditional roles. I was doing a music degree, but I worked for an engineering company full-time while I was doing it. I worked in the drafting office, which was very non-traditional, and in that time I had to do a great deal of work with construction companies, learning how to do quantity take-offs for bids. Since that time, I've been self-employed for most of my adult life in some non-traditional roles. I would be very happy to be part of those discussions in the future, because I think I can bring to that discussion some of my experiences.

Minister, you talked earlier about the discussions you were having in the federal, provincial, and territorial meetings. Ms. Neville got started on this question but ran out of time. Could you tell the committee what those discussions entailed? Were you seeing and hearing of women in those discussions who were filling non-traditional roles? Could you just elaborate on that discussion?

[Helena Guergis, Conservative, Simcoe—Grey, ON]

Thanks very much. I'm not sure whether you're a regular member, but welcome.

Thank you for your question. It was a really great opportunity for all the ministers responsible for women's issues to come together around the table. There was one man, and he was outstanding. We call him our honourary female. These were very talented, dedicated ministers, all of them, with a lot of experience in non-traditional roles as well. There was a lot of interest around the table in having a more in-depth conversation and discussion about what we could do as governments to encourage and provide more opportunities and access to these roles that are not traditionally held by women.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Irene Mathyssen]

Thank you, Minister. We are out of time. Thank you.

I have some questions on behalf of the NDP caucus. I too thank you for being here.

In the 2009-10 estimates, the overall budget for operating costs has increased. However, the budget for “strategic policy analysis, planning and development” has been cut significantly, by nearly one-third. It goes from $2,462,000 down to $1,729,000. We have that in the charts that we were provided. This line item, Minister, is very important, because it supports other departments for strategic policy development and gender-based analysis. I would like you to respond: why this cut, and how are you going to meet the obligations as set out under policy development and GBA?

[Helena Guergis, Conservative, Simcoe—Grey, ON]

I'm going to ask my official to address that one.

[Cindy Paquette, Director, Corporate Services Directorate, Status of Women Canada]

I'm Cindy Paquette, with Status of Women Canada, corporate services.

There was no cut made to the policy section. Last year we had to take the internal services and pro-rate them over the two main business lines, which were the women's program and policy. This year we were asked to separate them out and to put a separate line in for internal services. So there was no cut; it was just the way we were asked to set out the information differently this year. The team is the same size it was last year.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Irene Mathyssen]

I understand that there is this overall increase in funding and that it is for this new line item, internal services; you've mentioned this. Could you explain what the goal was behind introducing it? What is it, exactly?

[Cindy Paquette]

Treasury Board has a definition of internal services. It is all the corporate functions—the human resources, the finance, the IM/IT, the administration, records management, communications services, management, audit and evaluation, accommodation. It's all of the common things that every department has, and they're called internal services.

I can provide you the full definition from Treasury Board, if you'd like.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Irene Mathyssen]

Yes. That would be very helpful.

Page 5-3 of our notes indicates an increase in grant funding. Where do you plan to focus the increased funding? Does the government have new initiatives in mind in regard to that funding?

[Helena Guergis, Conservative, Simcoe—Grey, ON]

Under the community fund and the partnership fund in the past, since I've been the minister and prior to that, we've had a strong focus on the three pillars. Although they're announced as three pillars for the action plan for women, a lot of the granting and funding of projects has been in line with economic security and increasing women's prosperity. There's a focus on ending violence against women and also seeing women in leadership roles.

All of these vary in their different levels. I think all of us around the table recognize, using economic security as an example, that you'll see women at different levels. Some women have not even been able to write their own cheques or be a part of that normal budgeting process in the home. There are projects out there that help them go through that process, should they find themselves in a situation in which they need to know how to do it. They may be single, for a number of reasons. There are also those who are by far more advanced.

An example would be, say, in the business communities: a businesswoman runs a small or medium-sized enterprise and she has been in business for some time, so that she has a little more financial literacy, but then she's also looking for more than what she has, in terms of accountability and accounting practices and knowing what further steps she can take by way of even market access. It varies at all the different levels.

That's why we reach out to the grassroots organizations and the communities on the ground: we believe that they are best suited. They know what's going on in those communities in the community of people and women they're dealing with, so they develop projects that are tailored to those different levels of women.

The same would go for leadership, in terms of political aspirations or increasing political literacy, but also leadership within their own community and being more active and being a part of the normal, everyday things that go on in the community. There are projects to support that aspect as well.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Irene Mathyssen]

Thank you.

I'd like to come back to Ms. Neville's question about CEDAW. Canada has been asked to respond to two of its recommendations, on the accountability of the federal government to set standards to implement CEDAW towards vulnerable women and of course on violence against aboriginal women, and that's within a one-year timeframe.

How will Status of Women Canada respond to these two recommendations in its planned activities and programs? What efforts are being made to address the two recommendations, and how will SWC endeavour to respond to other recommendations put forth by the CEDAW committee?

[Helena Guergis, Conservative, Simcoe—Grey, ON]

Part of it is the ongoing process that I am undertaking in concluding the action plan. Then, of course, there are the three pillars, and there is a conversation about CEDAW. You can't develop the action plan without talking about CEDAW. At my federal-provincial meeting I had an opportunity to raise the provincial responsibilities that come along with CEDAW, ensuring that all my counterparts are aware of their responsibilities. In fact, I had a chart made to identify which areas were involved and where the overlaps were.

For my part through Status of Women Canada, there are projects and organizations such as FAFIA that we are funding to educate Canadian women on CEDAW and what their rights are and what needs to be done. That's part of the process and part of one of the responsibilities that we're required to do with CEDAW.

With respect to violence against aboriginal women, again that will be part of the action plan. You are familiar with Sisters in Spirit, which is a significant research project as well as an education tool and an awareness tool. What we're doing with it, which I think needs to be recognized, is make a commitment to develop SIS 2.

We still have almost a year left in research gathering. We'll take what we have already and work towards the rest of the five-year program and use all of that research in the development of what Sisters in Spirit 2 will be. The Native Women's Association of Canada is playing a key role as to how they would like to see the next phase of SIS 2 play out. I can't give you all of the announcements now, but I can assure you that part of the development of the action plan is including these conversations. There will be some actionable items on those areas.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Irene Mathyssen]

Thank you.

Now we are quite short of time, as we were late starting. With the committee's indulgence, could we have a quick two-minute round for each?

Ms. Neville.

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

Thank you.

I'm going to be very quick, because my colleague Mr. Wilfert has a question.

Madam Minister, I'm not here to engage in political debate, and I'm not at an all-candidates forum. I'm just trying to find out what's going on in the department. I have the Auditor General's report here. I would commend to you her introduction, and particularly the last paragraph on GBA, which states that they found that very few departments that performed gender-based analysis can show the analysis was used in designing public policy. It goes on from there. That's a real concern.

You focused your remarks significantly on your international efforts. I was at the UN, as part of the Inter-Parliamentary Union delegation, and I was upset and embarrassed that Canadian women were standing outside the United Nations protesting your appearance and Canada's role in looking after the interests of women. So I just put that on the table as a balance to it.

My colleague has a question on the international arena.

[Helena Guergis, Conservative, Simcoe—Grey, ON]

Okay. First of all--

[Bryon Wilfert, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Can I just put this on the table, Minister?

[Helena Guergis, Conservative, Simcoe—Grey, ON]

I'm going to answer Ms. Neville first, if that's okay.

[Bryon Wilfert, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

We've only got two minutes.

[Helena Guergis, Conservative, Simcoe—Grey, ON]

I know.

Quickly, first of all, it was not true what you just said, Ms. Neville. There were no protests against my representation, or Canada being there, or anything we were doing at the UN. There was some conversation about pay equity, and I've already told you many times that you're more than welcome to call and speak with the other ministers if you'd like to discuss that. You are studying it around the table. I think you're misrepresenting what conversations did go on there, and I think that's unfortunate.

With respect to GBA, what also needs to be recognized here is that there is a very strong element of cabinet confidentiality. Certain documents cannot be shared with the Auditor General, and she acknowledged that in the report. So that is one of the reasons why some evidence cannot be shown. We cannot show cabinet documents in the details they are expecting we would, to show and demonstrate that gender-based analysis has been done. You can't show those things, and I think you know that.

Go ahead, please.