Status of Women Committee on June 2nd, 2009

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Patricia Davidson]

Good morning, everyone. We'll call the meeting to order.

Before we start with our witnesses, I would just like everybody to be aware that we have a parliamentary delegation from the National Assembly of the Republic of Serbia sitting in the audience today.

We welcome you. We certainly hope that you will get some benefit out of our meeting.

Also, for those of you who can stay afterwards for about 15 minutes and visit with the delegation, that would be a good thing too. We'll make that opportunity available so that you can meet the individual members from the National Assembly of the Republic of Serbia.

Now we will start with our witnesses.

Welcome to our Auditor General, Ms. Sheila Fraser.

We'll ask you to start, please.

[Sheila Fraser, Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General of Canada]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

We thank you for this opportunity to meet with the committee today to discuss our chapter on gender-based analysis from our spring 2009 report. With me today are Doug Timmins, assistant auditor general, and Richard Domingue, principal, who are responsible for the GBA audit.

As many of you will recall, this audit was performed following a recommendation made by the committee last year that our office examine the implementation of GBA in the federal government. The audit objective was to determine whether selected departments were conducting GBA and whether the central agencies were reviewing gender impacts in cabinet documents on policy and program spending initiatives.

The federal government made a commitment in 1995 to implement GBA throughout its departments and agencies. As you are well aware, GBA is an analytical tool that can be used to assess how initiatives and policy proposals have an impact on men and women. Despite recent efforts to improve GBA practices in some departments and in the central agencies, we found that the government has not met its 1995 commitment to ensure that the analysis of gender impacts is carried out.

We looked at seven departments whose responsibilities can have an impact on men and women differently. The implementation of a GBA framework varied greatly in the departments examined. Indian and Northern Affairs Canada is clearly a leader. It is the only department we examined that had fully implemented the elements of a sound GBA framework. The Department of Finance Canada, Human Resources and Skills Development Canada, and, to a certain extent, Health Canada had implemented many of the key elements of an appropriate GBA framework. We note that Transport Canada and Veterans Affairs Canada have no GBA framework.

We reviewed 68 recent initiatives to verify if GBA had been performed. We considered an analysis to be GBA if we found documented research on gender impacts and we determined that the impacts had been considered in developing policy options--two key factors in performing GBA.

We found that few departments that are performing gender analyses were able to demonstrate that these analyses were used in designing public policy. Only in 4 of the 68 initiatives we reviewed was there evidence that GBA had been integrated in the policy development process. In 30 of the initiatives reviewed, gender impacts were analyzed but there was no evidence provided that the analysis was considered in developing public policy options. In 26 initiatives, we could not find any evidence that gender impacts had been considered at all.

We also found that the selected departments provided limited information to Cabinet and Treasury Board on the gender impact of proposals and spending initiatives. In more than half of the memoranda to Cabinet and over one third of submissions to Treasury Board, we found no reference to gender impacts. There was no indication why this information was not reported.

All three central agencies are responsible for reviewing a number of considerations in policy and budget documents, including the gender impacts reported by federal departments and agencies. The central agencies have a critical challenge role in ensuring departments take into account all relevant factors. The central agencies could not provide written evidence that they reviewed and challenged gender impacts of policy proposals or spending initiatives submitted by departments for approvals.

In its response to this audit, the government disagreed with our recommendation that central agencies document the challenge function they exercise when reviewing policy proposals or spending initiatives. I have serious concerns with the lack of appropriate documentation when I am told that evidence of challenges to gender-based analysis exists only in a cabinet confidence to which I do not have access. I am of the view that it is crucial for departments to maintain documentary evidence of key responsibilities such as their challenge of proposals and initiatives going forward to cabinet and Treasury Board.

There is no government-wide obligation to undertake GBA and the government's commitment to implement GBA has not been clearly communicated to departments and agencies. These are key factors that could explain why GBA practices vary greatly among the departments we reviewed, why GBA is not regularly performed, and why little information on gender impact is reported to Cabinet and Treasury Board.

Some officials expressed concerns over the leadership of the central agencies in promoting GBA. I believe TBS and PCO should provide support to Status of Women Canada in order to help the government meet its 1995 commitments.

Madam Chair, this concludes my opening statement. We would be pleased to answer any questions committee members may have.

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Patricia Davidson]

Thank you very much.

Although we have other people here to answer questions, I believe our next presenter will be Ms. Beckton.

[Clare Beckton, Coordinator, Office of the Coordinator, Status of Women Canada]

Thank you.

My name is Clare Beckton, and I am the coordinator, Status of Women Canada.

As you know, Status of Women Canada, in collaboration with the central agencies, leads the process to implement gender-based analysis across the federal government. I am joined today by two colleagues from central agencies. Neil Bouwer is the assistant secretary of social development policy for the Privy Council Office, and he also serves as PCO's champion for gender-based analysis. l'm also joined by Catrina Tapley from the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat. Ms. Tapley is the executive director of the security and justice division at Treasury Board and, more importantly, is the secretariat's champion of GBA. As such, Catrina ensures that program and policy analysts and senior management at TBS understand and fulfill their gender-based analysis responsibilities.

We are pleased that the Auditor General has recognized the efforts made by both the central agencies and Status of Women Canada to improve the practice of gender-based analysis in government. The goal of integrating the practice of gender-based analysis is increasingly being reflected in government initiatives. This has been reported in government responses to reports issued by the Standing Committee on the Status of Women pertaining to the practice of and accountability for gender-based analysis.

The government recognizes the importance of continuing to enhance the practice of gender-based analysis across all departments and agencies. Making gender-based analysis sustainable is a shared responsibility amongst all players, with the responsibility for performing gender-based analysis resting with individual departments and agencies.

Status of Women Canada helps departments build their capacity for GBA by developing and delivering training and tools, case studies, and public awareness materials. It also provides technical assistance to guide their efforts to create GBA organizational frameworks.

Key departments and agencies have used Status of Women Canada's training and tools. They have either adapted those to their own mandates and cultures, or created their own training products using Status of Women Canada's materials as a starting point. All have used the Status of Women Canada network of GBA trainers. For example, our colleagues at both PCO and Treasury Board Secretariat have made real efforts to embed GBA as a practice throughout their organization.

At TBS, they have improved GBA training for the program and policy analysts who are responsible for challenging initiatives or policy proposals from departments and agencies. PCO also provides GBA annual training for its policy analysts to support its work. The Auditor General has recognized this process.

In the last few years, the Government of Canada has taken concrete steps to advance the implementation of GBA systematically across the federal government, set within existing accountability frameworks, with the central agencies playing a pivotal role.

Through its review of proposals developed by federal organizations, PCO helps to ensure that GBA is integrated into the policy process and that the results are brought before ministers for decisions in the form of memoranda to cabinet. Similarly, the Treasury Board Secretariat uses its challenge function to ensure that Treasury Board submissions from departments have no unintended gender bias.

Since 2007 GBA has become one of the lenses that Treasury Board Secretariat uses to examine and challenge policies and programs before they are presented to Treasury Board ministers for their consideration. Currently Status of Women Canada, Privy Council, and Treasury Board present, in a complementary fashion, an information session to departments on what is expected from a GBA perspective in memoranda to cabinet, Treasury Board submissions, and organizational frameworks.

Status of Women Canada, with the support of the Privy Council Office and the Treasury Board Secretariat, has agreed to further enable departments and agencies to meet their commitments on gender-based analysis by clarifying and better communicating expectations about when it is appropriate to perform gender-based analysis.

Treasury Board and PCO, together with Status of Women Canada, will identify departments with challenges in meeting their GBA commitments and hold informal discussions. They will also continue to provide guidance to departments on the preparation of their policy and program proposals, including the consideration of gender issues when appropriate.

Treasury Board and Privy Council Office will also continue to provide regular training for their analysts so that they can communicate the government's expectations with respect to gender-based analysis in their work with departments.

Departments and agencies will also be asked to document the analytical process used to identify gender impacts when developing policies, programs, and legislation, as well as the implementation of gender-based analysis frameworks, and report findings. This is also reflected in PCO's template for memoranda to cabinet and in Treasury Board's updated guide to preparing Treasury Board submissions, which includes GBA in guidance to departments.

Through these and other measures, we are following on our goal to ensure that gender-based analysis becomes second nature and is consciously integrated into the work we do every day.

My colleagues and I would also be pleased to answer your questions.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Patricia Davidson]

Thank you very much.

We will go to our first round of questioning, starting with Ms. Neville, for seven minutes, please.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you to all of you who are here this morning. It's good to see you here.

Let me begin by thanking the Auditor General, first of all, for doing this report. It's an important one. As you stated, it's one that the committee has been urging your agency to do.

For me, it was a profound disappointment, when I read your report, given the work that this committee has done over the years on gender-based analysis and gender-based budgeting, to realize how far we have not come in that area.

When I listened to the two presentations, I found myself wondering if we were commenting on the same report or not, because there was such a profound discrepancy in the views of it.

I have many questions, and probably not enough time.

First, to the Auditor General, you recommend in your report that the central agencies document their challenge function. They have clearly said they won't. The minister reminded me, when she was here, that I didn't know what the cabinet process involved, and cabinet documents; you referenced it in your presentation.

Why did you make this recommendation? What evidence did you use? The challenge function: how important is it to be able to have that tool available? And how do we make it happen? Is there a way of making it happen?

[Sheila Fraser]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I think it's important at the outset to clarify that we do have access to many cabinet documents, or what are considered cabinet confidence. We had a new order in council, in fact, in 2005 that clarified further our right of access to cabinet confidence.There are certain documents, though, that we recognize should remain confidential and that we have no need to see--for instance, recommendations to ministers and discussions that go on in cabinet meetings. But analysis that may be considered cabinet confidence, we should be able to have access to and see.

We obviously have to be careful with these documents as to how we disclose what is in them, but we see them normally as part of our audit work. I believe it is very important that we be able to assess the challenge function that is done by the central agencies, be it PCO or TBS. It is a very critical part of the process in almost any major decision that goes on. All we really wanted to see was whether it was actually done. Had there been a review? Had the questions been asked?

As we said, I think about half of the memoranda to cabinet make no mention of it. Well, why is that? Did nobody ask? Was gender-based analysis considered or not? All we wanted to see was that the analysis and challenge function had been done.

We were told that it was done but it was done verbally, and the only indication that it was done was in documents, the précis or other documents, to which we do not have access.

Personally, I find that hard to believe, and I find that not acceptable. I say even to senior people in Treasury Board or PCO, how do they know that their people are doing this if there's absolutely no documentation, not even an e-mail, about this?

So we think that there should be documentation. It does not have to be volumes and volumes, but simply notations on file about the kinds of questions that are being asked when reviewing these proposals. I would think that this would be a normal part of the way government should operate.

We can understand, and people have told us, that at times, for example budget proposals, timelines are very short and things are very compressed, and one of the reasons given is that it would make the process more cumbersome. I think to every general principle there can be exceptions, and documentation can occur after the fact, but I would certainly expect that kind of documentation to exist.

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

Thank you.

I've got so many questions, I don't know where to go.

You identified INAC as a department that is doing well, and I'm pleased to hear that. INAC as well has put forward a number of bills, two in particular, that are recommendations to Parliament. One is dealing with the repeal of section 67 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, which was amended significantly in committee, and currently the government has brought forward something on matrimonial real property.

An independent analysis of that would be supportive of a gender lens for women. Did you in your analysis look at it in terms of a cultural context? In those two particular pieces of legislation, the women of those communities, based on their history and culture, are very vociferously opposed to the first piece and are to the second one.

Did that factor into your analysis--a cultural component?

[Sheila Fraser]

No. In fact, our work would be more limited in fact than what you may expect. We would look to see that the elements of a gender-based analysis framework are in place, that we can see evidence that the analysis has actually occurred and has been considered, but we wouldn't go into an evaluation of the analysis itself, and we certainly would not have considered cultural issues in that.

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

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Patricia Davidson]

You have about thirty seconds left.

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

What do we need to do to ensure that your recommendations are implemented?

[Sheila Fraser]

I really think, as we make the recommendation, that Status of Women Canada needs more support from PCO and Treasury Board Secretariat. I would suggest that the committee might want to get a detailed action plan from government on what they are actually going to do on this and perhaps suggest that there be a follow-up audit, not necessarily by us but either by Status of Women or Treasury Board Secretariat internal audit, that they actually track and see what progress is on a regular basis going forward.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Patricia Davidson]

Thank you very much.

We will now move to Madam Demers, please, for seven minutes.

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you for joining us this morning. We are delighted to welcome you here.

However, I am not so pleased, Ms. Beckton, when I think about what the Auditor General revealed in her report.

As I recall, you have been on the job for two years and every time you have appeared before the committee, you have reported on all of the efforts made to implement the practice of gender-based analysis in government. You have told us about a number of success stories as well, and about individuals who have championed gender-based analysis. And yet, today, because of the current economic crisis, women are more vulnerable than ever.

How can we explain the discrepancy between what Ms. Fraser is telling us and what you have been telling us over the years?

Mr. Bouwer, you are involved with social development policies and you are a champion at PCO. I understand that the most important policy decisions are made at PCO. How do you account for the fact that there are no provisions in the economic recovery plan specifically designed to give women access to the job market? Many men are able to access today's labour market, either through infrastructure or other programs. However, all that women have access to is training programs.

Ms. Tapley, you are also a champion of gender-based analysis. I have to wonder why you sat back and allowed the pay equity draft legislation to be passed into law. The witnesses whom we have heard from to date on the issue of pay equity all agree that this was not the type of legislation they wanted. Two employers who testified last week were the exception. They were happy with this legislation because now they will no longer be responsible for negotiating pay equity with employees. Would you care to share your views on this subject with me?

[Clare Beckton]

I'll start, then I'll turn it over to my colleagues.

Of course, we've accepted the recommendations of the Auditor General and a great deal of work has been done over the last few years, on which the Treasury Board and PCO could elaborate more, working together with Status of Women to look at the accountability mechanisms that are necessary to ensure that gender-based analysis will not only be done, but through which departments can demonstrate that accountability. So there has been a great deal of work done to set in place the ability to move forward with the recommendations that are in the Auditor General's report.

I'll now turn it over to my colleagues from PCO and Treasury Board.

[Neil Bouwer, Assistant Secretary to the Cabinet, Social Development Policy, Privy Council Office]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

First, it's a pleasure to be here to talk about this subject, and I welcome your questions.

You were asking about the economic action plan and the question was why was there not a component that would address the needs of women. Really, that's a question for the government to answer. As an official, I'm here to talk about the challenge function and the processes that we use to bring public service advice to bear on government decisions. Policy decisions are the prerogative of the government, so I can't really comment on that per se, but I'll be happy in discussion to talk about the role.

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Is it not your role, as champion of GBA, to make specific recommendations to the government?

[Neil Bouwer]

My role is to ensure that throughout the decision-making process, gender considerations, and many others, are brought to bear on an issue so that ministers have the best advice possible in order to make a decision.

That doesn't always mean they will take decisions the way I advise them to--I don't pretend to have that kind of influence--nor is it really my role. What I do is I bring considerations to bear and ensure through my briefings to cabinet committee chairs, and those of my colleagues to their cabinet committee chairs and ultimately to the Prime Minister, that different considerations are taken into account.

We strive to ensure, Madam Chair, that the best decisions possible are taken and that the government has at its disposal the best that the public service has to offer in terms of advice, and that includes gender-based analysis.

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Let me put the question to you another way, sir. I don't know if you give me an answer or not. Were your recommendations different from the ones that were followed? Would some of your recommendations have secured a place for women in the job market?

[Neil Bouwer]

On an ongoing basis we give advice, and where appropriate we ensure that gender issues are taken into account. I'm not at liberty to talk about any particular policy area and what the advice was from the public service. I think the decisions of the government stand for themselves.

My interpretation, incidentally, of gender-based analysis in very recent years is that progress has been made. There is further progress to be made, as I think is clear from our discussion here, but I think that central agencies are playing a role in that. As champion for the Privy Council Office, I would say that certainly in the area of domestic policy, beginning with social but also in the area of economic, we are making progress.

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

I do not want to disparage the work you do. I'm convinced you are doing everything possible to ensure that your recommendations are taken into consideration. However, the fact of the matter is that regardless of the work that is done, without strong leadership and a genuine desire to implement GBA and everything it entails, we really are spinning our wheels.

[Neil Bouwer]

I understand your point.

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Thank you.

Go ahead, Ms. Tapley.

[Catrina Tapley, Executive Director, Security and Justice Division, International Affairs, Security and Justice Sector, Treasury Board Secretariat]

Thank you for the opportunity to comment and the chance to be here today.

I want to begin by echoing the comments Madam Beckton has made, that we look forward to working with Status of Women as we continue to promote gender-based analysis. We certainly agree with the Auditor General's recommendations in that regard.

Unfortunately, you asked me a question on the Pay Equity Act, and I have to admit that this is not my area of expertise at the Treasury Board Secretariat. I understand that the committee is continuing to study this act in some detail, so I know you'll have an opportunity to pose those questions and have those discussions with others from Treasury Board who can answer those questions in a more holistic way.