Status of Women Committee on May 26th, 2010

[Alice Wong, Conservative, Richmond, BC]

I agree that social housing is an issue, and I'm glad to tell you that in my riding there will be a big funding announcement for social housing. A lot of low-income women will be there. You know, funding can happen within different ministries. That's one area.

Also, I want to keep the record straight: Healing Foundation funding is not cut. It's just probably that the whole job has been transferred to Health Canada, and again I mention that project-based funding is how funding is done right now. Saying that violence against women does not deserve as much funding is having one group of women against another group of women. That's my approach.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

I think we have finished that round, and we have six minutes left. Normally I don't ask questions as a chair, but I believe I would like to take a round and ask some questions. I'm asking questions because I'm extremely interested in this issue. I was Secretary of State for Status of Women for over six years and I well understand the problems of distributing a small amount of funds among many people.

I hear you saying that there have to be clear criteria. When I was minister, I did not intervene in funding decisions. The department chose, based on clear, objective criteria. The only time I intervened as a minister was when I was asked to look at whether a certain unfunded group deserved funding, because although they were outside the criteria, they were doing particularly good work.

So I think I hear a lot of the things you're saying about criteria. I understand too that there is a need to bring on new groups that are coming in, and I would like to hear your response to this idea. I understand this need. There are some people who are working in small areas where they've never had any funding before. I'd like to hear how you think those groups could be helped. I know Ms. Beeman or Ms. Stinson suggested different envelopes of funding, perhaps giving one to start-up groups, seeing how they work, and maybe then giving them core funding or long-term funding in a particular way. I'd like to hear how you feel we can help emerging groups that are dealing with emerging problems in specific regions that have now been shown to have those problems.

The final question I'd like to ask is about something that I know you've mentioned.

When I was minister, it was really important for me to hear from regional offices. There were regional offices across this country. The regional executive directors knew the groups and knew what was going on in the regions. They understood. They had worked with these groups. They had developed a sense of whether the groups delivered or not, but they also knew where problem areas could pop up suddenly. I always say that they were the people who really knew which groups needed funding.

What do you think about the need to reopen regional offices? Do you believe that it would really help funding?

[Jane Stinson]

I will just say briefly that it's there in our remarks. We think it's extremely important for the reasons that you've mentioned.

[Jennifer Beeman]

We've seen it. The loss of expertise from the closing of the regional offices was huge. When you met with either the director or your agent at Status of Women, they knew the territory. There was a team, and they knew everything that was going on. They were on top of things and knew both emerging problems and emerging groups at the same time. The loss of expertise was just huge, and we can see it in our relationship to Status of Women.

Emerging groups absolutely have to be funded, and I don't want there to be any misunderstanding in terms of questioning the decisions made versus the services that have been funded. The need for services is overwhelming; clearly that is not the question. The question is whether this funding is going to be used for groups that may not have a clear, long-term interest in promoting the status of women. It can be something that can be cut from those groups, but it cannot be cut from our missions.

That's the difference that we see. You will always have that problem of funding distribution, but the criteria have to be much clearer for us, and the question of rights advocacy is big.

[Shannon Phillips]

On the whole notion that there are more groups, so there are constraints on funding, I might suggest you stop funding for-profit groups and the private sector through Status of Women, and find the money that way to re-distribute to the new groups that ask for it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

We have never funded for-profit groups.

[Shannon Phillips]

I meant that “one” might want to consider doing that.

On the closure of regional offices, I believe that is a problem in particular. If so many new groups are getting funding, without that one-on-one kind of contact with a regional office, making sure that projects are on task, you may run into problems of less accountability, which runs contrary to the government's stated aims.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you.

Ms. Perron.

[Johanne Perron]

I would just like to repeat that we are not against new groups obtaining funding, or against new projects. The projects are valid; that is not the problem. What we are against is that this is being done on the backs of the groups that are already in place. In the past, when groups were in danger of losing their funding, the process sometimes extended over several years, because they were given a chance to adjust. As I understand it, if they did not adjust after a certain time, the funding was withdrawn. But we had no prior indication that we were going to lose our funding.

It is true that our relationship with the staff in the regions is important and the one we know best. Unfortunately, the minister does not come to our regions very often, and we understand that she does not have the time to do so. The staff in the regional offices are the ones who really know the groups.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you.

I want to thank you all for coming and spending such a very long time with us. It's tiring for all of us, late at night. It's hot to spend two hours, but you did shed a lot of light and give us a lot of ideas for recommendations on funding, if we see fit to do so.

Thank you so very much.

The meeting is adjourned.