Status of Women Committee on Jan. 18th, 2011

[Bernie Williams]

I don't know if you heard...that there is john school. These are men who are buying and selling our women and children.

But as a survivor of abuse in the police department, I think there needs to be a lot of work to bring.... I hear the word “accountability”, and yet I'm listening and they have to watch exactly what they say. When we spoke at a thing last week with the VPD, we heard how they like to ice things over. They really need to be transparent out there. There is a lot of good, but there is a lot of bad, too. But the majority that we see on the streets are the bad ones.

There was a first nations man who was sitting behind me and he was speaking to the deputy sergeant last week because Officer Jim Chu wasn't there. And this gentleman asked, “Why are you not bringing out the bad cops who are still perpetrating against our women?” They are some of our biggest abusers down there. I understand that it's like an old boys' school, whether you're an RC or political, or whatever you are.

We are hearing women say that these cops are picking up our women. If there's a warrant out for their arrest, they will say to the women, “You are going to give me”...whatever. And none of these police officers has ever been held to task on anything. They go out and they're bullies.

We've witnessed what they've been doing to homeless people on the streets. They walk by the drug dealers. They will target women who are trying to make ends meet, who go out just to buy milk or Pampers, or whatever it is. These men are in power and taunt these women, and they tell them, “We could phone the ministry on you right now if you don't comply with me.” It's been going on for years, and nothing has changed.

[Nina Grewal, Conservative, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

My other question is to the Pivot Legal Society. I would like to hear about the project you had for three years--the Jane Doe project. How did it help concerning violence against aboriginal women? How much funding did you receive?

[Dr. Darcie Bennett]

First I'll quickly touch on your question around services for men. I was having a conversation with a group of social workers about why the focus is always on women. One of the things they said is they have nothing for the men. They may know that she will go back, or he will go on and be with another woman.

The other thing we've seen repeatedly is that men who have been violent to women are directed toward anger management. I think it's really important that we acknowledge that this isn't about anger; it's about power and control.

Our Status of Women project involved three years of funding. There was $60,000 the first year and then $80,000 for the two years afterwards. It's running out. We really hope to be able to maintain that service. When we started that project the goal was to fill some of the gaps in women's access to legal services. Over those three years we've seen further erosion of that.

One thing we've tried to do is create legal clinics that are accessible to women and recognize that a woman may come in with a family law issue, a child welfare issue, or an immigration issue, but there are poverty issues there. There are all the criminal law issues they're dealing with, and we set them up with lawyers who understand those things and understand those dynamics.

A lot of our work is focused on training the women who work with these women, whether they're settlement workers or people in transition houses, because with the withdrawal of legal aid we've seen that they're doing more and more of the work that lawyers used to do.

So with that project we've really tried to fill narrow service gaps. But what women really need is representation in court from lawyers who understand the dynamics of violence against women and can be with them throughout the process.

We've been able to offer some bandages. We've been able to help women get visits with their kids and get restraining orders. That's important, but it's not a substitute for a funded legal aid service and training advocates who are already overworked to be able to help women write affidavits and things.

Again, it's great, it's important, and it would be a real tragedy if we were to lose that service in the coming year. But it's a bandage.

[Nina Grewal, Conservative, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Madam Chair, do I have time left?

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

No, that's it. You've gone a little over seven minutes, but that's fine.

So now we'll go to Ms. Davies for the NDP.

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you.

First of all, thank you to the witnesses for coming today. It's been a really intense day, and I'm glad we've heard everybody. I wish we could hear more people.

Kelly was just giving me a little bit of information, which I'll bring forward, but I'm trying to think about some of the common themes that are coming forward here from all of the witnesses we've heard today. I think there are issues that come forward. Unfortunately, they're things we're very familiar with and we hear over and over again: poverty, racism, discrimination, inequality, brutality, violence--the systemic issues that continue. But one thing that does strike me is what doesn't change, which is that there isn't any trust built up. I think between the institutions in power and the people who are trying to change what's happening, there's no real relationship in terms of a sense that we're working together, that things will change. I think that's a real issue. To me, that comes back to the issue of accountability.

So whatever brilliant report we come up with, as so many other reports that were there before us—and I've been on parliamentary committees where we had very good reports and we had very good recommendations—I think the challenge is how we actually take those recommendations and move them into action and actually make progress. That's what we have to grapple with, how we actually make that progress.

So I'd really like to put that forward and ask you what suggestions you have that we can build into the report. The idea is that there should be progress reports. There should be benchmarks. There should be targets and measurements. There should be ways to ensure that the accountability happens, whether it's with the police, the legislators, the social worker, or whatever it is.

Kelly, who I was just speaking with, pointed out to me that even just this last summer, in Crab Park, which those of us in Vancouver are very familiar with--it's a small green space on the waterfront that took a long time to get as sort of a public green space. There was a very important ceremony this past August at which a number of players came together, including the RCMP, including people from city hall, including the Vancouver Police Department, and there was an agreement on one little thing, and that was to provide financial support to families for the cost of memorials and funerals and for repatriation, but nothing happened.

Kelly tells me a number of meetings with the police or whoever took place even just for that one thing, to have some money so that the families could at least, with dignity and honour and respect, bury or have memorials for their missing family members and their murdered family members, but even that hasn't happened. So to me it is about a very basic level of trust and about what follow-through there is or there isn't.

So I'd appreciate any comments you have about what we need to do to ensure that in our report, in terms of accountability and making sure that things don't just get lost.... Having it be just another report that gets lost again and gets put on the shelf, and that's the end of that...[Technical difficulty--Editor]...set of recommendations. That's what I think we want to avoid.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Bernie, you had your hand up first.

[Bernie Williams]

I would like to recommend that with regard to the Highway of Tears, all of the 33 recommendations be revisited, those that were very crucial. In fact the RCMP, the Solicitor General, and the attorneys general were all sitting at the symposium.

I would also like to ask a question. The RCMP in Prince George received $6.3 million. I'd like to know what was done with that money. One of the things that is really not talked about is the family members and the children of the murdered and missing women. We know that a lot of these children are in care or in jail.

Anyway, I would like to recommend that.

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

What did they receive the money for, Bernie? Do you know? For investigations?

[Bernie Williams]

For investigations and that, and yet, as I showed earlier, they're basing this thing on 18 and we have 45 women's names. Again, we know that it's much higher, but....

I would really like to see those 33 recommendations also applied to what is going on for the public inquiry. These were the families that came forward and said, “This is what we want.” It's ironic how it was all dismissed, and yet the RCMP gets $6.3 million.

I'm trying to look.... I have to be very diplomatic about it, which is a first for me, but I'm really trying to look at this. Instead of putting these moneys out--like with that $10 million--there are organizations here that need the money and they are the ones doing the front-line work out there. There are a lot of copycat organizations, like I said, that are building on the backs of the people down here. If I could recommend that....

I'd like to know what could be set in place for the families. I don't hear about anything other than offering victim services, which...it's really, really not a good relationship with a lot of the family members. Like Kelly was mentioning about the burials and all of that, why should the family members have to always keep fighting to bring their loved ones home. Why did it take so long for the family members to be given the remains? It was sad. I can second that.

I think we should all be treated as equal. I know that in my lifetime it's not going to happen, but I have to believe in possibilities too. I would just like to offer that as part of my comments.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you very much, Bernie.

I'm going to go now to a second round. This will be a five-minute round for the question and the answer.

We will begin with Ms. Neville for the Liberals.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

My questions are directed to CEDAW, to Ms. Day and Sharon, on two aspects of what you talked about. One of the early groups--I think it was the first group we met with--talked about the lack of an accountability framework right now in terms of recommendations from international bodies. I wonder if you would speak to that, one or the other of you.

Second, in your presentation, Shelagh, you talked about three different initiatives: a national inquiry, a national action plan, and getting over the jurisdictional wrangling. As we just heard from Libby, even the negotiations for a park are not insignificant.

I'd like you to comment on the accountability framework, and I guess particularly on the first two initiatives. What would a national inquiry look like in your mind and what would a national action plan look like?

[Shelagh Day]

Well, let me speak to the accountability mechanisms first. I think accountability mechanisms are extraordinarily important, and in my mind it's not simply a question of what you think about in terms of this report.

This report is about the human rights of aboriginal women and girls. That's the whole substance of the report. We think of going to the international treaty bodies as part of what holds Canada accountable for the human rights of aboriginal women and girls, but then we find out when we come back to Canada that we have no mechanism inside our own country for dealing with the recommendations that have been made to us.

It's so clear. It has been said over and over again now to Canada, look, this is part of the international human rights law framework that you have agreed to be a part of, and what is said by the treaty bodies to you about your compliance with human rights does matter, so where's the internal mechanism to actually make sure that the recommendations that are made are taken seriously and implemented?

That accountability mechanism that we and the treaty bodies are asking for has to be cross-jurisdictional, because human rights and our implementation of them cross federal, provincial, and territorial jurisdictions.

So that's the first thing.

On the second thing, what does a national inquiry look like? Well, under laws in Canada, a national inquiry can look like what the federal government wants it to look like, right? The terms of reference can be written in a way that's big enough and broad enough to actually take into account the scope of the problem we have. I think this process is part of it, because in fact we keep doing this in order to get to the point where there's the political will to actually say, okay, we accept the responsibility.

Part of the reason why we look at the international treaty law is that it's so clear about saying what the obligations of government are. That's still what's missing here. At no level yet have governments actually said, we understand that we have responsibilities and obligations to aboriginal women and girls--profound ones. That's what we're looking for from a national inquiry: the government actually saying, okay, we understand the nature of our obligations and what steps we now have to take, and we understand that you're part of getting there.

A national action plan, I think, has to do with the things that the people at this table are all talking about. Let's see what the priorities are about what has to be done. Let's see that. Let's write it out. Let's say it. Let's get it on paper so that we have actual steps about what we're going to do and some benchmarks, some timelines, etc., to deal with it as a big, national, complex, essential issue of the basic human rights of aboriginal women and girls.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

I think we have run out of our five minutes.

Before I go to Ms. Grewal, Shelagh, you made a comment about how there is no mechanism in Canada for dealing with something like reporting to the CEDAW. There is. There is a mechanism. The Minister of Foreign Affairs is responsible for designating the particular minister responsible for pulling together provincial, municipal, and/or every other jurisdiction that has a role to play in the particular issue, and for getting the report and going and giving the report.

We have done this before on many issues. I know there is a mechanism, a clear mechanism, and not only on CEDAW but on every issue.

[Shelagh Day]

Yes, but you and I are not understanding each other properly, then, because I'm talking about a mechanism to deal with the implementation of the recommendations that come back from the treaty bodies. I'm not talking about the reporting--

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Oh. I thought you said there was no mechanism for dealing with the.... Sorry.

[Shelagh Day]

No.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Okay. Well, of course, it would be the ministers responsible for that particular issue as the mechanism, because federal-provincial-territorial meetings designate answers to problems. I'm just saying that there is a way to answer a recommendation.

[Shelagh Day]

Yes. I think there's a way too. It's just not being done.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

The next person is Mrs. Grewal. You have five minutes.

[Nina Grewal, Conservative, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

My question is directed to the RCMP.

In the Vancouver area only, how much funding is dedicated to Project E-PANA? And can you elaborate on what you are doing with these funds?

[S/Sgt Bruce Hulan]

The operating budget, the investigational operating budget, for the project for this fiscal year is $6 million. That may be the reference to the $6.3 million. But it's actually $6 million.

The money pays for salary dollars for the regular members of the RCMP and the support staff and for any investigational expenses that may be incurred during the year.

There was reference to family meetings or to having meetings with families. I just wanted to comment that this is something we committed to very early in the project to ensure that they happened. Part of that money is used to pay for the expenses of all family members who attend our meetings. Initially, when we started the project, we were holding two meetings a year at the request of the families. We are now at one meeting a year, and we ask that attendance be restricted to two family members. But we pay all the expenses they incur.

We first started out holding the meetings in various communities in the north--Prince Rupert, Smithers, Prince George--and we have now restricted ourselves to Prince George.

[Nina Grewal, Conservative, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

I see. Thank you.

Dona, do you have any questions?

[Dona Cadman, Conservative, Surrey North, BC]

Yes.

I think it was Michelle who said that women are stuck in a cycle that is tough to break out of. Is there a certain point in this cycle when it's easier, girl or boy, to break out? Is there sort of a halfway point after which they're not going to get out? Or is it an individual thing and that person has picked themselves up and gone on?