Status of Women Committee on June 5th, 2018

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Okay.

Should women of all ethnicities run?

[Justine Akman]

I believe the government has been clear on its positions on diversity generally.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Okay.

Should the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms be upheld for all women who choose to run for political office?

[Justine Akman]

I would say yes because all governments must follow the law.

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

Thank you very much.

Ms. Quach, you have seven minutes.

[Anne Minh-Thu Quach, NDP, Salaberry—Suroît, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you for being here.

Partisan questions sometimes come up.

Ms. Shen, I had a strong reaction to what you said regarding services for members with young children. I have a little girl who will be four years old. So she was born during my first term as member of Parliament. We formed a group of four members and fought for at least a family room to breastfeed and for all Parliament washrooms—both women's and men's—to be equipped with a changing table. It took a long time, but we have finally managed to get it done.

That said, there are still barriers that make things difficult for women with young children. The parliamentary daycare gives priority to members' children, but it does not accept children under the age of 18 months. In addition, we don't have access to it if we do not pay for five days of daycare per week. However, those of us who do not live in the Ottawa-Gatineau region are often here only three days a week.

Christine Moore and I have created a nanny service. It is pretty nice to be able to have our child in the House of Commons. That is quite tolerated in the case of children under the age of two, but this was not the case when we had our children in 2014 or 2015.

Something else made me react in Bill C-76, An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act, which talks about the “treatment of candidates' expenses”. This is an improvement, but it is still stated that those are expenses for the care of a person with an incapacity or a dependent. I cannot believe that, in the reimbursement of expenses, having a child is considered a handicap for the mother or father who would like to run for office.

In short, progress has been made, and I hope things will continue to move in that direction. I may have misunderstood, but I also hope the notion of handicap could be changed.

The two witness panels—especially the Status of Women Canada representatives—talked a lot about initiatives taken for the advancement of women. Can you tell us a bit more about unconscious biases? Is relevant training planned on the Hill? You have mostly talked about the situation within the federal government. People talk about intellectual self-defence. Could intellectual self-defence courses be provided for women?

Women have been consulted through programs aimed at encouraging them to run for office. They said they did not know how to respond to degrading comments, both by women and by men. When they hear those kinds of comments, they freeze up and don't know how to respond. That has happened in committee. It is also because we are young women—at least I am. We have not received training or information on that, and I think that is a failure.

Another issue is that the media do not show female models. That is a problem because people are under the impression that no women are interested in politics, but some are, although there is still a long way to go. Is any funding set aside for interviews with women in politics to show that it is done, that it is positive, enjoyable and useful?

[Selena Beattie, Director of Operations, Cabinet Affairs, Legislation and House Planning, Privy Council Office]

I think that three questions were asked. I will first answer the one about the measures to make Parliament more family-friendly. Then I will ask my colleagues from the Office of the Coordinator, Status of Women, to answer the question about expenses.

Very early in its mandate, the government established a priority to make parliamentarians' family lives easier. The Leader of the Government in the House asked your colleagues from the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs to consider the issue. They produced a report last fall that focused on five important themes. The first two themes were related to the travel points system.

In that respect, they suggested, first, that flexibility be shown towards members with more than two children under the age of two and that members be told that, in this case, another adult could accompany the children.

The second recommendation related to the travel points system was to look into the possibility of allowing members to have a child travelling with them without that counting against their points. In that respect, the Board of Internal Economy only looked at the issue on May 24. Its members adopted a few amendments that, I believe, have been shared with all members. In fact, the minutes are available on Parliament's website. The amendments they made, unless I am mistaken, were that no points would be deducted for children under the age of six and that members with more than one child aged between six and 20 would have additional points to ensure that the points would be provided for the children's travel.

The third theme covered by the committee focused on maternity and parental leave. As you know, right now, members do not have access to maternity or parental leave. However, the Parliament of Canada Act requires that, for each day of missed meetings beyond 21 days, a penalty be applied and members be unable to pay into employment insurance. So the board recommended that this be changed.

The government introduced an amendment to Bill C-74, the Budget Implementation Act, No.1 which is currently being considered by parliamentarians. That amendment aims to allow Parliament to create a regime for maternity and parental leave. That would enable the House of Commons and the Senate to establish that kind of a regime. Of course, it will be up to parliamentarians to decide what specific measures will be involved.

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

Selena, we're already over the seven minutes, but thank you very much. Maybe we can get back to that answer.

I'm now going to move to Eva, for seven minutes.

[Eva Nassif, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I want to thank our witnesses for joining us today.

I have the honour to represent the constituents of Vimy, in Laval. In addition, I am the lone Laval MP.

I ran for office twice before I won. At the same time, I was raising my triplets and studying full time at the university to earn two degrees. So I am a woman who tried twice to get elected, and I was elected in 2015. I did not give up.

I would like to ask you questions about women's participation in politics. Could you tell us about the barriers women face, aside from the fact that they are sometimes not appointed in ridings where victory is pretty much guaranteed. Can you explain to us the difference between the rural context and the urban context?

Another part of my question concerns women who are members of minority groups, of special groups. Are there more obstacles for those women related to political life than for men?

My question is for the representatives of the Office of the Coordinator, Status of Women.

[Justine Akman]

Thank you for the question.

I will answer in English, if that's okay with you.

Barriers that prevent women from becoming involved in politics include, among others—and I referred to some of this in my opening remarks—societal perceptions of appropriate career paths for women, a lack of support from party leadership, and fear of negative attacks and media attention based on gender norms. Stereotype perceptions or unconscious bias about leadership roles can impact the way female politicians are viewed and feel about themselves in terms of confidence.

For instance, a male politician may be described as competitive and tough, but a female politician with the same qualities may be viewed as cold and aggressive. Catalyst is a non-profit organization which found that women leaders who work in traditionally masculine occupations have their leadership skills judged more harshly than their male counterparts do. While a man in a leadership role can be considered both competent and likeable, a competent woman in the same role is rarely considered likeable. Other harmful perceptions include the idea that women are too soft to be in politics and that women are not natural leaders.

There is research. The Catalyst research does talk about how female politicians of colour experience the most hostility. That gets to the second part of your question.

We talked a bit about sexism, but it plays out in party recruitment as I talked about in the research of Dr. Melanee Thomas at the University of Calgary. We've already discussed that a bit.

Then there's the media with its often unbalanced treatment of women in politics, which reinforces politics as a male arena and something that men should do. In a review of 2,500 articles spanning 37 years, University of Alberta political scientist Dr. Linda Trimble found that women who ran for leadership of major political parties faced disproportionate scrutiny of their bodies, appearance, and adherence to traditional gender roles such as their marital status, compared with their male counterparts. Not surprisingly, women report being reluctant to go into politics because of how the media, including social media, will treat them, and they report security and safety concerns.

As I talked about earlier, female politicians are often targets of sexual harassment and misconduct and heckling. A December 2017 survey of female MPs by the Canadian Press found that 58% said they had personally been the target of one or more forms of sexual misconduct while in office, and of the 22 MPs who had experienced sexual misconduct, 15 said the misconduct was committed by another MP.

That just speaks to some of the barriers that you were asking about.

[Eva Nassif, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

Thank you.

We heard earlier from Statistics Canada officials who said that 18% of women in Quebec are interested in entering politics, the highest rate among all the provinces. I wonder why the percentage is the highest in Quebec. What are your thoughts? Are there different programs in Quebec than in the other provinces? Why are women more interested in entering politics in Quebec than elsewhere?

[Justine Akman]

I'm not able to answer why in Quebec specifically. What we do know through our federal, provincial, and territorial work is that there are programs in a variety of provinces to support women in politics. Alberta's government with its supportive program aims to increase gender parity in elected positions through training, mentoring, or communities of practice.

The Nova Scotia Advisory Council on the Status of Women has something called the Campaign School for Women: Leaders in Action. It's a course that prepares graduates to run for public office, organize campaigns, or pursue non-elected political roles.

The Government of New Brunswick has changed the way political parties receive government funds.

There are different initiatives across the country. Interestingly, for our next federal-provincial-territorial meeting in Yukon, the Northwest Territories minister for the status of women has been asking that women in leadership, women in politics be one of the issues that we speak about.

[Eva Nassif, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

I will now turn to the officials from the Privy Council Office.

We know that women currently hold 42 of 97 seats in the Senate, or 47% of all the seats. That is just 27.1% of the current number of women MPs. What do you think we could do to increase women's participation in politics in order to get more women MPs elected?

[Riri Shen]

It is difficult to recommend measures to increase the participation of women. As my colleagues pointed out, it is a very complex issue. As to the Senate, the government has created a new appointment process that is open and transparent. It is a merit-based system. Among the current government's appointees to the Senate, 58.5% are women.

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

Excellent. Thank you very much.

We'll now go to our second round.

We'll begin with Gérard Deltell for five minutes.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Thank you so much, Madam Chair.

Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the Parliament of Canada.

I had the privilege of serving in Quebec's National Assembly and I have now been in the House of Commons for 10 years. I have had the opportunity and great privilege of serving with first-rate people, both men and women. I remember Ms. Sylvie Roy, who was my first leader in the legislature and who passed away two years ago, unfortunately. I also think of Ms. Agnès Maltais. She was an staunch member of the PQ, whereas I was a very proud member of the ADQ. We had some absolutely scathing political debates, but with the utmost respect. I also remember Ms. Michelle Courchesne, the first female member opposite that I rubbed shoulders with. She was the minister of education while I was the education critic. We always worked positively for Quebec's future while I was there, despite our political differences and being members of the opposite sex.

I was also fortunate to serve in Quebec's national assembly under a government led by a woman, Ms. Pauline Marois. I often said that Ms. Marois and I agreed on two things: that the sun rose in the east and set in the west. Otherwise, we had different opinions on just about everything. Ms. Marois was nonetheless a strong presence in Quebec's political life, and therefore in Canadian politics, for over 30 years. She held all the important political positions in Quebec. When she retired, former premier Jean Charest said, roughly translated:

Perhaps a man will do the same thing one day, but I doubt it.

Since I have been in the House of Commons, I have been fortunate to meet first-rate people, of all political stripes. There is Ms. Harder, who I am getting to know, and Ms. Vecchio, of course. And Ms. Ambrose also, who was my first House leader here. She did an outstanding job and served her country as party leader and as minister.

Looking back in time, we must not forget Ms. Flora MacDonald, the first woman to serve as minister of foreign affairs. It was an extremely difficult time. It was 1979 and there was a minority government. She was sworn in 39 years ago yesterday. Ms. MacDonald played a prominent international role at a time when Canada was going through one of its worst political crises. She had to deal with six American hostages who were hiding in the Canadian embassy in Iran, where there was a civil war. With Ms. MacDonald's leadership and the support of the Right Honourable Joe Clark, the prime minister of the day, Canadian diplomacy had one of its brightest moments in our country's history.

All these people that I have had the pleasure of working with were, without exception, elected in the current political system. In our system, people who run for office either win or are defeated. First, they have to be chosen by their political party. In some cases, they are appointed by the party leader, while in others they are chosen by its members.

My question is very simple. In a political system such as ours, how can we achieve equality when the choice is up to the members of the political parties, whether Conservative, Liberal or NDP, and then ultimately the population?

How can we achieve the equality we hope for so much?

[Justine Akman]

I'll acknowledge that we have incredible women political leaders in Canada. We are very fortunate. However, we have not actually met what is recognized as the tipping point to have a change, which is 30%, whether it's on a corporate board or in Parliament. While 27% is a historic high for Canada, it still falls below the United Nations' recommendation of having at least 30% as the critical threshold for women in decision-making roles.

If we dig into that deeper, which we do at Status of Women, given that we look at intersectionality in everything we do, of those seats, only 15 visible minority women and three indigenous women were elected in 2015, so there is still some way to go.

If we look around the world, there is a variety of approaches to doing this. In my opening remarks I talked about countries such as Mexico and Rwanda, which always stand out.

There are countries with quota systems in various ways. It's certainly not something that Status of Women has advocated for, whether it's in politics or women on boards, but the proof is in the data. Quota systems are effective. They tend to create the desired change. In France, a parity law was introduced in 2000, requiring parties to present gender-balanced party lists for any elections, and ultimately there was an increase from 25% to 47%.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

My main question is, what do you propose?

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

Mr. Deltell, you know I'd love to hear you, but we're over our time.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Me too, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

I'm sorry. Maybe we can talk about this later, but we're going to move to Sean Fraser for the remaining five minutes.

[Sean Fraser, Liberal, Central Nova, NS]

Perfect. We just have a few minutes. Thanks very much. I am curious to hear Mr. Deltell as well, but we'll have to carry on another day.

You mentioned the research funding for Status of Women Canada since 2016. With respect to the research that's going on, is anybody actually speaking to women who've been elected and doing exit interviews with them to find out what their experience was and what their suggestions would be on how to get more women elected?

[Justine Akman]

Not at the moment, but thank you for the suggestion.

[Sean Fraser, Liberal, Central Nova, NS]

It might follow as a recommendation.

Ms. Jordan asked a question earlier that I've been holding onto this whole time, because you had only 20 seconds to respond.

Regarding the actual return on investment, I know that Daughters of the Vote was a great example. There were more women sitting in the House of Commons that day than have ever been elected to the House of Commons. Are there any procedures put in place to actually gauge whether this was successful? It was great to see everybody there that day, and it would be that much greater if 10 years from now they were sitting there professionally.

Is any type of longitudinal study being done on the community organizations that we're funding or on the initiatives that are going on, rather than having it be a feel-good thing for the government of the day? Is anybody studying this to make sure that the money being spent is resulting in change?

[Nancy Gardiner]

That's an excellent question. All of the projects are looked at in terms of results and what we're actually achieving from the results. There has been an evaluation of the women's program generally in terms of how successful these programs are and in terms of creating systemic change. All of these pieces are being considered under that evaluation and results framework.

You talked about the Daughters of the Vote and it being a feel-good project. That's partly true, yes, but part of the intent of the project was to actually look at young women to see if this is an option for them. Based on that, doing it once is maybe not going to get us the results we need, so we need to figure out whether there are other opportunities for us to look at in terms of enabling these young women to participate, and then at what are the longer-term results. We can look at them potentially doing things in their own communities that actually enhance their opportunities, not necessarily taking on political roles but as leaders in the community.