Status of Women Committee on June 5th, 2018

[Justine Akman, Director General, Policy and External Relations, Office of the Co-ordinator, Status of Women Canada]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I missed the last Status of Women FEWO appearance, so I'm happy to be with you today as you undertake to study barriers facing women in politics.

Recently we celebrated the 100th anniversary of the first women in Canada winning the right to vote in federal elections. As we acknowledge this achievement in our country's history, we remain mindful of the work remaining and so welcome this study.

The advancement of women's participation in democracy is essential to achieving gender equality and ensuring a better future for us all.

Introducing a gender-balanced federal cabinet in 2015 marked an important milestone for Canada; however, women still only represent 27% of members of Parliament. The Inter-Parliamentary Union ranks Canada 61st out of 190 countries on the proportion of women elected to Parliament. In comparison, women make up 19% of House representatives in the U.S., 39% in France, and 44% in Sweden.

These numbers point to continued barriers to women's equal participation in democracy, indicating ongoing systemic discrimination and persistent unconscious bias.

Barriers that prevent women from political participation are many, and they include societal perceptions of appropriate career paths for women, a lack of support from party leadership, a lack of role models, sexual harassment and violence, disproportionate responsibility for caregiving, and a fear of negative attacks and media attention based on gender norms. These barriers impede the development of a pipeline capable of carrying talented and committed women into political life in Canada.

Some women face additional barriers as a result of diverse identity factors, which particularly affects the democratic participation of visible minorities, persons with disabilities, and youth.

Indigenous women in particular can face great barriers to leadership positions. In 2015, only three of the 88 women elected to Parliament were indigenous. In first nations communities, women represented only 17.2% of band chiefs.

Addressing the many different barriers to our democratic participation requires the commitment of many different stakeholders.

Fostering women's leadership skills needs to start at the grassroots. It requires harnessing the power of networks and mentors to ensure women have the necessary tools and support to make it through the pipeline. For this reason, Status of Women Canada, through its women's program, supports projects that strengthen the participation of women in democracy and enhance their chances of success in the pipeline.

Among these is support for women's empowerment with over $13.5 million in funding for 25 projects to promote and enhance the participation of women in civic and political life by addressing systemic barriers. Of this, $5 million went to projects to strengthen the voice of indigenous women in their communities. Another is funding to advance gender equality, with $18 million for approximately 50 projects that engage some 150 women leaders from across the country working to advance gender equality locally and as part of a pan-Canadian network.

These investments allow us to support the work of organizations like Equal Voice, whose Daughters of the Vote initiative brought 338 young women leaders, representing each federal riding, to Ottawa to communicate their vision for Canada in 2017.

The government is also looking at ways to address structural barriers to women in politics. It announced in budget 2018 that it supports the measures recommended by the procedure and House affairs committee to make the House of Commons more family friendly, which my colleagues will address.

Real change for women in politics cannot happen without a commitment from political parties to look at their candidate recruitment and selection processes were sexism and implicit bias play out.

Research by Dr. Melanee Thomas at the University of Calgary shows that when parties are recruiting in ridings they know they can win, they prefer to place male candidates. Women are more likely to be chosen as nominees in areas considered strongholds for other parties, decreasing their likelihood of winning and the number of elected women overall. Political parties could look to the steps taken by the Government of Canada to integrate gender-based analysis plus into all decision-making, and to address biases in internal appointment processes.

As a result of the introduction of an open, transparent, and merit-based approach to selecting Governor in Council appointments in 2015, the appointment of women has increased by 10%, and is now at 44% for GIC appointments.

Even with opportunities and structural changes, harassment remains one of the most significant barriers to women in politics.

A 2016 study by the Inter-Parliamentary Union reveals that sexism, harassment and violence against women MPs are global problems that impede gender equality and undermine the foundations of democracy.

IPU's study, based on interviews with women MPs from 39 countries, reports that more than 80% of survey participants have experienced some form of psychological violence, including threats of death, rape, beatings, or abduction, during their parliamentary terms, as well as threats to their children. Social media is the main channel where psychological violence is perpetrated.

Sexist insults are equally frequent, with nearly two-thirds of respondents reporting this. Sexual harassment is described as common practice, and condescension a daily occurrence. Levels of physical violence are also significant, with 20% reporting they had been slapped, pushed, struck, or targeted by an object that could have injured them.

These findings are not unlike those of a December 2017 survey of female MPs in Canada. The government is moving to address this situation, having introduced Bill C-65 to ensure that federally regulated workplaces, including Parliament, are free from sexual harassment and violence.

Budget 2018 has also indicated $34.5 million starting in 2018-19, and $7.4 million per year ongoing, to support implementation of Bill C-65.

As can be seen, achieving equality for women in politics requires the participation of a wide range of actors working toward long-term solutions. Encouragingly, this scenario is playing out in many jurisdictions across the globe. In the U.K., MPs across party lines have formed the All-Party Parliamentary Group for Women in Parliament, to improve the recruitment and retention of women in politics. Diverse countries, such as Mexico, Rwanda, and Spain, have seen success with quotas, requiring that a certain proportion of women candidates fielded by a political party be women.

Going forward, this study will be invaluable to all of us for understanding the barriers to democratic participation that women face in Canada, and for searching out meaningful solutions. Status of Women Canada is looking forward to hearing the testimonies of stakeholders and experts in this area. We also await the recommendations of this committee to promote the institutional and cultural changes that will make our democracy more inclusive of women, in all our diversity.

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

Thank you very much.

I apologize because my initial introduction was confusing. I'm sorry.

Riri, Joshua, and Selina, you're with the Privy Council Office. It's time for your remarks.

[Riri Shen, Director of Operations, Democratic Institutions, Privy Council Office]

Madam Chair, I'd like to start my opening remarks by thanking the chair and the committee for inviting us to come before you today on the important topic of barriers facing women in politics in Canada.

My name is Riri Shen. I'm the director of operations for the democratic institutions secretariat at the Privy Council Office. I'm here today with Selena Beattie, director of operations, cabinet affairs, legislation and House planning, and Joshua Bath, an analyst at democratic institutions.

I would like to focus my remarks today on the current state of representation of women in Canada's democratic institutions, including in the Senate, and outline some of the recent actions brought forth by the government to increase accessibility to our democratic institutions. I will focus my remarks on the federal level.

As I am sure this committee is aware, the 2015 election set new records for women's participation and in terms of the number of women elected to the House of Commons. Roughly 30% of candidates in the 2015 election identified as women, and 26% of members elected to the House were women. Following a number of by-elections, which have occurred since the 42^nd general election, the proportion of women in the House has risen to 27.1%.

While these are historic highs in terms of women's representation in the House of Commons, the fact remains that women's representation continues to sit at rates far below parity and at rates below those in a number of like-minded democracies.

Academic research has identified a number of barriers to the participation of women in Canadian federal politics. In terms of Canada's electoral system, academics have noted barriers ranging from access to funds and financing to networking, as well as internal party policies, such as nomination contests, lack of party support to women candidates, and placing women candidates in unwinnable ridings. Additionally, academics have found that factors outside of our electoral system play a role in women's representation, including but not limited to the tone in the House of Commons, family-friendly policies for members, the harassment of women representatives online, family commitments, and other broad social phenomena. Increasing women's participation and representation is a complex issue. With that said, the government is continuing to take action to remove or alleviate some of the barriers women face when running for office.

The government announced in Budget 2018, tabled on February 27, that it is supportive of, and will work with Parliament on, the recommendations put forward in the report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs entitled “Support for Members of Parliament With Young Children”.

This includes working with Parliamentarians to ensure that the House of Commons is flexible, compassionate and reasonable in making accommodations for members with needs for young children that are related to their parliamentary functions—which we would be happy to detail further if you have questions.

The government has also followed through on its commitment to amend the Parliament of Canada Act to provide for the creation of maternity and parental leave for parliamentarians. That amendment is part of Bill C-74, the Budget Implementation Act, 2018, No. 1.

Bill C-76, the elections modernization act, which was introduced by the Minister of Democratic Institutions on April 30, 2018, proposes a number of updates to the Canada Elections Act that are aimed at making our electoral system more accessible to Canadians.

I wish to highlight provisions contained in Bill C-76 which are meant to reduce barriers to candidates in the treatment of regulated expenses to increase equity and accessibility in seeking election.

The bill would amend the Canada Elections Act to indicate that candidates may opt to pay expenses related to child care, to a candidate's own disability, or to the provision of care of a dependant's disability out of their personal funds in addition to campaign funds. This means that candidates would not be disadvantaged by requiring such expenses to count toward their expense limits during an election.

I would add that these expenses would be eligible for reimbursement following an election at an increased level of 90% rather than the current reimbursement rate of 60%. While these amendments would benefit both women and men, evidence suggests this would be more likely to benefit women candidates. In ensuring that women and men, in all their diversity, are able to participate in our elections, Bill C-76 would additionally make numerous amendments to reduce barriers to participation by persons with disabilities.

These include increased support and assistance at polls for persons with disabilities, increased accommodation to participate in the political debate, and broadening the application of existing provisions in the act so they do not apply only to individuals with physical disabilities.

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

Riri, before we carry on, thank you so much for the testimony. We've gone over your 10 minutes by quite a bit. If you wouldn't mind, we would be able to distribute your opening comments so we can look at the additional information in there, if that's okay with you. If you provide it directly to the clerk, she will make sure it gets out to everybody.

We're now going to begin our seven-minute rounds of questioning, and we're going to start with Bernadette Jordan.

[Bernadette Jordan, Liberal, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for appearing today.

I represent a rural riding in Nova Scotia, and I am the only woman elected in the province of Nova Scotia, only one of nine since women have been able to run federally. When I look at the 27.1%, I think you said, of women in the House now, I would say that is predominantly urban women.

What are we doing to have more women run in rural areas?

[Riri Shen]

I am not aware of any provisions in the Canada Elections Act or the elections modernization act with respect to that particular issue.

[Bernadette Jordan, Liberal, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Does anyone from Status of Women want to comment on whether anything is being done to increase the number of rural women? Where you live shouldn't be a barrier to running.

[Justine Akman]

As this committee is very familiar, we have what's called the women's program at Status of Women Canada, and we've had extensive calls for proposals on leadership issues. Women in both rural and urban areas would be eligible.

We are also investing in leadership research, given the increases to our research budget since 2016 and in budget 2017 as well. With Statistics Canada and research experts from across the country, including folks in all parts of the country, rural, remote, urban, we are undertaking a scan of what's happening in various leadership spaces and what research exists. We'll be using that scan to look at research gaps to see where we can improve our information.

[Bernadette Jordan, Liberal, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

We know that you have to see it to be it, which is a big push for more women to run. If they see themselves in those roles, they are more likely to run, and yet we are still only at 27.1%. I think you said of 64 we are 61st—it's in the sixties.

Are there any female-led mentorship programs or professional networks that are accessible to women who are interested in running? That's more a Status of Women question.

[Justine Akman]

We would have to get back to you on that. In particular, for running in political parties, I'm not familiar.... No. We would have to get back to you, if that's okay.

[Bernadette Jordan, Liberal, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Okay.

I was recently on a panel for the Women in Politics Forum, Equal Voice, a campaign school for women in Halifax. We talked a lot about the systemic barriers that women face during the nomination process.

What role can the federal government play in eliminating those barriers?

[Justine Akman]

I will take that, but I will also welcome my colleagues to jump in.

There's an incredible number of different roles.

Bill C-65, which addressed harassment in a variety of workplaces, is one of the most important measures.

As I mentioned, that Inter-Parliamentary Union study identified harassment as one of the major barriers to women entering politics. I have had the opportunity a couple of times to be part of a panel run by them at the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women, and the tales were truly harrowing, I would say, in terms of levels of both emotional and physical harassment of female politicians.

Certainly, Bill C-65 will help in that space, but also the work that Status of Women does to address gender and equality generally, speaking about gender-based violence. The work we have under that program would also help in that space.

As I mentioned, the women's program funds a lot of work in the leadership space, so Nancy Gardiner will jump in on that.

[Nancy Gardiner, Senior Director General, Women’s Program and Regional Operations, Office of the Co-ordinator, Status of Women]

I was also going to mention, your work with Equal Voice, we have had some experience also working with them on projects that have brought young women to these spaces and to demonstrate what it is like to actually be positioned into work in this area. I think those projects and opportunities for young women across Canada do allow them to see what it means to be in these spaces and to empower them to go back to their own communities.

[Bernadette Jordan, Liberal, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

That's an interesting point. Can it also be a deterrent?

[Nancy Gardiner]

From some of the feedback that I did hear in terms of what young women experienced, there were lots of positive stories and lots of great opportunities for them going back in their communities. There were some interesting points some of these young women did raise. I think if we were to do that again, we would look at some of those lessons learned from that opportunity.

[Bernadette Jordan, Liberal, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

I know one of the things I have heard from women who have done the university programs, like women in the House programs, is once they sit through question period, they never want to run because of the behaviour in the House during QP. Have you heard that feedback as well?

It's great to bring people. I think it's wonderful that we offer them that opportunity. I wish I had had it. At the same time, I think we have to look at what's being said that is not positive as well so we can address those things.

[Nancy Gardiner]

Those are some of the best lessons learned, I think, out of that particular opportunity. It wasn't just a happy experience with some of the challenges hidden. It wasn't just the challenges of potentially what they may have seen, but things they raise, like child care. These are real issues they would have seen or potentially thought that women, when they did get a little bit older—or maybe when they did think of this as an opportunity—were identifying as challenges. As Justine said, we're lucky in terms of having the opportunity to fund some of these types of projects to see where we can combat some of those barriers.

[Bernadette Jordan, Liberal, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

With regard to the funding, are there metrics for measurement of success once those programs are in place? Is there a way to determine if they have been successful? Is there a way to measure if more women have become involved because of the investments that have been made, or is it just something we're hoping is going to happen?

[Nancy Gardiner]

I think in terms of the results, basically the projects are looking at what initiatives we can put in place that would address systematic barriers, not a one-off project, but looking at what some of the opportunities are. As I said, the child care example is looking at some examples of things that can be put in place. We look at it. We see how the project works and see what it means in terms of putting it into action. Then we test to see if that actually does make an impact.

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

Excellent. Thank you so much, Nancy.

We're now going to move over to Rachael Harder for her seven minutes.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Thank you.

My first question is for both groups. Maybe we will start with Status of Women, and then we will move over to the Privy Council.

Both of you commented on the practice of putting men in winnable ridings and women in non-winnable ridings. Can you tell me if this is a practice of all political parties, or is this a practice of specific political parties?

[Justine Akman]

I am not intimately familiar with the research that I referred to, but I believe it was all political parties. We could confirm later on. It was a non-profit organization, a civil society organization, that did the research, so it would have been non-partisan. It would have done the research across political lines.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Does the Privy Council have anything to say with regard to that? You mentioned the same thing in your opening remarks.

[Joshua Bath, Analyst, Democratic Institutions, Privy Council Office]

We don't have information that separates the various political parties, but there is an incumbency advantage, and that generally seems to support men.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

I find it an interesting comment, because the way our electoral system is structured is first past the post, so parties don't necessarily have the opportunity to look at their candidates and shuffle them around. In your view, however, you're saying that is a common practice, that parties would look at their slate of 338 candidates, and then decide that women are going to go into the ridings that are non-winnable and the men are going into ridings that are winnable. That's what was communicated in your opening remarks. Is that correct?