Status of Women Committee on June 7th, 2018

[Sean Fraser, Liberal, Central Nova, NS]

Excellent. Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

Thank you very much.

I'd really like to thank Kayleigh and Shal very much for being part of our first panel.

We are going to wrap up this panel, switch to the second panel, and reconvene in about two minutes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

We're going to reconvene. Thank you very much, everybody, for coming back.

It's a pleasure for us to have Nancy Peckford. And, Eleni, how do say your last name?

[Eleni Bakopanos, National Board Member, Equal Voice]

Exactly as it's written—Eleni Bakopanos.

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

Oh, my goodness gracious. Thank you very much. She's a national board member from Equal Voice Canada. As well, we have Michaela Glasgo, who is appearing as an individual.

Thank you very much for coming. To begin, we're going to Equal Voice for seven minutes.

[Nancy Peckford, Executive Director, Equal Voice]

Thank you so much.

First of all, I salute the efforts of the committee to revisit this topic. Obviously a year out from the federal election, given some of the work that's happening across the country, it's really important to sustain this conversation and to look at new and innovative ways to get more women into politics.

Eleni and I are going to share our time. Just briefly, I'll give you an introduction to Equal Voice. I think you know that we're a 15-year-old national, multi-partisan organization that promotes the election of more women at all levels of government, in fact.

We're excited about being here today not just because of the excellent discussion on our Daughters of the Vote program, which we are very proud of, but also because Equal Voice has a federal mandate to pursue systemic change across jurisdictions in Canada. So, the timing of this invitation was excellent because we have in fact just developed a 12-point plan, not just for the federal arena, but also for other political institutions and jurisdictions, to really assess the degree to which they are embodying both inclusive and sustainable workplaces for women across party lines.

To that end, we have a 12-point plan, and we have both a brief and a chart. I'm going to turn to Eleni to speak to some of the first pieces of that analysis that we're providing to the committee, and then I'll wrap it up.

[Eleni Bakopanos]

Thank you very much for the opportunity to share our recommendations with you. The clerk has distributed a copy to all of you.

We thought we'd write it down so you'd at least have a chance to look at it. We're not going to deal with the problems, but we wanted to be very concrete in our presentation and give you some ideas of where we think there should be systemic change, which, in fact, in the long run will bring down the barriers for more women wanting to get into politics.

For those who don't know, when I got elected at 39 years of age, I had two young children of one and a half and three and a half. There's a big barrier that women keep bringing up to me all the time because the whole face of Parliament has changed. A younger generation has come forward, men and women, I'd like to say, and most of them would like to be parents. One of the greatest barriers we find is the way that Parliament accommodates those families.

There is, of course, a day care, but we are recommending more.

In our document, we say that we must find a balance between work and family and accommodate those who want to have their children looked after on Parliament Hill.

We ask that after-hours child care on the Hill be expanded for infants and toddlers. Often, parliamentarians are forced to sit late in the evening. Last night, for example, they finished voting at midnight. If a member has a young child, what will she do with it if her husband or someone else is not here to care for it?

We're recommending that we extend child care, and also that we have a parliamentary schedule that will in fact accommodate children.

The second recommendation we're making is to extend the leave from the House of Commons for female MPs who become parents to 60 days. At the moment, as you all know, it's only 21-day leave, which we believe does not really permit a new mother or father to be able to work. Obviously, they're working from their riding and constituency, because I don't think there's any time off for any member of Parliament, no matter what their personal circumstances may be. I've always said that it isn't a job to be a member of Parliament; it is a commitment and a public service. I think that extending it to 60 days would permit for a little more leeway to enjoy the first few months of their newborn's life.

We also want to enable virtual participation and voting in parliamentary committee meetings because we have the technology now. In my time, the technology was a little rough, but I think you can now accommodate voting. You can accommodate testimony. You can accommodate participation. We'd like to have a little more opportunity for new parents to be able to vote from their constituency and actually participate in committees, if they are unable to travel to the House pre- and post-birth. The new technology would permit that.

We would also like to reduce the travel obligation for expectant MPs and new mothers by introducing the accommodation we recommend, that is, is enabling them to do it virtually, along with other adjustments to the schedule,

I'll pass it over to Nancy.

[Nancy Peckford]

We did see in the federal budget of 2018 a commitment to expand child care services to better accommodate MPs. In addition to that, predictability is obviously an important consideration. Our systemic change recommendations are based on a global survey of what legislatures across the world are doing, thanks to some work done in collaboration with Grace Lore, a long-serving researcher with EV.

Obviously, we think that predictability in maintaining the current commitment to fixed election dates is pretty important. Also, the raging debate about how we structure the parliamentary sitting week so that we can get MPs who are parents home to their ridings, to work from their ridings, is something that we believe requires discussion. We are generally in favour of looking at Fridays as riding days.

From a sustainability perspective, which is a key question for many women in politics as well as for their male counterparts, we really support an increase to the members' office budgets to ensure that there's better constituency coverage in particular, given the role MPs are playing in their ridings as ombudspersons, liaisons, and so on. Revisiting the office budgets to ensure that constituency offices are really well supported is something we believe strongly in. As would not be a surprise to you, it is important to ensure there is competitive remuneration for MPs so that the full talent pool of women in Canada can really look at and fully pursue the opportunity to become elected at the federal level.

Finally, we speak to some safety recommendations, to ensure that there are robust harassment policies. EV has in fact developed a whole matrix of what makes for good policy. Much of what's happening federally in terms of policies in the House of Commons is strong, but we would strongly suggest an additional measure to ensure full independence in activating, overseeing, and reporting on the results of investigations.

Finally, it's not on your chart, but we would like to also endorse what you heard from a previous witness. We think an electoral financing mechanism to incentivize parties to run an agreed-upon threshold of women would be of value. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

Thank you very much for your opening comments.

Michaela Glasgo, you now have seven minutes.

[Michaela Glasgo, As an Individual]

Thank you, Madam Chair, for having me here today to provide my perspective on the barriers women face in politics here in Canada. This is a topic that impacts me on a personal level, and I feel honoured to be able to share some of my experiences and thoughts in relation to this topic.

I come from a large, tight-knit, and supportive family, and their example has been an integral part of forming who I am. I was born in Medicine Hat, and I continue to make southern Alberta my home because of my love for the community and the people who live there.

It is hard to say when my interest in politics formally began, but my family has always encouraged me to give back to my community and to go about leaving things better than when I found them. Academically, my interests were varied, and so at the end of high school I decided to enrol in a Bachelor of Arts program in political science at the University of Lethbridge.

In 2015, I was approached by Ms. Harder to be a part of her campaign team, which really kick-started my volunteer involvement. Seeing a young, competent, and successful candidate in action was inspiring. It motivated me to seek positions on my local Conservative boards, both federally and provincially.

In 2017, after meeting at Daughters of the Vote, a group of friends and I founded Story of a Tory, a platform where we seek to dispel the myths perpetuated about Conservative women. This idea was born out of a dissatisfaction with how we are portrayed in the media, by organizations, and by society as a whole.

To date, Story of a Tory has published more than 50 opinion pieces and interviews, endorsed a petition that has garnered national attention and been tabled in the House of Commons, and been featured by several major media outlets. Our stories are told by six regular authors located across the nation coming from various personal backgrounds. While we do not agree on everything, we are united by a chance to change the narrative.

Recently I decided to take the plunge and formally put my name forward for elected office. I am currently seeking the United Conservative Party of Alberta nomination for the riding of Brooks—Medicine Hat.

My decision to run for the UCP was an easy one. At the organizational level, the United Conservative Party has a gender-balanced board of directors—a group of competent women and men. This was established organically, not by a method of propping up, and definitely not because of an arbitrary quota. Further to that, there are nearly 40 women currently running for party nominations in 87 ridings, with new people enlisting every single day.

As I prepared for my appearance today, I reflected upon the subject at hand. What obstacles have I faced as a woman up to this point in my life? Some may say that the decision I made to run was made all the more difficult because of systemic barriers or by general marginalization, but I reject that outright. As a woman in Canada, and especially as a Conservative, I feel emboldened by the actions of those who have gone before me. Women have been at the forefront, growing and strengthening the movement alongside their male counterparts for decades. To me, there is no better time to be a woman entering this field, especially in the province of Alberta and with the leadership of Jason Kenney.

Mr. Kenney has been direct in his desire to see more female candidates running for nominations. In an interview I conducted with him in 2017, through Story of a Tory, he stated:

...we as conservatives, need strong women.... We...believe in freedom...the right (of people) to define their own political values. To suggest that someone must be a captive member of an identity category adopting uniformly left-leaning values is insulting and undemocratic.

I couldn't agree more.

I would say that the most pressing issue or barrier facing women in politics today is the fact that there are parties that are determined to speak on behalf of all women as some sort of locked-in-step identity category, discouraging their freedom to self-identify. When we assume that women, as an aggregate, cannot separately associate according to their individual opinions and moral convictions, but must act according to this amorphous, socially defined gender category, we are not progressing but are actually regressing. It would be much more advantageous to acknowledge diversity of opinion and promote the freedom to associate without virtually signalling the right and wrong ways to politicize womanhood.

Further to that point, if my belonging to a political party or ability to be elected is contingent on an arbitrary quota instead of based on the merit of my actions and the strength of my convictions, that is not a win for me or anyone else.

I believe in the freedom of individual members to elect women as capable candidates. Those women, much like anyone else who expects to succeed, should knock on thousands of doors, bring forward innovative policies, and work the hardest to earn their positions.

This need to categorize women is becoming increasingly prevalent at all levels. For example, we saw it here among this very group. Ms. Harder was denied the ability to chair this committee—a decision based on reductionist assumptions that she is incapable of sober thought and unable to act judiciously and at arm's length of her personal convictions. Worse yet, in order to even be the right kind of woman, she must adhere to a certain ideological orientation.

We complain about female politicians being reduced to stereotypes such as emotional, cold, or incapable. However, with the decision of this committee to take away Ms. Harder's nomination, this narrative was promulgated directly.

There will never be a perfect solution to achieving gender parity in Parliament or in the various legislatures across the country, but “parity” as it's defined does not endear itself to me. Parity defined as an arbitrary and mandatory 50% is a self-defeating principle. Affirmative action will never replace organic initiative.

Women will run for political parties with a robust policy platform that accurately reflects their views. The momentum will grow the more we are treated both as individuals and as equals. As one of my fellow authors at Story of a Tory has put it, “if you want a seat at the table, pull up a chair.”

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

Excellent. Thank you very much.

We're now going to begin with our seven-minute round, beginning with Emmanuella Lambropoulos.

[Emmanuella Lambropoulos, Liberal, Saint-Laurent, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses who are here today to answer some of our questions and to help us make the House of Commons and other political arenas more fair and equal.

First of all, the last witnesses who came on Tuesday were actually from Stats Canada. We learned that women are equally or more likely than men to sign petitions or boycott certain products, which are very political actions. However, when asked if they are interested in politics, they are significantly less likely to be interested in politics. This lends to the idea that maybe “politics” as a word is an issue, and maybe because historically men have been more involved in politics, women don't necessarily see themselves being those political figures.

I'd like to know in what ways you outreach to women. Do you specifically speak to getting women elected, or do you try to find other ways to get women interested in politics?

[Eleni Bakopanos]

I'm going to start by saying that we have to change the language. Emmanuella, you're absolutely right. You heard me say “public service”, and not necessarily “politics”. I think we have to start using different language, even for men and women in politics at the same time.

I would start, first of all, by encouraging them to use other language in terms of how we identify certain aspects of the job and certain responsibilities that the job has.

For me it's “public service” and not “politics”.

I'll pass it on to Nancy.

[Nancy Peckford]

I do think we have to invite women into politics. I see it all the time in multiple ways. Women are formidable community leaders but are not connecting to formal political spaces, whether it's riding associations, party conventions, or what have you. There is a specific cohort of women across party lines who are very engaged, but when you look at those who are disengaged....

I give Daughters of the Vote as an example. We were really deliberate about how we talked about politics, because we didn't. We did mention the House of Commons as a particular opportunity, and there is no doubt there are women who were very politicized, who brought themselves to the table and pulled up the chair.

However, there are lots of other women who would have not, I think, seized that moment to make an application, except for how we framed the opportunity, which was by asking the following. How do you lead in your community? How are you connected? How are you engaged? What does leadership look like to you? What's your vision for leadership? How do you want to make a difference? It was questions like those that, I think, rendered the opportunity more inclusive. Then, when they got here, those who didn't have a pre-existing connection to political spaces, I think, could better understand and feel comfortable.

I think it is really critical to think about how we use language in formal politics. We always say in Equal Voice that women are not turned off of politics and women are not unengaged in leadership. They are doing so much heavy lifting each and every day in so many ways in their community. The challenge is how to bridge the gap to the formal political arena, and I think we can unpack that in so many different ways.

[Emmanuella Lambropoulos, Liberal, Saint-Laurent, QC]

Thank you very much.

It says here that you work with all political parties to engage women in politics. What are the ways you reach out, other than...political parties?

[Nancy Peckford]

We create critical networking opportunities that bring in women across party lines through our 15 chapters, and also the campus chapters, where we really insist that the steering committees of each of those chapters have representation across party lines. A woman who might lean one way or another can then see themselves in the composition of our Equal Voice chapters, so that, again, women are bringing themselves in based upon who they might know or recognize in the community.

Those multi-partisan chapters are huge for us in terms of bringing women out and obviously insisting that together we all benefit from diverse demonstrations of leadership. It's like the capacity we have seen in ourselves within our organization, and the capacity of women who don't necessarily talk to each other all that much because of partisan identities, to come together and think more strategically about increasing the number of women.

[Eleni Bakopanos]

We do also hold a lot of panels where we invite people across party lines to discuss the issues.

For example, in Montreal, the Quebec chapter did a panel on exactly the challenges that some municipal councillors face when they give birth while in office, what those challenges were and how we could change the culture at the municipal level. It's not only at the federal level. We work at the municipal, provincial, and federal levels.

[Emmanuella Lambropoulos, Liberal, Saint-Laurent, QC]

Can you speak a bit to why you think it's important to have 50% women, or at least a higher percentage of women, in political office?

[Eleni Bakopanos]

Personally, I think that when you add women, you change the culture.

I want to respond a little bit to what was said earlier about one of the witnesses. It's not the number that is the issue, but it's been proven over and over again—analysis has been done—that you need at least 30% minimum in any institution to be able to effect change. That change is what the women will bring to the institution, so it's not....

I'm not wearing my Equal Voice hat now, but I do believe in quotas. I believe also in the system that was used in Europe where you have no less and no more than 40% and 60% of men and women in any corporate organization.

I think you have to bring this in, in order to be able to change the culture, and all women across all lines.... Diversity is the important thing also.

Nancy, I don't know if you want to add anything.

[Nancy Peckford]

Yes. I think we would say that no one woman should be mandated to represent all women. I think there's tremendous diversity in the panellists you've heard from, and there will continue to be.

With Daughters of the Vote as an example, again, we wanted to make sure we weren't mandating a very narrow subset of women to be the champions for all women.

Women are as heterogeneous as their male counterparts, and to that end, it's not fair to ask a woman to champion an ideology, a perspective, or a life experience based upon insights they simply do not have.

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

You have 30 seconds.

[Emmanuella Lambropoulos, Liberal, Saint-Laurent, QC]

Last question, do you think that if we impose quotas, or if we get more women elected, it would be because they were pressured or bullied into running for office, or do you think this would probably be by their own will?

[Nancy Peckford]

I think opportunity presents itself in all kinds of ways. How we get there and how parties get there is a discussion that is distinct within each party, but also more applicable to what the mechanisms are, like incentives, etc.

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

That's excellent, thank you so much.

We're now going to move over to Stephanie Kusie for her seven minutes.

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Michaela, I just want to thank the Story of a Tory for making me the Tuesday Tory some weeks ago. It was incredibly flattering.

In your opinion, how have Conservative women been alienated from the feminist movement, please?