Status of Women Committee on May 3rd, 2016

[Maia Welbourne]

That kind of monitoring—knowing that we're looking for this and having access to the data—allows us to see what's going on and monitor and explore whether there is actually a problem that needs to be fixed. I think it's important that we look at the data to see whether it's a blip rather than a trend, but because we pay attention to these things, because we report it so formally, we have the opportunity to ask whether there is a problem, and if there is, to ask whether we should then look at the program criteria and explore whether something among them is having this unintended consequence, if that's what it is.

[Karen Vecchio, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

As well as the Canadian experience class, is there any other class of immigration you're concerned with? Is there anything else you're seeing that has a peak or a valley we should be aware of?

[Maia Welbourne]

No. In fact, based on the data in the annual report, I would say the trends generally are good. We're seeing more women immigrants arriving and being admitted, and more women who are the principal applicants are part of that trend. We see that as entirely positive.

[Karen Vecchio, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

Certainly.

Chapter 5 of the 2015 annual report on immigration notes these officers are equipped with tools and procedures to assess the gender aspects of refugee resettlement applications. How do we ensure officers are using these tools and adequately implementing GBA? How are they monitored, and are there reporting mechanisms they are accountable to? When I'm looking at this overall, how does it progress?

[Fraser Valentine]

I would say there are two things being done. The first is in the field. The immigration program manager, who is the senior executive responsible for the immigration program in missions abroad, is accountable for the way in which the GBA policy is applied in the field, and that is critical.

With respect to how these officers are taking decisions, that gets a little more challenging for us to assess because of the independent role these officers are playing with respect to those decisions they are taking. What the department has done is that our international region, which is responsible for all of our missions abroad, is bring together their senior management from around the world on an annual basis. I know recently GBA was discussed with respect to its application in the field. It's done in that way, as well.

[Karen Vecchio, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada's 2015 annual report indicates the department continues to collect and generate sex-disaggregated data and disseminate research to support policy and program development. Does your department collaborate with Statistics Canada to collect this data? How do you get this data?

[Fraser Valentine]

This work is led through our research and evaluation branch. We have a dedicated section in the policy side of the department that works very closely with Statistics Canada with respect to the collection and use of that data. We have an internal data warehouse. We also share that information, and have memorandums of understanding, with Statistics Canada. They act as a critical focal point for statistics across the federal government, so it leverages out as well.

[Karen Vecchio, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

Okay. What gender-specific research has been conducted recently by the department?

[Fraser Valentine]

I would answer that question in a couple of ways.

The research and evaluation branch has done a number of studies both internally and in collaboration with, for instance, Statistics Canada. In May 2015 a study was done by StatsCan, which worked with us on the labour market outcomes of immigrant women who arrive as dependents of economic principal applicants. There is an ongoing set of research that's done through that gender lens to understand the place of immigrant women who come to Canada.

The other way I would answer that is that research is much more dispersed through the department. There are also research endeavours that happen in different parts of the department that then are used in, for instance, our settlement programming. This is a large expenditure of the department, monies we provide to settlement-providing organizations once a permanent resident has landed in Canada and accesses services such as language training and other kinds of settlement services. Gender-related aspects are embedded into the calls for proposals for those services, and that was done by using GBA and research that was conducted by the settlement branch.

[Karen Vecchio, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

Okay. Those are some of the impacts from having GBA. Is there anything else you can identify, or things that you've seen change, whether it's the work or the outcomes to the department, because of GBA? As you said, the settlement services are a good indicator. Is there anything else?

[Fraser Valentine]

Yes. One really resonated for me as I was preparing for today, having conversations with my colleagues, and looking at the data we collect with respect to our temporary resident business line. These are individuals who want to come to Canada as visitors, as students, or as workers.

As you probably are aware, nationals from some countries are required to submit biometrics—fingerprints—and those biometrics are collected abroad by third parties that we contract with called visa application centres. When we were developing the approach to implement biometrics abroad, a GBA was applied during the development process, and what was uncovered through that work was the need to be very conscious of the intersection between gender and race in the collection of those biometrics.

That was fed into the call for proposals and ultimately resulted in the following. If a woman goes into a visa application centre, she can request that her biometrics be collected in a private space and by a same-sex operator, if for religious reasons she would prefer that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Thank you.

Now we'll go on to Ms. Malcolmson for seven minutes.

[Sheila Malcolmson, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

What are the challenges, if any, for Immigration Canada having a legislated mandate to conduct gender-based analysis? Is there any downside?

[Fraser Valentine]

That's a great question.

I don't think that it's a downside, but I would say that we could continue to think through ways that we can present more robust outcome data in the context of that report to Parliament.

We have been, I think, very successful at presenting what I'm going to call output and activities-based data, including with respect to admissions, which is critically important, and this has done a lot to advance our thinking, but I think the next step is to have a much better understanding of the outcomes that we're achieving with respect to bringing immigrants to this country and how successful they are. That work is certainly under way throughout the department. We have not yet, though, embedded that in the annual report to Parliament, and I think that's something we will be looking at.

[Sheila Malcolmson, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Thank you.

Can you give us some examples of how your GBA lens for your department shaped the form of policy recommendations to cabinet?

[Fraser Valentine]

Yes. Again, I would answer this question in two ways.

The first is structural. As my colleague from Status of Women said, there is a requirement in the memorandum to cabinet and Treasury Board submission templates to focus our attention to the need to undertake a GBA and, if appropriate, to lay out those considerations. There is a structural element there.

The other thing that we have done in the department involves the cabinet and regulatory affairs section of the department. That's the focal point in the department that's responsible for assisting in the management of the development of memoranda to cabinet and getting them into cabinet and supporting the minister. It is co-located in my organization, so I'm responsible for both the cabinet and the regulatory business for the department and I am also the functional authority for GBA.

What that means practically is that in my management team, I have the director of cabinet and regulatory affairs and I have the lead that's responsible for GBA. I make sure that they're making those connections in a structural way and in a kind of challenge function way with my colleagues in the department.

The other way I would answer your question is that as we've advanced with the application of GBA, I think we've been successful in having analysts accept the idea that they are responsible as individuals, as public servants, for providing non-partisan professional advice to the government in the application of this lens to the advice that we're providing.

I'll be very candid and say that it is still uneven, which is what we found in the review that we did and which is why we've launched another set of training, but I think it's fair to say that we've had success in that regard, and some of the examples that Maia and I have provided are evidence of that.

[Sheila Malcolmson, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Thank you.

Are there any more examples of success stories and outcomes that you want to give us? I think the more we can describe in a three-dimensional way how this changed it, the more compelling it is for other departments to take on this work.

[Maia Welbourne]

I can give you a relatively narrow but concrete example of where it's made a difference.

When we're designing economic immigration policies and programs, some of them involve work experience requirements. In developing the federal skilled trades program and a decision to require two years' work experience, it was recognized that many women have breaks in employment and are more likely to engage in part-time work. That was worked into the requirements to recognize that we didn't want to put up any barriers to female tradespeople. The way of addressing those work requirements took that into account in a very direct way.

[Sheila Malcolmson, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Thank you.

[Fraser Valentine]

With respect to my previous example on biometrics, the other element that was adopted was the introduction of a family fee. Prior to the application of GBA, the fee was thought to be primarily per individual. Once the GBA was done, we quickly realized there are many parts of the world where people have much larger families, and those costs would become prohibitive. Therefore, a family fee was introduced and capped so that it was more affordable for those individuals.

[Sheila Malcolmson, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Thank you for the great examples and for giving a concrete example that we can fan out to other ministries. This is going to be really helpful in our work.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

We'll now move over to Ms. Vandenbeld.

[Anita Vandenbeld, Liberal, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

Thank you very much.

We heard from you and from the witnesses from Status of Women about the importance of leadership and of this being part of the culture. In your testimony you said that this application is understood, but it's uneven. We know that in many cases it could be that if you're an analyst and you aren't used to thinking this way, you may very well say that there is no different impact of this policy by gender, and then just tick that box and say that you don't need to do it, whereas perhaps delving a little further would show that there was a difference.

You mentioned that training is mandatory for executives, but not for all levels. Would mandatory training or some other form of proactive training make a difference?

[Fraser Valentine]

We decided to take the approach of making the training mandatory for all executives in the organization. What I didn't say in my remarks was that we made it mandatory for key managers as well. This is just under the executive level in those lead organizations that would be working on files, such as the folks in Maia's area, which is responsible for all selection policy. I would include my organization as well.

The reason we felt it was mandatory to include it for executives is that leadership principle that we discussed, and as you know, the executives in the Government of Canada are considered the leaders of those organizations. We felt it was important to ensure they understood their responsibility and accountability with respect to not just understanding GBA but in applying GBA with their staff and in their work. Ultimately they are responsible for approving that work up the line.

[Anita Vandenbeld, Liberal, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

You are the functional authority, and Ms. Welbourne is the champion. Can you explain what that means?