Status of Women Committee on May 5th, 2016

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Thank you very much.

We go back to my Liberal colleague Ms. Vandenbeld for five minutes.

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

Thank you very much.

I'm going to go a little bit out on a limb here, and this is for the Auditor General's Office, for Ms. Cheng and Mr. Domingue. Has your office ever done a gender-based analysis on your own work? For instance, when you're doing a value for money audit, have you ever taken what you define as value and looked at if there is a difference in terms of gender in that?

[Nancy Cheng]

I think when we look at gender-based analysis, we're talking about policy initiative, how it affects different people. So you don't distinguish the value that we provide, the value is for Parliament, and we don't try to say this would be necessarily for women vis-à-vis men. It's for Canadian citizenry at large, and Parliament represents them. Our job is to serve Parliament, and we bring forward either audit assurance when things are going well and we agree and say that's good, or we bring observations forward and suggest recommendations be made.

From that perspective, it is neutral to all Canadian citizenry and is not distinguished by gender. But then, obviously, when we were embarking on this particular subject, the gender equality issue hit a chord and that's why we've done the audit in the past and that's why we do the current audit as well.

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

One of the reasons I went there—and I didn't mean to put you on the spot—is because it's very easy, and we heard this from some of the other witnesses, to look at your own programming and to say it doesn't have a gender component; it doesn't have any implications; it's not necessary. I understand there's a check box that you can check that says you looked at it and it doesn't apply here.

The training component is so vitally important because often on the surface, if somebody isn't very well versed in gender-based analysis—and this wouldn't be any implication here—you might say this doesn't have any kind of impact. Yet, when you delve into the actual results of some of the policy decisions, you realize that in fact there probably is a differential.

This is now to the departments, how would you go about looking at these hidden gender biases, where at the outset you would just think they don't apply?

Ms. Kennedy or Ms. Mitchell.

[Nicole Kennedy]

That's a very difficult question for me to answer because the initiatives that go through our department automatically go through a gender-based analysis. We're always looking for exactly that, so it's rare that it wouldn't actually be done, whether it's an MC or a Treasury Board submission, it is very much a part of the focus of our department and how we do policy.

[Gail Mitchell]

At ESDC we do reflect on it from the service side through to the policy side because our programs really very much touch people. We deliver programs to individuals. It's pretty hard to come to the conclusion that these don't have a gender dimension, an age dimension, etc., even on the service side where it's the mechanics of how you move a benefit out to individuals. Even at that level we still look at it from a gender perspective as well because all these things like access to an office, access based on office hours, have an impact as well and they play differently.

I'd say overall we're pretty intent on being aware of these issues. Of course, everybody has blind spots, but what we try to do with these check lists of questions is test the assumptions on a regular basis.

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

How often would you see, for instance, an MC saying that a particular program is neutral and doesn't need a gender-based analysis?

[Nicole Kennedy]

If we see that, it would be a rare occurrence, and it would make us look a second time just to make sure that it is actually true. As Gail said, it is rare that there isn't a consequence for individuals of the types of programs we deliver.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Excellent.

I want to thank our guests for an excellent discussion and very good answers. Certainly, you have helped us understand a little better how the implementation part of GBA works.

We are going to suspend for two minutes while we bring our next discussion panel guests.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

I call our meeting back to order.

I have a couple of comments, just as a preface. I wanted to remind people that the Office of the Auditor General had previously provided their comments, so those are entered into the record for your reference.

I am very pleased as well that we have lots of gender parity happening on our committee today, so that is joyous.

I want to introduce our next panel participants. We have Mitch Davies, who is an assistant deputy minister for the Department of Industry. We also have Neil Bouwer, who is an assistant deputy minister for the Department of Natural Resources. Welcome, gentlemen.

Each of you will have five minutes to bring introductory comments, and then we will start our round of questioning.

Who will go first? Neil, it's over to you for five minutes.

[Neil Bouwer, Assistant Deputy Minister, Science and Policy Integration, Department of Natural Resources]

Thank you all for the opportunity to discuss Natural Resources Canada's efforts to implement gender-based analysis.

I am NRCan's GBA+ champion. As such, I believe GBA+ is a useful analytical tool for assessing the gender-specific impacts of initiatives on women and men, and it is integral to good policy-making.

As part of the Government of Canada's phased-in approach, NRCan committed to implementing gender-based analysis in informing policy and programs in 2012-13. Our early work focused on the development of a governance structure, a departmental statement of intent, and capacity-building.

Since 2014, we have formally included GBA+ in NRCan's strategic processes. At present, the department must conduct GBA+ for all proposals related to the federal budget and for all memos to cabinet and Treasury Board submissions.

We use a detailed assessment template, copies of which I have provided to the clerk, which asks policy authors questions such as: who are the target clients for the proposal; are all target clients able to participate equally in the proposed initiative, or are there barriers; would the proposal result in differential impacts based on gender or diversity; and if differential access or impacts have been identified, how can these be mitigated?

We undertake this assessment at the earliest possible point and carry it forward throughout the policy process. For example, if the GBA+ is undertaken for a budget proposal, and the parameters do not change, the analysis is carried forward through any subsequent memorandum to cabinet or Treasury Board submission. If there are changes in parameters, the templates are updated and re-approved.

Since April 1, 2015, NRCan has conducted GBA+ assessments on 42 proposals. Over one quarter of these proposals, that's 12, were considered exempt from further analysis, typically because they were routine, or because there had been previous GBAs completed. Almost one quarter of the proposals, that's 10, were identified likely differential gender-based or diversity-based access or impacts that required additional analysis and consideration of changes to the proposal's parameters and mitigation measures. For example, we seek to ensure the proposals do not reinforce historical gender disparities in the natural resources sector. The analysis of the remaining proposals, that's 20, found that differential gender-based or diversity-based access or impacts were not likely to occur.

NRCan has a responsibility centre with staff assigned to GBA+, about one full-time equivalent. This responsibility centre provides general support to the department and tracks progress on GBA+.

To support this work, NRCan has created a cadre of nine special advisors who provide directives to policy authors on how to conduct GBA+. Our sectors are responsible for conducting GBA+. The director general responsible for these matters is required to review and approve the final GBA+ evaluation templates.

We believe it is critical to raise awareness on GBA+ to build capacity in the department and to conduct GBA+ by offering tools and resources. We maintain considerable resources on our internal website for staff to access, such as case studies, information, and links to other federal resources.

My sector also maintains key facts and figures to support gender-based analysis at NRCan, specifically natural resources gender-desegregated data. We also connect our staff to data about the science community in Canada.

We support broader access to relevant data and information. Through the federal geospatial platform, Natural Resources Canada provides gender-desegregated socio-economic datasets to assist federal decision-making. This platform is available to all federal departments.

NRCan also contributed to funding for the production of “Women in Canada”, a report directed by Status of Women Canada and Statistics Canada. This report is an essential resource for gender-based statistics.

With respect to training, staff are encouraged to take the Status of Women Canada's online GBA+ training. We conduct focused training within the department for our special advisers, and this is an important departmental resource for policy authors. We also offer targeted training for analysts who prepare budget proposals and more general training and awareness activities to employees. NRCan has also collaborated in the development and delivery of targeted training for science and economic-based staff.

In particular, in April 2014, NRCan piloted a full-day training session on GBA+ for science-based departments. It was developed in co-operation with Status of Women Canada, Environment and Climate Change Canada, and Agriculture and Agri-food Canada.

Earlier this year, NRCan worked with Status of Women Canada; Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada; the Centre for Intercultural Learning; and other departments on the development and implementation of targeted training for economic and science-based departments.

NRCan recently reviewed the findings of the Auditor General's office regarding the implementation of GBA.

The report indicated GBA was incomplete in certain initiatives. In NRCan's case, the OAG assessed four NRCan initiatives and concluded that only two had completed GBAs. For the first initiative, a GBA+ process had not yet been established at NRCan. NRCan committed to implementing GBA+ in 2012. When this proposal was still being developed, NRCan was still in the process of developing guidance. For the second initiative, one element of the initiative was not fully assessed, and we don't get partial marks from the Auditor General.

We continue to face some challenges, Madam Chair, and I'm happy to discuss those with the committee today, such as making GBA relevant for a science-based department like NRCan and considering GBA at the earliest phase of policy development.

Thank you, Madam Chair, for this opportunity to address the committee.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Thank you.

That was excellent.

Now we're going to have Mitch Davies, who is with the Department of Innovation, Science and Economic Development. That's even better. There are lots of science people here today. I love that.

Go ahead, Mitch. You have five minutes.

[Mitch Davies, Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategic Policy Sector, Department of Industry]

Thank you, Madam Chair, for the invitation to present to the committee today.

Gender-based analysis is important to Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada. Departmental staff work actively to support the application of GBA to policies and programs throughout the departmental portfolio.

I want to take the opportunity today to inform you of some of the activities we've undertaken in the department over the last 18 months to build employee awareness and training on GBA+ requirements that apply across the government and to strengthen our performance in the department. I'll also speak to some considerations for our future work on GBA.

Guided by the 2011 action plan on GBA+ developed by Status of Women Canada, the Privy Council Office, and the Treasury Board Secretariat, the deputy minister appointed a GBA champion for the department in October 2014 who's responsible for leading on the many GBA activities that I'm going to tell you about today. Our champion is also active in the GBA champions' community to share best practices and set common goals.

In order to support officials conducting effective GBA reviews in the department, our deputy minister approved the launch of a renewed GBA+ policy and GBA+ guidance tool in February of 2015. The deputy also approved the strengthening of the department's management accountability system to ensure that GBAs are completed for all memoranda to cabinet and Treasury Board submissions sent to our ministers for approval.

Since women-led businesses are important to the growth and vitality of Canada's economy, the department provided $50,000 to Status of Women Canada to help organize the women's entrepreneurship forum in March of 2015. The Ottawa-based forum was a great success, bringing over 350 women entrepreneurs from many sectors of our economy to the city. In addition, one of our portfolio partners, the Business Development Bank of Canada, announced that the forum had earmarked $700 million over three years to finance women-owned businesses in Canada.

As I mentioned earlier, building employee awareness and training on GBA requirements are important to strengthening our performance. With this in mind, our GBA champion has worked with the department's communications branch to promote the value of integrating GBA+ into program and policy design, including at senior management committees.

In October 2015, the department announced a new mandatory training requirement related to GBA. By March 31, 2016, all employees were required to complete the Status of Women Canada's online GBA+ training course. I'm pleased to report that close to 90% of all our employees including our executives, over 3,800 people, have taken the course and received their certificates in GBA+ training. We're working on the last 10%. In addition, we've made it mandatory for all new employees to complete the GBA training within six months of their arrival into the department.

Also, with regard to strengthening employee awareness of the value of integrating GBA considerations into program and policy development, we commissioned a GBA case study on clean technology and hosted the full GBA+ training course for economic, science, and research-based departments in February 2016. Our partners on this training were Natural Resources Canada, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, but the event would not have happened without the active support and involvement of Status of Women Canada. The training was a major success with more than 70 officials participating from nine departments and agencies.

Finally, since gender-disaggregated data is essential to conducting effective GBAs, the department provided $20,000 last fiscal year to support the development of a new chapter on women, education, and technology in the seventh edition of Stats Canada's seminal publication entitled, Women in Canada. This chapter is expected to be published this June. Our regional development partners have also provided funding for the Women in Canada publication.

I hope that gives you an idea of the work done in recent months to implement strategies and systems designed to enhance performance on GBA+ within the department.

Currently, we are completing an annual GBA+ self-assessment survey on our own performance and will use the assessment to identify possible opportunities for further action this year. Some of the areas we're considering exploring include deepening our expertise in conducting GBAs across the department by establishing a network of GBA focal points in the individual program sectors who help support the early policy and program consideration of gender diversity analysis in their groups.

We also hope to continue to improve access to gender-disaggregated data relating to key sectors of our economy such as clean technology, automotive, aerospace, information and communication technologies, pharmaceuticals, and tourism.

In closing, I would like to thank you for allowing me to address the committee today.

I would like to reaffirm that the Department of Innovation, Science and Economic Development recognizes the value that gender-based analysis provides in ensuring that we develop and implement effective policies and programs that meet the needs of diverse groups of men and women according to their socio-economic and demographic considerations

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Thank you.

The chair has to remain impartial, so I can't ask you how your GBA+ encourages more women in engineering.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

I'll pass it over to my Liberal colleague Mr. Fraser for seven minutes.

[Sean Fraser, Liberal, Central Nova, NS]

Perhaps if there's a few minutes at the end, I'll defer to the chair.

I do think I will be splitting a little bit of my time with my colleague here, so I'll jump right into it.

One of the themes we heard from the prior witnesses, and indeed from you two, was on the issue of spreading GBA awareness through the institution. What have you found has been the most effective way to do that? Where do you think you can look next to help spread the culture of GBA awareness?

[Mitch Davies]

When it comes down to it, it's just a matter of having people understand what this is and is not.

I really want to commend Status of Women Canada. If you haven't taken the online course, I encourage you to.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

The whole committee has.

[Mitch Davies]

I found it really enlightening. Really what it told me, bringing it down to brass tacks, is that it's about doing your job properly. It's a simple matter of doing rigorous work to move beyond the superficial and to get the data you need to undertake an analysis about how programs affect individual Canadians in all walks of life in different parts of society.

Really, I think it's about doing your homework. Number one, having all of our employees do this and take this course is a major step forward. Second is getting them into the practice. I think that's where our next work plan will take us, to actually have the experts who are in my team closer to the people doing the day-to-day work on policies and programs. We're a big organization. We have to embed this in the groups that are actually doing it. It can't be done after; it has to be done while they do program and policy development.

The last step, and I also suggested this, is that there is still a need to get better information. We're trying to do that by supplementing the work that Stats Canada can do on their publication. We designed what we asked them to do for a very specific reason: women, education, and technology. We're trying to get at....

I won't answer directly the question that wasn't asked, but what about the pipeline? What about people's choices? What about women taking the path into STEM fields? When is it they're leaving that path? What are the issues involved in that? We have actually commissioned a lot of work over time on that, because these are what I would call intractable issues.

Getting more and more information, and more and more awareness and profile on those sorts of issues, is really key, I think, in terms of improving our performance.

[Neil Bouwer]

I won't repeat what my colleague said. I agree with it all. But if you're looking for something tangible, I would add that having people with expertise who are embedded in different policy centres makes a big difference. I think it's important to have people who have dedicated time to spend on GBA+. I think that's a real recipe for success, as is a leadership statement to make sure that people in the organization understand that this is important to the leadership of the organization and that there is an expectation that GBA+ is an integral part of a good policy-making process.

[Sean Fraser, Liberal, Central Nova, NS]

Just following up, do you find the mandatory nature of the training has really helped promote the awareness? Particularly I am interested in the new employees, as part of the first six months. Do you find there's more uptake with people who do it early on in their career rather than those who've been at it for quite a while?

[Mitch Davies]

I just think it quite simply tells everyone what's important in that what you measure is what becomes important in an organization. The fact that senior management, our deputy ministers, indicated that this is something all employees should do, must do, as part of becoming an employee in our department, right away sends a signal as to what's expected in the standard of work and the kind of rigour expected in the work.

What that does is it sets them up to actually then ask the question when they're working on a proposal, to talk to the experts in my group, to get involved early, to ask if there is data available that can help them. Often they wish to, but they need the resources, and that's where we can help. It really puts it front and centre.

We do a lot of other things that are mandatory. We make sure we do a security check. We make sure they have the language profile. We do a lot of other musts, and this has now also become a must.

[Sean Fraser, Liberal, Central Nova, NS]

Perfect.

I think there are almost three minutes left, if my colleague would like to pick it up here.

[John Aldag, Liberal, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

Thanks.

I'm new to the committee. As I was going through the material in preparation for today, a couple of things jumped out at me. All of the witnesses we heard from today mentioned the importance of data, having good knowledge and data to draw from.

Given that we had the cancellation of the long-form census under the previous government, and then with DRAP 2012 as well—I can speak to that as somebody who worked in the federal public service—do your departments actually have access to the kind of data you need? Do you have any in-house capability for generating your own data that you can't get through StatsCan? Do you have the capacity within your departments to do this kind of analysis?

Just some thoughts on that would be useful.