Status of Women Committee on May 5th, 2016

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

I'm not asking for specific figures or data, just a policy. Can you actually spell out a policy that got changed because of data collection that took place with regard to sex disaggregation?

[Neil Bouwer]

Yes, I can give you the example of the aboriginal forestry initiative, and I think that was in 2011 or 2012, so it predates the conversation we're having about mandatory GBA+ in NRCan, but that's a tangible example where running a gender-based lens and doing a gender-based analysis with data helped inform the program design in a way that was more sensitive. I think, at the end of the day, it led to a better program as a result, to the point that thinking about data and looking at diversity and different perspectives is part of doing good public policy.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Okay.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Thank you.

We go over to Mr. Fraser.

[Sean Fraser, Liberal, Central Nova, NS]

Thank you very much.

I'd like to toss a question to the Auditor General's office here. We've heard from four different departments today, all of whom indicated the internal mandatory nature of GBA analysis. One of the chief barriers that you identified in the last Auditor General's report on GBA was the lack of a mandatory nature like, say, Immigration has.

Do you think that it being mandatory, externally through legislation, for example, would still be a positive development to influence the use of GBA?

[Nancy Cheng]

The point that we're trying to make is that, if there's extra pressure being put to bear on the requirement to do GBA, that might be positive movement. It's not necessarily to say that we absolutely have to have the law changed and have some legislative requirements. We never really pushed to have it at that limit and we were careful of how we couched the recommendation in terms of saying that is an issue that needs to be looked at. We left it to management to decide the best way forward.

You could do it internally. You could do it at the level of government policy, having an explicit policy of the Government of Canada asking for that, or you could elevate it further. Ultimately, there is that internal challenge, which is probably the better place to have it.

Then you still have the opportunity of the central agencies' challenge, whether it's through Treasury Board Secretariat or PCO looking at the MCs as well as the TB submissions, to have that rigour there as well so you do indeed have the iterative process to make sure that the issue is sufficiently explored before we say it doesn't apply or that it comes to fruition, and you actually change your programming as a result of that.

There isn't a magic formula in terms of saying that it absolutely needs to be that way, and if we truly had that stronger view, we would probably have used stronger language in the report as well. But we identified it, saying it's necessary to see why things aren't moving as quickly, because we are looking at 20 years after making that international commitment. Even with the 2009 government position saying we will now have a government-wide departmental audit plan to implement GBA, we're still finding it's not quite there yet, so what does it take? That really is the point.

What we seem to be hearing from some of the witnesses today, at least the first two, is that the time frame seems to be fairly important for them, and I'm not quite sure whether there's been more dialogue in terms of looking at the best way to look at that. Maybe Status of Women can also help to look at that to see what better can be done there.

[Sean Fraser, Liberal, Central Nova, NS]

If we were to consider a recommendation that GBA becomes mandatory across the Government of Canada, what would be the handful of key elements to it? Would it be that we conduct the GBA loosely or would there be reporting regular assessment? What are the key pieces to a mandatory directive by the government?

[Nancy Cheng]

Good question. I don't think I have a specific answer for you. If you are going to go the route of saying that there should be a government policy, then the policy parameters need to be fleshed out. Usually you would have some principles that you want observe. In essence, you would probably support the fundamental position that Status of Women put forward. This would require a demonstration that you have looked at whether your policy might affect the two genders differently, whether you have looked at how it might affect people participating in those programs, and whether you would be able to take into account data as well as the perspective of different groups that might be affected. You would have to demonstrate how you analyzed this. It might call for a more documented analysis, as opposed to more intuitive thinking. In any policy instrument, you would have the basic principles that you need to observe, and you may need to lay out the roles and responsibilities of who's going to do what. If all the organizations have a robust challenge function, then at the external level you might need less, but everybody might not be at the same place.

[Sean Fraser, Liberal, Central Nova, NS]

Excellent.

To the two representatives from the departments, is there regular reporting now, and has it helped?

[Neil Bouwer]

I can say that at Natural Resources Canada we keep track of where things progress through GBAs, and internal reporting comes to me, as champion. I've shared some of that data with you today.

[Mitch Davies]

We are initiating this as part of the management framework that the deputy put in place a year or so ago. We'll do a complete self-assessment—my group will guide this—on our performance. Part of it is tracking the implementation, training, and performance required for completing the GBAs and assessing their quality. Then we'll go back to our senior management table and present recommendations on what we can do. I think it's really continuous improvement. It's like anything—you can legislate good practice, but you have to be doing the hard work and maintaining a level of urgency and priority in your management. That's what our self-assessment is intended to achieve.

[Sean Fraser, Liberal, Central Nova, NS]

Thank you, and thank you, Madam Chair, for the courtesy of extending us a few seconds.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

No worries.

My thanks to the witnesses for doing a wonderful job of preparing and responding.

For those items that you've agreed to send to the clerk, we need to have that information by May 12. We're going to be starting to draft our report.

Ms. Cheng.

[Nancy Cheng]

The PAC also called a hearing on this same report. That just happened recently. They might also try to craft a report. Maybe the two clerks should get together to make sure that your messages are coordinated.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

This is an excellent recommendation. We were aware that there was work going on, and we're waiting to see what the scope of the report will be.

My thanks to the committee for your participation. I look forward to seeing you again Tuesday at 5:30.

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

Chair, could I say one thing before we adjourn?

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Sure.

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

I expressed at the meeting on Tuesday my disappointment that the timing of the press release did not give our constituents much time to respond. My colleague had asked that the press release not contain quotations with no attribution. That's why we were trying to do that editing. We checked the transcript, and my colleague did not say she wanted to have the quotation marks removed and then bring the press release back to the committee a month later. That was not her request.

I hope that next time, especially when we're making very small changes, the committee can agree to leave it in the hands of staff. That means we could get press releases out early, and this gives Canadians a chance to chew on our invitations longer.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Certainly.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

You will notice that as soon as we made that agreement in the committee—I believe it was about three minutes later during the committee—that the press release went out. So we were right on it. We will do that in the go-forward.