Status of Women Committee on May 10th, 2016

[François Daigle]

It's very much the way my colleague at TBS explained it. We play a challenge function role. We're there to make sure that the policy proposals that come forward have gone through a thorough analysis and have been looked at not just through the GBA lens but with the various factors that need to come into play.

Early in the process, if we think that some of that analysis hasn't been done, we can ask the department to do it. If we don't think it's done and it's ready to go, we can recommend to the department that we push the item off to a later agenda. That gets the minister engaged and gets senior attention to the issue so that we can look at it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Excellent.

I will now turn it over to my NDP colleague, Ms. Malcolmson.

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

None of our witnesses last week seemed to know or could name a time when any of their budgetary proposals or proposals to cabinet had ever been turned back.

Could you talk a little more about how your two departments interact with proposals like that, on the ground?

If the Auditor General says that we're not doing a very good job of implementing GBA, I'm having trouble reconciling that with the really good news we're hearing from every department we've talked to that it's all fantastic. I'd love to know that it is, but it's only changed since December.

[François Daigle]

It's not all perfect. It is very uneven, I think, as the Auditor General's report points out.

We do push back. We do play a challenge function. On a weekly basis, we make decisions about whether proposals are ready to go to cabinet because they have done the necessary policy work for there to be a good conversation at cabinet.

The agendas of cabinet change on a weekly basis exactly because we play a challenge function and push items back. As Renée said earlier, depending on all of the issues that are in a proposal, sometimes the GBA will be important enough that we'll be able to push back. Sometimes it's one component of many others and the timing is such that the proposals need to come forward, so hopefully we have a chance to catch up on the GBA and some other things at the evaluation cycle of policies and programs.

[Renée LaFontaine]

The only thing I would add is that I want to take responsibility for our challenge function. We needed to adapt it and we needed to set better expectations with departments.

I want to reiterate my colleague's point. It isn't easy. It's not perfect out there. Gender...is hard to find. Sometimes programs don't mature in the first year of their implementation. It takes a while to have them be adopted by Canadians and to learn how they are going. One of the things we have to focus more on is tracking and following up on the information. With better sharing of what some departments are doing, it's going to have other departments thinking about it well in advance.

The other thing we're going to do is track and monitor. If you missed your one chance at Treasury Board and it didn't go through, we haven't been tracking or monitoring either. We can do a much better job of that. What is tracked gets attention, and what is measured kind of gets even more attention. I think we, at the centre, have to do a lot better job of that to really help departments make this the priority it needs to be in the programs it's relevant to.

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

Can you talk a bit about how you interact with, I think, the 80 government agencies that have not actually committed to implementing the departmental action plan.

Do you see a significant difference between the agencies that have bought into this, and those that are still on the outside of that commitment?

[Renée LaFontaine]

With the departments and agencies we deal with in the area of health and a lot of the social programs at ESDC, gender-based analysis is an integral part of their program design, and we're finding that it's working very well. It isn't a struggle to get the data and information from them.

Where it's more obscure in the fundamental role of the program is if it's national security for Canada or it's dealing with the forestry sector writ large. It's setting regulations around that. It's very obscure. Those are the departments we have to spend more time and energy with.

Oftentimes, there can be gender issues. I'll give you a success story of sorts that we had at Treasury Board a couple of years ago. It was the border security agencies that were looking at the tools and equipment for the border services officers. They were focused on their job of securing Canadians and making sure that their job was well done. The type of equipment that we bought for the female and male border officers had to be adjusted quite a bit after a year of operations because of the effectiveness of that equipment and tools. It's those kinds of things. It was in the second year of the program operation that we learned of that, based on their feedback and their learning how they were going to deliver....

I don't want to make excuses, but there are some parts of the programming—and we do a lot at the federal level that doesn't directly touch Canadians—that are not as easy as you would imagine.

[François Daigle]

I don't think I have really anything to add.

It's very similar from PCO's perspective. It depends on the issue; it depends on the department. I don't think there's necessarily a correlation between signing on to the action plan and doing gender-based analysis. Just because the department hasn't signed on to the action plan—I think there are 29 or 30 that have signed on—it doesn't mean that they're not doing gender-based analysis. If the proposal calls for it, they would do it. They may not be as equipped as they need to be, but if it's relevant to their proposal, then they will do the research and do the analysis.

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

We heard from some witnesses and departments that are producing annual reports on how well they're doing. Could you speak for a minute about how many departments and agencies are reporting to you on that and if that reporting will become mandatory?

[François Daigle]

They're not reporting to PCO, so maybe the question is better put to Status of Women, who is tracking that.

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

All right. Very good.

Do I have time?

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

You have 40 seconds.

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

Thank you very much for your work, and we look forward to an even more positive Auditor General's report next time around.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Excellent.

Over to you, Ms. Sahota, for seven minutes.

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Brampton North, ON]

Thank you for your presentation.

I would like each of the departments to give me specific examples of programs where gender-based analysis was applied and to tell me how the outcome impacted the department, the policy, Canadians in general, or the people affected by the policy. It was very helpful to hear the Treasury Board about border security, because it gives just a little bit of insight into what it takes and what should be done going forward, so some examples would be good.

Also, perhaps you could give examples of programs that aren't at face value female-oriented programs, like violence against of women or something like that, but nonetheless are enlightening because we've never thought about them with a gender lens applied.

[François Daigle]

Maybe one recent example I can give is the initiative to bring bring 25,000 Syrian refugees into Canada before February. Through that exercise, the department had not only the plan to help bring 25,000 people to Canada but also the follow-up with the provinces and all of the work that's going to be done for their resettlement and the integration.

A lot of gender-based analysis goes into that, and maybe IRCC talked to you about this when they were here, as well as a lot of research and disaggregated data that they pull together to understand what's going to happen when they bring these people to Canada. In these communities, what services will they have, what are they going to need, how will they be organized, and will they will get language training—all of those things. I think this is one recent example where there was a lot of analysis that was brought to the proposal.

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Brampton North, ON]

[Inaudible--Editor] impacts the policy itself or the Syrian refugees that did come here.

[François Daigle]

I think it helps plan for the settlement and the integration so that we can work more effectively with provinces on settlement and settlement services.

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Brampton North, ON]

Did you find that the needs were very different based on gender?

[François Daigle]

The needs are very different, and that's taken into account, I think, by the department as it's funding various settlement agencies in different places. It depends on the makeup of the families coming. What we saw, for example, is that a lot of these families are large, which has an impact on the level of services, where they get their services and where they're going to stay. All of those things were taken into account in the proposals we saw.

[Stan Lipinski]

The Department of Justice doesn't necessarily have a whole suite of programs for Canadians directly, but we do have a lot of transfer payments to the provinces and territories on the programming side.

For example, we have the aboriginal justice strategy, which has been very successful. It has funded a number of culturally relevant and gender-specific programs, such as healing circles, wellness programs for women or men, as well as family mediation services, all of which are gender specific. The evaluations have shown that through the aboriginal justice strategy, there has been a decline in recidivism and offending in a number of communities that have participated in the strategy.

Also, in youth criminal justice, a fair amount of money goes to the provinces and territories. There are lots of funding agreements that allow for the funding of gender-specific programs, services, and projects aimed at youth in conflict with the law.

Again, all of these are evaluated over time. You can't necessarily always speak to whether or not one or two of these programs have had an impact, but in their totality you get a sense of where there's been some movement.

Those are a couple of examples of the types of things that are gender-specific that are being done with some results we can point to through evaluations.

[Renée LaFontaine]

Maybe I can add one or two more.

I'll give you the not so obvious case. You might recall that in 2010, a boatload of Tamil refugees showed up on the B.C. coast. The border services agency needed urgent funding to take care of these people. There were over 500 of them. Intuitively, and without a lot of fuss, they understood that we needed different facilities for the women and the children, and for the single males. From the get go, they were gathering data and designing programs that were implemented within weeks, because of their intuitive understanding that there's a major difference in the way we treat these two groups of refugees.

The second point I want to highlight is in an easier area. A large department like ESDC, which has a very large research capacity and a good selection of disaggregated data about their programming, conducted a study on elder abuse. They were able to make some interesting findings about what's happening across Canada. They found that we don't have enough shelters for elderly men whose wives have died, who might not be being treated well by their families and needed to have places to go to. That's one of the ones I share in my training programs all the time.

The last thing I would say about Treasury Board Secretariat is that Treasury Board is the employer of the public service, and we do GBAs regularly on the types of our employees and what their needs are in terms of the benefits programs, the income support programs, the sick leave programs, and those sorts of things. Those needs are very different depending on the age, stage, ethnicity, and background of our employees. We find they have different needs in their programs, and we try to design our programs to meet their needs.

I hope—

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

That's the end of our time.

I want to thank our witnesses for your excellent input and continued work to try to deepen the application of GBA and improve the way it works. Thank you very much.

We're going to suspend for two minutes while we change our witnesses.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

I call the meeting back to order.

We are very lucky to have guests today from the Department of Finance, including Richard Botham, the assistant deputy minister for economic development and corporate finance. From the Department of Public Works and Government Services, we have Alfred MacLeod; and from StatsCan, we have François Nault and Tamara Hudon.

We welcome all of you.

We're going to begin with Richard, for 10 minutes, please.

[Richard Botham, Assistant Deputy Minister, Economic Development and Corporate Finance Branch, Department of Finance]

Thank you, Madam Chair, for inviting me to address you today.

I am the assistant deputy minister of the economic development and corporate finance branch at the Department of Finance Canada. I am also the gender-based analysis champion for the department.

The Department of Finance is the government's primary source of analysis and advice on Canada's economic and financial affairs.

In certain policy areas, the department is the lead within the Government of Canada. The department has lead responsibility for policy development on tax and tariff legislation, major federal transfers to provinces and territories, the legislative and regulatory framework for the financial sector, and representing Canada within international financial institutions.

The department also provides analysis and advice on the economic merit and fiscal implications of policy and program proposals developed by other government departments. Departmental officials serve as members of a broader team of federal officials from the Privy Council Office and Treasury Board Secretariat that reviews options for, and the implications, including gender implications, of proposals that are presented to cabinet.

These two roles, as the lead on certain policy areas and as a central agency, have shaped the department's activities with respect to gender-based analysis.

Gender-based analysis is a key policy tool for evaluating the potential gender impacts of proposed policies, plans, and programs, and to support informed decision-making. The Department of Finance has committed to performing gender-based analysis on all new policy proposals, including tax and spending measures where appropriate, and where data exists.

Gender considerations are integrated into all aspects of the federal budget process. Our pre-budget consultations are undertaken on an annual basis and solicit the perspectives of diverse stakeholders, including gender perspectives.

In our challenge function role, the Department of Finance reviews budget proposals put forth by other federal departments and agencies, and provides advice to the Minister of Finance on funding decisions. We require departments and agencies to consider all relevant factors, including gender, when developing a policy or program for budget consideration. When departments and agencies submit their budget proposals, we require their gender-based analysis as part of the proposal package. A summary of the results of the gender-based analysis are included in the budget advice to the Minister of Finance.

For new policies, plans, or programs that originate from the Department of Finance, analysts in the department perform a gender-based analysis to determine whether the proposal will result in important gender impacts. This analysis can be brief if an initial assessment finds that there are likely to be few or no important gender impacts, or the analysis can be extensive if an initial assessment indicates there may be significant gender impacts. The gender-based analysis can involve a statistical analysis or fiscal simulation of the gender impacts.

Outside of the budget process, Finance works with the departments and agencies to ensure that gender-based analysis has been fully considered during the development of memoranda to cabinet.

It is difficult to talk about specific examples where a gender-based analysis has had an impact, given that our advice on budget and policy proposals are cabinet confidences. I have chosen a couple of examples to give you a flavour of the information that a gender-based analysis at Finance could examine. These examples were selected because they have obvious important gender impacts.

The first example is the teacher and early childhood educator school supply tax credit that was introduced in budget 2016, which allows Canadian educators to claim a 15% refundable tax credit on up to $1,000 in expenditures on eligible supplies. According to Statistics Canada's labour force survey, almost 80% of people employed as educators in primary and secondary schools or child care centres in fall 2015 were women. Given their higher level of employment in this sector, a gender-based analysis would likely find that working-age women would be expected to benefit more from this measure than men. The impact of the measure on other diverse groups of women and men could also be assessed through other data sources, looking at intersecting identity factors for this occupational group.

A second example is the budget measure of improving heart health for women. Heart disease and stroke are the leading causes of death for Canadian women, yet many women are not aware of heart attack or stroke and do not know how to recognize the symptoms until it is too late. From the “Women in Canada” report that was available last fall from Statistics Canada, we know that in 2009 in Canada, 3.9% of females over 12 years old had been diagnosed with heart disease. In a gender-based analysis we could expect that research results of a program that targets women's heart health would likely have greater benefit for women and that there would be benefits for both men and women with respect to those employed in heart research.

A different example that demonstrates our recent activities related to gender-based analysis is the latest budget decision for Status of Women Canada. Budget 2016 announced $23.3 million over five years starting in 2016-17, and $7 million per year ongoing to strengthen capacity at Status of Women Canada, including to ensure that gender-based analysis is performed more consistently across the federal government and to support the creation of a dedicated research and evaluation unit to provide evidence-based, innovative research with respect to women's issues.

We do several things at the Department of Finance to support our analysis in conducting GBAs and to ensure that our gender-based analyses are relevant and appropriately prioritized. We offer department-specific training for GBA so our analysts and economists are trained to conduct GBAs in the development of Finance-led proposals or when reviewing GBAs performed by other departments and agencies.

We have designed finance-specific tools to use to perform a GBA on all budget proposals. We revised these tools prior to the development of budget 2016 to also incorporate the identification of demographic characteristics of diverse groups of women and men, such as race, age, aboriginal identity, income level, ability, and sexual orientation, given departments and agencies are increasingly conducting broader GBAs to also include diversity implications.

We participate in interdepartmental GBA working groups, both at the ADM level and the working level, to ensure we are learning best practices from other departments and agencies. We also observe the government's annual gender-based analysis awareness week, which is coming up next week, with special communications and activities.

GBA commitments are integrated into the performance management agreements for all executives. Specifically, executives are required to meet the department's GBA commitments to allow for ministerial consideration of the potential gender-specific impacts of proposed policy initiatives.

My branch coordinates our departmental activities and annual reporting on our contributions to Status of Women Canada. In the past 12 months, the department completed more than 250 gender-based analyses. A total of 24 finance employees, largely new employees to the department, attended two GBA training sessions that were held in the fall of 2015.

The Department of Finance was not a part of the most recent audit on the implementation of gender-based analysis, but we were implicated in the previous audit in 2009. Since that time, we have been working to improve our GBA tools and processes to ensure we are fulfilling the GBA commitments we have made.

Our biggest barrier for performing gender-based analysis is gender-disaggregated data. Our colleagues at Statistics Canada produce the “Women in Canada” report that provides some of the best gender-disaggregated data on a number of topics like women's health, women in the labour market, and family and living arrangements that can provide evidence to use in our analyses. Many departments and agencies also share our concern regarding data, and we understand that we are going to be exploring collectively how data collection can be improved and better accessed.

For tax-related proposals developed within the Department of Finance, our tax policy branch analysts use a variety of data sources, including data that are linked to information allowing detailed gender analysis.

Another barrier we have faced is that departments and agencies are responsible for implementing their own GBAs. As we know from the Auditor General's reports, it has been implemented unevenly and without consistency. From a challenge function perspective, this means that we receive input in different formats, styles, and depths from each federal organization, which can make it challenging to incorporate that information into our advice in a meaningful way.

We have taken note of the new tools being developed by the Privy Council Office, such as the policy considerations checklist. As central agencies, we will be working together to try to align how we will ask departments and agencies to report on the GBAs, given that we all use this information in a similar fashion to provide advice to ministers.