Status of Women Committee on Oct. 31st, 2017

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

In the time remaining, could you re-emphasize for us the importance of that domestic violence leave provision as something that can build women's economic security, ultimately?

[Kasari Govender]

Ultimately, if a woman is dealing with all of those different pieces at the same time, probably all aspects will be suffering. She'll be struggling to find housing. She'll be struggling to keep her job. If she's taking time off from work and that isn't built into leave, then she is often having to miss her employment. What that means, of course, is that she may be fired, or she may be taking unpaid leave in order to flee.

All of these are pieces of the same puzzle in terms of building up her economic security. The better place she's in to get her life back on track—to get housing, to get a regular income—the better place she's in to stay safe. If she's dealing with that as a working woman, she will either be forced out of her employment or she will have to take unpaid absences, neither of which contribute, of course, to her economic security.

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

In your work, is it fair to say that this link between domestic violence and the economic vulnerability of women is amplified when you are looking at women living with disabilities, senior women, and other marginalized populations?

[Kasari Govender]

There's simply no question about it. Again, think about all these obstacles in her way as she leaves the relationship. Where there are additional obstacles, where she has accessibility challenges, where she is trying to find a transition home that might take her—one that's accessible, for example—or where she is deaf or hard of hearing, accessing all of these services takes quite a bit of additional time. For example, in legal aid she only gets 25 or 35 hours. In B.C. and some other legal aid regimes they are limited on hours. That doesn't change if you need a translator for a different language or if you need a translator for sign language, but that means you actually get half the time, because everything is being said twice.

Some of these sound like small details, but they have a pretty profound impact on women's lives. We are often in the position that so many of our issues are tied back to enabling women to have the choice to leave violent relationships. There are all kinds of legal regimes and policies and practices of government that get in the way of a woman's ability to leave. That's where we think the federal government has a real role—both in creating those provisions where they have jurisdiction and in being a leader for provinces, helping with the path.

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

Thank you very much.

We'll now move on to Pam Damoff for seven minutes.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Thank you very much, Chair.

My first question is for CIBC. Our previous witness, Dr. Coe, mentioned men advocating real change in Australia and said she didn't understand why we didn't have it in a country like Canada, and then you brought it up. Could you tell us a bit more about what happened at that event and tell us whether there are plans to expand it and build a profile of it here in Canada?

Also, is there a role that the federal government can play in assisting with it?

[Andrea Nalyzyty]

It was an amazing program. We've had one session so far. It lasted for a day and a half. We brought together very senior leaders from across the organization and some clients. That was different for us, because we brought some of our major clients into the session as well. It was a real opportunity to consider what is meant by gender bias and what you have experienced or haven't experienced that others have to deal with.

One question was, have you ever felt sexually harassed in the workplace? Many men said no, and most of the women raised their hands. There was an exchange of information wherein the men were shocked that the women, whom they work with every day, had experienced something like this at some time in their working career. It's an opportunity to see what others experience.

We're going to have three more sessions by the end of this year. Catalyst Canada is a big supporter of men advocating real change, and there's a real opportunity to leverage it in other workplaces. It doesn't have to be in private sector workplaces. It could be done in a community as well.

I'd be happy to get and to provide to you more information on the way the program can be leveraged.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

That would be great.

Catalyst is a fantastic organization. I've had a number of conversations with them, and they've also appeared at our committee. One conversation I had with them was around women on boards. You mentioned that you had done some work with them as well.

Companies in the banking sector have traditionally done far better than other TSX-listed companies in having representation on boards. Certain sectors—the auto industry is another one—have done better than average.

Having said that, according to the comply or explain program about 45% of public companies still have absolutely no women on their boards. It boggles my mind that they couldn't find at least one woman to sit on their board.

I wonder whether you want to comment or provide some thoughts on how best to solve that issue, and also whether you think it's time for quotas. When I've spoken with Catalyst, they've said that where success has occurred, it has come in countries that have brought in actual quotas for boards. Could you provide us your thoughts on that?

[Andrea Nalyzyty]

I think one of the best ways to encourage increased representation of women on boards is, first of all, to give women an opportunity to sit on boards. I would suggest that this starts at the not-for-profit level, where there's a real opportunity to develop some board experience. That's point number one.

Point number two is that through showing the successes that various private sector industries or companies have when they have more women represented on the board—the different perspective that's brought to the decision-making process—those successes will lead to enhanced representation by women.

I will have to get back to you on what CIBC's position is on quotas, because I'm not authorized to speak to that.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

That's fine.

My next question is for our other witnesses, West Coast LEAF. You mentioned that Canada's federal government contribution to child care is low compared with that of other countries. This government is investing $7.5 billion over the next 11 years, and it's the first time in 10 years that the federal government has actually engaged with the provinces on child care.

In my riding, I made an announcement with the provincial minister for early education and child care. Ontario has increased the number of spaces by 32%. We are providing, as I mentioned, $7.5 billion for high-quality, affordable child care.

There is certainly, then, a lot of movement and commitment by this government to invest in child care. I'm just wondering about the figures you have about our participation. Are those current figures that take into account this investment, or are they older figures?

[Zahra Jimale]

Those are the figures from the report. The report was produced in July 2016, I believe, but I actually can't say right now.

[Kasari Govender]

From my memory of when the report was produced, it was in a state of flux. Some announcements had been made. The provincial government had received the money and it was unclear exactly what was going to happen to it provincially. That's why today we were really focused on attaching strings to the money you're giving to the provincial government. It needs to be spent not just on improving child care in general but actually, as you say, creating more child care spaces, targeting them at those most in need, and ensuring they are available for low-income and middle-class people in particular.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Part of that money included looking at the data to get some statistics on where the money is going and what the need is. Because the agreement was only signed on June 12 between the feds and the provinces, I suspect it doesn't include a lot of—

[Kasari Govender]

That's right. I don't know that we have the international comparison since that, but what I can say is that we met with the provincial minister responsible for child care in B.C., and those decisions are still very much in flux about what that's going to look like.

We have some commitments from the B.C. government. You may know that there's sort of an unstable situation here, and that child care is a pretty central piece of what this new provincial government has promised to do. Again, we have some concerns about what that will look like. I'm not saying it's not going to look good, but we really want to be focused on the priority areas that we've mentioned here, and there has been no commitment.

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

Thank you very much.

We're now going to start the second round, with Rachael Harder for five minutes.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'm going to go to Andrea from CIBC. My questions are mainly for you. First off, I'm needing you to clarify a bit here with regard to the difference between sponsorship and mentorship. I know you've referred to it a little, but could you give me a clear delineation between those terms?

[Andrea Nalyzyty]

The biggest distinction is that your sponsor has put skin in the game in helping you advance your career. A mentor is somebody who can, frankly, sometimes put skin in the game, but primarily guides you from the sidelines and provides advice, versus somebody who is willing to stick their neck out for you.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Thank you. I appreciate that.

[Andrea Nalyzyty]

Frankly, I wish I had gotten a sponsor earlier in my career. That's what I encourage everybody to do—women or men—if they're starting in the organization or starting their careers now. It's very valuable.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Is that something CIBC have made a part of their policy and regular way of doing things? Do they have a program, so to speak, for sponsorship and mentorship, or are they just encouraged by word of mouth that this is something you should explore and pursue? How does that work?

[Andrea Nalyzyty]

It initially started as a word-of-mouth exercise, but we have developed various networks across the organization in which we strongly encourage people to get involved, either as a mentor, a sponsor, or somebody who is being mentored or sponsored, and we try to show the value of those relationships. We highlight the value of having a mentor or sponsor, or being a mentor or sponsor, and then we encourage other people to join the network as well.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Awesome. Thank you.

One of the things you mentioned early on is how CIBC put an analysis in place in order to raise awareness with regard to gender bias and where it was taking place, maybe without even knowing it, whether that was on a policy level or just on a treatment-interaction level, etc.

You mentioned that CIBC wanted to take steps to identify and then address these areas. What motivated that? Was that government policy, was it something internally, or was it client-based? What motivated you to make that change within your institution?

[Andrea Nalyzyty]

The primary driver was that it was the right thing to do. We were hearing what was happening in the community and in society generally. We heard what was happening within our organization, and we thought this was a great opportunity to tackle the issue. Overt discrimination is rare, I would suggest. Most people don't engage in those types of activities. It's the unconscious bias that holds people back, and that's what we wanted to tackle.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Why was that important to you?

[Andrea Nalyzyty]

Do you mean to CIBC as a whole?