Status of Women Committee on Dec. 7th, 2023

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

My next question is this. Yesterday I came across a UNICEF report showing a 20% reduction in child poverty in Canada from 2014 to 2021. This is a remarkable achievement.

What policies do you attribute this to, and what more can you say on that?

[Marci Ien, Liberal, Toronto Centre, ON]

In one word, it's the CCB.

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

Thank you.

We're now going to move it over to Andréanne Larouche for six minutes.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Thank you, Chair.

Like others, I can’t fail to mention that yesterday was December 6, the date on which, every year, we mark the horrific femicide that occurred in 1989, during which 14 women were killed simply because they were women. I said plenty on the subject yesterday, but I’ll come back to it later when I ask my questions. I feel I must emphasize this fact, as it is a significant event. We also have a duty to remember. We simply cannot forget these women, even 34 years after the tragedy.

At the time, I was seven years old—I’m revealing my age by saying that. The images of this tragedy are among the first that affected me, as a girl. In fact, I remember it very clearly. Today, I have a 21-month-old daughter. Being a mother has altered the way I view this tragedy. I think a lot about my daughter when I speak. For the past two years, my little girl has been on my mind every time I speak. I don’t know what’s going to happen, but I see the horrible rise of misogyny. I also see that we haven’t made much progress after all. We have gained some ground, but when it comes to violence against women, we’re haven’t moved forward. The number of femicides is on the rise, which is extremely worrying. But I’ll come back to this later, when I ask my questions.

One other thing worries me.

Yesterday, I said it was time for action. To that end, we’re aiming to create more representative, more diverse Parliaments. I even visited Rwanda last year: we were exploring ways of attracting more women to the various Parliaments. Indeed, we realize that we need them. We women make up 50% of the population, but here we barely make up 30% of MPs.

Given what’s going on right now, I don’t see how we’ll be able to attract more women into politics. I’m thinking of all my colleagues who will likely spend at least the next 36 hours voting. We’ll be taking turns. We’re suffering from incredible “proceduritis.” How can we send out the message that we want to see more women in politics when some people are so partisan, choosing to make us spend long hours or all night debating and voting? I don’t understand why people don’t realize that, in 2023, we need to approach politics differently. We won’t attract more women by engaging in politics this way.

I’m sorry, but, as a mother, I felt compelled to say so. This is hardly edifying for democracy. I have as many family obligations as I do in my riding, where, for example, I have to go out on weekends and help people with food drives. I should be spending time in my riding, but I don’t know what’s going to happen in the next few hours. I’m not the only MP who feels this way.

That said, I will now turn to the minister.

In Supplementary Estimates (B) 2023–2024, $6.3 million, part of the $160 million budgeted, is earmarked for women’s organizations and equity-seeking groups. These funds will be disbursed in the form of grants and contributions under the Women’s Program.

I remind you that this program’s purpose is to achieve women’s full participation in the economic, social and democratic life of Canada through systemic change.

Beyond the way things are done here in Parliament, how could this funding help women’s equity groups? There’s so much left to do, one wonders if it will be enough and what changes it might bring.

[Marci Ien, Liberal, Toronto Centre, ON]

Thank you very much, Ms. Larouche.

If you'll permit me, I just want to acknowledge your courage and acknowledge the leader that you are. I can't bypass everything you just said. I want to acknowledge that.

How do we get more women in politics? It's a big question when we are in the environment that you described. I think more women seeing people like you doing this, and not just doing it but calling out the things you see, is really important. This is why we have some members we're looking at on a screen right now. This is why that is important. This is why we voted to keep it, but it is hard, and you are honest in everything you say. Thank you for saying it, and thank you for making sure it's on the record.

I had to address that before the women's program.

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

You're at one minute, Andréanne.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

In practical terms, what is this money intended to do? What type of organization will be able to apply? What changes are hoped for and are specifically targeted? I’d like to come back to the budget and this program.

[Marci Ien, Liberal, Toronto Centre, ON]

The women's program is so very important. I want to address here what has been categorized and characterized as cuts to it. They aren't. It's emergency funding. Emergency funding, Andréanne, is emergency funding, meaning that the national action plan and the half a billion dollars behind it that I mentioned before are meant to pick up where that emergency funding left off. People are saying this is a cut and are asking what we cut. I will always say that emergency funding isn't sustainable. The national action plan that I laid out and have been laying out this morning picks up where that left off.

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

Thank you very much, Minister len.

I'm going to remind everybody of my wacky arm. When you start seeing me going like this, that means wind it down.

I'm going to pass the floor over to Bonita.

Bonita, you have the floor for the next six minutes.

[Bonita Zarrillo, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, Minister, for being here today.

I want to talk a bit about the $150 million in cuts to the women's shelters, but I want to start with menstrual equity.

I recently received a number of letters from a classroom of social justice students from Charles Best school, which is on the unceded and traditional territory of the Kwikwetlem.

Minister, in these letters they were asking for mandatory menstrual education. I want to read to you part of the email from the social justice teacher, Ms. Leslie. She wrote, “We are advocating for the inclusion of mandatory menstruation education in the public school system to dispel misinformation, empower children with knowledge and help end gender stereotypes. I believe you will find the students' arguments compelling and we look forward to hearing from you in the near future.”

I will share those letters with you, Minister, but I wonder if you wouldn't mind sharing with the students, who I will definitely share this information with, what kind of education is planned. I know that we heard in this committee, in testimony around the menstrual equity study we did, that more education is needed. What can I tell the students about that?

[Marci Ien, Liberal, Toronto Centre, ON]

First of all, I love that students are writing to you and that they are so passionate, but as you know and they know, the provinces have jurisdiction over education. Do I wish I did, Bonita? I do, but it is provinces that do.

Here's what you can share with them. The fact that we even have a pilot and that it's called the menstrual equity fund is educating people. When it was included in the budget last year, it was considered a small thing, but there was so much interest in it. People wanted to know more. That's educating people. What does this mean? What does it mean that to buy menstrual products in Nunavut it's $60 for a box of pads? What do you mean? What do you mean that women are showing up at food banks and other places and there's nothing there for them? There is now. What does that mean?

Provinces handle education, as you know. I am also the Minister of Youth, as you know. I love that they are engaged and they are passionate, but I would encourage.... As the deputy pointed out, Food Banks Canada has an amazing website that is up now and that will show students—because I know they are interested in these things—graphs and figures as to who gets what across this country, how it's being rolled out and how much money is behind all of this. It lays it all out. It's a great teaching tool.

I used to be a supply teacher, so I'm just letting you know that it's a great teaching tool. I love that they reached out.

[Bonita Zarrillo, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Thank you so much. As I said, I will send those letters on to you.

[Marci Ien, Liberal, Toronto Centre, ON]

Please do.

[Bonita Zarrillo, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

I wanted to talk about the $150-million cut to women's shelters under the WAGE program. I hear you on what you have just said about the women's program, that these are emergency funds, but gender-based violence is not an emergency. It's systemic, embedded and consistent. Shelters have an ongoing need for operational funding to combat gender-based violence, because in addition it's on the rise. The current women's program is not helping shelters.

What is the government going to do to offer long-standing protection of women through shelters?

[Marci Ien, Liberal, Toronto Centre, ON]

We already are: The national action plan to end gender-based violence is a replenishment of funds. It's a continuation of our work.

When you talk about that cut, I say, listen, emergency funding is emergency funding, and that was in the context of the pandemic, Bonita. During the pandemic, which was qualified as and is an emergency, we stepped up and said, “Immediately, $300 million is going out to make sure shelters have exactly what they need in this situation.”

The action plan, with half a billion dollars behind it, picks up on this, and I can tell you that shelter organizations are benefiting in 10 provinces—and we've made these announcements—including in my province of Ontario. I was meant to be in your province today, but because of said votes that Andréanne so eloquently talked about, I will not be travelling. I was meant to sign into.... Well, we have signed the agreement, but I was meant to announce tomorrow morning in B.C., because your province has signed on, the rollout of this part of the action plan for the province of British Columbia.

Shelters are benefiting. Organizations on the ground are benefiting, and the good thing about each province and territory is that they can map out exactly what they need, so the Province of B.C. will target what it sees and needs. It has and will put that forward in its plan. I look forward to getting there sooner rather than later.

[Bonita Zarrillo, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Thank you, Minister.

As you're talking about communities as they need it, I want to talk a bit about the fall economic statement and the failure of the government to mention the ongoing crisis of missing and murdered indigenous women, girls and two-spirit individuals.

Today I am subbing in for my colleague from Winnipeg Centre. This is a crisis in her riding. I wonder if you could just share what's being done to support missing and murdered indigenous women and girls and two-spirited individuals across the country.

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

Minister Ien, we are already over time on that.

Bonita, if you don't mind, I'm going to move that to your second round. Thank you.

We're now going to move over to our second round, with five minutes for the Liberals and the NDP and two and a half minutes for the Bloc.... I mean five for the CPC and Liberals—please bear with me today—and two and a half minutes for the NDP and the Bloc.

Michelle Ferreri, we'll start with you for five minutes.

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

Thanks, Madam Chair, and thank you, Minister, for being here today.

There are some serious issues happening in our country. You said on record in your statement today, Minister, that “policy comes from things that are measured”. Those were your words. In the past year, more than 50 cities and municipalities across Ontario have declared intimate partner violence and gender-based violence to be an epidemic, including Toronto, Sudbury, Hamilton, Kingston and my hometown of Peterborough. One woman is killed every other day in Canada inside the terrifying rates of violence and, under this Prime Minister, violence against women has increased 79%.

This is my question for you today, Minister. We are studying Bill S-205 in this committee. The intention of Bill S-205 is to better protect individuals who file domestic violence complaints. As well, it creates a peace bond in the Criminal Code that is specific to and provides for more severe conditions for individuals accused of domestic violence, and the bill would allow the judge to require the accused to wear an electronic monitoring device if the judge determines that the victim's safety and life are at risk during the interim release period.

It is pretty important legislation that was brought forth by a senator whose own daughter was murdered, but in this committee, the Liberals and NDP voted to remove the two major components of that bill, one being victim consultation and the other being the words “intimate partner”. They voted to remove “intimate partner” and replace it with “persons”.

You've said here that we have an epidemic. You say we have an issue with gender-based violence and intimate partner violence. How can you justify your party's removing this from the bill?

[Marci Ien, Liberal, Toronto Centre, ON]

Michelle, it's good to see you.

First and foremost, our government under Minister Virani has declared intimate partner violence an epidemic. My home province of Ontario, under the leadership of Premier Doug Ford, has not, so I will start there.

With respect to Bill S-205, it's my understanding, Michelle, that it's being studied by a committee and that clause-by-clause is still in progress. As a guest of this committee, I will not speak to the decisions of committee members and the decisions they are making here. However, I will say, with regard to intimate partner violence, that just this year Keira's law was passed.

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

Thank you. On that point, Minister, I think it's absolutely your responsibility to speak to this. This is your ministry file. You are there for women.

With respect to Keira's law, we worked on that in this committee. It is critical. We actually had testimony from Keira's stepfather, who said how important this legislation was and to leave it the way it was.

It is your party, Minister, that has removed these two components of this bill. How in the world can you justify not having every safeguard possible, when these cities have declared epidemics? Every other day in Canada, one woman is killed amid the terrifying rates of violence.

[Marci Ien, Liberal, Toronto Centre, ON]

That is why my province of Ontario should know—

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

Why are you passing that to the province, Minister?

[Marci Ien, Liberal, Toronto Centre, ON]

I am making it clear—

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

You are the federal minister.

[Marci Ien, Liberal, Toronto Centre, ON]

I absolutely am, and I'm proud to be, Michelle, but I'm not a member of this committee. I am the federal minister. You are absolutely right, but this is still being studied by committee. Clause-by-clause is still in progress—