Status of Women Committee on Feb. 27th, 2024

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Thank you to all the witnesses for coming to our committee today to contribute to this important study. There are many repercussions from the fact that women don't benefit from greater economic empowerment.

I'm going to start with Ms. Brayton.

In a way, you talked about invisible work, which has long been a pet issue of mine. Among other groups in Quebec, the Association féministe d'éducation et d'action sociale is calling for the first Tuesday in April to be a day of recognition for invisible work, with the aim of reflecting on it.

You talked about the problem that affects half of family caregivers. You can come back to that statistic. It's a form of invisible work, such as work within the family and volunteer work.

How would organizing such a day contribute to the collective reflection on ways to better recognize invisible work in our societies?

[Bonnie Brayton]

Our head office is currently in Montreal, Quebec. I completely agree with the proposal you are talking about.

The volunteer sector has been in decline for years, and we need not wonder why.

As you mentioned, there really are gaps. First of all, we don't always understand how heavy the burden is for these people. In addition, there are a lot of opportunities to seize in order to do things better. We need to think about ways to support this type of contribution to the economy in a more concrete way. A number of things would have to be considered. In addition to holding a day of reflection, there should also be related policies put in place.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

We hope that at least one day of reflection can lead to a collective reflection on the policies that could be put in place. We completely agree on that.

You also talked about the impact of gender‑based violence and the links between gender‑based violence and the lack of economic autonomy. In this committee, we're also wondering about how to broaden our thinking on what constitutes violence. It's also a pet issue for me. Here, I'm opening up the discussion on the issue of coercive control. Unfortunately, there is financial violence, and this issue could be better recognized. We must not wait for that to lead to violent acts. We have to be able to work more on prevention and recognize that financial violence can lead to much more serious consequences.

How do you think we could broaden the thinking and emphasize the importance of arriving at better recognition of coercive control?

[Bonnie Brayton]

Thank you very much for bringing that up.

Despite the forthcoming introduction of the Canada benefit, which I've spoken about quite often, we have concerns. We know that once this benefit is in place, women with disabilities will be at high risk of experiencing another type of violence, namely, gender‑based violence.

To explain that, I'm going to talk about current research and recommendations of the DisAbled Women's Network of Canada. We have a project looking at the importance of peer support, not only on a personal level but also in navigating the system and barriers. When you think about how to improve the situation of women with disabilities on planet Earth, the first thing we see is that the DisAbled Women's Network of Canada is the only disability organization in the country. Besides, aren't you tired of seeing me here? In Quebec, there's Action femmes et handicap. Apart from these two organizations, there's a gap in leadership and leadership support for women with disabilities.

I'm straying a little from your question, but I think it's important to understand that the lack of leadership around the table puts us at risk everywhere and contributes to the lack of access to employment, health care and transportation, among other things. We're not at the table often enough.

However, I would remind everyone that 30% of all women in Canada are living with a disability. That's a third of them.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Thank you very much.

I'd like to ask one last quick question on violence.

Ms. Uppal, you also talked about financial abuse. Do you have anything to add on coercive control and the expansion of what constitutes violence?

[Medora Uppal]

Was that question directed to me?

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Yes, Ms. Uppal, the question is for you.

In your opening remarks, you talked about financial abuse and its consequences. Do you want to add anything to what Ms. Brayton said about coercive control?

[Medora Uppal]

Thank you.

The consequences are very real. What we see is that women can't escape fast enough. They don't have the resources and the means because they have no access to their finances. They live under threat, trying to figure out how to navigate the system.

In women's shelters and transitional housing across the country, there are just not enough beds. What we see in Ontario alone is that women have no money to be able to afford to stay in hotels, and those are not the safest places for them to go. The shelter system itself is over capacity. We also have no.... Often as part of the financial control, there's an emotional control of separation from family. Sometimes women are coming from poor situations into the abuse. Sometimes they are dislocated from their families. They have no resources to find an escape.

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

Thank you so much.

We're now going to have to move on to our next six minutes. Online, you'll find Leah Gazan.

Leah, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Thank you so much, Madam Chair.

I'm sorry that I can't join you in person today.

Thank you to all the panellists for the wonderful testimony. My first question is for Bonnie Brayton.

You spoke about how unpaid care work is primarily done by women. You also connected gender-based violence with poverty and financial abuse.

One of the things I'm offering up in this Parliament is my private member's bill in support of a guaranteed livable basic income. One of the reasons is exactly that—for example, the senior women who worked in unpaid care work, who have no pensions and who are living in poverty. It's also for the 70% of adults with severe intellectual disabilities who live in poverty.

I'm wondering what your thoughts are about putting in place a guaranteed livable basic income to deal with issues of gender-based violence but also to ensure that the disabled community can live in dignity in spite of all the discrimination they face in the workforce.

[Bonnie Brayton]

Thank you very much. Also, thanks very much for what you are doing with respect to the guaranteed basic income.

I would say it's been important to support the Canada disability benefit and to understand that one of the things we've felt, as a community, is a bit of a trade-off between accepting the idea that the Canada disability benefit was something we could do, have seen done and, indeed, will come forward, and.... I think the larger idea of a guaranteed basic income is something we should be working towards, because the Canada disability benefit only benefits a group of people with disabilities in a specific age group: working-age Canadians with disabilities.

That said, whether we're talking about a guaranteed basic income or the Canada disability benefit, indeed we've made the connection to the fact that it's extremely important. We've also made the connection that there is a higher risk of gender-based violence. Of course, I could relay chilling stories of situations women with disabilities have been in on the basis of financial coercion and gender-based violence.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Thank you so much for that.

I have limited time, and I have another question for you before I move on.

My bill is for a guaranteed livable basic income in addition to other programs and support meant for special needs, including disabilities, because I know there's a higher cost of living for medication and things to assist with physical disabilities in that area.

You spoke about the national child care strategy for parents and children with disabilities, and how it doesn't address that specific demographic. How is not addressing this demographic impacting the right to access child care?

[Bonnie Brayton]

I was over the moon when the national child care strategy was first announced and have been quite disappointed, as I mentioned before, because there has been no focus on ensuring that this is an opportunity to rethink child care, not just around what buildings look like but also around what people need, which is 24-hour family care.

I want to say that I think the child care initiative we have in motion is important, but it's one small piece of a national strategy that needs to think about family care, 24-hour care and all the women who need access to child care who don't work nine to five.

I think there are a lot of layers to your questions, and I don't want to take up all of your time because you might have someone else.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Yes or no, do you feel that, in its current ideation, the national child care strategy is ableist?

[Bonnie Brayton]

I do.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Okay. Thank you very much.

I'm moving on to Lindsey Cooke from Manitoba Possible.

You spoke a lot about underfunding the care economy. I've been a big proponent of livable wages in the care economy, where workers are primarily women and from BIPOC communities.

I'm wondering if you could expand a bit on that and how, if we are going to develop a care economy, we need to look at wages, benefits and pensions—how, if we are going to move forward, the government needs to become a feminist government by ensuring that fields that are primarily done by women are equally paid and valued.

[Lindsey Cooke]

Through the chair, thank you MP Gazan for that very important question.

I've been very excited today to hear the consistency across our testimony when it comes to the care economy and the importance of reversing the devaluation of that work. It is devalued for the very reason that it has traditionally been held by women, and there are ongoing stereotypes about the reason why people do this work. I have been told by government representatives that part of the compensation is the goodwill I get from the work I do, but I think we would all agree that goodwill doesn't put dinner on the table—certainly not in today's economy.

We need to rethink how we're viewing this work and understand that the work the care economy does is critical. It underpins the rest of the Canadian economy, allowing others to work and contribute.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Karen Vecchio]

Thank you so much.

I feel a much bigger heart when I take care of people. Is that what I'm understanding?

We're going into our next round, which is five minutes, five minutes, two and a half minutes, and two and a half minutes.

We'll start off with Dominique Vien for five minutes.

[Dominique Vien, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I'd like to thank our guests for being with us today, both those who have travelled here and those participating by videoconference.

What strikes me is that we have so much work to do as women. I'm talking about women who have a disability as well as those who don't. I often say that, even though there's equality in law, we're still far from equality in fact. It's all well and good to establish all kinds of policies, directives and fine strategies, but we're not yet where we should be.

In a previous life, I was part of a cabinet in the National Assembly that demanded gender parity. A directive was also sent to all Crown corporations. All the ministers responsible for Crown corporations had to ensure that the boards of directors of Crown corporations were gender balanced, or at least that they were trying to achieve that. I can tell you that we were slapped on the wrist by the premier if we didn't succeed.

Ms. Lusby, you mentioned the issue of equity on boards, or perhaps it was Ms. Cooke. In any case, I think the example has to come from the top.

Are Crown corporations and government organizations in Manitoba given similar guidelines to ensure parity?

[Jennifer Lusby]

Thank you.

If I understand the question correctly it is whether we have anything in Manitoba to support women into leadership at the board level. Did I hear that correctly?

[Dominique Vien, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

Yes, exactly.

In your province, in Manitoba, do government organizations and Crown corporations receive any instructions or directives in this regard?

[Jennifer Lusby]

Not that I know of. I know with Manitoba Possible we have signed on to the 50-30 challenge, and we are particularly interested in that gender parity at the boardroom table. I know for myself as a board chair, as a relatively young board chair, it's been quite the journey. I think there's so much more that we can do to support women in those board positions and to figure out some of the barriers they are currently dealing with. For me, what I see is that mentorship plays a huge part of it.

In order to really get to those board positions, specifically when we speak of officer positions or the board chairperson positions, there are not that many women who are currently serving in these roles. For me, I was looking to Manitoba Possible and to the board, and I didn't see myself represented in those top positions when I first joined back in 2016.

When I first joined the board somebody at the organization shook my hand and said, “Oh, you're young.” That was a very interesting moment for me where—

[Dominique Vien, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

Ms. Lusby, could you tell us exactly what the 50‑30 challenge is?

[Jennifer Lusby]

The 50-30 challenge is a commitment for organizations to have 50% gender parity on their boards and 30% representation from equity-deserving groups. That was something that we took on at Manitoba Possible, but Lindsey might like to expand on that as well.

[Lindsey Cooke]

Yes. It's a commitment that is being led by the federal government and you can sign on as a partner. We undertook that as an organization and are pleased to be able to indicate that we have met that and continue to strive for even further representation.

I think it was Ruth Bader Ginsburg who said we can stop at 100%, so here we go.