STANDING SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL FINANCE
EVIDENCE
OTTAWA, Tuesday, December 4, 2018
The Standing Senate Committee on National Finance met this day at 9:30 a.m. to study the subject matter of all of Bill C-86, A second Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on February 27, 2018 and other measures (topic: Part 4 - Division 18); and, in camera, to examine the Supplementary Estimates (A) for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2019 (consideration of a draft report); and, in camera, to examine the Main Estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2019 (consideration of a draft report).
Senator Percy Mockler (Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Chair: Good morning. I am Percy Mockler, senator from New Brunswick and chair of the committee.
[Translation]
I want to welcome all of you who are in the room here, as well as all Canadians who are watching us on TV or online.
[English]
Also, as a reminder to those watching, the committee hearings are open to the public and available online at sencanada.ca.
[Translation]
I will now ask the senators to introduce themselves.
Senator Forest: Éric Forest, Gulf Region, Quebec.
Senator Pratte: André Pratte, from Quebec.
Senator Moncion: Lucie Moncion, from Ontario.
[English]
Senator M. Deacon: Marty Deacon, Ontario.
Senator Moncion: Elizabeth Marshall, Newfoundland and Labrador.
Senator Eaton: Nicky Eaton, Ontario.
Senator Boehm: Peter Boehm, Ontario.
Senator Klyne: Marty Klyne, Saskatchewan.
[Translation]
The Chair: I would also like to mention the presence of our clerk, Ms. Gaëtane Lemay, and of our two analysts, Mr. Alex Smith and Mr. Shaowei Pu, who also support the work of our committee.
[English]
Honourable senators, today we continue our consideration of the subject matter of Bill C-86, A second Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on February 27, 2018, and other measures, which was referred to us by the Senate on November 7.
Last week we held three meetings to go over the entire bill with government officials mainly from the Department of Finance. Unfortunately, we ran out of time on Wednesday afternoon. As a result, we have Division 18 of Part 4 that couldn’t be reviewed.
This morning, Danielle Bélanger will walk us through and make comments on Division 18, which creates a department for women and gender equality. We will ask Ms. Bélanger to make her presentation, to be followed by questions from the senators.
From the Status of Women Canada, I welcome Danielle Bélanger,Director, GBA Plus and Strategic Policy, Policy and External Relations Directorate.
[Translation]
Ms. Bélanger, you have the floor.
Danielle Bélanger, Director, GBA Plus and Strategic Policy, Policy and External Relations Directorate, Status of Women Canada: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
[English]
Good morning, everyone. I will provide a brief overview of the proposed bill to create a new department. Under this proposed act, Status of Women Canada will become the new department for women and gender equality. This act will formalize the important role of the former Office of the Coordinator for the Status of Women and its minister into legislation by creating a new department.
The new department and its minister will have an expanded mandate, under this proposed legislation, for gender equality to include sexual orientation as well as gender identity and expression.
It will also assume responsibility and be a central hub for promoting a greater understanding of how Canada uses the gender and diversity lens, also known as gender-based analysis plus, to examine the impact of new and existing government measures on people of varying identities and abilities.
[Translation]
Finally, in order to promote gender equality and continue to improve the lives of women, the new minister will draw on the previous work done by the Office of the Coordinator for the Status of Women, and the organizations that work for equality, by developing and implementing policies, by doing research, and by awarding grants and contributions.
I am ready to answer all of your questions. Thank you very much.
The Chair: Thank you, Madam.
[English]
Senator Eaton: Thank you for being here. This seems like very important legislation, very topical, but why is it in the budget bill?
Ms. Bélanger: It was proposed in Budget 2018 to create a new department basically for promoting more fulsome gender equality.
Senator Eaton: I understand that. I was wondering why it’s in the budget bill and is not stand-alone legislation.
In the pursuit of economic and economic equality with respect to sexual orientation and gender expression, could you give me some examples of that in the workplace or what that will entail?
Ms. Bélanger: By expanding the mandate to go beyond just women and including gender equality, it includes the LGBTQ2 community. We have been working closely with the LGBTQ2 Secretariat at PCO and ensuring that gender equality goes beyond just women and would include girls as well.
Senator Eaton: Is that discrimination against gay or homosexual people and transgender?
Ms. Bélanger: Yes, exactly.
Senator Klyne: Could you tell me about some of the specific projects or activities that you envision will be undertaken by your new department?
Ms. Bélanger: Absolutely. Currently, we organize our projects under three main pillars: economic empowerment, gender-based violence and leadership.
Status of Women Canada has been doing work, primarily with women’s organizations. In moving forward with an expanded mandate, we would also include LGBTQ2 communities, for instance.
When it comes to gender-based violence, we would be looking at violence against girls and women but also looking at LGBTQ2 communities as well.
Senator Klyne: What comes under the umbrella or the one pillar of economic empowerment?
Ms. Bélanger: We work a lot with women entrepreneurs, for instance. We work closely with other government departments, such as ISED and ESDC, in terms of looking at the gender wage gap, looking at supporting and achieving pay equity and other measures in the labour market.
Certainly the minister of ESDC is the lead on pay equity, for instance, but we offer support.
Senator Klyne: Will you be directly communicating with the pay equity commissioner office?
Ms. Bélanger: Absolutely. We often work very horizontally as a hub or a small organization. We work with our partners, not only federal organizations but provinces and territories. We also work with other organizations externally, some corporations and some private sector organizations.
Senator Klyne: Will the grants and contributions will largely find their way in the economic empowerment?
Ms. Bélanger: It will probably be a mix, not just under that pillar but under other pillars for sure.
Senator Boehm: I have a few questions related to GBA+.
A few years ago when I was still in the public service, I did the course that was for public servants. I have my certificate and everything, and we’ve encouraged others to do that as well.
How will the new department continue that work? The new department, like the old department, will have to work across government and with some of the subnational authorities. Do you have a comment on that?
Ms. Bélanger: For sure. We’ll be continuing to promote GBA+ as the gender diversity lens. We continue to work closely with central agencies to ensure that there is a good understanding of what we mean by GBA+.
We have a good partnership right now the Canada School of Public Service. We’ve been offering pilots on GBA+ premium courses for federal public servants. I am really happy to hear that you’ve taken the online course. We continue to encourage folks to do so.
Certainly capacity is a big issue across government, so we definitely want to put together a much more central focus on GBA+ in order to promote it. Our current minister is a very big champion and has been doing a great job of marketing the GBA+ lens.
In particular, we held a GBA+ forum two weeks ago that had over 500 participants. They were not only federal government officials but folks from provinces and territories, international, and academia in attendance.
Senator Boehm: I was on a panel at that forum. One of the issues that came up was that GBA+ as a term doesn’t exactly roll off the tongue.
Are you looking at rebranding that or changing the name to make it a bit more understandable to Canadians?
Ms. Bélanger: We have been considering that. We’ve heard, especially from folks outside government, that it’s not as jazzy or accessible.
Senator Boehm: It sounds a bit bureaucratic.
Ms. Bélanger: It does, absolutely. It started in 1995 out of Beijing. A lot of work has happened over the years. Also, the “plus” is the intersectionality of gender and diversity. We had a panel at the conference about unpacking the “plus” and what that means, especially in looking at different identities.
We are exploring options for sure.
Senator Boehm: Thank you very much.
[Translation]
Senator Forest: Thank you, Ms. Bélanger, for your very interesting presentation.
Following the creation of this new department, a letter of mandate was issued. To allow us to follow the development of this initiative and the impact of the resources being invested, have you prepared some project-based, yearly performance indicators?
Ms. Bélanger: Yes. In Budget 2018, we included the Gender Results Framework. It’s a framework that contains indicators, and into which other departments must post their achievements. For the first time, provinces and territories will be working with us on these indicators in order to measure the impact and progress of gender equality.
Senator Forest: We want this new department to be transparent, so that people can see clearly how public funds are being used. It will be easy to access and consult the evolution of the work thanks to the performance indicators.
Ms. Bélanger: That is a very good point and a good question. This framework is our primary tool for measuring our impact. There are also the departmental plans. We work as a central group that will see to it that the other departments...
Senator Forest: Will you have a coordination function?
Ms. Bélanger: That is correct. Coordination will be very, very important.
Senator Forest: In the same vein as Senator Boehm, yes, people are more sensitive to the LGBTQ2+ phenomenon, which has many facets. The target group is the public at large. We have to help it discover this reality, and also contribute to lessening the violence and isolation these people face. Have you thought about a communication or intervention plan that would raise the awareness of the general public with regard to this phenomenon, which is a totally natural thing?
Ms. Bélanger: Raise awareness in terms of GBA+?
Senator Forest: The reality of GBA+, yes.
Ms. Bélanger: We are currently conducting awareness-raising campaigns aimed at the general public to communicate the work the department does, but in future, we would like to do more in the context of our strategies.
We have a strategy to promote gender equality that targets men and boys, because this issue does not only concern girls and women; it’s mostly a societal issue. That is certainly part of our plans.
Senator Forest: Thank you.
[English]
Senator Marshall: Thank you for being here.
Could you give us some details on the logistics of the new department once the legislation is enacted? I am interested in your budget, the staffing, and how you will take over the Status of Women. Could you take us through that?
Ms. Bélanger: Sure. No extra funding comes with the new proposed legislation. It will certainly be status quo in terms of our employee count as well as where we are. It’s really just a question of changing the title at this point.
If new resources come, that is within the purview of this government.
Senator Marshall: You will be taking over the Status of Women and turning it into a department.
Ms. Bélanger: Absolutely. It is all about formalizing the role of the department and formalizing the role of the minister.
Senator M. Deacon: My question might be a bit repetitive, and thank you, Senator Marshall, for that question.
You’re looking at these improvements. You’re making this decision to obviously be better and more efficient at the work you’re doing. Beyond a name change or a name of an organizational change, what was at the heart of what you are trying to get at to be more efficient, to be more aligned, and to deliver to Canada in a stronger way? What were your highest priorities for improvements moving forward?
Ms. Bélanger: The highest priority for this piece of legislation is really to formalize that role and to give a formal backing for a full minister to be able to engage with her counterparts as well.
It was created as a small agency in 1976 under an OIC. It was really about coordinating policies and programs. In terms of where this government has been going with gender equality, as well as previously over the past few decades, gender equality has been taking on a much higher profile within society. By giving it formal backing to become a full department, it is more robust in terms of engagement.
Senator M. Deacon: With that piece, if you take it from our domestic picture to the international forward-facing picture, I must believe this is better for our position and our robustness as we work internationally with partners of similar goals.
Ms. Bélanger: We’ve done work with the OECD. Certainly other international governments see Canada as a leader when it comes to gender equality.
By becoming a full department, this one measure demonstrates that there is value in that.
Senator Andreychuk: I am sorry I was a little late. There are too many ongoing committees.
I want to go through your policies. We spent a lot of time in the Human Rights Committee, as led by one of our former colleagues, to get gender-based analysis introduced in the first place. It has moved entirely too slowly for most of us, but will we be able to see those policies and how they’re applied in the departments?
It’s one thing for you to say you’ve done a gender-based analysis of whatever format and whatever it’s titled — GBA+ or whatever — but people need to know how you’ve applied it, if we are to be transparent and accountable.
It shouldn’t just be a check mark somewhere that we’ve done it or we’ve considered it, but the public doesn’t know. We don’t get confidence in it. The feedback we’re getting from many groups is that they need to know how you apply it and we need to see that.
Ms. Bélanger: I agree. There are a lot of best practices out there. In terms of the agenda of how the G7 was put together, a gender-based analysis was applied to that. Also, other best-case studies are used at the Canada School of Public Service in terms of when federal officials go and learn about gender-based analysis.
We highlight a dozen really great examples from across different sectors, whether it us transportation, natural resources or the health sector, of how a policy had been transformed by using a gender-based analysis.
A lot of it is good policy development at the front and looking at how your measure has intended or unintended impacts on people, on all different Canadians.
Senator Andreychuk: That is exactly what we heard in the other committee.
On a particular act or policy which comes before us, we would like to know what the process was transparently so we could see it and we could assess whether in fact it’s a full policy and analysis. That is what we were asking for.
Otherwise, we’re going on the fact that we did it. You’re telling us that you applied it and it had an impact. We would like to know how, why and where. I think the public has to be engaged if we are actually to succeed in a gender-based analysis.
Ms. Bélanger: Parliamentary committees might be a good place as well to be asking for gender-based analyses when folks come forward.
Senator Andreychuk: I think I am forewarning this committee, as the other committee has been asking and quite frankly has not received the answers. We get generalities: We’re working on it, it’s there, but we are never ever able to tie it to any particular program of the government.
That’s the difficulty. We’re going on faith and our job is really oversight, not faith. I made my point.
The Chair: If there are no other questions, this will complete consideration of Part 4, Division 18.
[Translation]
Ms. Bélanger, thank you very much for your comments and explanations.
[English]
We will now move in camera for consideration of two reports. We will give you the details following the commencement of the next meeting.
(The committee continued in camera.)