:
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Good day.
[Translation]
I am pleased to appear before the Standing Committee on the Status of Women. I would also like to take this opportunity to offer my congratulations on the elections of Ms. Judy Sgro as Chair and Ms. Joy Smith as Vice-Chair of the Standing Committee. They bring a strong commitment to women and their contributions will strengthen the work of the Standing Committee.
Recently, I tabled in Parliament the Government of Canada's responses to three of this Committee's reports on Status of Women Canada. I will discuss the Government's actions in response to these reports throughout my presentation.
Canada's new Government is committed to supporting the full participation of all women in the economic, social and cultural life of Canada. Canada's new Government fundamentally believes that women are equal. We believe that women are strong, achievers, leaders in every sector of our society, providers for our families, and role models. And I am sure you share that belief, too.
[English]
As the minister responsible for Status of Women, I am pleased to discuss with the committee my work to date. In my first months, I met with a number of women's organizations and individuals. I held two round tables focusing on what actions can be taken by all levels of government, the private sector, and NGOs to make a real difference in Canadian women's lives.
There was a strong consensus. All demanded concrete actions. That is why I am pleased that this new government has adopted new terms and conditions for the women's program. We will focus on supporting projects that will directly assist women in their communities. We will focus our efforts and support to address the economic stability of women, particularly senior women, and to end violence against women. We will be working with other departments across the government to support women in their various roles as mothers, employees, entrepreneurs, community builders, and taxpayers.
We know organizations across Canada have been doing their part to directly support women facing many challenges. We will now be able to more effectively partner with them in their work. We know direct assistance for women delivered more locally will have the greatest impact.
Barriers such as the need for training and updating skills, the need for personal advice on preparing for job applications and interviews, the need for mentorship in their local communities, or the need for immigrant women to access services, whether those services are provided by non-profit organizations or different levels of government, are the real needs faced by women in communities across the country. Our support will make a real difference in the lives of Canadian women. This government wants to tackle the real barriers that exist.
After over thirty years of existence, Status of Women Canada must deliver real, measurable results directly affecting women and their families. Through our expenditure review announced early last week, the new government has concluded that $5 million can be saved through greater efficiencies in the administrative operations at Status of Women. The women's program's grants and contributions will have the same annual budget of $10.8 million. The savings will not affect the $10.8 million available to support women.
In addition, we have committed to the Sisters in Spirit initiative. Our government will continue to provide $1 million a year until the years 2010-11. As we all know, aboriginal women have traditionally played a key role in their communities, and in October 2005 Canada was cited by the United Nations Human Rights Committee for failing to adequately address the high rate of violence against aboriginal women. These women and their children deserve safe communities.
I have met with first nations, Métis, and Inuit women's organizations, and their message was clear. They are looking for a government that will deliver change, that will act and make a meaningful difference in their lives. We must continue to support those in the aboriginal community, like Sisters in Spirit, who are taking action.
Canada was also cited in that same 2005 report as failing to address the issues of matrimonial property rights for aboriginal women. I supported and am proud that last Friday my colleague the , Mr. Prentice, announced for this fall a nationwide consultation on matrimonial property rights. These consultations with provincial and territorial governments, first nations, and aboriginal women's organizations are an important first step toward finding solutions to protect the rights and to ensure the well-being of women, children, and families living on reserves.
Aboriginal women are strong leaders in their communities, leaders such as Tracy Gauthier, chief of the Mississaugas of Scugog Island in my riding of Durham, who has ensured that the social and child care needs in her community are being met. Also, there's Leslie Lounsbury, who started the first-ever youth magazine in Winnipeg, and she is seen as an inspiration for aboriginal women across Canada. These women, and so many more, are vibrant reminders of how vitally important they are to their communities and how women can make a difference if given a chance.
I would also like to point out that this government has taken measures to strengthen Canada's response to the unique needs of the victims of human trafficking, victims who are often women and children.
[Translation]
On another topic brought up in this Committee, the Government Response to the Standing Committee's Report on Gender-Based Analysis (GBA) focussed on accountability. Gender-based analysis is an important tool used by federal departments and agencies to develop policies and programs that reflect the needs of all Canadians. In fact, gender-based analysis was actively used in the development of budget 2006. Agencies have already begun training their staff in the application of GBA tools.
[English]
In our future work in supporting the full participation of all Canadian women in the economic, social, and cultural life of Canada, our focus will remain to directly support Canadian women and deliver real results. We will continue strengthening accountability and supporting projects that lead to the direct participation of women. I am committed to working with my colleague ministers to ensure their policies and programs address the needs of women, and in particular, women who face barriers in achieving their goals.
I look forward to the standing committee's continued role in making these goals a reality.
Merci beaucoup. Thank you.
:
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I'm going to try to do mine in four to four and a half minutes, because I want to share with my colleagues and get in as many questions as we can.
Thank you for coming, Minister. First, I want to say, Madam Minister, that I find it disrespectful to this committee and to the women of Canada for us to have to wait seven months to have you appear in front of our committee, and then to have only one hour, and at this, it's not even an hour, with the presentation.
I also want to table, Madam Chair, if I could, because this is part of my question this morning, a letter that was signed by the making a commitment during the election that he would respect the CEDAW agreement with the United Nations. I have a copy here for all committee members, if I may.
The minister talks a great deal about women's equality and talks about programs on the ground, most of which are being done by HRDC in any case, in terms of upgrading resumés, and so on.
But let me get to the crux of it. The criteria of the department have been changed dramatically. This department was established to fight for the equality of Canadian women across this country. If it hadn't been for this department's activism and funding of equality organizations in this country, women would not have equal rights in the Constitution. As the minister very well knows, it was women who fought for that and had to march on Parliament Hill to get that right, and it was as a result of that kind of strength.
That brings me to the questions.
In this changed world where we have changed the criteria, women are being muzzled; that is, organizations, advocacy, capacity building, all that is gone. Can the minister tell me this--and I'm going to go through this, and I would appreciate it if she would be short in her answers, because the time is tight. The issue of equality is gone from your criteria. Why is that?
Fundamentally, this government recognizes that it's been 25 years. The charter is there. We recognize that women are equal under the charter and under any democratic society.
Equality was not a criterion, and in fact, the original establishing legislation for the Status of Women, although it's moved ministries, indicated that the purpose was to “co-ordinate policy with respect to the Status of Women and administer related programs”.
Of course, as I said in my presentation, we do not intend to touch the women's program or to touch the amount of money. We believe we have not in any way muzzled it. Every person, including women in this country, has the freedom and the support of this government to the freedom of speech and freedom of advocating on behalf of any interests. Women equally have access to all of that.
:
Well, I think some questions, as they're posed, deserve a fulsome answer. I'm here to represent the actions of the government and the policies and thinking behind this government.
As far as social justice is concerned, I guess what I would suggest is that it's not one or the other. We've never proposed.... We recognize there are barriers and there are challenges. We're proposing to use taxpayer dollars to help women in their daily lives and in their communities.
We have a numbers of studies that tell us what the barriers are. We received a report from Statistics Canada. In that report, at the presentation that was given, there were identified criteria or realities. We know that if we can move further ahead, if we can accelerate and emphasize the efforts in those areas, those trends will decrease as far as violence against women is concerned.
This is not a matter of saying there is a total disregard for whatever barriers are there. This is not about saying every barrier and everything has been solved. That is my first statement. Obviously we have not solved a lot of the challenges for women. It's why we are now focusing on helping women in their communities and in their daily lives to overcome those challenges.
:
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Minister, I hope you will come back, because there are many questions that we have to ask you.
I have a couple of quick questions.
I lost count of the number of times you used the word “real” in your presentation. I certainly hope it's not code for anything else that is happening here.
Could you tell me this, please? In the response to the standing committee, why did you indicate that you were committed to the full participation of women in the economic, social, and political life of Canadian society, yet there is nothing in the criteria on political life?
:
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Minister, for being with us today to respond to our questions.
I have a couple of brief questions for you, but I would like to begin by addressing what I consider the prerequisites for holding a position where you are responsible for the Status of Women.
Your spokesperson, Ms. Véronique Bruneau, said the following in La Presse: “From now on, we want to support actions, not words”.
I'm assuming that your spokesperson represents you. Having said that, do you believe that advocacy, as well as the possibility for women to influence the federal, provincial or municipal governments, is nothing more than words, as opposed to actions?
:
I'm trying to understand the flow and the thinking behind your question, but I'll just get to the ultimate.
As for actions and the difference that actions can make, we can all articulate and identify the issue, which I think has been done clearly for many years. We can articulate in words and identify what some of the challenges are, which has been done through many studies, conferences, forums, reports, and so on. What we're saying is that now is the time to perform actions.
I can give you a good example of actions. I come from an industry of broadcasting that was predominantly male-controlled. Through the action of some very insightful leaders, who happened to be women, they decided this was not acceptable. So we created an organization called Canadian Women in Communications.
But we also asked the industry, why is it that women aren't participating more fully? They said because of the limited number of qualified women available. So that organization created apprenticeship programs, scholarships, etc., to address the exact challenge.
They also said it's a matter of training and experience and enabling them to participate in non-traditional roles. So there was a program set up to address this and make sure there were enough qualified women capable of taking on some non-traditional roles.
So the organization was able to identify the most meaningful ways to directly increase the participation of women in broadcasting. If you look at that industry today, they've done this without any government funding. If you look at it today, we have women who are the heads and the leaders of broadcast services, of broadcast industries. We have senior women in the telephony industry. To me, this is real action: identify what the problem is and then put into place measures that will help women. And they didn't do this from one central source—
It really is an honour to have you here today, Minister, to present to our committee.
Some of the things I have heard all across this country.... I too have met with a number of women's organizations that have been extremely pleased with the $10.8 million for programs that is still in place. I commend you for working with these individuals. I had a woman in from the YWCA yesterday. She said she'd read the newspaper, and after making some calls she realized the $10.8 million was there. She was so grateful about that.
The fact that you had the two round tables focusing on what actions could be taken by all levels of government, and working in such a collaborative way with all levels of government, and really being determined to take action on these issues, will make a real difference in Canadian women's lives. And I've heard that from several NGOs.
Certainly, it's a very exciting time for Canada right now, under your leadership, to see that action is going to be taken and things are really going to be done, so that it doesn't take years and years of reports and everything, but that things are actually being done. You're actually taking the work that's already been done and amalgamating it in such a way that we can have an action plan.
I'm very interested in the renewed terms and conditions that have been brought forward. I really like the idea that women are equal, that we have the Charter of Rights. That's why immigrants come to Canada. That's why my father and mother came to Canada: because under Canadian laws we are equal citizens, and we can rise to the top if we work hard and if we take those advantages.
You and I have talked. We've talked around this table today. I know that everyone around this table believes in the full participation of women in the economic, social, and cultural life of Canada. That is really what is so exciting.
I have a lot of women's organizations in my riding, and I've met with every one of them. They're excited about these new terms and conditions.
Can you specifically reiterate and talk a little bit more about how these renewed terms and conditions will actually benefit the women in the organizations in my riding? They're very excited about the fact that they're not victims but are equal people. They're ready to go, and they're ready to grow in the Canadian society.
:
Thank you for your question. It gives me an opportunity to provide some more description.
I spoke yesterday with the minister for women from Newfoundland, who was very enthusiastic because she was able to describe to me those organizations in Newfoundland. These are the same organizations, many of them, that are right across this country.
She told me about an organization that is struggling because of the employment level in Newfoundland, which has been seriously affected by some of the industrial changes that have happened there. She was able to tell me that she too wanted to undertake that kind of real action in supporting those women on the ground.
We have women's groups--and we know they're right across this country as well--who won't get the advantage of more direct mentorship. There are women leaders in every community, but it's a matter of connecting those who have accomplished something through opportunity, through hard work, through sometimes just good luck, with those who haven't had the same opportunities, etc., and to be able to encourage them to help the next generation.
I know that we have a program in Heritage--it's in Heritage--called “citizenship”. In answer to a previous question, that's where I see the work having to be done to encourage and promote increased participation of women, of youth, of our immigrant population, and of our new Canadians in the political life of Canada. That's where it has to happen.
I also know that the Department of Health actually gives grants and helps out people. There are organizations that we have in every one of our communities. We all have the Red Cross. They get support from the Department of Health, not through Status of Women.
We also have an official languages program, which we will use then to help immigrant women who are struggling with having to adopt one of Canada's official languages.
We have a program that we support, the aboriginal women's associations, in making sure that they can have a voice. Many of these bands are now led by predominantly male organizations.
We have many programs under our multiculturalism program as well, and we believe that the status of women program certainly can play a role that will complement the existing programs within every department.
So I think what we're saying here is that we have settlement houses, and we can support some of the projects within those settlement houses that are specifically directed to women.
In my riding we have a women's entrepreneur organization. We can help them spread out and be able to mentor, as I said, and include more women who have aspirations to themselves being entrepreneurs.
So there are different ways. I think the primary thing here for me is that the responsibility of the Minister of Status of Women is not only to ensure that the programs are available, that the resources for effective programming are there, but also to be an advocate at the cabinet table and to challenge every one of my colleagues and to ask how this will affect women, how will it benefit women, when you present legislation. Ensure us that the gender analysis has been done and do not just allow any group of people to say, well, that's not our job; it's the job of that unit over there.
:
Let me just respond very quickly.
I have read the reports. In fact, that is why I've made the decisions and the government agrees with the decisions that I've made.
We have those reports, and I've actually taken the reports and all the reports that reference aboriginal women, and that's why I've been able to sit down with the and get him to move in concert with all of my colleagues on increased funding for aboriginal housing, for a better plan for the education of aboriginal children and youth, and on establishing a process to address matrimonial property rights.
That is why this government is moving ahead: because we know that women are equally affected by not recognizing their foreign credentials. The number of qualified, experienced, educated women who come to this country.... I met a page last year. Her mother has two master's degrees from a foreign university and now she's cleaning office buildings. That is why we're acting.
We've read those reports, and we're saying that's why it's so important now, after all of those reports, after millions of dollars, for us to use those dollars now to effect real change and make a real difference.
:
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Back in May, this committee recommended a minimum 25% increase to the budget for the Status of Women. Now what we have is almost a 40% cut to the administrative part of this budget. We also have met with women's groups across this country, and there is serious concern that this cut, when you look deeper, is more than administration. It affects the important research work that's done, which is the basis for advocacy and reform to the system. The Status of Women is the one government department whose raison d'être is to give a voice to women. Now we see that the funding criteria have changed: equality is out, social justice is out, advocacy is out, capacity building is out. What's in? Funding for for-profit organizations is in and funding for spiritual initiatives is in.
I'd like to know who the minister consulted with, because once upon a time, back in May, this minister stood for equality for women and backed equality for women, and in fact said it needed more work. So after pressure from the to meet with REAL Women, this has changed. Why? What's happened? I'd like to know whether this minister, after listening to other women's groups across the country, listening to this committee, will have the guts to go to the Prime Minister to fight for the 25% increase, minimum, for this department.
:
You can look this up--everyone is aware of it--I've worked very closely with Canadian Women in Communications. Within that organization there are many for-profit organizations that have put forward scholarships, apprenticeships, etc. They've asked for support from government at various levels to hold their awards events, to celebrate, to enable the mentorship programs, the gatherings to hear from entrepreneurs on how they can improve their businesses.
I want to say this and I want to make it clear--and I want the full opportunity to do this, Madam Chair. I sit here as a member of this government. I sit here not only as a colleague of cabinet ministers, but I also have full support. I agree with our . He has asked me, and every minister, to deliver real action, to deliver and make changes in the lives of Canadians. Consequently, I have responded in the House that the organization called REAL Women is one organization out of hundreds of other organizations. Just as individuals are entitled to their different positions, so are organizations, and a responsible government.... I am glad I am part of the government, because it means that I can do something, that I have the support of my colleagues, and as government we can effect change.
Consequently, we listen to all organizations. That is the task that has been given by the . He supports me, and I support him.
Minister, we really do appreciate your being here. You and I have even had some personal conversations on women's issues. I really appreciate the feedback and the respect and the time you've taken to hear what I have to say from my previous experience, and how you're incorporating that into what you're doing.
I do want to say that I think some of the suggestions around the table that women have been muzzled are absolutely ridiculous. I believe in the strength of women, and our party believes in the strength of women. I think all women in the House of Commons should have this same approach.
I'm actually quite offended by the suggestion that maybe I'm weak or something like that, that someone can just barrel over me, that I have no voice and I have no way of dealing with things here in Canada. I mean, that's just absolutely absurd. I'm really getting sick and tired of the character assassination, because when that is said, it's placed on me as a woman in this House.
I want to know what you think of that as a woman too, when you hear someone accuse you of that, because I'd be interested to see how it affects you. I think it's absolutely ridiculous.
Any barriers that have been suggested around this table are barriers that all Canadians experience, and we have a responsibility, as members of Parliament, to get rid of those barriers for all Canadians, for new Canadians who come here as well. Your reference to taking care of new immigrants and their foreign training credentials, which is something that was ignored by the previous Liberal government for years and years, I think is extremely important. I'm glad to see that we're finally taking that on as well. If you care to comment a bit more on that, you can.
At Status of Women Canada, of the money they have been receiving, $13.6 million is spent on administration. Having been a small business person, I have a hard time believing that any corporation, for 13 years, would allow an organization to go on and spend $13.6 million on administration, while only $11 million went to the grants--only $11 million of it is going out to the front line to solve the problems. I think it's just absurd that anyone would advocate that this should continue in any way. We have a responsibility, again, as members of Parliament, to ensure that the money is not only spent wisely, but that it's actually producing results.
Now I'll get into my personal side, which we have discussed, which is talking about violence against women. Thirteen years ago I has been volunteering in rape crisis for just shy of eight years. One out of two women was being assaulted. That hasn't changed at all. So I suggest to the honourable members across the way that whatever plan they had in place was not working. It did nothing. Nothing's changed. Can we please put our swords down here and actually work together to try to solve these problems?
I appreciate that you're actually listening to me, that you're listening to other organizations across the country, and that you're prepared to tackle that. If you wanted to comment a little bit more on the commitment we've made to seeing some real changes in violence against women, I would really like to hear what you have to say.
Regarding pay equity, again, I'll just point out that I look forward to hearing from the minister, who has been tasked with responding to this committee. From what I've seen, I'm very impressed, because again we'll see some real action. We won't just see more reports; we'll see some action, and I'm really looking forward to that.
If you want to give us more on that, you may. Thanks.
:
I will clarify the numbers. One thing I have certainly learned is that reading government numbers is not the easiest task an individual is given. Even after years of reading business plans, it seems it's very different.
To clarify, the entire $13 million is not just administration; there are areas of activity. That's where we will be reviewing what activities will continue that are included in the $13 million. It's misrepresentation to say that it's going to come out of programming.
I know, Ms. Ievers, that we are going to be looking, because we know we can reduce that 31¢ cost to deliver $1. For example, in order to administer and give out $10.8 million, the administrative cost, the directorate cost, is $3.3 million.
When we also look at another area, at directorate costs in some of the areas of delivery.... There are different areas, and we're very clear—I asked for these numbers and I got these numbers—as to how many of these dollars are going to programs, to activities, and how many are for administration. I'm comfortable that we will be able to find the $5 million in administration.
One of the things Status of Women voluntarily undertook, before expenditure review, was to look at the points of contact with Status of Women across the country, and to look at how it could be done more effectively and more efficiently. They had already undertaken that.
If I could, I would like to have an opportunity to speak about being called weak and frail and about being part of that nomenclature.
I have to say, Madam Chair, that as a visible minority, as a woman, as a person of colour, I face challenges that are unique. I would say also that there was a time in my life, in my youth, that I maybe felt weak, because I was being told I was different, I was being told I didn't belong, I was being told that I was special and would need extra help, and I was also being told that whatever I did would reflect not only on my family but on a whole community.
There are women like me, and many women around this table, who have maybe not the same challenges but different challenges, who have been able to not only work and advocate on their own behalf, but advocate on behalf of other people.
I believe we have a role, those of us who are fortunate to have won the confidence of the people in our communities. We are role models. The first thing I would not do is go back to my riding and call the women and address them as weak, vulnerable, or disadvantaged.
:
I guess I'm just going to have reiterate it again. What I've learned is that if you keep saying it and saying it and saying it, maybe people realize what the truth is; the difference is that you have to make sure what you say and say and say is the truth to start with.
What I'd like to say is that in no way does this government say all women are strong. In fact we recognize that among all women, just as among all men, there are those who will have the opportunities and the strength and the personality and the support to take leadership roles. There are those men who will not play the same role as other men. There are children who have different advantages and opportunities, just as there are women who will have different opportunities, disadvantages, and advantages. So to characterize what we are saying as a belief that all women are strong is a mischaracterization.
We are not saying there are no weak women, but what we will not say is that all Canadian women are weak. We will not say that all Canadian women are vulnerable. What we're saying is that we also know at the same time that all Canadian women have dreams and aspirations, all Canadian women want to feel safe in their communities, all Canadian women want to be able to participate in their chosen ways, and in some areas they have more challenges than in other areas. What we're saying here is that there are women who are facing barriers we can do something about with real action, who are facing challenges we can do something about by helping them in their local communities through organizations. That is what this government is saying.
It is a total mischaracterization to say that by redesigning the terms and conditions, we are automatically saying that women are not weak, that all women are strong. That's not what we're saying. That is a mischaracterization of what we're saying.
I think the first step is totally the opposite. We recognize there are some women who are going to need our help, and that's why we want to get to the communities and to help them in their daily lives.
:
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Ms. Ievers and panel, for coming to join us here this afternoon.
My question actually pertains to the testimony that this committee has heard relating primarily to economic security but also to access.
We heard that there have been some gains for women in particular, but there remains a segment of our population, particularly women seniors, native aboriginal women, and new Canadian or immigrant women, for whom we have not been able to close the gap with regard to access and being fully integrated and having the same economic benefit. The gap continues to be there and doesn't seem to be moving all that quickly, despite the fact that we've seen some announcements around, for example, support for immigrant settlement. There's been a reduction in the residence fee--and I'll context this by saying I want to focus on immigrant women in particular--and we've seen some movement towards helping foreign-trained immigrants get their equivalency to participate fully in Canadian society.
I wonder if you could comment on why we still don't seem to be closing the gap in those issues, specifically for immigrant women.
:
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I would first like to make a statement to follow up on what was said earlier by the minister with respect to immigrant women.
There was a great deal of discussion this morning both by the minister and members opposite with respect to programs for immigrant women, assisting immigrant women on the ground and all of these things, which of course is fair. I'm someone who has lived the immigrant experience and I worked for about 30 years with immigrant women in the city of Toronto. I have a strong understanding of what they go through, I can assure you.
I'm also a co-founder of NOIVMWC. I also know that if it wasn't for a charter challenge to the Government of Canada in 1986, immigrant women would not have received English as a second language subsidized language training. It was deemed at the time that women did not need language training and so on.
There are still many barriers. Multicultural health is an issue. Immigrant women deal with certain health issues in different ways. On language there are a lot of barriers. The fact that we have charter rights doesn't mean they automatically are applied to women in this country. You have to fight for them and you have to challenge them, as everyone knows.
My question is, having removed the advocacy part of the criteria, will NOIVMWC be one of those organizations that will be defunded once the new criteria come into effect?
:
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I would like to thank you for the opportunity to answer our questions. I think it's very encouraging to see that you're here to carry on after the minister had to leave.
Some of the things we've heard here this morning are extremely important, and they're things that I think each of us sitting around these tables agree to. I think we do believe in equality for women, and strength for women, and I think that's extremely important. We have to remember that those are some of the goals we're trying to work towards.
It has been very encouraging to hear the minister say that she has participated in round tables and consultations with groups, and many different groups regardless of what their mandate is. I think that's important. We need to deal directly to assist women in their communities, where they need it. These are all very important things.
We need to address the economic stability of women, the violence issues. These are all things that women in all communities are facing, in most cases, regardless of their age or their background.
We need to support training and skills, and mentorships, to try to increase the betterment of women across this country. It's also very encouraging to think that we're going to be looking for measurable results.
Status of Women over the years has done some remarkable work. We have seen that in a lot of different aspects of this great country of ours. But we also have to realize that times change and issues change, and the outcomes that we're looking for sometimes have to be approached in different manners. I think it's important that there is flexibility and that there is a broad, open-minded approach to how we can better the status of women in Canada.
We've had $10.8 million for programming, and we've seen that amount over several years. I'm extremely pleased to see that in the cost-saving measures that have been put forward, we are not affecting programming. It is vital that that money stay in the programming and that we continue to support women.
At this committee, one of the areas of our society that we have seen greatly disadvantaged in many ways is the aboriginal communities. I think somebody spoke earlier today about the United Nations having cited us in 2005 for the incidence of violence against aboriginal women and failing to address matrimonial property rights. Those are just two of the issues, but they're certainly on a very international scale, and Canada and the plight of women was made very much in the forefront.
We do know that in the 2006 budget there was $450 million allotted for improving water supply and housing on reserves, education outcomes, and socio-economic conditions. Minister Prentice launched the second phase of the national consultation process on matrimonial real property on-reserve. We have seen an approval of a final Indian residential school settlement agreement. Those are some of the things that are going towards helping aboriginals in general.
Can you tell me, are there specific ways Status of Women has identified to help aboriginals in particular?
:
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you all for being with us today to answer our questions.
I really have two main questions. First of all, I understand that there will be $2.5 million worth of cuts this year, which will go into effect with the next budget. I also understand that the Minister has asked you to see where further cuts can be made. I would like to get a detailed breakdown of those cuts--if possible, in hard copy--for reference purposes. But could you give me a verbal answer now?
When will the new criteria for the Women's Program come into effect? Under the new criteria, can groups such as the National Association of Women and the Law, the FFQ and the Canadian Feminist Alliance for International Action expect to disappear?
In 2005, consultations were held with respect to the criteria of the Women's Program. The Minister said she had consulted with women's groups. I would like to know what women's groups were consulted. Are we talking about the same group as in 2005? It would be rather strange for the criteria to suddenly have changed after meetings with other people. I would like to know which women's groups were met with the second time.
I want to thank the witnesses very much for coming today. We do appreciate the information you were able to give us. You've provided more insight. Thank you all very much.
To members, the estimates have to be reviewed. That's a responsibility of the committee. We don't have time now, with seven minutes, to do so, which leaves us no other option but to have them come at the beginning of the next meeting. If everybody could meet with department officials before then--if you have additional questions--we could deal with the estimates as expeditiously as possible at the beginning of our next meeting. We do have officials from DFAIT and Justice Canada confirmed for our next meeting. If members could come prepared to do a fast review of our estimates, and have any questions asked ahead of time with departmental officials, the committee could deal with them.
There was reference, Ms. Stronach, to distribution of some material. You'll see that gets done in English and French.
Is there any other business we need to talk about? Ms. Mourani.