FEWO Committee Report

In 1999, the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration made a commitment to gender analysis of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. The following year, the Department established a GBA unit that began by doing preliminary gender-based analysis for departmental bills (C-31 and C-11). Analysis of regulations indicated where sex-disaggregated data collection, monitoring and analysis were required in order to assess gender-based impacts over time. When the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act was passed, it included a legislative requirement to provide a gender-based analysis of the impact of the Act in an annual report to Parliament.

The GBA Unit is located within the Strategic Policy and Partnerships Branch which is part of the Strategic Directions and Communications Sector that identifies ongoing and emerging issues relevant across the Department. The unit became permanent in 2003 and included two full-time equivalents: a director and a senior analyst. In October 2004, a junior analyst position (term) was created due to an increased workload. The only direct costs identified by the Department are for the salaries of the three staff with other costs absorbed by the programs and branches. Any GBA training costs for example are considered part of general departmental training costs and not identified separately.

The GBA unit is mandated to:

•

provide ongoing analyses of gender-related implications of departmental legislative initiatives and strategic directions, horizontal policy issues, and any emerging domestic and international trends.

•

develop tools to build capacity to support the implementation of gender-based analysis across the Department. This is done in part by delivering training programs that are specifically tailored to departmental and branch needs.

•

support the Department’s branches in the development and implementation of branch GBA plans, as required.

•

coordinate the gender-based analysis section of the report to Parliament and provide an annual internal stock-taking report on departmental activities on gender-based analysis.

Citizenship and Immigration is unique in that it has a legislative requirement to report to Parliament on the gender-based impact of its primary legislation, the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA). The IRPA thus provides the primary mechanism to ensure that gender considerations are mainstreamed. The legislative review process also integrates GBA into the Department’s work as it does regulatory adjustments. Parliamentary reporting means that the Department absolutely must do an annual report and this automatically becomes part of a deputy minister’s way of evaluating performance.

The Department has also undertaken the development of a strategic framework for gender-based analysis. Covering the period from 2005 to 2010, the framework sets out the Department’s objectives and principles for gender-based analysis as well as the concrete steps to be taken in order to meet any legislative requirement. This strategic framework aids in measuring performance and reinforcing accountability at the branch level.

Each branch, according to its area of responsibility, is expected to outline the issues for reporting and the elements necessary to undertake substantive analysis. Branch plans are to report on particular areas of responsibility under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. They are to include the gender-based analysis initiatives designed to build best practices, the identification of data challenges in relation to sex-disaggregated data and work processes, and activities to build staff knowledge and confidence, including training. All of the branch plans are signed off by the director general of the branch and they in turn report back to their assistant deputy minister who is responsible for overall program administration and human resources.

B. Human Resources and Skills Development Canada

Although the training started in 2001, using Status of Women Canada material, it has now moved to documentation containing examples taken from departmental work and specific case studies based on the realization that concrete examples that work in the Department and address its business are needed. It took about two years to understand all the issues fully and to get the training strategy organized. The training methodology and documentation increased the employees’ experience and abilities and allowed the Department to arrive at a common understanding of gender-based analysis and to adopt a shared terminology. The people who had undergone the training became those most apt to turn to the unit for extra help. Almost 150 employees have been trained in both official languages.

The legislative requirement has played a critical role. Essentially, the requirement itself did not mainstream the gender-based analysis, but it created a very formal basis for gender-based analysis in the Department. The strategic framework for GBA identifies an annual stock-taking process to consider progress made, challenges faced, and further opportunities. This annual report is intended as a management tool to be taken at the corporate level, and it facilitates gender-based analysis.

The strategic framework states that the Department must ensure that sufficient resources are allocated to enable the Department to make progress in implementing the framework and meet its accountability requirements under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. Because of the legislative requirement to report and the adoption of branch GBA plans, the Department is currently assessing the need for further human resources as part of the implementation strategy for the strategic framework.

The gender plans to be done for each branch in the Department are a practical application of how a branch is going to move forward on its requirement to report and efforts are made to get everyone working on policy and programs to think about GBA. Because there are a number of common elements in all of the branch plans, it gives consistency across the Department and permits stocktaking on progress. The full plan from all branches is moving branch by branch and will take another year to complete.

Work and consultation with non-governmental organizations like the Canadian Council on Refugees is carried out informally and on an ad hoc basis by the GBA unit and also by the individual branches, when they are doing their plans.

The departments now known as Human Resources and Skills Development Canada and Social Development Canada were formed in 2003. They have several predecessors that focused on equality issues and these are outlined in the following discussion.

In 1954, the Women’s Bureau, established as part of the former Department of Labour, was the first organization in the federal government created to address the concerns of women. From 1954 to 1993, its mission was to advance the full and equal participation of women in employment. Under that mandate the bureau undertook a number of functions, including research, analysis and information dissemination on workplace issues. It contributed to policy initiatives aimed at improving the situation of women in the labour force and regularly consulted and collaborated with unions, employers, other jurisdictions, and non-governmental and international organizations.

In 1993, Human Resources Development Canada, or HRDC, was created from the amalgamation of five former departments, including Labour. At that time, the Women’s Bureau began to assume a broader focus that reflected the wider range of policies and programs for which HRDC was responsible. By 1999 the Women’s Bureau outlined a new model for advancing gender analysis in the Department. The model involved the development of a network of gender advisers located throughout the Department to work toward integrating gender analysis into their area of expertise.

Created in 2000, the network of gender advisers consisted of departmental officials mandated to apply gender analysis in their work areas. The Women’s Bureau supported the network of gender advisors through the provision of a variety of capacity-building instruments pertaining to training on gender analysis. In September 2001 the Women’s Bureau changed its name to the Gender Analysis and Policy Directorate, or GAP, to better reflect its mandate of promoting gender analysis. This change was part of the implementation of the Department’s 1999 strategic plan.

In 2003, the need for a large gender unit consisting of 12 employees was deemed to be no longer necessary and the Gender Analysis and Policy Directorate was reduced to 5 people. It was argued that gender analysis had been more fully integrated into the Department’s policy and program development. At the same time, a policy on gender analysis, approved by the National Management Board, was launched. The policy was developed to provide the Department with a clear framework for meeting its commitments. It clarified key concepts, outlined roles and responsibilities of key players and featured a results-based management and accountability framework.

By December 2003, HRDC was divided into two distinct departments: Social Development Canada (SDC), and Human Resources and Skills Development Canada (HRSDC). As a result of this split in HRDC, staff from Gender Analysis and Policy Directorate were divided between the two new departments: three staff members to SDC, and two staff to HRSDC.

In March 2004, the two staff assigned to gender analysis moved to the Strategy and Intergovernmental Relations Directorate headed by a director general within the Strategic Policy and Planning Branch.

At the present time, gender-based analysis is tentative and is undergoing a review. In February 2005, the Department began to examine existing policy on gender analysis to ensure that GBA is being applied within all branches of the Department. Each branch is to implement its own gender-based analysis approach while developing an accountability mechanism for the Department.

Among the options being explored to forward to senior management, the Department is seeking to ensure that gender considerations are integrated in departmental programs and policies. Tools to assess the effectiveness will be developed and could include monitoring through departmental policy committees. The integration and implementation of gender analysis could also be monitored through annual progress reports to senior management, compiled by the Strategy and Intergovernmental Relations Branch.

Within the Department, there are existing policy committees that could ensure that the questions around gender analysis are asked and that the branch responsible for policy development has thought about the gender implications of its proposed actions. Policy committees exist at several levels: the director general level, the assistant deputy minister level, and one of senior executives is chaired by the deputy minister. Policy initiatives go through these committees on their way to the minister.

Because the Department collects extensive data through its programming, this could provide an advantage in terms of public reporting compared to other departments. It has an ability to be more specific and already reports publicly on some gender breakdowns in terms of outcomes for some active programming measures.

C. Social Development Canada

The Department is aware that, with the reorganization and the split of the Department, it needs to find a way to move forward in refining appropriate accountability mechanisms and improving its policy processes. In terms of accountability issues and public reporting, it sees room to improve the function within internal policy committees and in accountabilities to the deputy minister and to the minister in terms of the policy analysis.

In addition, the Department can build on strengths with the training and the capacity of the departmental gender network members to ensure that gender considerations are brought forward in policy options for the minister. Because the network of gender advisers has had personnel changes, the challenge is to ensure that, despite staff turnovers, the knowledge is maintained and shared among people in the Department. Because the network is reinvented every 12 to 18 months, there is a lack of continuity and expertise in preparing documents for policy committees.

The specialized unit for gender analysis was created in April 2004 as part of the Horizontal Initiatives and International Relations Division within the Policy and Strategic Directions Branch. The division has responsibilities for other horizontal and crosscutting files such as Aboriginal issues, minority language communities, and international relations. In terms of human resources, there are three dedicated staff: a senior manager at the EX level and two policy analysts.

The overall mandate of the group is to support the integration of gender and other considerations into the policy, program, and service delivery activities of the Department. The Department also has a departmental network of gender advisers. Thus, gender advisers can be attached to various policy teams as needed.

At present, the mechanisms for accountability are relatively ad hoc. There are a series of management committees, including a policy committee at the assistant deputy minister level that reports to the deputy ministers. The Department is looking at the various committee structures within the Department to identify the best place to ensure full consideration of gender issues, whether at the policy and program committee or at management committee.

Ongoing work includes contributions to international commitments, presentations by specialists, fact sheets for employees on gender and disability and on gender and diversity, case studies such as one examining men’s and women’s needs and preferences with respect to government services, and the building of gender analysis into the key files of the Department whether on child care, caregivers, or pensions.

One ongoing challenge is to find the right balance between the specialized gender unit and its role vis-à-vis integrating gender considerations more directly in the core files. The aim is to ensure that gender is consistently addressed in all policy, program, and service delivery work of the Department.

The Department also wants to find ways to address intersections of diversity, such as gender and minority language groups or gender and disability. The specialized unit for gender analysis is in a division with multiple responsibilities for other horizontal and crosscutting files. Because the division also deals with Aboriginal issues, minority language communities, and international relations, the synergy among the various units has been helpful in developing departmental material for the Beijing +10 conference in New York.

The Department recognizes the need for staffing in the gender unit. It is also trying to re-energize the network of gender-based advisers and develop a specific Social Development Canada gender analysis policy.

D. Health Canada

In 1993, a women’s health bureau was established at Health Canada and in 1996 was allocated additional resources to establish and fund centres of excellence for women’s health and to fund other recipients of the Women’s Health Contribution program.

Gender-based analysis was first formalized at Health Canada in 1999 with the development of the Women’s Health Strategy. One of the four principal objectives of the strategy was to ensure that Health Canada’s policies and programs were responsive to sex and gender differences and to women’s health needs. This commitment to gender-based analysis was further strengthened in 2000 with Health Canada’s release of its gender-based analysis policy, promoting the GBA approach to developing policies, programs, and legislation as necessary to securing the best possible health for women, men, boys, and girls of Canada.

Within the Women’s Health and Gender Analysis Bureau that is headed by an executive director, there is a small GBA unit. From within the Department’s Health Policy Branch, the Women’s Health and Gender Analysis Bureau works with the branches and regions of the Department to build capacity for women’s health. The work of the bureau and its GBA unit is supported by all program areas of the bureau, including the women’s health contribution unit, the policy analysis unit, and the information dissemination unit. Since 2003, after the Gender-based Analysis Implementation Strategy was endorsed by the Department’s executive committee, the bureau has shifted internal resources to reflect the government’s reinvigorated approach to achieving gender equality. The GBA unit within the bureau has a budget of $350,000 per year.

The gender-based analysis unit of the bureau is mandated to build GBA expertise through focused capacity building, including training on the theories and practical applications of GBA. It has committed resources to developing women’s health indicators and guidelines for the development of gender-sensitive health indicators, pilot projects in relevant policy areas, documentation on concepts of gender and health, coaching-style training that guides staff in applying GBA to real-world case studies, and a quarterly e-bulletin on GBA. Overall, it works to improve reporting and accountability by providing analysis and advice to Health Canada staff and interventions on Treasury Board submissions.

By 2003, Health Canada’s Gender-based Analysis Implementation Strategy was endorsed by the Department’s executive committee. The five-prong strategy aims by 2008 to advance a systematic approach to policy development such that Health Canada will fully integrate gender into its day-to-day planning and operations.

There is a biannual reporting requirement to the departmental executive committee. The reports are based on information from gender based focal points identified in departmental regions and branches. These GBA focal points were identified in 2004 to advise the bureau and support the development of work plans in their respective branches and regions.

E. Canadian International Development Agency

The first phase of work at the Department focused on increasing awareness of the benefits of applying GBA and of commencing application. Progress, however, has been uneven, supported by the enthusiasm of some individuals and slowed by the resistance of others. However, with heightened GBA awareness, the bureau now receives increased demands and support for the need to target interventions early at key policy tables.

It is important to continue building understanding of responsibilities and skills in the application of gender-based analysis throughout the Department. There has not been a long history of research data collection and knowledge of women’s health and gender and health issues. The differential impacts of sex and gender are not easily detected. There is a need for continued work to support women’s health surveillance and health reporting. In health, differences can be less obvious and more complex given the determinants of health, which alone and interactively influence health. These determinants and their compounded effects must be taken into account.

The Department recognizes the need for partnerships in order to move forward on the necessary interdisciplinary multi-sectoral work. The main focus of the GBA unit has been inside the Department although it has also benefited from work with NGOs and other stakeholders. Thus, the unit also applies knowledge generated from the Women’s Health Contribution program and the centres of excellence for women’s health, the Canadian Women’s Health Network, and working groups.

The Department is currently reviewing its women’s health strategy and working toward the development of a renewed plan of action on women’s health with targeted objectives to focus research policy and program work on life cycle and diversity issues.

In 1976, the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) implemented its first policy on women in development. However, it was 1984 when the Women in Development (WID) unit headed by a director was established in the policy branch. This unit spearheaded the creation of a policy calling for the integration of WID using a strategy of institutionalization; in other words, incorporating WID throughout all programming, including the use of gender-based analysis.

The 1995 foreign policy statement, “Canada in the World,” reflected the importance of the rights of women in international relations, and gender equality emerged as one of six program priorities of Official Development Assistance. This emphasis provided a further mandate for gender-based analysis at CIDA. In 1999, a departmental policy on gender equality was developed with the goal of achieving equality between women and men to ensure sustainable development.

The Gender Equality Division is headed by a director and is situated within the Policy Branch. In addition to the gender equality division, each of the programming branches has either a gender equality specialist or has identified a gender equality focal point. Together, these staff makes up the gender equality core group, which fosters discussion and exchange of best practice within the Agency.

The specialists work internally to integrate gender equality considerations in various agency processes, provide ongoing support to staff and partners to understand and address gender equality dimensions in policy development and program delivery, and work externally in cooperation with other donors and partners.

In each branch, partners and operating officers are responsible for implementing CIDA’s policy on gender equality. Its three objectives have been translated into corporate development results. The policy document itself provides staff with basic gender analysis guidelines for use in program planning. A modular three-day training course is also available to CIDA staff, as well as an introductory training course on-line at CIDA’s Web site.

The Agency has three main mechanisms for furthering gender-based analysis:

•

Agency guidelines for project planning and reporting have established requirements for gender analysis and for the completion of a gender equality assessment form. Managers fill out the form with the gender equality specialist, who must sign off on it. The form is intended to lead to more consistent provision of gender equality technical advice into programming.

•

Annual performance reports include identification of gender equality results and a requirement to report on how projects are promoting gender equality.

•

A performance assessment framework has been developed as a tool to assess agency performance on gender equality. Its focus is on development results achieved. The framework has wider potential uses in the planning and monitoring of projects and country programs, as well as in assessing possible partner institutions. It is in the final stages of the pilot phase and is expected to have agency approval in April.

CIDA has identified several factors that contribute to success in GBA. These include:

•

having a clear gender equality policy and a mandate to implement it;

•

using the findings of gender-based analysis to actually shape the design of policies, programs, and projects;

•

incorporating gender equality at all levels and in all types of activities, from policy formulation and dialogue through to program design and project planning, implementation, and assessment;

•

benefiting from the use of local expertise in partner countries;

•

having organizational structures, procedures, and norms that promote gender equality — for example, engendering and using the organization’s planning cycle and accountability frameworks; being explicit with gender equality results and indicators in the programming; and finally,

•

ensuring commitment of staff at all levels.

The Agency has also acknowledged that there are multiple challenges still existing as the social change required for progress on gender equality is complex and long term. Among the challenges, CIDA included the following:

•

Explicit gender equality results and indicators must be set and adequate human and financial resources applied.

•

Capacity development is difficult given the workloads of staff and the complexity and changing nature of CIDA’s work.

•

Accountability is essential but complex, requiring capacity, systems, and ongoing management attention and commitment.

•

Gender equality needs to be recognized as a field of professional expertise and gender analysis as a key category of development thinking with adequate resources, both human and financial, assigned.

•

Approaches to gender equality integration need to be adapted within new programming realities. For example, gender equality is not given sufficient analysis and priority in poverty reduction strategy papers and in sector-wide approaches and other program-based approaches. Entry points could include policy dialogue; capacity development; inclusion of gender equality expertise, particularly at the local level; and promoting equitable participation of women and men in decision-making processes.

•

Uneven or flagging political will for gender equality has created particular challenges. Due to significant success on gender equality, some feel that it is time to move on to newer emerging issues, despite the fact that significant disparities in gender equality persist. At the international level, some of the areas where we have made inroads are under threat; for example, in the area of sexual and reproductive health.

F. Justice Canada

In 1995, in response to the 1995 Beijing Platform for Action and the 1995 Federal Plan for Gender Equality, the Department of Justice established the Office of the Senior Adviser on Gender Equality, better known as SAGE. The original intent of the SAGE office included a five-year mandate for the completion of its work.

By 1997, the SAGE office had developed and published a Justice-specific policy on gender equality analysis entitled “Policy of the Department of Justice on Gender Equality Analysis.” A binder of materials was published, and a training program was developed and delivered on how to apply the policy.

In 2000, the SAGE office merged with the Diversity Policy Group and was renamed the Diversity and Gender Equality Office, better known as DAGE. The merger recognized the importance of the intersectionality of diversity in gender issues. DAGE, with the support of a committee comprised of experts in the field of gender and diversity analysis, judges, and academics, developed a new training package and program entitled “Social Context Training.” The training was modelled on that used by the National Judicial Institute in developing its training for judges. The training was delivered to members of the executive council as well as to some middle managers.

By 2001, the executive council, recognizing the complexity and range of issues that the Department dealt with on a daily basis, made a decision to integrate the diversity and gender function into all aspects of the work of the Department. By December 2004, the DAGE Office was closed, and the responsibility for ensuring the inclusion of a diversity and gender analysis became the responsibility of each and every employee in the Department.

As of 2005, all the core functions of the Diversity and Gender Equality Office, like GBA analysis, and continued work on the agenda for gender equality, were transferred to a group within Justice called the Policy Integration Group. This group apparently still has a specific unit dedicated to GBA but its staffing and reporting structure is unclear. While the initial setup costs for the five-year mandate were estimated at about $1.5 million, there are no specifically dedicated dollars in the current decentralized model.

The 1997 Policy of the Department of Justice on Gender Equality Analysis continues to be the guiding policy document for the Department.

Accountability was part of the intent of integration that was to:

•

ensure that the ownership and responsibility for diversity and gender analysis is placed with the Department as a whole and individually with each employee;

•

build organizational capacity, competency, and accountability;

•

foster and support the notion of the importance of including diversity and gender consideration as an integral core component of the work of the Department.

When decentralizing (or integrating) the functions under the Diversity and Gender Equality Office, the Department apparently considered the following factors. It recognized that:

•

the Department had been working conscientiously on this issue since 1995, had provided training to employees on more than one occasion, and had developed capacity.

•

a number of sections in the Department were working in areas that directly impacted equality issues: the Human Rights Law Section, the charter group, the public law policy group, victims, Aboriginal Affairs, and others.

•

the Department was dealing with a broadened scope and more complex nature of issues.

•

an internal capacity of a centralized unit to provide timely, expert knowledge in all areas of the work of the Department was an ideal that would be difficult, if not impossible, to achieve.

•

diminishing resources government-wide and greater competition for human and other financial resources would likely not provide for the increase necessary to adequately fund the unit to meet the capacity required.

•

a centralized unit made the work on gender-based analysis the job of a few people and reinforced the perspective that gender and diversity analysis was something that was conducted outside of or in addition to the analytical process.

•

timeliness of involvement was a key issue, and it was important to have diversity and gender consideration form an integral part of the analysis from the beginning of the process. There would be a greater likelihood of achieving this if each sector assumed responsibility for its inclusion

Overall, there is still an inability to be able to report with consistency the good work that is being done by the Department. The instruments for measuring results have not been developed, and this makes it more difficult to assign accountability. Ongoing vigilance is needed to ensure that diversity in gender analysis remains a priority in the Department.

For federal departments, there remain several broad challenges as each department recreates its own infrastructure and process for dealing with diversity and gender concerns. These broader challenges include:

•

The assumption that gender equality already exists.

•

A lack of shared understanding of what is meant by GBA.

•

While one size does not fit all, there needs to be some common accountability mechanisms and indicators based on a common understanding of what is to be done.

•

In developing this common understanding, it is important to determine what constitutes a success in terms of doing gender analysis. Is it the fact that the analysis is done? Is it the fact that the analysis was used and applied to the policy or to the outcome? With varying levels of indicators, there is a need for more specific use of indicators of success in outcomes.

•

A mechanism for compliance should be established, perhaps making reporting on GBA compulsory.

G. Finance Canada

In 2005, the Minister of Finance announced that the Department was being asked to conduct gender-based analysis of components of the upcoming budget.⁸

Hon. Ralph Goodale (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I will do my very best to respect the principles of gender equity in the preparation of this budget and indeed every budget going forward.

(House of Commons, 7 February 2005)

The Department does not have a separate unit to coordinate gender-based analysis. Individual branches are responsible for conducting gender-based analysis in their respective areas.

In general, for issues such as income tax where there is direct departmental responsibility, the Department stated that it does GBA to the extent possible, given data availability and other elements. For other budgetary decisions, the Department reviews the supporting information provided in memorandum to cabinet from departments initiating proposals and gives advice in terms of funding levels and other elements. Overall, its funding decisions are related to cabinet discussions and throne speeches.

The Department has specific program responsibilities in a number of areas: developing tax and tariff policy, managing federal borrowings on financial markets, administering major transfers of federal funds to the provinces and territories, developing regulatory policy for the financial sector, and representing Canada within the international financial institutions. It reported that it carries out gender-based analysis for those policy initiatives under its direct area of responsibility, especially as part of the budget process.

As most of the Department’s legislative agenda focuses on tax policy changes, most of the analysis is conducted in the Tax Policy Branch. Policy analysis takes place in this branch when specific proposals for changes are assessed as part of the budget process. The Department claimed that gender analysis is also carried on in other parts of the Department that have specific program responsibilities — namely, the Financial Sector Policy Branch and the International Trade and Finance Branch.

In the Department’s general role for the economic and fiscal framework, it has supported substantial investments in priority areas such as health care, children, research and many others in recent years, believing that reinvesting in these programs enables the goal of equality between the sexes. It acknowledges a direct link between good economic performance, the government’s fiscal capacity and the ability to invest so as to attain greater gender equality.

As a central agency, along with the two other central agencies, the Privy Council Office and the Treasury Board Secretariat, the Department gives advice and makes recommendations to the government on decisions about funding for new proposals in various policy areas. In these cases, operational departments make proposals for changes in areas related to their specific lines of responsibilities. Funding decisions on these policy initiatives are typically made in the budget with a few made off the budget cycle.

What we did as part of the budget process was to extend if possible, where there was information or where we could produce it by making an analysis of our own — but mostly that would be by digging through the memoranda to cabinet to find these considerations — an explicit element of the advice we provided on initiatives that included what the gender-based perspective was on this particular issue.

Mr. Louis Lévesque (Associate Deputy Minister, Department of Finance)