Honourable senators, as a senator from Manitoba, I recognize that I live on Treaty 1 territory, the traditional territory of the Anishinabe, Cree, Oji-Cree, Dakota and Dene and the Métis Nation homeland. I also recognize that we are gathered here today on the unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabeg people.

Honourable colleagues, I rise today to support Bill S-213, which in the words of its sponsor, Senator McCallum, is a “slight but powerful and timely piece of legislation.”

Quite simply, this bill would result in requiring the Minister for Women and Gender Equality to table a statement on the public record that contains gender impact analysis of new legislation on women and girls in Canada, particularly Indigenous women and girls.

As Senator McCallum explained, the reference in her bill to “particularly Indigenous women” aims to facilitate attention to those who are living each day at the intersection of multiple sources of disadvantage, and thereby include their voices, who can best articulate the shortcomings and considerations that are relevant to their situation — in this case, First Nations, Métis, Inuit and non-status women.

Today I want to share with you some of my thoughts about the usefulness of this bill. As senators, it is part of our job to give voice in this chamber to a wide range of concerns and opinions. Yes, it is part of our job to use words as best we can, yet none of us fool ourselves into thinking that our words will somehow be miraculously transformed into effective action.

Practically speaking, we know that laws and policies are just words, unless they are actualized through financial and human resources managed well, to result in implementation of those laws and policies. Passage of a bill is not an end in itself; it is, at best, a tentative beginning in making systemic change.

“Implementation” is just one word, but it encompasses hundreds of decisions and actions necessary to make anything actually happen. This is why the details in Senator McCallum’s bill matter, why they could make the difference between words spoken and effective action taken. This is why this bill makes sense at this stage of our shared journey as legislators in trying to identify what needs to be done, then figure out what needs to be in a law or its regulations to actually produce the intended results.

Clear requirements are set out in this bill, with the onus unequivocally resting with the Minister for Women and Gender Equity to table the impact analysis, in the house in which the government bill originated, no later than two sitting days after the bill is introduced. This means that the impact analysis cannot be an afterthought, and it cannot be kept secret by being tagged as a cabinet document, as happens now.

Furthermore, this bill would also require gender-lensed analysis to be undertaken by the minister for all private members’ bills once they are referred to committee within their respective house of Parliament. As Senator McCallum explained, committee referral of a private member’s bill is actually an indicator of meaningful progress through our parliamentary system. The minister is required to table their analysis of such a private member’s bill in the house of origin, no later than 10 sitting days after the bill is referred to committee.

Not only that, in the event that amendments are made to a bill, the minister would have to table an additional statement with additional impact analysis of those amendments, and every such ministerial statement tabled would also have to be published on the departmental website, making this knowledge more accessible to the folks who pay for all that legislators do; the Canadian public.

Let me turn now to another question about this bill. In this place, we have heard some thoughtful concerns about whether the new responsibilities that this bill places on the Minister for Women and Gender Equality are really necessary, or are they redundant given that subsection 4.2(1) of the Department of Justice Act already requires the minister to ascertain whether any of the provisions of new legislation are inconsistent with the purposes and provisions of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and to report any such inconsistency to the House of Commons at the first convenient opportunity.

Colleagues, I am honoured to have worn this little snowflake pin, signifying membership in the Order of Canada, for more than 35 years, because of the massive social movement in Canada that led to the naming and strengthening of equality rights in the Charter that are entrenched in our Constitution. I wish to offer my thoughts on why the amendments to the Department for Women and Gender Equality Act proposed in Bill S-213 are, in fact, highly compatible with the requirement in the Department of Justice Act. As a co-founder of LEAF, the Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund, which is responsible for more interventions in courts on women’s equality than any other individual organization in Canada for more than 30 years, let me remind you. The stark reality is that cases on women’s equality, using the Charter protections that were so hard fought and won those decades ago, have nevertheless been lost more often than won.

Let me also remind you that although section 25 on Aboriginal rights resides inside the Charter portion of our Constitution, it is in fact section 35, outside the Charter, with specific mention of Aboriginal women’s rights in subsection 4, that is the basis for most of the court decisions on Aboriginal rights and Aboriginal women’s rights.

Charter statements, as required by the Department of Justice Act are a good thing — don’t get me wrong — but they focus on Charter rights. I am sad to say that the Charter has not served women and girls, including Aboriginal women and girls, as well as those of us who helped to draft section 28 — the sex equality guarantee, designed to bolster section 15, the equality rights section of the Charter — sincerely believed it would, when we were so deeply involved in that Constitution-making.

In contrast, impact analysis under Bill S-213, whether it incorporates Charter analysis or not, requires that the minister who is directly responsible for women and gender equality in Canada must focus and report publicly on how the proposed legislation is expected to impact the lives of women and girls — particularly Indigenous women and girls. This is the laser focus needed to ensure that women and girls are not overlooked in the broader analysis of proposed legislation required in a Charter report under the Department of Justice Act.

Colleagues, Bill S-213 is not a redundancy. It is an essential enhancement of the methodology needed for effective implementation, for effective action, beyond words.

Now, I wish to address another question raised about this bill, that of not defining any specific analytical tool to be used for the minister’s required report. To my mind, this bill strikes a needed balance, between leaving everything to officials and providing a sufficiently detailed framework that guides a minister and their officials into producing useful and relevant information that is needed for effective implementation to occur.

This may be another lesson that this COVID pandemic is giving us to learn: We’re able to work in this chamber in person and virtually because we have had to be flexible and willing to apply what tools experts could give us to work with. Where the law was so detailed and inflexible, we saw frustratingly long delays or complete abandonment of tasks. That is why, dear colleagues, it is important to let the experts at the Department for Women and Gender Equality determine the best tools for appropriate impact analysis of bills. It’s their job to analyze our bills with the latest and best impact-analysis tools. We don’t want to force specific tools upon the experts that become useless, thereby erecting yet another barrier to progress in the implementation of gender equality in Canada.

I urge you to think about the thousands of Canadian women trying to achieve their personal and professional goals, who despite our constitutional guarantees of equality, are still earning less and facing more barriers than many men in Canada. Think about all the ways we can consider their and their families’ well-being with the implementation of Bill S-213. We’ll be keeping our promise to Canadian women, while making a genuine effort to reconcile with Indigenous women.

With this bill, we’ll be tackling discrimination, racism and oppressive factors that harm Canadian women and girls, in turn harming the Canadian economy, society and our democracy.

According to annual reporting by Statistics Canada for 2019, of all those who were employed in health occupations, almost 80% were women. Of those employed in education, law, and social, community and government services, over 70% were women. Of all those in business, finance and administration occupations in Canada, almost 70% were women. Many of those deemed to be Canada’s essential workers are women, and for months now we have been acknowledging them with our words, or by hanging hearts in our windows or banging pots in our yards at 6 p.m. But now as legislators, with this bill, we have a chance to do more than send them thank-you tweets, or make statements in this chamber.

Women dominate crucial sectors of productivity in Canada, and our economy would not — could not — survive without their contributions. The social fabric of our country is interwoven with women’s essential work in homes and in public spheres. As we heard the first woman finance minister in the history of Canada describe her financial update, we heard her refer to it as feminist. We hear new terms like “she-cession” instead of “recession or ”she-covery instead of “recovery”. As we hear this, we must think and act substantively about women’s well-being when we make laws. Because, dear colleagues, without women, our social fabric will shred, and our democracy will be torn asunder.

I would also like to remind you, with a great sense of prospective loss, due to Senator Sinclair’s announcement that he will be leaving us soon, that Canada committed to reconciliation and renewing the relationship with Indigenous peoples based on recognition of rights, respect, cooperation and partnership. Traditional leadership in many Indigenous communities entailed egalitarian relations between men and women. Notions of leadership predicated on patriarchy were introduced through European missionary work, new forms of trade relations, Western institutions of governance and the state. Before European contact, many Indigenous women were influential and respected leaders in their communities, and while we have outstanding Indigenous women leaders today, the Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls has indubitably demonstrated that as a population group, the most vulnerable people in Canada are Indigenous women and girls.

We have seen the invaluable contribution of women. Yes, Bill S-213 is a slight but powerful and timely piece of legislation. Please join me in supporting it.

Thank you, meegwetch.