Hearings by Status of Women Committee a Hoax

R.E.A.L Women of Canada Press Release
Ottawa, Ontario February 8, 2007

The House of Commons Standing Committee on the Status of Women, on which the opposition holds the majority, is conducting four days of televised hearings on the topic of the potential impact of the funding cuts at Status of Women Canada.

The Committee selected the groups which were to testify before it. The score: 27 groups who opposed the cuts and a total of only 3 groups who supported the cuts, including REAL Women of Canada. Although REAL Women has extensive background knowledge about Status of Women funding, we didn't even make the initial selection. Only after extensive pressure was the Committee prepared to hear our views on the subject.

The 27 witnesses opposed to the cuts with only a couple of exceptions, are all funded by the Status of Women and according to their testimony, regarded these grants as their "entitlements." Having no other source of income but taxpayers' dollars, they described the cuts as "anti-women", crippling the involvement of women in the public debate in Canada. REAL Women does not receive funds from the Status of Women but has managed to be involved in the public debate solely with the financial support of our members.

This remarkable lack of balance in the number of witnesses appearing before the Committee raises the question as to why was a review held in the first place, since the Committee's conclusions are obviously preordained?

Since the committee proceedings are televised by CPAC, it is reasonable to conclude that the purpose of these hearings is to provide fodder for the upcoming election to attempt to back the claim that the Conservatives are, in fact, "anti-women." Not only have these special interest groups of women already received many millions of dollars since 1973 from the Status of Women - now this Committee is spending even more taxpayers' money paying all the witnesses' expenses in order to hoodwink the public into thinking that these cuts are offensive to "women". The cuts are only offensive to the special interest group of feminists whose extremist views are not supported by mainstream women.

Contact Person:
C. Gwendolyn Landolt
Diane Watts

Conservative Government Bringing Common Sense to Public Finances

R.E.A.L Women of Canada Press Release
Ottawa, Ontario September 26, 2006

The decision by the Conservative government to cut back on some of the egregious abuse of taxpayers money is a great relief.

Canadians over the years have been more heavily taxed than any other country in the industrialized world. The Conservative government has apparently now decided to do something about it. This action is long overdue as literally billions of dollars have been wasted on programs and activities that not only are ineffective, but also have promoted agendas which most mainstream Canadians reject.

REAL Women is especially pleased that the Status of Women's budget will be reduced by $5 million in these cutbacks. This is a good start, and we hope that the Status of Women will eventually be eliminated entirely, since it does not represent "women", but only represents the ideology of feminists. That is the Status of Women was established in 1973 under Prime Minister Trudeau and over the years, it has funded feminist groups to serve as agents of change, never recognizing that other women have different views and have no wish to be represented by these feminist organizations.

REAL Women was also delighted that the budget cuts included the elimination of the troublesome Court Challenges Program. This Program was supposedly established to fund "disadvantaged" groups, but instead, it has constantly funded only left of centre organizations and by way of this abuse of the taxpayers money has carried out social restructuring by way of the courts. The promotion of social changes by way of judicial fiat funded by the Court Challenges Program has resulted in the bypassing of the democratic process of public debate in Parliament. In fact the Court Challenges Program was a profoundly undemocratic use of taxpayers money to restructure society, with the public being deprived of having any input in these changes. The elimination of the Court Challenges Program will go a long way to promoting democracy in Canada.

Finally, REAL Women was pleased that the Law Reform Commission was eliminated in the budget cutbacks. The Commission was established to make recommendations for the improvement and modernization and reform of federal legislation. However, the Commission's recommendations were not rooted in legal principle, but rather were rooted in the personal bias and perspective of the appointed Commissioners. As a result, the Commission became notorious for its promotion of the agendas of special interest organizations only. Moreover, the Commission's recommendations reflected the opinions of no one but the Commissioners themselves, and its recommendations served as a platform for the left-wing to launch their programs and perspectives.

All in all, the budget cut-backs announced by the Conservative government were an excellent start in the Government gaining control of our national agenda instead of allowing it to be dictated by special interest groups.

Action Urged to Counteract Leftist Media Campaign Against Removal of Court Challenges Program
LifeSiteNews.com, Steve Jalsevac, September 28, 2006

OTTAWA, September 28, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – REAL Women of Canada today warned that the taxpayer funded Court Challenges Program and its supporters have begun a strong counter-offensive to persuade the Conservative government to reverse its decision to eliminate the Program.

In its announcement today the non-taxpayer funded conservative women's group stated, "Numerous newspaper articles and letters to the editor have been flooding the country over the past few days. However, these articles and letters have not been telling the real story behind the CCP which has had such a powerful influence in shaping the social values of our country over the years. The truth about the CCP is that it has been used to allow left-wing special interest groups to bypass Parliament and allow controversial social issues to be resolved by judicial fiat. The cancellation of the CCP was long overdue."

REAL Women sent a letter today to the editors of media across the country and urged other Canadians opposed to the abuse of democratic process and taxpayer funds by the Court Challenges Program to also write letters expressing their support for the government's decision.

The REAL Women letter stated:

Dear Editor,

It was good news that the recent cutbacks announced by the Conservative government included the elimination of the Court Challenges Program. This agency was an example of government corruption and taxpayer abuse.

The CCP did not advance the rights of minorities, but, with very few exceptions, was being used to subvert the democratic process and advance the cause of left-wing special interest groups to change the social values of this country by judicial fiat. That is, the CCP funding allowed the courts to decide controversial issues rather than Parliament. The latter, at least, hears both sides of an issue, makes compromises and has access to the social facts involved with an issue. CCP funding only permitted one side to be heard by the court, since those holding other views did not have the deep pockets to appear before the court and the federal Attorney General under the Liberal government usually supported the special interest groups in the court.

The final insult to the taxpayer was that the CCP, although completely funded by the taxpayer, was not answerable to Parliament, nor was it subject to the Access to Information Act. The CCP was controlled and operated by the special interest groups who sat on its Board of Directors and its Advisory Committee and then happily directed the grants to their own organizations. A very cozy arrangement indeed. As such, the CCP was profoundly undemocratic and an insult to taxpayers. The disbandment of the CCP was long overdue.

See related stories
Don't expect the Court Challenges Program to go Quietly
Lorne Gunter warns "powerful liberal-left special interest groups" will organize usual loud protests to get it re-instated
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/sep/06092811.html

Canadian Conservatives Look for End of Liberal Founded Court Challenges Program
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/sep/06090705.html

Canadian Government Funds Radical Homosexual Activist Organizations Through Court Challenges and Status of Women
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2004/jun/04061405.html

Canadian Conservative Government Slashes Funding to Wasteful Anti-Family Programs
LifeSiteNews.com, John-Henry Westen
September 26, 2006

OTTAWA, September 26, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The budgets of some of the most wasteful and at the same time biased Canadian government funded programs have been slashed by the new Conservative Government. Three organizations which have been overtly pushing for same-sex marriage have been denied millions of tax-dollars they have been receiving for years under the previous Liberal government.

In an announcement of over two billion dollars in reduction of waste spending, the Conservative Government has included five million dollars in "administrative reductions to Status of Women Canada", a $5.6 million dollar saving in eliminating the Court Challenges Program, and another $4.2 million dollars in cuts to the Law Commission of Canada.

LifeSiteNews.com has reported frequently about the abuses of these three organizations. The Court Challenges Program has been the engine with which homosexual activists altered laws in Canada on marriage. (see coverage: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2004/apr/04041305.html ). The Law Commission of Canada also endorsed same sex marriage in 2002 (see coverage: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2002/jan/02013004.html ) and even suggested that the legal privileges of all marriage should be eliminated. Status of Women Canada, has pushed both abortion and same-sex marriage (see coverage: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/aug/06081501.html )

Thousands of Canadians have raised their concerns to their Members of Parliament regarding the waste of taxpayer dollars funding these totally one-sided and ideological organizations.

Campaign Life Coalition (CLC) has repeatedly urged its membership across Canada to demand that public funding to these biased programs be cut. Jim Hughes, National President of CLC congratulated the Conservative Government on the move.

"I'm happy to see them doing something that is a common sense solution to a problem that has existed for a long time," Hughes told LifeSiteNews.com. Speaking of the end of the Court Challenges program he said, "I think its excellent, wonderful that taxpayers are not going to have to shell out for this. If someone wants to take something to court they can do it at their own expense. For too many years it has been solely at the disposal of the left wing in political struggles and I'm happy to see it come to an end. It is a small step toward restoring democracy in Canada."

REAL Women Canada, a conservative women's group said in a press release today that they were "especially pleased" at the cut to Status of Women. "This is a good start, and we hope that the Status of Women will eventually be eliminated entirely, since it does not represent 'women', but only represents the ideology of feminists," said the group. "The Status of Women was established in 1973 under Prime Minister Trudeau and over the years, it has funded feminist groups to serve as agents of change, never recognizing that other women have different views and have no wish to be represented by these feminist organizations."

Queer film fest under attack
Straight.com, by Pieta Woolley
Publish Date: 14-Sep-2006

The Department of Canadian Heritage should cut $23,000 in funding to the Vancouver Queer Film Festival because the films are “degenerate and degrading to humanity”, according to conservative lobby group REAL Women of Canada. In an article posted on Lifesite.net, a Christian-conservative news site, REAL Women vice president Gwen Landolt is quoted: “The films are used as a political statement against established social mores, a way of showing contempt, of saying, ‘We don’t have to be held to normal standards of behaviour.’…I think the government is trying to show how wide-open they are to all diversity, but surely there is a limit to tolerance.”

The authors of the August 29 article, John-Henry Westen and Gudrun Schultz, urge readers to write to Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Heritage Minister Bev Oda asking that the funding end.

Michelle Bruehler, media coordinator for the Out on Screen society (which presents the festival), discovered the piece—which is the top-hit article on-line about the 2006 festival and has been posted to dozens of conservative activist sites—when she was gathering festival coverage for her files.

“At first I laughed. It was really innocent. I just thought, ‘Well, this is something to add to the media file,’” Bruehler told the Georgia Straight. Then, she said, she started to realize the power behind Canada’s conservative lobby and Landolt, who is an outspoken lawyer and has addressed the United Nations more than 30 times. “This has become a serious issue.”

Bruehler and OOS’s executive director, Drew Dennis, are asking their organization’s 3,000-strong membership and other supporters to write to Harper and Oda in support of the festival. They phoned Heritage Canada on September 11, and local program officers assured them that their funding is not in immediate jeopardy.

“Our hope is that the squawking won’t have a huge impact, but we don’t want to turn a blind eye to it,” Dennis said.

The article, at www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/aug/06083101.html, lists what Landolt called “degenerate and degrading” films from August’s festival: Deconstructing Crack Ho, Dyke After Dyke, I Cum I, Lesbians on Ecstasy, Post-Porn & New Technologies of Pleasure, and Toilet Sex in Canadian Cinema. Dennis pointed out that these are mostly independent lesbian shorts and don’t represent the range of films at the festival. In fact, Dennis and Bruehler said they don’t believe Landolt has seen any of the festival’s films, so she wouldn’t know whether there’s “no artistry there”, as she said in the article.

On behalf of Landolt, REAL Women researcher Diane Watts returned a call from the Straight. She said Landolt wouldn’t have to see any queer films to know they’re unartistic because they are “easy to categorize”, like cowboy films; people either like them or they don’t. Canadians, Watts said, are overtaxed to the point where most families have little discretionary income. A queer film fest, she said, should be paid for by those who want to see queer films, not by the general taxpayer.

“We’ve always objected to the government handing out $1 billion per year to special-interest groups,” she said. “I don’t even think the majority of homosexuals would attend that type of festival, because it’s too fringe.”

Watts went on to say that REAL Women doesn’t support federal funding of any controversial art. As an example of noncontroversial art, Watts suggested the Pierre Auguste Renoir exhibit at the National Gallery of Canada. (The 19th-century French court consistently refused to show then-fringy Impressionist paintings, including Renoir’s, at the Louvre’s Salon d’Apollon.)

The whole situation reminds Heather Redfern, executive director of the Alliance for Arts and Culture, of her days in Edmonton. The conservative Canadian Taxpayers Federation had a radio spot called “This is what they spent your tax dollars on.”

“We had a festival called Loud & Queer, and they went on the same rant,” she told the Straight. “It’s just not to be taken seriously.”

Redfern predicted that REAL Women’s members will send indignant e-mails to Ottawa and that nothing will change. This is why Canada’s arts-funding bodies stay at arm’s length from politicians and bureaucrats, she said.

Dennis noted that as long as the festival doesn’t lose its funding, the dialogue is appreciated. Next year, Dennis suggested, the festival may invite Landolt to speak in a workshop, a exercise in bridge-building similar to the censorship workshop they organized years ago with the B.C. Film Classification Board.

This is the latest from Focus on the Family (FOTF) group ...

Court Challenges Program Under Review
Today’s Family News,
September 13, 2006

The federal Court Challenges Program (CCP), which funds “historically disadvantaged” groups wanting to launch a constitutional challenge of federal laws, is once again “facing an uncertain future,” CanWest News Service reported last week.

The program is currently under scrutiny by Canadian Heritage Minister Bev Oda as part of an overall review of government programs “to ensure that money was spent wisely and in a transparent and accountable manner,” spokesperson Nancy Heppner told CanWest.

Launched in 1978 under the Liberals to fund cases involving minority-language rights, it was expanded in 1985 to include funding for precedent-setting cases alleging discrimination in contravention of the equality guarantees in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

It was cancelled when the Conservatives were in power, only to be reinstated in 1994 by Jean Chretien’s Liberal government – but essentially as a taxpayer-funded private corporation. As such, the CCP is not required to disclose which groups it chooses to fund, how it makes its decisions, or how much money is dispersed.

Justice Minister Vic Toews recently expressed concern that even he is not privy to this information.

“The secrecy that the program is shrouded in, that the public doesn’t know who is being funded or indeed what kind of criteria is being used, is rather shocking when we are responsible for the money we receive from you to fund particular programs,” he said.

Pro-family groups have long regarded the CCP as being inherently biased against the institution of marriage and the right of parents to spank their children.

As REAL Women of Canada noted in 2003, “By assisting in the framing of the legal action for one side only in these controversial social issues, the Program gives that position an undue advantage and influence in the Canadian courts. This would appear to be defeating the very objectives of the Charter itself.”

In 1998, then-Reform MP Maurice Vellacott told the House of Commons that whenever REAL Women had applied to the CCP for funding assistance, it was turned down.

“On many issues, their view contrasts with that of the [feminist] Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund or LEAF for short,” he said. “Time and again, REAL Women has been denied funding by the Court Challenges Program while LEAF has been consistently handed out cheques.”

In an editorial, the Halifax Daily News urged the government to maintain the program on grounds that some of the cases it has funded “have helped shape Canada into a place where there is a great deal more equality than in some other western nations.”

National Post columnist Lorne Gunter, on the other hand, said the sooner the government kills the Court Challenges Program, the better.

“Most Canadians,” he wrote, “have probably never heard of the CCP. . . . Yet no other federal program or law has done more damage to Canadian democracy. No other has so fundamentally altered Canadian society without recourse to Parliament."

Harper et les femmes
PUBLICATION: La Presse
DATE: 2006.09.12
SECTION: Forum
PAGE: A20
BYLINE: Collard, Nathalie

Le gouvernement conservateur de Stephen Harper souhaite-t-il voir disparaître les groupes féministes? C'est ce que nous saurons d'ici quelques semaines, lorsque le Conseil du Trésor annoncera les conclusions de son exercice de révision des programmes gouvernementaux, dont fait partie ceux du ministère de la Condition féminine.

Au bureau de la ministre de la Condition féminine, Bev Oda, on nous assure qu'il s'agit d'un examen normal des subventions qui a lieu régulièrement, peu importe le gouvernement au pouvoir. Si c'est le cas, personne ne contestera le droit du gouvernement de veiller à la bonne gestion des fonds publics.

Mais l'inquiétude est vive au sein des groupes féministes, en particulier à l'extérieur du Québec où certaines associations dépendent complètement des subventions du fédéral.

Plusieurs féministes craignent que les Conservateurs tentent de transformer le programme de promotion de la femme- dont l'objectif premier est de soutenir le travail de groupes de femmes qui oeuvrent pour l'égalité entre hommes et femmes et la participation des femmes à la société canadienne- afin de réduire les subventions destinées au groupes féministes. Une rencontre est prévue au début octobre entre la ministre responsable, Bev Oda, et des représentantes de groupes de femmes. Sera-t-il trop tard? La date limite pour le versement des subventions est fixée au 26 septembre... Déjà, l'organisme Femmes et droit a dû fermer ses portes il y a quelques semaines et vendredi, ce sera au tour de l'Alliance féminine pour l'action internationale de mettre ses employés à pied, faute d'argent pour les payer.

Les craintes des groupes féministes sont alimentées, entre autres, par le lobby de l'association REAL Women (un groupe anti-féministe bien implanté dans l'ouest du pays et qui fait la promotion du rôle traditionnel de la femme), association qui a pourtant déjà reçu des subventions du programme de promotion de la femme qu'elle dénonce aujourd'hui. Difficile à dire si ce groupe, on ne peut plus virulent à l'endroit des féministes, jouit d'une véritable influence à Ottawa.

D'ici quelques semaines, la ministre Bev Oda doit également répondre aux recommandations du comité permanent de la condition féminine, dont le rapport a été adopté en mai dernier, et qui suggère d'augmenter de 25 % les subventions aux organismes qui font la promotion de l'égalité entre les sexes tout en privilégiant un financement plus stable qui assurerait la pérennité des petits organismes. Bref, des recommandations qui vont à l'encontre des souhaits exprimés par les anti-féministes.

Le gouvernement Harper y sera-t-il sensible? Respectera-t-il une des valeurs fondamentales de ce pays, soit l'égalité entre les hommes et les femmes, ou coupera-t-il les vivres aux groupes féministes, donnant ainsi raison à ceux et celles qui l'ont accusé de vouloir ramener les femmes à la maison avec sa subvention de 1200 $ accordée aux parents d'enfants de moins de 6 ans. Stephen Harper ami ou ennemi des féministes? C'est ce que nous verrons.

[English Translation]

Harper et les femmes
PUBLICATION: La Presse
DATE: 2006.09.12
SECTION: Forum
PAGE: A20
BYLINE: Collard, Nathalie

Does the Conservative government of Stephen Harper wish to see feminist groups disappear? This is what we will know in several weeks, when the Treasury Board will announce the results of its review of governmental programs, including those under Status of Women.

At the office of Minister responsible for Status of Women, Beverley Oda, we are being assured that this is a normal procedure, regardless of the government in power, for a program that distributes grants on an ongoing basis. If this is the case, no one will contest the right of the government to oversee the responsible management of funds, to pursue good government.

But the worry is real amongst feminist groups, in particular those outside of Québec, where several organizations are entirely reliant on federal grants.

Many feminists fear that the Conservatives are trying to transform the Women's Program — whose main goal is to support women's organizations working for gender equality and the full participation of women in Canadian society — to reduce grants for feminist groups. A meeting is scheduled for early October between the minister responsible, Bev Oda, and representatives of women's organizations. Will to be too late? The deadline for the current program which gives grants to groups is fixed at September 26th. Already, the National Association of Women and the Law was forced to close its doors several weeks ago, and on Friday, it will be the Canadian Feminist Alliance for International Action (FAFIA) who lays off its employees, because there will be no money to pay them.

The fear of women's groups is being fed, amongst others, by the efforts of the organization REAL Women, an anti-feminist group well established in the west of the country which promotes the traditional role of women, an organization which nevertheless has received money from the Women's Program, a program they are denouncing today. It is difficult to say if this group, which could not be more harshly critical of feminist organizations, is enjoying real influence in Ottawa.

Within several weeks, the Minister Beverley Oda must also respond to the recommendations of the Parliamentary committee on the Status of Women, which adopted a report last May suggesting a 25% increase in the funds available to equality-seeking organizations, while also emphasizing the need for stable funding to ensure the stability of the often small organizations which do this work. These recommendations go against the express wishes of anti-feminists.

Will the Harper government show that it cares? Will it respect a fundamental Canadian value — equality between men and women — or will it starve feminist organizations of the funding they need, giving reason to those who accused it of wanting to push women back into the home with its $1,200 grant to parents of children under six? Is Stephen Harper a friend or an enemy of feminists? Time will tell.

DAWN visitors are encouraged to send letters of support for Status of Women Canada (SWC) to the following:

The Hon. Beverley J. Oda, PC, MP Minister of Status of Women

Maria Minna Critic, Status of Women, Liberal Party

Irene Mathyssen Critic, Status of Women, New Democratic Party

Mme Maria Mourani Critic, Status of Women, Bloc Québecois

with a copy to your MP and any of the following:

The Hon. Bill Graham Interim Leader of the Liberal Party

The Hon. Jack Layton Leader of the NDP Party

The Right Honourable Stephen Harper, PC, MP Prime Minister of Canada

The Hon. Rona Ambrose, PC, MP Minister of the Environment

The Hon. Diane Finley, PC, MP Minister of Human Resources and Social Development

The Hon. Josée Verner, PC, MP Minister of International Cooperation and Minister for La Francophonie and Official Languages

The Hon. Carol Skelton, PC, MP Minister of National Revenue and Minister of Western Economic Diversification

---

Alliance for Marriage and Family (AMF) seeks to protect family as ‘3-parents case’ seen as impacting definition of marriage
by Deborah Gyapong, Canadian Catholic News
August 30, 2006

OTTAWA, Canada (CCN) – The Alliance for Marriage and Family (AMF) has filed a factum in the so-called “three parents case,” saying its member groups have a “common cause” to protect the “traditional family unit in Canadian society and law.”

The case, which comes before the Ontario Court of Appeal Sept. 25-26 in Toronto, involves a lesbian couple raising a child conceived by artificial insemination. Both women want to be considered the legal mother of the child. The biological father is also actively involved in the child’s life. If their case is successful, it will mark the first time a child would have three legally recognized parents.

The AMF, composed of the Catholic Civil Rights League (CCRL), REAL Women of Canada, the Evangelical Fellowship (EFC), Focus on the Family, and the Christian Legal Fellowship, opposes the change on the basis that the law has always recognized two parents for a child.

“This is effectively providing an impetus for affirmation of multiple or group parenting rights,” said CCRL president Phil Horgan in a telephone interview with Canadian Catholic News.

“It fundamentally changes our fundamental understanding of family,” said REAL Women’s national vice president Gwen Landolt in a telephone interview with CCN.

Not only does the notion of three parents undermine the traditional notion of a mother and a father, but also it will open up a “Pandora’s box of complications,” Landolt said.

Read the rest of the article here

Conservatives Must Come Clean on Agenda for Status of Women Canada

Liberal Party of Canada
Press Release

August 25, 2006

OTTAWA – Liberal Critic for Status of Women and Multiculturalism Maria Minna today called on Heritage Minister Bev Oda to reveal the Conservative government’s true intentions for the future of Status of Women Canada.

“The Conservative grassroots community is actively campaigning for the demise of this important agency which promotes the rights of women in Canada,” said Ms. Minna. “Ms. Oda must come clean and reveal whether or not she will bow to the pressure of these extreme right-wing groups or if she will take a stand and publicly distance herself from their position.”

Recent media reports indicate that several socially Conservative blogs have begun a campaign to eliminate the federal agency for the Status of Women. The group REAL women of Canada, which also opposes same-sex marriage and legalized abortion, launched the campaign because of their belief that the agency “promotes feminist policies on the false premise that women in Canada are victims of a patriarchal society.”

The Conservative government has yet to publicly comment on the Internet campaign but is in the process of reviewing the mandate of Status of Women Canada and will release their results this fall.

Ms. Minna pointed out that if the agency is disbanded, hundreds of women’s groups across Canada could potentially lose their federal funding.

“By eliminating this agency, the Conservative government will cut off at the knees important national efforts to lift women out of poverty, prevent domestic violence and improve economic security for women across Canada,” she said.

“It’s time for Ms. Oda to make known her true intentions for the future of the agency,” Ms. Minna said. “Canadians have a right to know if women’s equality is a priority for this government.”

Source: http://www.liberal.ca/news_e.aspx?type=news&id=11845

Links: Anti-Status of Women Canada

Grassroots Blogger Reaction against Canada’s Status of Women Prompts Media Action
Public not aware feminist organization has been manipulating government since 1973
by Hilary White, LifeSiteNews.com

TORONTO, August 25, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A grassroots effort to abolish the government-funded radical feminist organization, Status of Women, is picking up speed and garnering attention in the mainstream press. This morning, an article appearing in Maclean’s Magazine and the Globe and Mail, two of Canada’s most prominent news sources, cited the work of bloggers – also called “citizen journalists” – in bringing the issue to public attention.

On August 14, LifeSiteNews.com reported that Status of Women (SoW) was likely using public funds to launch a massive counter offensive in the media after human rights group REAL Women of Canada had sent letters to MP’s calling for the organization to be defunded and dissolved.

When the main Canadian media outlets ignored the story, it was taken up on the blogs – live online journals by private individuals – largely women, who say they were tired both of Status of Women’s radical feminist agenda in Canadian politics and the media’s campaign of silence against any opposed opinion. Read More

Canadian Taxpayers Funding Radical Feminist Counter-Offensive
Federal agency determined to derail critics of its 33 year ideological crusade
by Hilary White, LifeSiteNews.com, August 14, 2006

TORONTO, August 14, 2006 – Status of Women, Canada’s federal agency promoting feminism in Parliament for over 30 years is under scrutiny and is fighting back, all at taxpayer’s expense, says REAL Women of Canada, a national pro-marriage, pro-family women's rights organization. Status of Women, established by the Trudeau Liberals in 1973 to promote “gender equity” in Canadian politics, has engineered a “counter offensive” against the current efforts to force the agency to come clean on its ideological bias.

In April this year, REAL Women of Canada sent a letter to Canada’s MP’s calling for the defunding and disbanding of Status of Women. Since then, a backlash of letters, media columns and emails to REAL Women's Ottawa and Toronto offices has come from the taxpayer funded feminist agency.

In an action alert sent out to supporters, REAL Women said that the evidence indicates that Status of Women itself arranged to have an Access to Information request that would reveal all correspondence to and from MP’s in response to REAL Women’s letter. This, said Gwen Landoldt, REAL Women vice president, will expose MP’s who might be questioning the agency’s usefulness to pressure from the feminist lobby.

This strategy, Landolt said, is going to be used in the next election. “That the Conservative government dared to question the feminist agenda, is going to be a valuable stick for them come election time.”

Columns from prominent Canadian feminist journalists have appeared slamming REAL Women for having criticized Status of Women. Read More

Anti-Status of Women Canada Blogs:

Susanne at Big Blue Wave: “It is time to eliminate Status of Women”
http://bluewavecanada.blogspot.com/2006/08/it-is-time-to-eliminate-status-of.html

Hailey at Every Good and Perfect Gift: “Feminists Don’t Speak for Me”
(but Susanne obviously does speak for the Hailey-Mary)
http://bluewavecanada.blogspot.com/2006/08/it-is-time-to-eliminate-status-of.html (same URL as in above blog)

Hunter at Climbing Out of the Dark: “One Mad Woman!!”
http://climbingoutofthedark.blogspot.com/2006/08/sows-going-ballistic.html

Kathy Shaidle at Relapsed Catholic: “We need Status of Women Canada like a fish needs a bicycle “
http://relapsedcatholic.blogspot.com/2006/08/we-need-status-of-women-canada-like.html
http://relapsedcatholic.blogspot.com/2006/08/oh-boy-charts-and-graphs-from-group-im.html

Dianne Wood at Family Matters: “The old SOW has got to go”
http://familymatterswithdianne.blogspot.com/2006/08/old-sow-has-got-to-go.html

Kate McMillan at Small Dead Animals:
http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/004489.html

R.E.A.L. Women of Canada

Counter-Attack by Feminists

A L E R T
August 7, 2006

Since 1973, the federal Status of Women has given millions of dollars to feminist only groups and promoted feminist policies on the false premise that women in Canada are victims of a patriarchal society. Although some women may be victims, the vast majority of Canadian women are perfectly able and are capable of making their own decisions about their lives. They do not need nor want the Status of Women to speak on their behalf.

With the election of the Conservatives in January 2006, REAL Women believed that the time had come to examine this serious abuse of taxpayers' money, as well as the hugely unnecessary House of Commons Standing Committee on the Status of Women. (The latter had recommended that there be a 25% increase in funding to feminist only group.)

REAL Women sent a letter dated April 4, 2006, addressed to the Prime Minister as well as to "friendly" MPs from various political parties requesting that this entire matter be objectively examined.

REAL Women's efforts to disband the Status of Women and its outrageous policies and funding, however, has recently been met by a massive counter offensive with letters pouring in to the Prime Minister and his Cabinet and individual MPs from across the country expressing concerns about the disbandment of the Status of Women.

Although we have no way of proving it, we are confident that this well-coordinated campaign has been instigated by the Status of Women itself, whose future is on the line, since its efforts may no longer be required.

There is no one better placed administratively to coordinate this counter offensive than the Status of Women which has first-hand information on the developments and has on record all the feminist groups and shelters across the country. Further, an application has been received under the Access to Information Act for a record of all correspondence received by the Status of Women on this issue. The purpose of this is to expose (and pressure) MPs who have written to the agency to support REAL Women and its perspective on the Status of Women.

The theme of these many letters is that "shelters for abused women and children protect them from the violence." (No mention of the studies which indicate that half of domestic violence is instigated by the women.) The letters also claim that women need the support of the Status of Women to work for pay equity, marital property and senior women's income, etc.

Never is it mentioned that the Status of Women, including women's shelters themselves, are matters of provincial jurisdiction only. They do not fall within federal jurisdiction and there is no reason why the federal government is funding so generously these provincial issues and organizations. Further, there is no reason why the Status of Women portfolio is included in the Cabinet.

In order to offset this national feminist effort to protect feminist control in Canada, it would be appreciated if you would write immediately to the Prime Minister, relevant Members of his Cabinet (list below), and your MP and the opposition leaders who are all being inundated with letters to support feminist policies and funding of the Status of Women.

Please write to the following: (addresses removed)

The Right Honourable Stephen Harper, PC, MP
Prime Minister of Canada

The Hon. Beverley J. Oda, PC, MP
Minister of Status of Women

The Hon. Rona Ambrose, PC, MP
Minister of the Environment
Environment Canada

The Hon. Diane Finley, PC, MP
Minister of Human Resources and Social Development

The Hon. Josée Verner, PC, MP
Minister of International Cooperation and
Minister for La Francophonie and Official Languages

The Hon. Carol Skelton, PC, MP
Minister of National Revenue and
Minister of Western Economic Diversification

The Hon. Bill Graham
Interim Leader of the Liberal Party

The Hon. Jack Layton
Leader of the NDP Party

July 20, 2006

R.E.A.L. Women file complaint against Ontario Chief Justice

The R.E.A.L. Women of Canada clan are at it again ... Now they've filed a formal complaint against Ontario Chief Justice Roy McMurtry with the Canadian Judicial Council, alleging judicial misconduct.

Excerpt:

Judge Who Gave Canada Homosexual "Marriage" Had Conflict of Interest Says Women's Rights Group

TORONTO, July 19, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The women’s rights organization, REAL Women of Canada, has filed a formal complaint against Ontario Chief Justice Roy McMurtry with the Canadian Judicial Council, alleging judicial misconduct. McMurtry was the judge who issued a ruling in 2003 on the Halpern case that effectively ended the traditional definition of marriage in Canada.

McMurtry’s son, James, revealed in a letter to the editor of a BC newspaper that his sister is a lesbian in a live-in relationship with another woman. This, says REAL Women, creates a serious concern that “McMurtry had a personal and familial interest” in the Halpern case, “which seriously impaired his objectivity and his ability to adjudicate the case.”

** sniped **

REAL Women’s letter alleges that McMurtry’s personal interest biased the entire process and violated the “fundamental judicial obligations of office.” REAL Women says that in addition, Justice McMurtry deliberately chose and selected judges sympathetic to same-sex "marriage" to hear the case. Read the Full Article

Attack on feminism hurts women here and overseas

Heather Mallick

CBC News Viewpoint
June 30, 2006

REAL Women are on the warpath, as I guess I would be too if I were REAListic, Equal, Active, and for Life. Hey, I am all those things! Oh, they mean "not in your unREAL way." I think.

REALists have been quiet for a long time. But they see the Stephen Harper minority government as their chance to change Canada back to the way they say it used to be. Whatever that was, I'm sure it was lovely. And frankly, their view of the future does verge on the dire.

"We are living in the best of material times … Yet, simultaneously, we are also living in a time of moral decadence: abortion on demand, the legalization of same-sex relationships as marriages, the cultural and legal acceptance of homosexuality despite its destructive ramifications, both psychologically and medically, rampant sexual promiscuity and euthanasia, legalized drug use and legalized prostitution just around the corner."

But I'm for all these things. Not sure about rampant euthanasia (get it in writing, I say, and point out the drawbacks: "Yer dead") or prostitution, but perhaps they don't grasp that legal changes regarding prostitution are aimed (by good men and good women) at saving hundreds of sex workers and other women who have vanished into the thinnest of air in Canada. Some of them might have been fed to pigs.

Read Full Article Here

REAL Women of Canada has obtained an additional Access to Information request on feminist groups for 2004 - 2005 through Status of Women Canada.

In their latest newsletter (May-June 2006), they've posted budgets to organizations such as LEAF, NAWL, & NAC on their website as a part of their Letter Writing Campaign to MPs.

Links to the specific articles in their online Newsletter:

Ongoing Discrimination of Status of Women:
http://www.realwomenca.com/newsletter/2006_may_jun/article_7.html

Professional Feminists Face Changing Times:
http://www.realwomenca.com/newsletter/2006_may_jun/article_9.html

For visitor's who don't wish to visit the REAL Women website, we have copied and pasted below, the text from one of the abovementioned URLs with the letter REAL Women wrote to MPs.:

From REAL Women website:

ONGOING DISCRIMINATION BY THE STATUS OF WOMEN

Since REAL Women of Canada began in 1983, we have had to contend with the fact that anti-family, anti-life feminist groups have been generously funded by the federal government 's Women's Programme at the Status of Women. Hundreds of millions of tax dollars have flowed to these feminist groups since this programme began in 1973. The funding of feminist groups has enabled them to become agents of change to promote feminism throughout Canada. As a result, feminists are more influential in Canada than anywhere else in the world.

In contrast, except for a few small grants from the Women's Programme, REAL Women has had to support itself from our membership dues and donations received from our members and supporters. As generous as our members are, it still means we have a limited income and in no way can operate on in a level playing field with the feminists.

As outlined in recent issues of REALity, REAL women applied, under the Access to Information Act, for material relating to the funding of feminist groups by the Women's Programme at the Status of Women.

The material we received revealed an abuse of power by the former Liberal government in funding feminist-only groups. This funding policy MUST be stopped.

On April 4, 2006, REAL Women sent a letter outlining the discriminatory policies of the Women's Programme and the Standing Committee on the Status of Women to all "friendly" MPs, which included Conservative, as well as some individual, Liberal and Bloc Quebecois MPs who are supportive of the pro-life/pro-family cause

Below is a copy of our letter to the MPs, which describes this outrageous funding in support of a special interest group of feminists and also raises objections to the re-establishment of the House of Commons Committee on the Status of Women.

April 4, 2006

Dear M.P.:

RE: THE DISCRIMINATORY POLICIES OF THE STATUS OF WOMEN

Since 1973, the federal taxpayers have paid hundreds of millions of dollars to feminist-only organizations by way of the Women's Program at the Status of Women Canada. The mission statement of the Status of Women is "to promote gender equality and the full participation of women in the economic, social, cultural and political life of the country". Its practical effect, however, is that only feminist objectives and feminist women in Canada are promoted by the agency. Other women's organizations, which have differing perspectives from that of feminism are denied funding and recognition.

The Status of Women refuses to fund organizations that are not feminist on the premise that it funds only "equality - seeking" women's organizations, and in its view, only feminist organizations are validly seeking equality for women. This is highly discriminatory since most women support the equality of women - but there are different ways to interpret and achieve this objective. For example, the promotion of the equality of women is one of the objectives included in the Objects of Incorporation for REAL Women, yet the Status of Women does not accept our organization as an "equality - seeking" organization.

Feminist organizations, however, do not represent Canadian women in general but rather a special interest group of women whose ideology is that of feminism. The feminist ideology does not now, and never has had the support of the vast majority of Canadian women. Thus, this funding of the special interest group of feminists by the Status of Women is highly biased and discriminatory, and provides an uneven playing field for all other women's organizations in Canada.

Because of its discriminatory policies, the Women's Program of the Status of Women has made only a few token grants to REAL Women of Canada over the years and these small grants were stopped entirely in 1996. Nor has REAL Women been invited to participate in activities supported by the Status of Women. An exception arose in December of 1999 when the Status of Women sponsored a Consultation on Gender Equality, to which REAL Women was given an invitation. However, the feminist participants at that conference, whose organizations depend solely for their existence on the Status of Women funding, insisted that REAL Women's invitation be withdrawn. When our representative refused to leave the conference, the feminist participants isolated, ignored and then booed her and refused to permit her to participate in the conference in any way. Since that conference, REAL Women has not been invited to participate in any further conferences sponsored by the Status of Women, even though our organization represents the views of over 55,000 Canadian women.

Extent of Funding to Feminist Organizations

An application was made under the Access to Information Act for information about the funding by the Status of Women in the ten-year period from 1992 - 2002. A further application was made under the Act for information about funding for the fiscal year 2004 - 2005.

According to this material, hundreds of feminist organizations receive government funding each year from the Program. For example, between 1997 - 2003 alone, the number of recipients and the total of the grants awarded to them by Status of Women were as follows:

Year - Number of Recipients - Amount
1997-1998 343 $ 8,286,059
1998-1999 262 $10,321,916
1999-2000 207 $ 8,502,412
2000-2001 227 $ 9,810,390
2001-2002 215 $10,385,851
2002-2003 222 $12,297,090

Organizations funded by the Status of Women include national, provincial and regional feminist organizations, such as the following:

* The legal arm of the feminist organization, The Legal Education Action Fund (LEAF) received $900,334 over a 10-year period, 1992 - 2002, which enabled this group to intervene in court cases and to mount their own court challenges. In contrast, REAL Women of Canada was obliged to fund its own pro-family interventions before the courts.

* The National Association of Women and the Law (NAWL) received $1,648,318 in the same 10-year period. In the fiscal year 2004-2005, this organization received an additional grant of $474,879.

* The National Action Committee on the Status of Women, (NAC), the umbrella group for the feminist organizations of Canada, received $984,551 in the 10-year period, and In the fiscal year 2004 - 2005 received an additional $150,000.

* Child Care lobby groups, such as the Canadian Child Care Federation, and the Child Care Advocacy Association of Canada, received $1,362,209 between 1992 and 2002. These organizations form the pressure group for a national child care plan as recently proposed and implemented by the former Liberal government.

In the fiscal year 2004 - 2005 these child care lobby groups received a further $483,753 from the Women's Program. This large grant was given during the time that the former Liberal government was negotiating with the provinces for a national child care program.

On February 16, 2006, the tax funded Child Care Advocacy Association of Canada launched a Canada wide campaign called "Code Blue" to lobby for and work with the provincial / territorial governments and parliamentarians to prevent the present Conservative government from cancelling the federal / provincial agreements on child care made last year by the former Liberal government.

It is significant that these child care lobby groups have the most to gain from a national child care plan since such a program would provide them with financial security by placing them on the government payroll with secure income and benefits.

* In the 20-month period preceding December 4, 1998, lesbian organizations received $250,918. In the fiscal year 2004 - 2005, an additional $90,280 was awarded to a homosexual / lesbian association.

* 524 women's shelters across Canada have been funded by the Status of Women, even though such shelters fall within provincial jurisdiction. These women's centres serve as agents of change for feminists in communities across Canada. Feminists claim they provide protection from male assault, in spite of the fact that a Statistics Canada study, released in July 2003, found that more men were killed, hurt, or threatened by their partners in 2001 than in previous years. The study "Family Violence in Canada," funded by the Federal Family Violence Initiative, found that spousal violence has increased for both men and women. In 2001, there were 344 incidents per 100,000 women, and for men, there were 62 incidents for every 100,000 - the latter is up 40% from six years ago. Although there were many more incidents of assault against women, this does not mean that men should be neglected.

* The pro-abortion organization, BC Pro-Choice Action Network, initially received $60,220 in the 10-year period fro 1992 - 2002. However, in 2004 - 2005 it received $27,400. According to information on their web site, the spokesperson for this organization, Joyce Arthur, stated that opposition to abortion "comes primarily from religious justifications for oppressing women" and is due to a need to "maximize [the Catholic Church's] membership levels to maintain their worldly influence and wealth". This pro-abortion organization also accused pro-life Christians of being "religious fanatics" who do "little or nothing for children once they are born". She stated that pro-life Christians are "anti-woman and anti-child," and had views which were "uninformed, sexist, cruel". She also accused pro-life Christians of lacking the ability to empathize, which "breeds intolerance, hate crimes, and war". Ms. Arthur further stated, according to the web site, that pro-lifers' attitude towards women is like "the slaveholder's attitude to blacks, and the Nazi's attitude to Jews". That an organization that expresses such bigoted views, receives public funding is shameful and an unpardonable offense to the Canadian taxpayer.

* Organizations to promote the decriminalization of prostitution in Canada, namely the Canadian National Coalition of Experiential Women (CNCEW), received $325,000 to actively campaign to decriminalize solicitation for prostitution. In the fiscal year 2004 - 2005, it received an additional $322,646 from the Women's Program. This large grant was made at the time that the Liberal government had established a sub-committee of the Justice Committee to study the issue of prostitution. This Committee recommended that prostitution be decriminalized.

House of Commons Standing Committee on the Status of Women in Canada (FEWO)

It is also a concern to us, that the House of Commons Standing Committee of the Status of Women, which was established in October, 2004, serves to promote only feminist organizations and their feminist agenda in Canada. The Committee stated that it promotes "equality - seeking" women's organizations. Of course, its narrow definition of "equality" excludes all other women's organizations. The Committee's first report, tabled in the House of Commons on February 10, 2005, recommended that funding for women's [feminist] groups be increased by 25%. In its second report, tabled in the House of Commons on April 19, 2005, the Committee recommended that a "gender analysis" be carried out on all federal government departments, their policies, and proposed legislation. In practical terms, the purpose of this proposal is to ensure that all government actions be subject to feminist overview and approval in order to ensure that the feminist ideology is spread throughout Canada.

Such extreme recommendations by the Standing Committee on the Status of Women expose it as being out of touch with the views of most Canadian women. This group's recommendations fail to comply with the democratic process in regard to a full consultation and fair treatment of all organizations.

Therefore, we request, that the discriminatory Status of Women, as well as the Standing Committee on the Status of Women (FEWO), be disbanded, since they represent only the singular views of a special interest group of feminists. In short, these two agencies serve no purpose but to promote the views of a handful of extremist feminist organizations at the expense of the Canadian taxpayer. These feminist ideologues serve only to increase intolerance and disrespect towards those who do not share their views.

In this regard, it should be pointed out that women's organizations, being special interest organizations, should be self supporting as REAL Women of Canada has been since it was federally incorporated in 1983. REAL Women has managed to exist without debt, financed solely by the donations and dues of our grassroots members with only a few minor grants from the government. Similarly, all special interest groups should be required to do the same.

Summary

Feminist groups have few, if any, members, and are, in effect, mostly phantom organizations sustained only by the funding they receive from the Status of Women. Since these organizations represent no one but the radical feminists who run them, they should not receive financial support from the Canadian taxpayer.

Yours truly,

Lorraine McNamara
National President
REAL Women of Canada

Please write to:
The Right Hon. Stephen Harper
Prime Minister of Canada
Langevin Building
80 Wellington Street
Ottawa, ON K1A 0A2

The Hon. Beverley Oda, P.C. M.P.
Minister of Canadian Heritage and Status of Women
Canadian Heritage
Les Terrasses de la Chaudière
12th Floor, 15 Eddy Street
Gatineau, Quebec K1A 0M5

Please raise your objections to the funding policies of the Status of Women and the discriminatory policies of the House of Commons Committee on the Status of Women.

---

 

See also:

April 25, 2006

Call for Letters in support of increased funding for women's equality-seeking groups
Now is the time to ACT and stand in solidarity with women's equality-seeking groups who on a daily basis, struggle to advance women's equality with very little resources. I encourage every member of DAWN Ontario and our allies to share this far and wide. Please ask the same of women in your respective networks.

Write to the Prime Minister and send copies to the Minister Responsible for Status of Women and to the Liberal, NDP and Bloc Québecois Critics for Status of Women, in support of increased funding for women's equality-seeking groups! (see sample letter) As previously posted, the R.E.A.L. Women of Canada group has been lobbying for the last 7 years to disband Status of Women. With Harper and the Conservatives in power, the time to act is NOW!

French by HONEY HOT Feminist Translation
briand@mediom.qc.ca, martin@laurentides.net

Bulletin spécial
Le lobby R.E.A.L. Women of Canada tente de faire démanteler Condition
féminine Canada et le Comité permanent de la condition féminine (CPCF)

Le 24 juin 2006

R.E.A.L. Women of Canada a eu gain de cause dans une autre demande d'accès à de l'information concernant les organisations féministes pour l'exercice 2004-2005, par le biais d'une requête concernant Condition féminine Canada.

Dans la plus récente édition de son bulletin (mai-juin 2006), R.E.A.L. Women affiche sur son site Web les budgets d'opération d'organisations comme le Fonds d'action et d'éducation juridique (FAEJ), l'Association nationale Femmes et droit (ANFD) et le Comité canadien d'action sur le statut de la femme (CCA), dans le cadre d'une campagne de pressions visant la députation fédérale.

Liens à ces articles de leur bulletin en ligne:

Ongoing Discrimination of Status of Women (La discrimination se poursuit à Condition féminine Canada) :
http://www.realwomenca.com/newsletter/2006_may_jun/article_7.html

Professional Feminists Face Changing Times (Les féministes professionnelles se heurtent à des temps nouveaux) :
http://www.realwomenca.com/newsletter/2006_may_jun/article_9.html

Pour les internautes qui ne souhaitent pas honorer de leur présence le site de R.E.A.L. Women, nous avons copié-collé ci-dessous le texte (traduit) d'une des pages Web susmentionnées, y compris une partie de la lettre adressée par R.E.A.L. Women aux députés fédéraux :

Du site de R.E.A.L. Women:

[TRADUCTION]

LA DISCRIMINATION SE POURSUIT À CONDITION FÉMININE CANADA

Depuis les débuts de R.E.A.L. Women of Canada en 1983, nous avons dû composer avec le fait que des organisations féministes anti-famille et anti-vie recevaient un généreux financement du Programme fédéral de promotion de la femme, à Condition féminine Canada. Des centaines de millions de dollars des contribuables ont été versés à ces groupes féministes depuis les débuts de du programme en 1973. Le financement des organisations féministes leur a permis de devenir des agents de changement par la promotion du féminisme dans tout le Canada. Suite à cela, les féministes ont plus d'influence au Canada que partout ailleurs dans le monde.

En contrepartie, sauf pour quelques subventions restreintes du Programme de promotion de la femme, R.E.A.L. Women a été forcée de s'en tenir aux cotisations et aux dons de ses membres et de ses supporters. Malgré la générosité de nos membres, cela signifie que nous ne disposons que de revenus limités et ne pouvons fonctionner sur un pied d'égalité avec les féministes.

Comme nous l'avons expliqué dans des numéros récents de notre bulletin REALity, R.E.A.L. Women a demandé, aux termes de la Loi sur l'accès à l'information, des éléments d'information concernant le financement d'organisations féministes par le Programme de promotion de la femme à Condition féminine Canada.

Les données qui nous ont été communiquées révèlent un abus de pouvoir par l'ex-gouvernement libéral, qui ne finançait que les groupes féministes. Cette politique de financement DOIT être abolie.

Le 4 avril 2006, R.E.A.L. Women a fait parvenir une lettre décrivant les politiques discriminatoires du Programme de promotion de la femme à tous les député-es « amicaux » à notre cause, soit les Conservateurs et quelques élu-es du Parti libéral et du Bloc québécois qui ont manifesté leur soutien à la cause pro-vie et pro-famille.

Veuillez trouver ci-dessous une copie de notre lettre aux député-es. Elle décrit ce scandale - leur financement d'un groupe d'intérêt, les féministes - et soulève également des objections à la remise sur pied d'un Comité permanent sur la condition féminine à la Chambre des communes.

_______________________________________________________

Le 4 avril 2006

Monsieur ou Madame le/la député-e,

OBJET : LES POLITIQUES DISCRIMINATOIRES DE CONDITION FÉMININE Canada (CFC)

Depuis 1973, les contribuables fédéraux ont versé des centaines de millions de dollars à des organisations exclusivement féministes par le biais du Programme de promotion de la femme de Condition féminine Canada. CFC a pour mission de « promouvoir l'égalité entre les sexes et la participation active de toutes les femmes à la vie économique, sociale, culturelle et politique du pays ». En pratique, cependant, il n'y a que les objectifs féministes et les femmes féministes du Canada qui bénéficient du travail de promotion effectué par cet organisme. D'autres organisations de femmes, dont les perspectives diffèrent de celles du féminisme, se voient refuser financement et reconnaissance.

CFC refuse de financer les organisations qui ne sont pas féministes, sous prétexte de ne financer que les groupes de femmes « oeuvrant en faveur de l'égalité ». À leur sens, seules les organisations féministes oeuvrent de façon valide à l'égalité des femmes. Cette politique est hautement discriminatoire puisque la plupart des femmes appuient l'égalité des femmes, mais qu'il existe différentes façons d'interpréter et d'atteindre cet objectif. Par exemple, la promotion de l'égalité des femmes est un des objectifs inclus dans les motifs d'incorporation de R.E.A.L. Women; néanmoins, CFC ne reconnaît pas notre organisation comme un groupe « oeuvrant en faveur de l'égalité ».

Il faut savoir que les organisations féministes ne représentent pas les femmes canadiennes en général mais bien un groupe d'intérêt particulier de femmes dont l'idéologie est celle du féminisme. L'idéologie féministe n'a pas actuellement et n'a jamais eu le soutien de la vaste majorité des Canadiennes. C'est dire que le financement du groupe d'intérêt particulier que constituent les féministes est hautement biaisé et discriminatoire et qu'il crée une situation inéquitable pour l'ensemble des autres groupes de femmes du Canada.

À cause de ses politiques discriminatoires, le Programme de promotion de la femme de CFC n'a accordé que quelques contributions symboliques à R.E.A.L. Women of Canada depuis ses débuts, et ces micro-subventions ont entièrement
cessé en 1996. R.E.A.L. Women n'a pas été invitée non plus aux activités soutenues par CFC. Une exception est survenue en décembre 1999 lorsque CFC a marrainé une Consultation sur l'égalité entre les sexes, à laquelle R.E.A.L.

Women a été invitée. Toutefois, les participantes féministes à cette conférence, des membres d'organisations qui dépendent exclusivement de CFC pour financer leur existence, ont insisté pour obtenir le retrait de l'invitation faite à R.E.A.L. Women. Lorsque notre représentante a refusé de quitter la conférence, les participantes féministes l'ont isolée, ignorée, puis huée et empêchée de participer d'aucune façon à la conférence. Depuis cet événement, R.E.A.L. Women n'a été invitée à participer à aucune autre conférence marrainée par CFC, même si notre organisation représente les
opinions de plus de 55 000 Canadiennes.

(.)

Veuillez écrire au:
Très honorable Stephen Harper
Premier ministre du Canada
Édifice Langevin
80, rue Wellington
Ottawa (Ont.) K1A 0A2

L'honorable Beverley Oda, députée conservatrice
Ministre du Patrimoine canadien et de la Condition féminine
Patrimoine canadien
Les Terrasses de la Chaudière
12e étage, 15, rue Eddy
Gatineau (Québec) K1A 0M5

Veuillez vous objecter aux politiques de financement de Condition féminine Canada et aux politiques discriminatoires du Comité permanent sur la condition féminine de la Chambre des Communes.

____________________________________

(RETOUR AU MESSAGE DE DAWN)

Voir également:
Le 25 avril 2006

Appel à des lettres de soutien pour un meilleur financement des groupes oeuvrant pour l'égalité des femmes

Le temps est arrivé de PASSER AUX ACTES et de nous montrer solidaires des groupes oeuvrant pour l'égalité des femmes qui luttent quotidiennement, avec très peu de ressources, pour promouvoir l'égalité des femmes. J'encourage
chaque membre de DAWN Ontario et chacun-e de nos allié-es à donner à ce message une diffusion maximale. Veuillez demander la même chose aux femmes de vos réseaux respectifs.

Écrivez au Premier ministre Harper et faites parvenir des copies de votre lettre à la ministre fédérale responsable de la Condition féminine, Madame Oda, ainsi qu'aux critiques à la condition féminine du Parti Libéral, du NPD et du Bloc québécois, pour réclamer un meilleur financement des groupes oeuvrant pour l'égalité des femmes! (voir lettre-échantillon). Comme nous l' avons dit, l'organisation R.E.A.L. Women of Canada fait pression depuis sept ans pour obtenir l'abolition de Condition féminine Canada. Avec l'arrivée au pouvoir de M. Harper et des Conservateurs, c'est MAINTENANT qu'il faut agir!

Fighting the Blues - What the Social Conservative Agenda Means to Women
The CLC 13th National Women’s Conference Paper

June 16, 2006

REAL Women Canada is a key partner in the alliance of social conservative groups which strongly supports the Conservatives. In this statement, REAL Women acknowledges that the future they have planned for us is something that will alarm Canadians. What is their agenda? Should we be alarmed?

“Social Conservatives to Sell Tory Daycare Plan”, read the headline of a Globe and Mail story on April 19, 2006. The Globe and Mail reported what many in Canada may have known intuitively. On April 3, the day Parliament re-opened — the Conservative government had met with far right-wing groups to strategize around how to convince the public that a taxable $1200/year/pre-school child was preferable to setting-up a public system of early childhood learning and care. Their ideological base of support is really the far right. The most vocal critics of public child care come from small, fundamentalist religious-based groups; the Conservatives are relying on them to counter the voices of working families and child care advocates. And they now have a direct link to the Prime Minister’s office.

The Globe reported that to try and avoid negative publicity for Prime Minister Harper’s office, Conservative Senator Anne Cools organized the meeting. When questioned about the meeting, Sandra Buckler, spokesperson for the Prime Minister’s Office admitted that it had taken place, but refused to name the groups and individuals in attendance. “The only thing I can possibly say is that we’re reaching out to all interested groups who agree with our child care plan”, Buckler said.

Exactly which groups support the Conservative policy of parental allowance and oppose publicly-funded child care, and what are their objectives? REAL Women Canada was one of the organizations at the April 3 meeting. It describes itself as upholding the ideal that “even in a changing world, every family, who so chooses, be able to look after their children in their own home”. Hand-in-hand with this is the view that women staying at home to raise children are making a “career choice”, as well as a —

Long-term investment in the well-being of their children and in the future stability of the next generation. A full-time mother makes a significant contribution to society by contributing psychologically and emotionally to the well-being of her children and also economically in that her full-time care of the child negates the need and costs of outside day care services (Statement on Child Care).

This dedication to the role of motherhood should be encouraged, not discouraged, by our tax laws and legislation (Canada’s New Women’s Movement).

Placing women in the paid workforce has consistently been a priority in Communist countries. This also appears to be an integral part of Canada’s current policy (Who’s in Charge of the Family?).

According to REAL Women then, a woman’s proper place is in the home, she should be encouraged to stay there and those who support a publicly-funded, safe, and accessible child-care system are Communists.

Another organization in attendance at the meeting was the Canada Family Action Coalition. On the front page of their website there is a similar message:

Canada does not need another socialist “care” system. Health care, the socialist monopoly is inoperable the way it is. Public education, another attempt at monopoly is a disaster. Now, the
socialists want a Soviet style attack on the family. Support the plan to help parents with freedom and choice—$1200 direct to parents.

Let the current daycare operators operate and compete — keep the government and unions out of free market provision of good service.

Socially conservative groups clearly understand that the Conservative policy to provide a family allowance instead of
building of a public child care system is an entry point to a host of controversial positions touching all working people in Canada:

• the proper role of women and men in society;
• the role of social services, like health care, child care and public education;
• the role and legitimacy of unions;
• family policy including support for single-income, married, heterosexual couples and opposition to birth control, sex education, choice.

Unraveling Conservative arguments favouring direct allowances for parents instead of and as opposed to public child care helps to lay bare their vision for Canada in the context of growing inequality between rich and poor, and persisting inequalities between women and men.

Read the full document:
'Fighting the Blues' - What the Social Conservative Agenda Means to Women (PDF file, 281 kb, 26 pgs)

Update: April 30, 2006

As a follow up to our Call for Letters in support of increased funding for women's equality-seeking groups, please see excerpt below from the April 28th Hansard containing the question posed by Maria Minna, Liberal critic for Status of Women and the response from Bev Oda, the Minister Responsible for Status of Women.

Source:
39th PARLIAMENT, 1st SESSION - EDITED HANSARD . NUMBER 012 - Friday, April 28, 2006

Status of Women

Hon. Maria Minna (Beaches-East York, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, conservative-minded groups are actively campaigning to have the Status of Women Canada program disbanded. Can the minister reassure the House that the government will take no such action and that no cuts will be made to the budget of this very important department?

Hon. Bev Oda (Minister of Canadian Heritage and Status of Women, CPC): Mr. Speaker, the member's question gives me the opportunity to indicate that this government recognizes the importance of women. They represent 50% of all Canadians. We will support them in their endeavours. The resources they require so they can fully participate in Canadian life will be assured.

Now is the time to ACT and stand in solidarity with women's equality-seeking groups who on a daily basis, struggle to advance women's equality with very little resources.

I encourage every member of DAWN Ontario and our allies to share this far and wide. Please ask the same of women in your respective networks.

Write to the Prime Minister and send copies to the Minister Responsible for Status of Women and to the Liberal, NDP and Bloc Québecois Critics for Status of Women, in support of increased funding for women's equality-seeking groups! (sample letter appears below)

As previously posted, the R.E.A.L. Women of Canada group has been lobbying for the last 7 years to disband Status of Women. With Harper and the Conservatives in power, the time to act is NOW!

CONTACT INFO

Find your local MP's contact info at this link:
http://www.parl.gc.ca/information/about/people/house/mpscur.asp?Language=E

Send letter to:

Stephen Harper, Prime Minister

• Email: pm@pm.gc.ca
  
  
• Address:
  Office of the Prime Minister
  80 Wellington Street
  Ottawa K1A 0A2
  
  
• Fax: 613-941-6900

Send copies to:

Bev Oda, Minister Responsible for the Status of Women Canada

• Email: Oda.B@parl.gc.ca
  
  
• Address:
  House of Commons
  Ottawa, Ontario
  K1A 0A6
  
  
• Fax: 613.992.2794

Maria Minna, Critic, Status of Women, Liberal Party

• Email: Minna.M@parl.gc.ca
  
  
• Address:
  House of Commons
  Ottawa, Ontario
  K1A 0A6
  
  
• Fax: 613.996.7942

Irene Mathyssen, Critic, Status of Women, New Democratic Party

• Email: Mathyssen.I@parl.gc.ca
  
  
• Address:
  House of Commons
  Ottawa, Ontario
  K1A 0A6
  
  
• Fax: 613.943.8717

Mme Maria Mourani, Critic, Status of Women, Bloc Québecois

• Email: Mourani.Ma@parl.gc.ca
  
  
• Address:
  House of Commons
  Ottawa, Ontario
  K1A 0A6
  
  
• Fax: 613.992.1932

Sample Letter (added April 25, 2006)

Follow this link to Download Sample Letter as a Word doc

Instructions for copying & pasting text:

1. Select/block the text you want to copy
2. Press CTRL + C to copy text
3. Press CTRL + V to paste text into body of your letter or email message

[Date]

The Right Honourable Stephen Harper
Prime Minister of Canada
Langevin Block,
House of Commons
Ottawa, ON

Dear Prime Minister Harper:

During the recent federal election, you acknowledged that "Canada still has more to do to meet its international obligations to women's equality". I appreciate this acknowledgement. I am also pleased to learn that you plan to "take concrete and immediate measures, as recommended by the United Nations, to ensure that governments in Canada fully uphold their equality commitments to women(1)." ( http://www.fafia-afai.org/images/Conservative_response_Jan182006.pdf ).

As you may know, this year marks the 25th anniversary of Canada's ratification of the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). Canada ratified this convention in 1981 with the consent of all provinces and territories . While I recognize that some women in Canada have made progress since then, many women have been left behind.

In this anniversary year, you, as Prime Minister, have a unique opportunity to ensure Canada's full accountability for its human rights commitments to women. To do this, the federal government must sustain both its own efforts to achieve equality for women and its support of non-governmental organizations' contributions.

In particular, you can improve Canada's performance under CEDAW by immediately supporting the Minister of Status of Women to do the following:

• Release the report of the Expert Panel on Accountability Mechanisms for Gender Equality (commissioned before the federal election);
• Provide both project and core-funding to women's equality-seeking groups, including women-centered services;
• Increase the budget of Status of Women Canada (including to the Women's Programme) to $100 million.

These steps are necessary because as you know, women continue to face violence and poverty at highly disproportionate rates. For example, in 2004, 37% of all female homicide victims were killed by a current or former spouse, whereas this was the case with only 4% of male homicide victims(2). As well, in 2003, women employed full-time full-year in Canada earned only 71% of the amount earned by similarly employed males(3). As a consequence, more women than men are poor in Canada. In particular, the poverty rate for female lone parent led families is 38%, compared with just 13% of lone parent families headed by men, and just 7% of non-elderly two-parent families(4). These realities are only aggravated if one is a woman of colour, an immigrant woman, a woman with disabilities and/or an Aboriginal woman.

In addition, with women holding only 21% of the seats in the federal Parliament and 22% in the new federal cabinet, issues of significance to women do not always get the attention they deserve. As a consequence, through the research, analysis and support provided by Status of Women Canada, many women's organizations in Canada are able to play a vital democratic role in gathering and reflecting women's voices and experiences. These voices contribute to the development of just public policy for all Canadians.

As Canada prepares to report back to the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women in early 2007, it is time for Canada to make meaningful progress on the long-standing recommendations from the UN. Progress in these areas would represent positive steps towards improving Canada's record and advancing women's human rights in Canada.

With your support, Canada can make the 25th anniversary of our ratification of CEDAW an event worth celebrating.

Sincerely,

[Your name and address]

cc: The Honourable Beverley J. Oda, Minister of Status of Women - Oda.B@parl.gc.ca
Ms. Maria Minna, Critic, Status of Women, Liberal Party - Minna.M@parl.gc.ca
Ms. Irene Mathyssen, Critic, Status of Women, New Democratic Party - Mathyssen.I@parl.gc.ca
Mme Maria Mourani, Critic, Status of Women, Bloc Québecois - Mourani.Ma@parl.gc.ca

1 To see the UN's recommendations to Canada please see:
http://www.fafia-afai.org/images/CEDAW_UNrecs_to_Canada_2003.pdf
2 Statistics Canada. 2006. Women in Canada 2005.p.164
3 Statistics Canada. 2006. Women in Canada 2005. p.152
4 Statistics Canada. 2006. Women in Canada 2005. (2003 data). P.144

 

Relevant Links

From R.E.A.L. Women
ELECTION 2006 AND ITS AFTERMATH

Excerpt:

"A Conservative government will also begin the difficult work of dismantling the Liberal infrastructure that has served the Liberals so well over the years in perpetuating its left wing policies. These include the funding of feminist only and homosexual organizations, multicultural organizations, and the Court Challenges Programme. The Status of Women and the Law Commission must also be dissolved. The Conservatives must also devise a transparent and honourable method of choosing judges for the courts - there is already one vacancy on the Supreme Court that must be filled immediately."

National Post Thu 06 Apr 2006 Issues & Ideas A22, Andrea Mrozek
Feminist activism -- paid for by you and me
or Source Link

R.E.A.L. Women of Canada Press Release dd Feb 15, 2006
Feminist Shell Game
or Source link

R.E.A.L. Women of Canada newsletter, Issue Nov-Dec 2005
IMPOSING FEMINISM IN CANADA
or Source link

R.E.A.L. Women of Canada newsletter, Issue Jan-Feb 2000
THE STATUS OF WOMEN MUST BE DISBANDED
or Source link

Apparently, R.E.A.L. Women is engaging in a letter campaign to the federal government to have the Status of Women Canada (SWC) disbanded.

Hence letters supporting SWC to the government from feminists and feminist groups are needed at this point. (If you are unfamiliar with R.E.A.L. Women check out their website at: http://www.realwomenca.com)

Below is a copy of an article from the REAL Women website that provides some ideas for where they are going with the new government. We've highlighted one section that you should look at if you don't have time, or the stomach to read the whole sorry thing.

Also below, appears a copy of a National Post column that is no doubt the start of the right wing press to support their agenda.

This would be a good time to write your MP, Stephen Harper, with copies to the Minister Responsible for the Status of Women Canada, and to the Liberal, NDP and the Bloc Québecois critics for Status of Women, in support of increased funding for women's equality-seeking groups! (sample letter appears below)

Let's not let them do to women in the whole country what they've done to us in Ontario!

CONTACT INFO

Find your local MP's contact info at this link:
http://www.parl.gc.ca/information/about/people/house/mpscur.asp?Language=E

Send letter to:

Stephen Harper, Prime Minister

• Email: pm@pm.gc.ca
  
  
• Address:
  Office of the Prime Minister
  80 Wellington Street
  Ottawa K1A 0A2
  
  
• Fax: 613-941-6900

Send copies to:

Bev Oda, Minister Responsible for the Status of Women Canada

• Email: Oda.B@parl.gc.ca
  
  
• Address:
  House of Commons
  Ottawa, Ontario
  K1A 0A6
  
  
• Fax: 613.992.2794

Maria Minna, Critic, Status of Women, Liberal Party

• Email: Minna.M@parl.gc.ca
  
  
• Address:
  House of Commons
  Ottawa, Ontario
  K1A 0A6
  
  
• Fax: 613.996.7942

Irene Mathyssen, Critic, Status of Women, New Democratic Party

• Email: Mathyssen.I@parl.gc.ca
  
  
• Address:
  House of Commons
  Ottawa, Ontario
  K1A 0A6
  
  
• Fax: 613.943.8717

Mme Maria Maurani, Critic, Status of Women, Bloc Québecois

• Email: Mourani.Ma@parl.gc.ca
  
  
• Address:
  House of Commons
  Ottawa, Ontario
  K1A 0A6
  
  
• Fax: 613.992.1932

Sample Letter (added April 25, 2006)

Follow this link to Copy & Paste text of Sample Letter from HTML page

Follow this link to Download Sample Letter as a Word doc

[Date]

Mr. Stephen Harper
Prime Minister of Canada
Langevin Block,
House of Commons
Ottawa, ON

Dear Prime Minister Harper:

During the recent federal election, you acknowledged that "Canada still has more to do to meet its international obligations to women's equality". I appreciate this acknowledgement. I am also pleased to learn that you plan to "take concrete and immediate measures, as recommended by the United Nations, to ensure that governments in Canada fully uphold their equality commitments to women(1)." ( http://www.fafia-afai.org/images/Conservative_response_Jan182006.pdf ).

As you may know, this year marks the 25th anniversary of Canada's ratification of the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). Canada ratified this convention in 1981 with the consent of all provinces and territories . While I recognize that some women in Canada have made progress since then, many women have been left behind.

In this anniversary year, you, as Prime Minister, have a unique opportunity to ensure Canada's full accountability for its human rights commitments to women. To do this, the federal government must sustain both its own efforts to achieve equality for women and its support of non-governmental organizations' contributions.

In particular, you can improve Canada's performance under CEDAW by immediately supporting the Minister of Status of Women to do the following:

• Release the report of the Expert Panel on Accountability Mechanisms for Gender Equality (commissioned before the federal election);
• Provide both project and core-funding to women's equality-seeking groups, including women-centered services;
• Increase the budget of Status of Women Canada (including to the Women's Programme) to $100 million.

These steps are necessary because as you know, women continue to face violence and poverty at highly disproportionate rates. For example, in 2004, 37% of all female homicide victims were killed by a current or former spouse, whereas this was the case with only 4% of male homicide victims(2). As well, in 2003, women employed full-time full-year in Canada earned only 71% of the amount earned by similarly employed males(3). As a consequence, more women than men are poor in Canada. In particular, the poverty rate for female lone parent led families is 38%, compared with just 13% of lone parent families headed by men, and just 7% of non-elderly two-parent families(4). These realities are only aggravated if one is a woman of colour, an immigrant woman, a woman with disabilities and/or an Aboriginal woman.

In addition, with women holding only 21% of the seats in the federal Parliament and 22% in the new federal cabinet, issues of significance to women do not always get the attention they deserve. As a consequence, through the research, analysis and support provided by Status of Women Canada, many women's organizations in Canada are able to play a vital democratic role in gathering and reflecting women's voices and experiences. These voices contribute to the development of just public policy for all Canadians.

As Canada prepares to report back to the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women in early 2007, it is time for Canada to make meaningful progress on the long-standing recommendations from the UN. Progress in these areas would represent positive steps towards improving Canada's record and advancing women's human rights in Canada.

With your support, Canada can make the 25th anniversary of our ratification of CEDAW an event worth celebrating.

Sincerely,

[Your name and address]

cc: The Honourable Beverley J. Oda, Minister of Status of Women - Oda.B@parl.gc.ca
Ms. Maria Minna, Critic, Status of Women, Liberal Party - Minna.M@parl.gc.ca
Ms. Irene Mathyssen, Critic, Status of Women, New Democratic Party - Mathyssen.I@parl.gc.ca
Mme Maria Maurani, Critic, Status of Women, Bloc Québecois - Mourani.Ma@parl.gc.ca

1 To see the UN's recommendations to Canada please see:
http://www.fafia-afai.org/images/CEDAW_UNrecs_to_Canada_2003.pdf
2 Statistics Canada. 2006. Women in Canada 2005.p.164
3 Statistics Canada. 2006. Women in Canada 2005. p.152
4 Statistics Canada. 2006. Women in Canada 2005. (2003 data). P.144

From the R.E.A.L. Women website

ELECTION 2006 AND ITS AFTERMATH

Source Link


The federal election was quite a journey. When it began, on November 29, 2005, the Liberals were in the lead by 8 points. The Liberals were confident, even smug, believing that the Conservatives would stumble and self-destruct during the election campaign. The Liberals predicted all would go well for them, as Canada's natural ruling party which would win yet another (their fifth) straight election. Most agreed with this analysis by Liberal officials. In effect, the Liberal plan was to campaign on the same strategy as they had used in the June 2004 election just 18 months previously. Not a good idea.

REAL Women was one of the few organizations in Canada which predicted last spring that there would be a Liberal defeat in 2006. We were well aware that the political situation had changed dramatically between the 2004 and 2006 elections. We predicted, in fact, a Liberal defeat in 2006 in a press release dated last June 29, 2005. In that press release, we stated:

REAL Women predicts that the Martin Liberals will meet defeat within the year during the next federal election as history repeats itself:

• Liberal arrogance in 1957 over the pipeline led to Liberal defeat
• Liberal arrogance and intensive pork barreling in 1983 led to Liberal defeat
• Liberal arrogance over Bill C-38 and its imposing of the Bill which is unacceptable to the majority of

Canadians, and by compelling the Cabinet and pressuring the Liberal backbenchers to vote for the Bill, plus the Liberals' overt corruption, will lead to its defeat in the early 2006 federal election.

The Liberal government has outlived its usefulness. It will not recover from Bill C-38. Corruption, imposing on Canadians third world politics by way of arrogant top-down government, open bribery to obtain votes, and the manipulation of the Parliamentary process will bring down this despotic Prime Minister and his cronies.

The Liberal government will linger on for a few more months, but its time has run out.

Wait and see.

The many missteps by the Liberals during the campaign, plus the RCMP investigation of possible wrong doing in the Finance Department confirmed one very critical fact - namely that Canadians understood during May and June 2005, when the non-confidence votes and the vote on same-sex marriage were taking place, that there were no moral or ethical considerations that would stop the Liberals in their efforts to hold onto power - power to be held for the benefit of the party and its elites. To pursue this power, the Liberals used every trick, misrepresentation, bribery and other devices at their disposal.

The public knew then that the Liberals genuinely believed that they were entitled to govern as a right. All the bumps in the Liberal road that occurred since then, were not the defining moments but rather, the moments to confirm what Canadians knew about the Liberals and their leader Mr. Martin. In contrast, at the time of the June 2004 election, Mr. Martin had been Prime Minister for only six months. Few at that time had an understanding of Mr. Martin or his policies. By January 2006, they did, and they did not like what they saw. They saw a political leader who would do whatever it took to stay in power. The preservation of power was all that mattered to him.

Liberal MP Belinda Stronach

What is so interesting in retrospect is that the crossing of the floor by MP Belinda Stronach (Newmarket - Aurora ) last May from the Conservative to the Liberal party, which saved the Liberals from defeat in a non-confidence vote at that time, was ironically a decision which saved the Conservative party and led it to its victory in the 2006 election. That is, if the non-confidence vote had been successful in May, the Conservatives would not at that time, have developed their extensive platform which did so much to dispel the alleged "scary" perception of Mr. Harper and the Conservatives. Without this platform on which to campaign in May, Mr. Harper would have been restricted to campaigning only on the issue of Liberal corruption - not enough to turn the voters away from the Liberals, and to demand the change in government that finally occurred in this January's election.

The Road Ahead

The Conservative win of 124 seats means that Canadians will not have to struggle with the projected Liberal policies such as the decriminalization of both prostitution and marijuana and the easing of legal access to the non-medical use of drugs. A Conservative government will also not bring in a euthanasia bill, planned by former Minister of Justice, Irwin Cotler. We must be watchful, however, for anti-life and anti-family private members bills that may gain support from a united opposition of Bloc (51 seats), NDP (29 seats), and Liberals (103 seats).

Another advantage of the Conservative Party win is that the Canadian presence at the UN will change. No longer will Canada work with its former ally, the rabidly anti-Christian left-wing European Union. Instead, hopefully, Canada will, for the most part, be supporting the US government's pro-life / family positions at the UN. Also the Canadian Ambassador to the UN, Allan Rock, will soon be recalled and replaced by an individual more amenable to Conservative policies.

A Conservative government will also begin the difficult work of dismantling the Liberal infrastructure that has served the Liberals so well over the years in perpetuating its left wing policies. These include the funding of feminist only and homosexual organizations, multicultural organizations, and the Court Challenges Programme. The Status of Women and the Law Commission must also be dissolved. The Conservatives must also devise a transparent and honourable method of choosing judges for the courts - there is already one vacancy on the Supreme Court that must be filled immediately.

The road ahead for change will not be easy for the Conservatives. They will have to move very slowly so as not to alarm the electorate. They will also be harangued by the propaganda of the hostile mainstream media.

Further, Mr. Harper spoke the absolute truth on January 18, 2006 when he stated that his government would have to deal with a Liberal-dominated Senate, a liberal judiciary and the civil service.

The 105-seat Senate has 67 Liberals and only 23 Tories - the remaining senators are either Independent or old-time Progressive Conservatives who never approved of the merging of the Alliance Party with the former Conservative Party. The senators are patronage appointments who owe their position for their hard work for their respective parties. Unfortunately, they see their job in the Senate not as being a quiet reflective voice of sober thought, but rather as cheerleaders for their party. Conservative legislation passing through these raucous Liberal senators will not be easy.

Similarly, many in the civil service will not be willing to be neutral despite their claims to the contrary. This is especially true in regard to the Departments of Justice and Foreign Affairs, where feminist/lesbian/homosexuals have dominated the policy decision-making positions for several years. Many of these latter see their role in government as promoting the "progressive" agenda of the left in government policy. They will not quietly depart, but will remain on, if at all possible, to fight any changes in a conservative direction. We can expect their attempting to undermine the Conservatives by such actions, for example, as arranging significant leaks to the media, which will be ready and willing to raise controversy over any changes in the left agenda.

Finally, the Liberal appointed judges will be ready with pens poised to block any affront to their personal philosophies and ideologies by a conservative government. They have no problem, as evidenced by some of the articles in this issue of Reality, in making up so-called "constitutional" reasons to block legislation not to their liking.

Despite these real problems, however, the Conservatives will have to show they can govern and govern well. It will not be easy having regard to the triple obstacles mentioned above. However, the entrenched liberalism in the government and our courts must be shown up for what it is - sheer opportunism and manipulation to promote an agenda for self-serving reasons, not for the benefit of the public.

In this regard, one of the first obligations of the Conservative government will be to reform Parliament so as to return to us once again a truly democratic government - not one controlled by a handful of paid advisors in the Prime Minister's Office.

Although the Conservative Party is forming a minority government, its election marks the beginning of renewal for Canada. The government must judicially and reasonably carry out its responsibilities. If so, a conservative government will be in power for many years to come.

Please let the new Prime Minister know that Canadians want a pro-life/ family Ambassador appointed to the UN. It will mean a great deal to Canadians as well as to the world internationally, if he does so.

Please write to:
The Right. Hon. Stephen J. Harper
Prime Minister of Canada
Langevin Building
80 Wellington Street
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0A2

Minister of Foreign Affairs
Department of Foreign Affairs
Lester B. Pearson Building, Tower "A", 10th Floor
125 Sussex Drive
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0G2

Your MP
House of Commons
Parliament Buildings

National Post Thu 06 Apr 2006 Issues & Ideas A22
Andrea Mrozek

Feminist activism -- paid for by you and me

Source Link


It didn't exactly offer the drama of, say, the Persons Case. When Status of Women Canada sent a delegation to last month's 50th UN session on (naturally) the Status of Women, it came armed with a report on the work it does does on behalf of Canadian females. "Canada's national women's machinery has conducted regional, national and online consultations, focusing on accountability issues, including gender equality indicators," read the delegation's statement. Hardly stirring stuff.

But fighting for women's rights using polls and paperwork seems to be what the federal government agency -- with its annual $23-million budget -- is all about these days.

In 1973, the Royal Commission for the Status of Women recommended that women's groups with a feminist outlook receive federal funding to help women achieve equality. Status of Women Canada is the result. But with millions of dollars being spent on these groups every year, Canadians might well wonder what these organizations have achieved.

We've all heard that working women earn only about 76 cents for every dollar their male co-workers take home (a statistic that neatly ignores career transience). But when it comes to fighting for equality, women's groups seem focused on less direct concerns. "The biggest driving issue, as well as accomplishment for us in the past couple of years has been on the issue of child care," says Paulette Senior, CEO of the YWCA, referring to the national day-care program passed by the Liberal government last year.

Unfortunately for the YWCA, which received $153,453 in federal funding in 2003-2004, Canadians recently elected a new government, in large part on a promise to dismantle the proposed national child-care arrangement.

Canadians voted this way despite the $60-million in federal funding that went to pro-feminist groups between 1997 and 2003. That figure comes courtesy of access to information documents obtained by Real Women of Canada, the Ottawa-based group that bills itself as the voice of the "alternative" women's movement.

Gwen Landolt, Real Women's vice-president, believes that while some federally funded women's groups work on issues of domestic violence and equal treatment of women, their purpose is superfluous. Many others, she says, are pursuing a different agenda altogether. After all, demanding low-cost housing specifically for women won't make them any more equal to men.

"They're acting as agents of change to promote their radical feminist agenda," says Landolt. "Their theory is that women are oppressed by the patriarchy."

She insists these groups lack any real grassroots support, but rather are front organizations for governments and unions. Landolt's group, by contrast, was delisted from federal funding in 1996 because officials did not qualify it as an equality-seeking group. Today, Real Women claims 55,000 members.

In a country where abortion is legal, divorce laws are liberalized and the majority of university graduates -- and four of the nine Supreme Court judges -- are women, feminist groups have been forced to find unique reasons for sticking around.

Kathy Marshall is executive director of Womenspace, a group dedicated to empowering women through the use of the Internet. Womenspace received $441,800 in federal cash in 2003-2004, and claims to have 2,000 people on its mailing list. Its most recent success? According to Marshall, it was ensuring that the "language of women's equality rights" was included in something called the "World Summit on the Information Society Declaration."

The Ottawa-based National Association of Women and the Law is using its $474,879 in funding not only to oppose the implementation of misogynist sharia law in Canada, but to fight for "transgendered rights" in the workplace and society.

Meanwhile, visit the Web site of the federally funded National Action Committee on the Status of Women, which calls itself Canada's largest feminist group, and the most recent press release you'll find is one congratulating "the pan-Canadian women's movement" for (apparently) influencing the outcome of the 2004 election. In their June 30, 2004, announcement, NAC directs the victorious Liberals to continue "promoting equality through redistribution policies ... and a new system of proportional representation."

Of course, there's nothing wrong with feminist groups running out of equality issues shifting their focus to campaigning for higher taxes. But since that's essentially the platform of the federal NDP, exactly why are taxpayers funding them to do it? In an age when Canadian women are independent, it seems that Canada's women's groups are more helpless and dependent than ever.

Hold your noses ...

R.E.A.L. Women of Canada Press Release dd Feb 15, 2006

Feminist Shell Game

Source link

For Immediate Release
Ottawa, Ontario February 15, 2006

300 women claiming to represent all Canadian women met on Parliament Hill February 13-14 to supposedly celebrate their work 25 years ago which resulted in the inclusion of S.28 in the Charter of Rights. Section 28 guarantees that the Charter's provisions apply equally for male and female persons. Ironically, Section 28 of the Charter has turned out to be unused, unproved and without effect, according to the decisions brought down by the Supreme Court of Canada on the Charter.

Feminists do not now, and never have had the support of Canadian women. They are a special interest group representing their own ideology only. Moreover, feminist organizations continue to exist in Canada today only because they are funded by the federal Status of Women, without which funding they would collapse, since they have little or no grassroots support.

This week's feminist meeting in Ottawa, true to form, was supported by the Status of Women and other government departments such as the Department of Justice, and government tax-supported agencies such as the National Film Board, Law Commission of Canada, Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) and International Development Research Centre (IRDC).

The meeting made such unpopular recommendations as championing a universal national day care plan, thereby ignoring the enthusiastic reception given to the $1200 child care support paid directly to all parents equally proposed by the Conservative Party in the recent election.

This meeting also recommended the imposition of proportional representation to ensure that 50 % of elected parliamentarians are of the female gender. Feminists refuse to accept that women vote on the basis of issues, not anatomy. Reasonable voters reject tampering with our democratic process by legislating gender quotas which bypass merit and reward the pre-set criteria chosen by undemocratically appointed committees.

Canadian women from diverse backgrounds and values are not represented by the narrow feminist agenda and reject their undemocratic manipulations. They prefer to work through a democratic system of government.

The federal government must stop funding these unrepresentative women and their irrational policies.

- 30 -
Contact persons:
C. Gwendolyn Landolt Tel: (905) 731-5425, 787-0348, 889-1993
Diane Watts Tel: (613) 236-4001

From the R.E.A.L. Women of Canada newsletter, Issue Nov-Dec 2005

IMPOSING FEMINISM IN CANADA

Source link

Feminists have not been too popular in Canada for a number of years. This is due to the fact that most women do not support their extremist ideology and impractical, often incoherent policies.

Women have moved on to other more important matters, such as balancing their lives between the family and workplace, the care of vulnerable family members because of age or disability, and in general, the health and well-being of their families.

This rejection of feminism does not sit well with feminist Liberal MPs, who are determined to revive feminism in Canada.

In the fall of 2004, they managed to establish the Standing Committee on the Status of Women, supposedly to "study" the problems of women but, in fact, to serve as a platform to spread feminism in Canada.

One of the first decisions made by the Committee was to recommend to the government that it increase funding by 25% to feminist volunteer groups, (See REALity September/October, 2005, p. 14, "Increased Government Funding for Feminist Only Organizations.")

A further step was taken by the Committee when it tabled its second report in the House of Commons in April 2005, in which it recommended that a "gender analysis" be conducted in all federal government departments and agencies on legislation and policies, supposedly to ensure that the equality of women is not detrimentally affected by government decisions. The Committee's proposal means that the government must develop programmes and legislation that are women-specific as well as to:

… ensure that legislation, programmes and policies which are not specifically targeted for women do not inadvertently maintain or exacerbate any equality gap.

In practical terms, the purpose of this proposal is to ensure that all government decisions are subject to feminist overview and approval so that the feminist ideology will be integrated across the country.

This is not the first time however, that feminists have tried to impose "gender analysis" in Canada.

Ten years ago in 1995, at the time of the UN International Conference on Women held in Beijing, China the federal government, under the direction of the Status of Women, put in place a 5-year plan on gender equality. This was called the Federal Plan on Gender Equality (1995 - 2000). This was followed by another gender analysis plan called the Agenda for Gender Equality (2000 - 2005). In accordance with these plans the Canadian government adopted a policy requiring the 24 individual federal departments and agencies to conduct gender-based analysis of policies and legislation. While the various departments were responsible for conducting gender-based analysis, Status of Women Canada provided training and support for this project.

To the dismay of the Status of Women Committee and their feminist adherents, the application of this gender-based analysis in the federal government was "uneven". According to the Committee, this was due to the lack of a binding obligation to conduct this analysis, internal resistance, and the lack of shared responsibility, all which contributed to the dismal failure of the plan.

Therefore, the Status of Women Committee began consultations in the fall of 2004 with multiple so-called "equality-seeking" women's organizations. The expression "equality-seeking" groups is used as a means to deliberately exclude REAL Women because we support traditional values which, in their view, is not "equality seeking." Never mind that the equality of women is included in our objects of incorporation! The purpose of this consultation was to determine what to do about the problem of the supposed negative impact on women by the failure to implement gender analysis within the federal government. All the women's groups that were consulted pronounced themselves, to the last woman, shocked, shocked, and appalled by this failure to properly implement gender analysis by the federal government.

In their study of this unsatisfactory situation, the Committee did, however, award gold stars to a few government departments, which were obediently carrying out gender analysis. These included:

* Citizenship and Immigration Since 2001 the department has been very good indeed about applying gender analysis to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. That Act also requires the department to report its performance on the crucial issue of gender analysis to Parliament - a move which the Committee highly approved.
* CIDA (Canada International Development Agency) This Agency administers Canada's foreign aid. The Status of Women Committee proudly recounted CIDA's contribution to gender analysis when CIDA, working on a programme to build roads in Bangladesh, hired only widows to build the roads since widows were very poor. Fathers of families did not count since CIDA's gender analysis of the situation indicated that widows needed the money more, so they excluded all males from the work.
* Health Canada Health Canada received a gold star from the Committee because in 1993 it established a Women's Health Bureau, and in 1996 allocated additional resources to establish and fund centres of excellence for women's health. The department also funds the Women's Health Contribution Programme. (Whatever that is)

Gender based analysis was first formalized at Health Canada in 1999 with the development of a "Women's Health Strategy". This commitment to gender based analysis was further strengthened in 2000 with Health Canada's release of a Gender Based policy. Remarkable.

Finance Canada

The Committee found that although Finance Canada, as a key central agency, had an important role to play in promoting and implementing gender based analysis, it had not adequately fulfilled its duties in this regard. It had made no effort to either enforce a requirement by departments to induct a gender based analysis on funding proposals or to evaluate the adequacy of the gender analyses submitted to it.

This definitely was not good news to the Committee. However, the situation was at least partly redeemed by Minister of Finance, Ralph Goodale himself, when he stated, in the House of Commons, on December 13, 2004, that he was committed to ensuring that all policy proposals for the 2005 - 2006 budget would require a gender based analysis. This made Mr. Goodale a very good boy, according to the Committee.

Recommendations by the Status of Women Committee

After its extensive study of the failure by the federal government to properly apply gender based analysis, the Committee made the following recommendations to the government to enforce gender analysis.

1. That the Government of Canada immediately initiate consultations, in time for the 2006 - 2007 budget, aimed at the development of legislation that would ensure the systematic application of gender based analysis to all federal policy and program activities
2. That the Privy Council Office (PCO) (the administrative arm of the federal government) immediately establish a secretariat with responsibility for ensuring the development and eventual implementation of effective gender equality legislation
3. That the Privy Council Office (PCO) immediately designate one official with clear responsibility to initiate and coordinate the federal government's various departments on gender based analysis.
4. That the Privy Council Office provide a written report to Parliament within 129 days on its initiative on gender based analysis
5. That the PCO secretariat table annually in Parliament a public report outlining progress toward this legislation
6. That the Privy Council Office immediately establish responsibility for analyzing all memoranda to cabinet and other cabinet documents for gender based analysis
7. That the PCO officials and all deputy ministers, and associate deputy ministers participate in workshops that provide training to assess GBA
8. That Status of Women Canada ensure that "equality-seeking" (that expression again!) women's organizations engage in a thorough consultation on the equality goals for priority action in the 2005 - 2010 action plan on gender equality.
9. That the Treasury Board Secretariat designate a senior official to take responsibility for ensuring that gender based analysis is included in policies, directions, and requirements pertinent to the 2005- 2010 action plan on gender equality which is currently being developed by Status of Women Canada.
10. That every federal department and agency immediately designate an assistant or associate deputy minister with responsibility for gender based analysis.
11. That senior level departmental policy and other committees within all federal departments and agencies require regular, at least annual, progress reports on gender based analysis with a particular focus on specific results.

No "half-measures" for these feminists! They are clearly convinced that gender analysis is the answer to their prayers to have feminism dominate the national agenda.

Status of Women Canada

The government agency, the Status of Women Canada, thrilled by the Committee's recommendations, which would provide it with increased stature, recognition and power, decided to do its part in encouraging this fortunate turn of events. It did this by announcing that it had commenced an online consultation with regard to gender equality. The first question asked on this consultation is whether the respondent supports gender equality, and the second question asked is whether gender based analysis would be the best route to follow in order to achieve gender equality. The purpose of this consultation was to point out that there was overwhelming support for gender analysis by the general public. Gerrymandered to produce the desired result, the consultation will make the feminists' point, which is the entire object of the exercise, but not necessarily the truth.

Finally, in order to ensure that gender analysis is properly applied by the federal government, the Status of Women Canada also established an "expert" panel to study "accountability and to provide advice on strengthening gender equality in Canada." We have no doubt that these feminists "experts" will arrive at even more rules and recommendations to further ensure that gender analysis is enforced in Canada.

Please write to Prime Minister Paul Martin, the Minister of Finance, Ralph Goodale, the Minister responsible for the Status of Women, Liza Frulla, and your MP, strongly objecting to this proposed take-over by feminists, who have little or no support from the general public in imposing their gender analysis in Canada.

<sniped>

From the R.E.A.L. Women of Canada newsletter, Issue Jan-Feb 2000

THE STATUS OF WOMEN MUST BE DISBANDED

Source link

In 1973, in response to a recommendation by the 1970 Royal Commission Report on the Status of Women, the Status of Women section of the federal Department of Secretary of State was established. The purpose of the Status of Women was to advance the equality of women in Canada.

However, in the nearly thirty years since it was formed, this government agency has degenerated into a caricature of what was intended, and has become an agent for the promotion of a radical feminist revolution in Canada. It remains locked into the ideology of feminism and its discredited policies, established back in the 1960s and 1970s. That is, although women’s needs and interests have moved on, the feminists at the Status of Women haven't noticed. They are still busily promoting pay and employment equity and universal day care, long discarded policies. Women today are more concerned about the stress in their lives caused by divorce and family breakdown, job insecurity, excessive taxation, and lack of support and respect for the effort of parents in raising their children. Yet, the Status of Women keeps sputtering the extreme left-leaning agenda of the old-time feminists and lesbians in Canada.

Moreover, the fact that the Minister for Women’s Issues, Hedy Fry, represents the riding of Vancouver Centre in the House of Commons is significant, since the riding has a large homosexual/lesbian population. This has considerable influence on Ms. Fry's support and advocacy for lesbian groups.

In fact, the Status of Women, under Hedy Fry, has paid out $253,918 to lesbian causes alone in the fiscal years 1996–1998. More than half of this went to lesbian groups in Ms. Fry’s own BC province. Lesbian advocacy groups there received $145,418 during this twenty-month period (April 1996 - December 1998). The grants to lesbian groups are as follows:

<sniped>

REAL Women of Canada, which supports traditional marriage, applied for and was denied a grant by the Status of Women in 1999. We apparently don’t rate as a genuine women's group by the Status of Women.

The lesbian groups which are the beneficiaries of such generous funding from the Status of Women are intolerant and discriminate against REAL Women and other traditional women's groups. (See, "REAL Women Experiences Discrimination at Federal Conference," p. 1.)

Go To Top

Return to DAWN Ontario index page

Featured News & Alerts

What's New
additions to the site indexed daily

Contact Us