done with equality

thank you, jennifer ditchburn, you dogged reporter you, for the ongoing attention to bev oda's mission of mockery . your article filed today quite nicely covers the newest of the ministerial bullshit. just when we thought it was safe to apply for future funding from the so far un-slashed women's program, oda banned the use of federal funds for domestic lobbying or advocacy. and thus brings to an end the era of what came close to democratic engagement for civil society.

i've been itching to shout from the rooftops what happened at a rocking meeting in ottawa on tuesday. oda gobsmacked key women's movement reps who were finally granted her audience. it's no wonder she's so comfortable following the harper plan to dismantle the women's movement - oda believes we already have full equality in canada and that reactions to cuts/changes to swc have been 'hysterical'. she believes the private sector has a bigger role to play, government a lesser one, and that all women have equal access to the law. oh, and here's the kicker: oda believes systemic discrimination in canada doesn't exist [while even an hysterical statscan report from last year would suggest otherwise].

our release from last week is still up on the cnw board, but the one issued this morning about the ban on lobbying and oda's stunning absence from reality isn't up on any site yet. i won't post it here either, because, well frankly, how it turned out after another painful media-by-committee process just wasn't so shit hot. so instead, some highlights:

a meeting this morning with beverley oda, minister responsible for the status of women, deepened the concerns of national women's groups regarding the federal government's commitmen to women's equality.

the gutting of status of women signaled the intent of this government to undermine long-standing efforts to promote equality. now, the prohibition of advocacy or lobbying with federal dollars is just plain anti-democratic - and punitive to those with the least resources.

astonished by what they see as a failure of a standing minister to support the values of the very portfolio she is expected to steer, women's groups have immediately requested a meeting with prime minister harper... [they] will ask harper to justify the recent actions of his government and declarations of minister oda in light of his election commitments.

- 30 -

meanwhile, we'll see what more oda reveals to us about her enlightened understanding matters pertaining to gender equality when she finally shows up to a fewo meeting tomorrow (the parliamentary standing committee on the status of women).


Anonymous Anonymous said...

For those of us trying to understand this funding issue for women, how does it work?

The government used to give specific women money and then what would happen?

Do they set up offices with staff?

Do they meet with other groups also getting money from taxpayers, who have been able to set up offices and pay staff, only because of that funding?

In the age of the internet, why is it so difficult to have gotten your point across?

The taxpayer has no clue or little to no clue why there is this hair-pulling going on?

Have men asked for and received similar funding for their issues, and if so, why not?

If women have 52% of the population, many of which can vote presumabley, why are you finding yourself in this situation today?

Seriously, I don't know why it didn't get done under the Liberal government...but then again, the taxpayer does not really know what you are even demanding be changed????

Can you spell it out?

Are you employed in some way by any of these groups...how many are we talking about anyway?

9:22 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


12:21 p.m.  
Anonymous Kelseigh said...

Now, now. The first "anonymous" brings up a good point. A lot of people don't know this stuff.

So the real question is, if women have 52% of the population, how have those with a vested interest in preventing women reaching equality been able to keep so many from accessing the truth of the matter, and what can we do to change that?

Not that yon troll doesn't know any of this, but it's a good thing to think about.

1:56 p.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The first response to my post seems to be why regular folks, (who have not been following this whole dust-up), cannot find the bones of why there is all this sighing going on.

I asked some pretty basic questions, and no one has come forward to answer them, respectfully.

Why is that?

I am a woman, not that that should matter...should it?....in a family business, raised children, struggled as everyone does to balance it all, but not really into things political, in terms of petitioning.

Now I have the time to listen and watch what the trends are and what the parties put out, and how appreciative people are for what they have been given.

I even see men jumping on your 5-things-feminism project, too, so that should mean you have even more support.

But what does it say, when your side cannot, or will not, lay out for the rest of us what you really do in your many, many groups to make things better?

If you need the rest of us, on the sidelines on your side, would it not help garner support, by being accountable for your choice of words, when others ask reasonable questions?

So, trying again....how does it work?

Why are there so many groups, in the hundreds as I understand it, all grabbing for the same pie?

Is there one main lobby and what IS your key, critical aim at this time?

How well does the internet help you all, to put that key purpose in front of all those aligned groups.

Or perhaps I am wrong...you all may not be aligned, may not have the same needs????

As of now, you seem to have been flailing about on the taxpayers' dime, all over the map on who wants what.

Who can keep up beyond the general feel that a whole lot of money is being spent, and by your own admission, for not so much accomplished as you would like.

All voters have the ability to put women into government and yet we have the numbers we do....which are low, right?

Why does lobbying the government help that cause?

It needs to be THE issue for the voter, the female voter in this case, or I suspect having gender as the guiding reason to vote for an MP, say, is just not that important.

Surely we know that women vote for men by the thousands, and not just those women who are not joined up with any of your groups. Is that not so?

That is a whole other problem, and not one that seeking out government funds is likely to help.

Although I sure would like to hear from you why that might be???

Maybe someone will help us understand better your position(s), and answer some of the queries without feeling defensive.

Maybe Scott, whose name is quite prominent in support of 5-things-feminism, can help the rest of us busy people out.

12:39 p.m.  

Post a Comment

<< Home