WE’RE
WORTH
MORE!

1.
CANADA’S COMMITMENT TO END
ALL FORMS OF DISCRIMINATION
AGAINST WOMEN
-The Canadian government signed the
United Nations Convention On The Elimina­
tion Of All Forms Of Discrimination Against
Women in 1981. The Canadian government
also signed the Forward Looking Strategies
document which came out of the Nairobi
conference in 1985.
-Both documents refer to the necessity of
involving non-governmental women’s
groups in achieving real change. Women
must be at the heart of any movement or
institution which can accomplish the vast
social changes required to achieve either of
these commitments to equality.

C

-NAC and other women’s groups argue that
“the Canadian government has an obligation to maintain and increase according to
need its funding of women’s organizations
dedicated to the principles of the U.N. Con­
ventions and our own Canadian Charter of
Rights.”

2.
FUNDING OF WOMEN’S GROUPS
AND THE FEDERAL BUDGET
-Canada’s 1989-1990 budget is $133 billion.

GOVERNMENT FUNDING
AND THE WOMEN’S MOVEMENT

-The defence budget is $11.2 billion and has had a growth
rate of at least 5% over the last years; the federal govern­
ment made loans of $17 million to strip clubs; and the
government spent $14.2 million on its campaign to sell the
Goods and Services Tax.

This information sheet looks at :
-In 1989 - 90 the Women’s Program of Sec­
retary of State had a budget of $11 million, or
0.009% of the total budget.

1.

Canada’s commitment to
eliminate all forms of
discrimination against women.

2.

Funding of women’s groups in
relation to Canada’s budget.

-In 1987, the government agreed that the funding level of the
Women’s Program would be maintained and indexed to a
cost of living allowance and it considered increasing funding
to meet the needs of new groups and emerging priorities.

3.
4.

Government Funding: Pro’s and
Con’s.
The government’s I^JWflg -F^’
commitment to women’s
equality.

- The Women’s Program of Secretary of State was cut by $2
million in the 1989-1990 budget. This was a 15.3% budget
cut.
Ker

5.

How this affects all of us

-Similar cuts were made to programs which funded native
and visible minority advocacy groups. The advocacy work of
women in those groups has been doubly cut.

6.

What we can do.
-The Women’s Program budget amounts to J^cents for
every Canadian female.
7^

-The government does little consultation about its funding
priorities. It has ignored the protests of women’s groups and
continues not to fund any activity related to Reproductive
Rights (Abortion), Peace, the Environment or Lesbian
Rights.

- The government has announced it is moving away from
operational funding and more towards “project funding”.
» Without consulation the government has announced it
will fund “new priorities”. We have still not achieved the
old ones!!

cuts to the Women's Program occured in the
1990-91 budget.

BACKGROUND

Government funding for women’s
groups began in 1973 with the creation
of the Women's Program Division of
the Secretary of State. This was in re­
sponse to recommendations by the
Royal Commission on the Status of
Women (1970) combined with pressure
from emerging women’s groups.

THE GOVERNMENT IS BACKING OUT OF ITS COMMIT­
MENT TO CANADIAN WOMEN!

■ Since then, countless non-governmental women’s groups
have acted as advocates on behalf women and have ad­
vised the government on legislation and programs affecting
women.
- Non-profit women’s groups now provide essential services
in the areas of women’s health, transition houses, sexual
assault crisis centres, women in conflict with the law, em­
ployment counselling, among others.

- In 1988-89 the Program funded 47 national and 560 re­
gional women’s groups. Most of these received ‘project’
grants. A small number received larger adminstrative or
‘operational’ grants. Women’s groups had won this more
secure, less intrusive ‘operational’ funding after many years
of negotiations with the Program. The 15% cut was directed
explicitly at "the administrative overhead of groups”, mean­
ing that all groups expecting ‘operational’ grants were cut
by 15%. The exception to this was NAC, which was cut by
50% over three years. The political effect of the emphasis

on project funding is that the Program will have increased
influence on the priorities established by women’s groups.

3. GOVERNMENT FUNDING AND THE
WOMEN’S MOVEMENT: PROS AND CONS
-’’Funding” is more than a transfer of money. It is an
agreement between funders and recipients that certain
kinds of activities are in part the responsibility of the funder.
The current crisis in funding for women’s groups is more
accurately described as a struggle about who has the bulk
of the social responsibility to address and change the sys­
tematic inequalities which women face. The cuts to the
Women’s Program suggest that the work of eliminating
barriers to women’s full and equal participation in our soci­
ety is being “privatized” (that is, foisted upon the private,
voluntary, charitable work of women) along with Via Rail and
the Postal Service.

-In a market economy resources are un­
equally distributed, and groups which are
disadvantaged do not have access to funds
to provide their own advocacy or services.
It is government’s role to re-distribute re­
sources to assist disadvantaged groups.

-Thousands of women on boards, committees and collec­
tives have struggled with whether their funding applications
will violate their autonomy, the autonomy of the movement
and women’s right to define women’s issues. Other issues,
such as the dangers of being project-driven, dangers of
women’s organizations becoming another arm of govern­
ment, having to match the work to fit the application’s
criteria, the paternalistic attitudes of funders, possible
competition for dollars and the inability to plan for long-term
change have all been raised in the context of this discussion.
All of these are real dangers, and are, in part, how we lose
control of the definition of our issues.
We know, howeverthatwithoutthe constant voice ofwomen
stating clearly what we want and need, that government will
define "equality” for us. The ability of the women’s move­
ment to influence social policy has been strengthened by
our pressure on the government to maintain its international
and domestic obligations. Government funding can create
an internal pressuretointegratewomen’s equality concerns
into the policy and policy making functions of the govern­
ment.
-Funding Is needed. Non-lntrusive operational funding
Isourright. Women have a right to expect that our taxes are
used to remove barriers to women’s full participation in
Canadian society.

4. THE GOVERNMENT’S FAILING
COMMITMENT TO WOMEN’S EQUALITY
WHAT HAS THE GOVERNMENT DONE FOR
WOMEN LATELY?

•Reneged on its promise of a new child care system;
•Proposed to re-criminalize abortion and remove
women’s reproductive choice;
-Called the 0.5 cent reduction in the wage gap be­
tween women and men a “victory” of the Employ­
ment Equity legislation;
-Proposed a 7% goods and services tax on every­
thing from postage, books, tampons, haircuts, mov­
ies, to transportation;
-Traded away women’s jobs in the electronics, food
processing and textiles industries;
-Backed out of its responsibility for unemployment
insurance;
-Provided funding for the building of transition
houses and shelters, but provided no assurance that
there will be funding for programs;
-Shut women out of the constitutional decision­
making process;
-Spent more money on loans to strip clubs than to
women’s groups;
-Continues with an immigration policy which favours
rich males;
-Continued to discriminate against immigrant
women in federally funded language training pro­
grams;
- refused to fund women’s work on
reproductive choice, lesbian rights,
the environment or peace.
AND
DECREASED FUNDING
WOMEN’S GROUPS BY MILLION

groups will receive funding. This means that newly-formed
organizations, immigrant women's organizations, visible
minority women's organizations, disabled women's organi­
zations and native women’s organizations are not as likely
to receive secure funding.
-The groups which appear to be targetted in the cuts are
those which focus on economic and political advocacy.

-Women’s groups are being forced to compete with each
other and with other social movements for shrinking dollars
in the public and private sectors
If you are a member of a group that conducts advocacy
on behalf of disabled women, women of colour, native
women or poor women, you will find that your gains will be
limited as the avenues to decision and opportunities
to influence government and institutional policy are re­
stricted.
If you live anywhere other than in the larger cities you will
find it harder to get information about other women’s efforts
and actions: regional isolation will increase.
If you are a supporter of women’s groups, you will receive
a greater number of appeals for a greater share of your
disposible income to help them replace government fund­
ing.

If you are a woman In trouble, you will find that there will be
fewer services - shelters, transition houses, crisis centres,
information, networking - organized by women for women.
If you are a citizen concerned about women’s equality
you will notice that less and less of your tax dollars are being
spent on these issues.

TO

___________________ #3*4________ _

We are moving further away from our common vision of
an equal society.

5. HOW DO THESE CUTS AFFECT YOU?
If you are active in a woman’s organization, you will find
that there are fewer government dollars for projects, and
your priorities will need to shift from dealing with the needs
of women to the needs of funders.
-Effects of the 15% cut on our organizations are already
apparent. Among the groups that receive operational fund­
ing, many have decided to cut their newsletters and reduce
their regional networking budgets. Our feminist periodicals
are in particular jeopardy and may seriously limit our ability
to communicate with each other.

-Other groups have cut staff positions. Virtually all work in
women’s groups is done by volunteers and underpaid staff:
cuts in personnel are cuts into the core of the movement.

- The cuts also effectively place a freeze on how many

6. HOW CAN YOUR VOICE BE HEARD?
Talk with your friends, neighbors and people you
work with about your concerns.

Become more involved in and actively support femi­
nist organizations.
Voice your concerns about how your tax dollars are
used.

- - Write to Brian Mulroney, Prime Minister of Canada,-?
House of Commons, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0A6.
visit local Member of Parliament in her or his
constituency office.

BUDGET CUTS UPDATE
February 23, 1990

This year’s cuts to the Women's Program are
devastating. The Program was cut by $1.6 million. Of
this, approximately $1.4 million has been cut from
women's centres.
As far as we can tell, ALL
WOMEN’S CENTRES HAVE RECEIVED MAJOR OR
100% CUTS TO THEIR FUNDING. One quarter of
these cuts have been in Québec, where 40 centres
have lost funding.
The Minister also made deep cuts in the Program’s
support to women's periodicals and research.
Healthsharing,
Canadian
Woman
Studies and
Resources for Feminist Research were cut by 100%.
The Canadian Association for the Advancement of
Women and Sport was cut by 100%.
Canadian
Congress for Learning Opportunities for Women,
Canadian Research Institute for the Advancement of
Women, Nouveau Départ and the Women's Research
Centre were cut by 20%.
The cuts to centres are an attack on the heart of the
women’s movement.
Centres provide support,
counselling, education, hot lines and organizing
networks for women across the country. Slashing our
periodicals is an attack on our ability to communicate
with each other, and to do pro-active, badly needed
education.
The cuts to research jeopardize our
capacity to know the actual, current conditions of
Canadian women’s lives.

More than ever we must organize to fight the antifeminist backlash and for the survival of our
movement

Pamphlet produced by the National Action Committee on the Status of Women
344 Bloor Street West, Toronto, Canada M5S 3A7 Phone (416) 922-3246

Cut the Torys! Fund Women!
A Feminist Manifesto for International Women's Day 1990
The feminist movement is outraged! The Tory government is leading an anti-feminist backlash.
The latest federal budget has cut funding to three national women’s publications and an estimated
100 regional women's centres. The arrogant yet spineless Tories didn’t even announce the cuts
publicly
The cuts are not designed to reduce the deficit, but to silence us.
$1.6 million means a lot to feminist organizing, but it is meaningless in terms of federal deficit
cutting.
Canadian Woman Studies, Healthsharing, and Resources for Feminist Research had their
Secretary of State Women's Program funding cut by 100%. Healths haring, which is the largest
circulation feminist magazine in Canada, was dealt the most devastating blow, because this
funding made up over 50% of its total budget. Canadian Woman Studies and Resources for Feminist
Research have lost half of their total budgets.
Over 100 women’s centres, which provide the core of women's services in smaller communities
across the country, have lost their funding. Forty of the women’s centres cuts are in Quebec.
This is not deficit reduction, it is an attempt to dismantle the women's movement. They say cut
back, we say fight they say fight back
The Tories have been trying to slash funding to feminist groups since 1984. Last year the
Secretary of State Women's Program was cut by 15%. This year it has been cut another 15%.
Feminist organizers across the country believe that the days of the Women’s Program are
numbered, thus ending all significant federal funding to women's groups.
Why are the Tories doing this? Because they think that they can get away with it. Because they
claim that the women of this country have already achieved equality and because they want to
silence all advocacy groups that criticize their social and economic policy. Because they think that
either women should be upper-class professionals who can pay for high-priced help or that they
should be out of the labour force and working at home, taking care of everybody.
Are we going to take this? When are we going to fight back? We need to act now and strongly to
keep feminist organizing alive in Canada. The Tories have the power of the buck but we have power
in our numbers. They can take away our rent and our salaries, but we still have our loud voices. We
have done a lot over the past twenty years, with very little cash, and we will continue to fight for
equality, justice and freedom for women on this planet. We will make life hell for this government.
We will continue to do the right thing.
Call and write your MPs. especially the Minister (Ir)Responsible for the Status of Women, Mary
Collins, and the deficit-cutting Secretary of State, Gerry Weiner. Sit in at your MPs' offices, have a
party on their doorsteps. Even though this might be unpleasant, it's worth it. Let's show them how
we feel about saving $1.6 million at the expense of millions of Canadian women.
And if our publications and centres are going to survive, we must support them more than ever.
We need to contribute our time and our money. Self-sufficiency may be our only option. Get in touch
with the groups that you support and ask them what you can do.
Not the Tories, not the State, Women will control ourfate!

Canadian Woman Studies, Healthsharing, Resources for Feminist Research,
National Action Committee on the Status of Women (NAC)

COUPEZ LES VIVRES AUX CONSERVATEURS,
PAS AUX FEMMES!
Un Manifeste Féministe pour la Journée Internationale de la Femme 1990
Le Mouvement Féministe est scandalisé! Le gouver­
nement conservateur est à nouveau au coeur d’une
vague d’anti-féminisme. Le dernier budget fédéral vient
de couper les vivres à trois magazines de femmes à tirage
national ainsi qu’à une centaine de Centres de Femmes
régionaux. Les députés conservateurs arrogants mais
lâches, n’ont même pas annoncé ces coupures de budget
publiquement!

Ces coupures n’ont pas été conçues pour réduire le
déficit mais bien pour nous réduire au silence!
La somme de 1.6 million de dollars est énorme pour
les organismes féministes, mais elle est insignifiante
quand il s’agit de la réduction du déficit fédéral.
Les Cahiers de la Femme, Healthsharing et Docu­
mentation sur la Recherche Féministe ont vu leurs
subventions accordées par le Programme des Femmes
au Secrétariat d’Etat coupées à 100%. Healthsharing, le
magazine féministe qui a le plus grand tirage au Canada,
a été le plus durement touché puisqu ’il dépendait presque
totalement des subventions du gouvernement. Les
Cahiers de la Femme et Documentation sur la Recher­
che Féministe ont perdu 50% de leur budget.
Plus de 100 centres pour les femmes —• qui fournissent
la majorité des services offerts aux femmes dans les
petites communautés à travers le pays — se retrouvent
sans ressources. Quarante de ces centres de femmes
affectés par les coupures budgétaires sont au Québec.
Tout ceci ne vise pas à la réduction du déficit, c’est une
tentative pour démanteler le mouvement des femmes.
Ils disent de couper, nous disons de lutter!
Les Conservateurs s’efforcent de réduire les subven­
tions accordées aux groupes féministes depuis 1984.
L’année passée, le Programme des Femmes au Secrétar­
iat d’Etat a été réduit de 15%. Cette année, nouvelle
coupure de 15%. Dans tout le pays, les organismes
féministes s’accordent à penser que les jours du Pro­
gramme des Femmes sont comptés. Sa disparition met­

trait fin à toute aide fédérale significative pour les
groupes de femmes.
Pourquoi les Conservateurs agissent-ils ainsi? Parce
qu’ils croient pouvoir s’en tirer. Parce qu’ils proclament
que les femmes dans ce pays ont déjà réussi à acquérir
l’égalité et parce qu’ils veulent anéantir tous les groupes
solidaires qui critiquent leur politique sociale et écon­
omique. Parce qu’ils pensent que les femmes se doivent
d’être des cadres supérieurs pouvant se payer une aide
ménagère qui coûte très cher, ou alors qu ’elles devraient
être hors de la force active et travailler à la maison en
prenant bien soin de tout le monde.
Allons-nous nous laisser faire? Quand commencer­
ons-nous à nous défendre? Nous devons agir maintenant
et en force pour sauvegarder les organismes féministes
au Canada. Les Conservateurs ont le pouvoir du dollar,
mais nous, nous avons celui du nombre. Ils peuvent nous
enlever nos loyers et nos salaires, nous, nous garderons
nos voix. Nous avons accompli beaucoup durant les
vingt dernières années, avec très peu d’argent, et nous
continuerons à lutter pour l’égalité, la justice et la liberté
pour les femmes dans le monde entier. Nous allons lui
faire une vie d’enfer, à ce gouvernement! Et nous
continuerons à faire ce qui est juste.
Téléphonez et écrivez à vos députés et surtout à la
Ministre (Ir)Responsable du Statut de la Femme, Mary
Collins, et au Secrétaire d’Etat qui s’est chargé de la
réduction du déficit, Gerry Weiner. Occupez les bu­
reaux des députés, faites une fête devant leur porte. Bien
que ce soit désagréable, cela en vaut la peine. Montronsleur ce que nous ressentons à propos des 1.6 million de
dollars économisés aux dépends de millions de canadi­
ennes.
Et si nos publications et nos centres survivent, plus que
jamais nous nous devons de les aider. Nous devons
contribuer en temps et en argent. H se peut que l’auton­
omie financière soit notre seule option. Contactez les
groupes que vous soutenez et demandez ce que vous
pouvez faire pour aider.

Les Cahiers de la Femme, Healthsharing,
Documentation de la Recherche Féministe,

Le Comité d’Action National sur le Statut de la Femme (N AC)