Category: Advocacy

Here’s what we asked the government to do

Posted on by Informed Perspectives

Federal Pre-Budget Brief 

Leveraging the Canada Elections Act to Enable Systemic Change & Accelerate Women’s and Gender-diverse People’s Political Representation in Canada’s Parliament

The Ask: 

Informed Perspectives is requesting that the Government of Canada make a key amendment to the Canada Elections Act, specifically in section 444, entitled “Reimbursement of Election Expenses and Accessibility Expenses”. 

The change would reduce the extent to which the Government of Canada reimburses federal political parties for eligible election expenses under Section 444 of the Act. 

Specifically, the proposed change:  

would establish a clear and measurable floor for women’s-representation (45 percent) while creating a separate, affirmative category for candidates who self-identify as non-binary, gender-diverse, Two-Spirit, or otherwise outside the woman/man binary. 

The Canada Elections Act already reimburses eligible parties for a substantial portion of their election expenses. The proposed legislative change would leverage an existing, publicly accepted mechanism to impose the above representation imperatives as a pre-condition for reimbursement to accelerate women’s and non-binary representation in the House. This mechanism does not have a fiscal impact, but would represent modest savings if registered political parties do not comply. 

This recommendation aligns with Recommendation 10 of the House of Commons Report of the Standing Committee on Status of Women from April 2019 in the 42nd Parliament, 1st session, entitled Elect Her, A RoadMap for Improving the Representation of Women in Canadian Politics which is: 

“That the Government of Canada create a financial incentive for all registered parties to nominate more candidates who are women in general elections and by‑elections.” 

Further, a previous Private Members Bill, C-237 (the Candidate Gender Equity Act) in 2016 sought to leverage the same mechanism to accelerate the percentage of female-identified candidates on the ballot. 

The bill was thoroughly vetted by House of Commons legislative counsel and determined to be a viable and constitutionally defensible mechanism. In fact, legislative experts concluded that the bill could, in fact: 

”be considered an affirmative action measure — something protected by the Charter — because it strives to promote consideration of a disadvantaged group — women — in politics and public life.”

Rationale: 

1. Boosting Canada’s economy requires accelerating women’s political representation 

Securing Canada’s economic future is a central preoccupation of Canadians. Prime Minister Carney was given a strong mandate in April 2025 to foster a strong and dynamic economy that could withstand the trials and tribulation of trade turbulence with the United States, while diversifying trade relationships across the globe. 

The current government has launched an ambitious plan designed to build domestic resilience, boost productivity and strengthen national sovereignty. These priorities have strong support across party lines. However, one of the most critical mechanisms to bolster the economy has been overlooked: accelerating women’s representation. 

According to a team of Canadian economists, Ali Shariati, Stephen Tapp and Armine Yalnizyan, a significant body of international literature provides supportive evidence that women’s political representation can affect the policies governments adopt, the quality of public decision-making, the allocation of public resources, and the barriers women face in participating fully in the economy. 

Major international organizations — including the OECD, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and the World Economic Forum — also frame gender equality not only as a rights issue — but also as a valuable economic strategy. The OECD summarizes the evidence succinctly: 

“Gender equality is good not only for women, but also for men and for families, for growth, and for society as a whole.” 

Countries with both high levels of women’s political representation and strong labour market policies (such as Iceland, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Denmark, New Zealand, and Spain): 

1. Make better use of human capital, and 

2. Often experience robust long-term economic growth, 

In the attached appendix, Shariati, Tapp and Yalnizyan note that: “political representation matters because research indicates that women legislators can increase the political priority attached to addressing labour market barriers.” 

Who participates in political decision-making can influence the policies governments pursue, the talent they draw upon, the way public resources are managed, and the barriers Canadians face in contributing fully to the economy. 

Consequently, Shariati et al conclude that: 

accelerating women’s political representation should therefore be considered part of a broader strategy to strengthen Canada’s institutions, human capital and long-run economic performance. 

2. The status quo of incrementalism won’t get the job done 

Data collected by the Interparliamentary Union show that although Canada often regards itself as a leader on gender equality, most EU countries reliably outperform us on women’s political representation. The United Kingdom, France, Spain and Belgium, as well as Australia and New Zealand, are in the top 50. Canada’s third-largest trading partner, Mexico, is now in the top six. 

In contrast, Canada trails 71 other nations on this metric, having dropped from 28th place in 2000. For every seven male MPs currently in Parliament, there are only three women. Without systemic intervention, we may not achieve gender parity in the House of Commons for another four decades (see Appendix, Figure 1). 

Research demonstrates that without a structural imperative to ensure parity, unequal representation will continue to prevail because: 

  • Informal party networks continue to favour dominant groups (often male);
  • Incumbency advantages protect existing (usually male) candidates.
  • Without explicit policies, women are: 
    • Less likely to be recruited; 
    • Less likely to be nominated in what parties consider safe ridings;
    • More likely to remain discouraged by informal barriers; and 
    • More likely to face funding gaps. 

In recognition of this gender discrimination, more than 100 countries worldwide have proactively addressed systemic barriers in part through some form of gender mandate. 

3. Canadian public opinion supports action 

Abacus Polling commissioned by Informed Perspectives (August 2022, August 2025) reveals that Canadians are eager to see gender balance on the federal ballot and believe that the status quo is unfair. A significant majority believe that women should hold the balance of power. 

  • Nearly 90% of Canadians believe it’s important to have diverse representation in politics. This is true among 84% of men and 79% of right-leaning voters.
  • 86% of Canadians believe it’s important to have equal representation of men and women in politics in Canada. This is also true for more than 80% of men and 79% of right-leaning voters. 
  • More than 75% of Canadians believe gender parity would lead to policies that reflect the realities and needs of the broader population, increase respect in political dialogue, increase government productivity and increase cross-party collaboration. This is true across demographics. 
  • 80% of voters in Canada believe women and men have equal capacity to lead. 

In addition, international research has found that voters prefer when political decision-making bodies have equal numbers of women and men, even when mandatory requirements are imposed. A recent European study also found that the introduction of gender mandates in parliamentary systems has a positive effect on reducing the gender gap in political knowledge among young adults.
 

What Would this Proposed Change to the Canada Elections Act Achieve? 

As Prime Minister Mark Carney has noted: 

“We have a gender-balanced cabinet, the largest women’s caucus — a very active, organized women’s caucus — and the ideas, the energy, the perspectives that come make us a better government. We can be a better government still, and part of how we become better will be to have more women in our caucus, in Parliament.” 

Research backs up the Prime Minister’s claim: contrary to some public perceptions, mandatory quotas actually improve the quality of elected officials. A Swedish study revealed that when parties are required to run women candidates, they seek the most qualified women possible and let go of less qualified men. 

The global evidence is clear: the proportion of women in legislative bodies overall only meaningfully increases when gender parity rules applied to all political parties are adopted. 

See more about the research here.

Learn about the Balance the Power campaign

Here’s how Parliament can tackle the rise in anti-feminist ideology

Posted on by Shari Graydon

“Your body, my choice – forever.” 

That’s what anti-feminist online influencer Nick Fuentes posted on X last year, fortified by Donald Trump’s election. His boast went viral.  

A few months later, the hate-inciting Andrew Tate – accused of human trafficking and rape in Romania – was given sanctuary in the US. 

Why did Tate base his anti-feminist empire in Romania? Because it’s the worst-performing country for gender equality in Europe. Eighty percent of Romanians believe the lie that women belong at home. 


And why did Tate return to America? Because he knew his misogyny would be not only welcome, but celebrated there.


Not coincidentally, the US ranks 84th internationally for women’s representation in politics. That’s a shocking status for a country that, until recently, was considered a beacon of democracy. But at 73rd, Canada is only a few points ahead of our southern neighbour.

This Parliament, led by the members of the Committee on the Status of Women, has a chance to help change that. That the Committee has chosen to focus some of its resources on examining the threats that anti-feminist rhetoric pose in an increasingly online world is a recognition of how high the stakes are. 

The lies being spread by the likes of Nick Fuentes and Andrew Tate include the contention that advancing women’s rights weakens society; that our role is to be subservient; and that we deserve to be violated. Those lies threaten our freedom, our economy and our democracy. And one of the best ways to combat them is to ensure that women’s contributions are equitable, visible and recognized as essential.

This week, Informed Perspectives presented a concrete proposal to the Committee to oppose the trends being weaponized by authoritarians and their online abbetors.  

We pointed out that the women members’ very presence in Parliament is itself a start. But we argued that passively permitting men to continue to retain 70% of the electoral power implicitly reinforces the lies being spread.

We’re living next door to a terrifying case study, witnessing the catastrophic impact that anti-feminist rhetoric left unchecked can have, destroying decades of democratic norms and equality progress, almost overnight. 

Consider: when the US began rolling back abortion rights, the only option many American women had to end an unwanted pregnancy was to turn to feminist networks in one of the most Catholic countries in the world: Mexico. 

How did that happen? A dozen years ago, Mexico started requiring all political parties to run as many women as men in their national elections. As a result, a country previously famous for its machismo achieved gender parity. 

Not surprisingly, women quickly used their political power to make it much easier to access reproductive health care. Their success benefited not only hundreds of thousands of Mexican women, but their American sisters, as well. 

When a nation ensures that women hold half the seats and visibly exercise political authority, it makes equality the expected standard. It challenges the myths that misogyny spreads. By the same token, continuing to accept men’s significant overrepresentation bolsters perceptions that women don’t belong and aren’t capable of wielding power. 

At the turn of this century, out of 181 countries. Canada ranked 28th for women in politics. Now we’re 73rd – much closer to the US than Mexico, which is 5th. We have accepted incremental change, while Mexico – and dozens of other nations – have said no to the status quo, and transformed their systems. 

Informed Perspectives has studied the policy measures successful elsewhere. Here’s what we know could work in our system:

Require parties to run equal numbers of men and women, including in winnable ridings. Those that fail to comply, forfeit their right to compete. Period. 

It’s not complicated; it wouldn’t be costly to implement; and it’s not controversial. 

Abacus polling conducted last fall found that 86% of Canadians believe women and men should be equitably represented.  In fact, Canada is now an outlier in the democratic world for having failed to take the kind of concerted action so many other countries have embraced.

We are encouraging the members of the Committee – alongside all women MPs and their enlightened male allies – to wield the power they have and collectively champion this overdue democratic change.


In doing so, they would not only challenge anti-feminist ideology and dramatically amplify women’s visibility and impact, they would also secure their place in history for having achieved this long -sought goal of balancing the power.  

Political recruitment has never been a meritocracy

Posted on by Informed Perspectives

Structural barriers shape who gets selected long before merit is evaluated:

  • Informal networks favour dominant groups
  • Party gatekeepers filter out outsiders
  • Incumbency advantages protect existing (often male) candidates
  • Financial barriers exclude many qualified people

Women face additional hurdles: specifically, they are:

  • Less likely to be recruited by parties
  • Less likely to be nominated in safe ridings
  • More likely to face funding gaps and higher scrutiny
  • More likely to be run in a riding, their party has little chance of winning

The evidence makes clear: Countries mandating gender representation measures have noticed that legislative performance improves, deliberation becomes more inclusive and public trust rises.

In Sweden, when parties were forced to recruit women candidates, they sought the best-qualified people they could, and let some of their less-qualified male defaults go. As a result researchers found that the qualifications of those elected improved.

The status quo in Canada:

  • We’ve relied on incremental change, rather than recognizing and addressing systemic barriers.
  • As a result, women remained less than 30% of Parliament for over 100 years.
  • Progress without intervention has been painfully slow and inconsistent.At this rate, we won’t reach gender parity until 2115.

In contrast, other democratic countries that adopted party quotas increased women’s representation significantly faster. 

Sources: Electoral Gender Quotas and Democratic Legitimacy, American Political Science Review; Gender Quotas and the Crisis of the Mediocre Man: Theory and Evidence from Sweden, American Economic Association

Got questions? Email us at info@informedperspectives.org.

From respectable to shameful

Posted on by Informed Perspectives


“What are you doing, and how can I help you?”

That’s what Shari Graydon asked the executive director of Equal Voice back in 2019. She had just learned from our ground-breaking Gender Gap Tracker research that politicians made up a whopping 60% of the men and women most frequently quoted by Canada’s most influential news media.

The discovery made her realize that Informed Perspectives (formerly Informed Opinions) couldn’t achieve our mandate – to bridge the gender gap in media – until Equal Voice realized its goal of ensuring women held as many seats as men.

For over more than two decades, organizations like Equal Voice have done vital work encouraging more women to run, hosting campaign schools and raising awareness.

These efforts may have moved individuals, but they failed to move the system itself: men still occupy 69.5% of the seats, and Canada’s global ranking for the representation of women in politics has dropped from a respectable 26th to a shameful 70th.

This is a problem, because like the media, politics have the power to influence everything else.

And it’s why we’ve been investing heavily in research, public engagement and advocacy aimed at making systemic change.

Instead of preparing women to fit an electoral machine that was built to keep them out, we’re exploring proven remedies that will ensure they hold the balance of power within.

Over the past four years, we have: 

1) Reviewed the different paths to parity other countries have taken and created an accessible summary to make clear what the broad options include;

2) Collaborated with scholars and advocates to write, publish and disseminate thought leadership on related issues in dozens of publications across Canada;

3) Commissioned polling research documenting Canadians’ overwhelming support for seeing women hold a balance of power and publicized it through hundreds of news stories;

4) Met with dozens of MPs and policy makers about our research, the actions Canada could take, and the democratic and economic benefits we could realize;

5) Created an online tool that makes it easy for residents to send an email to their elected representatives at all three levels of government, requesting action.

Our efforts are gaining traction. 

Earlier this fall in Ottawa, we met with senior officials to talk about how to advance the issue. I’m delighted to report that we’re seeing an openness to this conversation that didn’t exist a few years ago.

We need to seize the moment – but we can’t do it alone!

We’re collaborating with international experts to create a tailored brief that maps out the most impactful means of achieving progress within Canada’s first-past-the-post single-member system. And we’re reminding politicians why acting now is not just in our best interests, but in theirs, too.

Your support for this work has been – and will continue to be – invaluable. And when we ultimately realize our collective ambition to “Balance the Power” we look forward to declaring in celebration:

 “Look what we made happen together!

Young voices making waves

Posted on by Shari Graydon

“Women who get c-sections are pussies.”

This mind-blowingly ignorant pronouncement was made by a Calgary high school teacher to his biology students. Not last century, but this year.

Does thinking about a room full of impressionable young people hearing this claim made by an authority figure in the tax-payer funded education system enrage you? (Three days later, I’m still fuming.)

But what gives me hope is that it was one of the first stories shared at the Making Waves workshop Informed Opinions convenes every year in collaboration with Hanita Simard.

Hanita mobilizes a network of women and teens keen to spend their privilege by working for change – on everything from climate action and women’s equality to mental health and LGBTQ+ rights. We invest a day together talking about how to make waves and why it matters that their voices are heard.

When I paused my presentation 20 minutes in to invite the 60 teens and women present to reflect on if or when they’d either silenced themselves or been silenced by others, a grade 12 student spoke up to share her experience.

She said that when her biology teacher verbally demonstrated how unfit he was to deliver scientific insights, she was too stunned to object. But by sharing the story with the rest of us, she galvanized the room.

Later that day, after we’d already talked about the value of being strategic about your audience, articulating a clear, out-come-focused purpose and making an explicit solution-focused call-to-action, we drafted a letter to the principal.

Maria Spronk-Johnson, a lawyer currently on mat leave, facilitated a live demo using ChatGPT to show how easy the technology made it to incorporate data about how often c-sections are medically-necessary.

Maria did so with her infant daughter, Rose, strapped to her chest, a visible reminder of how profoundly different women’s realities so often are and why it’s critically necessary for our voices to be equitably integrated into every decision-making — and educational — arena.

Calgary Foundation and Bennett Jones sponsored Saturday’s event in the law firm’s beautiful Calgary offices. We all left high on one another’s energy, insights and commitment.

To learn more about Making Waves, visit https://lnkd.in/gBxMgvvZ

And if you’d like to collaborate with Informed Opinions on convening or sponsoring a similar event for young women in your community, please contact samantha@informedopinions.org

 

 

The ongoing commitment to ensure women’s voices are heard

Posted on by Shari Graydon

Published in the Toronto Star

Decades of research make clear that ensuring women’s voices are integrated into decision-making in every arena delivers better outcomes.

Women are being silenced, violated and gaslit. And not just in Sarah Polley’s brilliant, Oscar-nominated film, “Women Talking.”

In recent weeks, New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and Scotland First Minister Nicola Sturgeon announced their resignations, citing, in part, the toll that being viciously trolled and attacked was taking on their lives.

Here at home, Gov.-Gen. Mary Simon’s office announced the closing of all comments on her social media accounts due to an increase in abusive, racist and violent threats. And BC MLA Melanie Mark cited similar treatment in her decision to resign.

Like the dilemma faced by the women on whom Polley’s film and Miriam Toews’ equally powerful book was based, the decisions these women are making are not free choices: they are lesser-evils necessitated by self-preservation.

Watching the film, it’s crystal clear that the women being driven from their homes by abuse do not enjoy basic democratic privileges. But we need to understand the continuing exodus of women from public life in Canada as a threat to our own democracy.

Decades of research make clear that ensuring women’s voices are integrated into decision-making in every arena — from science to business to policy-making — delivers better outcomes.

“Women Talking” complements that research with rich emotional context. Although the story reflects the particular circumstances faced by a colony of isolated and illiterate Mennonite women, its message — demonstrating the heartbreaking consequences of being denied influence and autonomy — is universal.

At a time when violence against women, both online and off, is rising, the story’s broader relevance is impossible to miss. And the power of this explicit “act of female imagination,” as both Polley and Toews labelled it, comes from privileging women’s perspectives in every frame.

Many of the vivid scenes of sexual assaultor domestic abuse written and shot by men reinforce and normalize the violation of women’s bodies. But this film’s depiction is completely centred on the women’s emotional sense-making and the consequences they’re trying to survive.

The violence is evoked solely through aftermath: footage of women and girls shot from above, awakening in their beds bruised, bleeding and disoriented, calling out to, and then being comforted by one another. And it’s utterly devastating.

Some viewers raised on a diet of action flicks may spurn a movie so-up-front about its focus on talking. But they would be wrong to conclude that watching a group of oppressed women discussing, debating and coming to consensus by envisioning a shared future would merit a pass. Because the film is, in fact, a riveting and emotionally gripping roller-coaster.

In contrast to the world it depicts, women in Canada do have a voice. But we still hold less than a third of the seats in Parliament. And we’ve had to march in the streets, to demand every bit of equality: to be able to vote … to own, versus be, property … to be paid what we’re worth … to be protected from sexual harassment or assault, whether we work in mining or the military, health care or high-tech.

As recent events make clear, we’re not remotely there yet.

Canada currently lags dozens of other countries for women’s representation in elected office. We rank 61st in the world because governments from Sweden to Mexico have taken deliberate measures to ensure women hold a balance of power.

Informed Opinions, the organization I lead, recently conducted research to document the paths they’ve taken to achieve parity. It’s not rocket science; the steps are clear and replicable. What’s required is political will.

“Women Talking” surfaces issues we should all not only be talking about, but acting on. We need a balance of power in this country. And to achieve that, politicians need to adopt measures that will deliver meaningful change.

What we can learn from Jacinda Ardern

Posted on by Shari Graydon

Chutzpah and humility are a rare but precious combination.

It takes the first to run for Prime Minister at 37.

It takes the second to have the self-awareness to bow out after six years — despite earning international accolades for leading through a pandemic, mass murder and volcanic eruption — because you’ve candidly assessed your capacity and believe that someone else on your team will be better equipped to lead your party to victory in the next election.

Much will be written about Jacinda Ardern’s leadership. The BBC article linked below quotes the Australian PM as appreciating her “intellect, strength and empathy”, and New Zealand’s opposition leader as recognizing that she gave “her all to this incredibly demanding job”.

But what I think resonated with many people, both in NZ and around the world, was that she manifested unparalleled authenticity and grace.

She was both unapologetically in charge and deeply human. She demonstrated strength in vulnerability.

She brought to the role many of the qualities that have been historically denigrated by patriarchal values, and made clear how valuable they are.

In the process, she reinforced the critical importance of more gender-balanced governing.

When asked what she hoped her legacy would be, she did not cite the accomplishments that earned her global attention, but said,

“I hope I leave New Zealanders with a belief that you can be kind, but strong, empathetic, decisive, optimistic but focused. And that you can be your own kind of leader – one who knows when it’s time to go.”

Making decisions on a daily basis that have massive implications for the lives of the citizens you serve is enormously difficult.

And being able to acknowledge your limitations, not just privately, but publicly? That’s genuine #leadership.

Politics shouldn’t be a life sentence.

We would all benefit from more leaders able to do what Jacinda Ardern has done.

#BalanceofPower

Online hate that targets women is a threat to democracy itself

Posted on by Shari Graydon

Published in the Ottawa Citizen

Women are now being subjected not just to insults and demeaning comments but to vicious lies, doctored images and sexual and violent intimidation.

Elon Musk isn’t responsible for how unappealing public life has become for even ambitious women. But the billionaire’s ascension to Twitter’s c-suite and his reinstatement of some infamously banned bad actors is turbo-charging abuse on the platform, making the challenge even harder.

Research by Amnesty International and others has already established that women are much more frequently targeted by online hate than men.

Consider that in the 2017 municipal elections in Alberta, women candidates were four times more likely than men to describe the campaign as “negative” and report that the criticism they received was personal. They weren’t being dissed for their policies or positions, but for their race or religion, their parenting or appearance.

 

Almost half said they “regularly” received misogynistic or discriminatory attacks.

And research by my organization, Informed Opinion, finds that the problem is growing, and if you’re Black or Brown, Indigenous or openly LGBTQ, it’s even worse.

Women are now being subjected not just to insults and demeaning comments but also to vicious lies and doctored images aimed at damaging their reputations. Many are being threatened with physical or sexual violence. This is an existential threat to democracy.

It makes online hate seem not just normal but inevitable. And that makes people who aren’t receiving it complacent — unwilling to take it seriously and prone to defending egregious attacks as a “freedom of speech” issue.

But it’s not the abusers whose speech is threatened. The truth is that if we don’t impose limits on what can be shared, anonymous attackers can say whatever they want, while the message to women is “Speak at your own risk.”

Many of the women we support who’ve reported safety concerns to the police have been told “Just stay off the internet.” But social media platforms are central to the way most of us access news, remain connected or wield influence. If you’re a politician, staffer, journalist, researcher or advocate, you rely on email and social media in order to do your job.

So when your mobile phone becomes weaponized, or when trolls are regularly hijacking your feed with insults, lies and threats, you have to review those attacks to decide whether to mute or block, document or report. Reading rape threats and seeing images of yourself photo-shopped onto porn takes a huge toll on your mental health, and it often comes with an actual pricetag.

Some women don’t promote their public appearances because they don’t want to be stalked in person. Others decline speaking opportunities altogether. This may reduce their income. It definitely undermines their ability to have impact.

Many invest in therapy because the threats are triggering. Still others are compelled to hire a lawyer. This constitutes a “toxicity tax.” And the people paying it are already under-represented.

So when they leave public office — or journalism or advocacy work — they deprive themselves of their chosen career and rob the rest of us of their talents and contributions. That affects us all. Public conversations, amplified through the news and social media, help set agendas, shape priorities, impact spending. Our democracy needs those conversations in order to reflect the experiences, insights and solutions of all citizens.

Online abuse threatens to erode equality gains that have taken decades to achieve.

When Informed Opinions heard from the women in our database about how brutal the attacks targeting them had become, we created our #ToxicHush Online Action Kit to offer them guidance on how to deal with it. But we can’t make victims responsible for addressing this crime. Curbing online harms is about promoting free speech by safeguarding public conversations.

We expect the companies making the drugs we take, and the cars we drive, to assess the risks involved and show how they’ve ensured our safety. We need to demand similar transparency from billion-dollar tech corporations. Legacy media aren’t allowed to disseminate hate; social media platforms have had a free pass for too long.

They didn’t invent misogyny, racism, homophobia — but they facilitate anonymity, promote conflict, and amplify abuse. Platforms that profit from this must be made accountable. The U.K., the EU and Australia are all demanding this. Canadian governments at all levels must do the same.

Adapted from remarks Shari Graydon, CEO and Catalyst of Informed Opinions, to the Federation of Canadian Municipalities earlier this week. The Toxic Hush Action kit is available here.

 

For Charlotte’s sake, say NO to the status quo

Posted on by Shari Graydon

Charlotte, light of my life, is 7. Her fearless physicality, fierce devotion to her brothers, and clarity about her artist’s soul… these are just three of the things that make my heart ache when I think about the many ways the world she is inheriting will fail to deliver what she deserves. 

But one of those likely or inevitable failures is fixable. And you can help (especially if you act now — see below)!

At the turn of the millennium, Canada ranked 27th in the world for women’s representation in parliament. Now we’re 59th. 

Let that sink in. Canada, a beacon of democracy, has been outpaced on this metric by 58 other nations.

Representation is a prerequisite for democracy — but we don’t offer it to women and girls in this country. 

Despite the good work of Equal Voice, which has been advocating for parity in politics for two decades, we’ve only gained 10 points in the past 20 years. At this rate, we’ll be lucky to reach parity by 2062. 

Charlotte will be pushing 50 by then, and I probably won’t be alive to see it. 

While we were feeling smug about the appointment of a gender-balanced federal cabinet, other countries recognized the cost of not ensuring women have an equal say across government. Dozens of them decided that “natural evolution” (aka “incremental change”) wasn’t cutting it. And so they adopted laws.

Mexico is among them. This deeply Catholic country wrestled its culture of machismo to the ground and achieved parity in politics in 2018. 

If they can do it, so can we.

But change doesn’t just happen; it’s made to happen. Especially when the change involved requires some people with power to dismantle the structural barriers that keep other people from accessing it.

Political parties have the power to fix this. The status quo exists because they haven’t prioritized women’s equality as dozens of other countries have. And we haven’t insisted. So we can start to do that, now.

Canadians who want our democracy to live up to its promise can say “no” to the status quo. They can sign an online petition calling on our elected MPs to ensure it is read aloud in the House of Commons. The deadline to make this happen is September 17th. 

Parity in politics? It’s only fair. 

Share the petition with others, follow us on Twitter @59_WTF, watch this space for other ways you can help, or sign up to receive email notifications from Informed Opinions. 

Together we can create the circumstances that all the Charlottes in our lives grow up in a country that demonstrates its respect for women’s rights by giving them access to an equal voice in government.

Remembering Inspirational Feminist Advocate, Shirley Greenberg

Posted on by Shari Graydon

The staff and board of Informed Opinions join all of Ottawa, many thousands of women, and the extended Greenberg family in mourning the passing of Shirley Greenberg. 

An inspirational feminist advocate, role model and philanthropist, her generosity has made — and continues to make — a profound difference in the lives of countless women. 

Alongside many other feminist advocacy organizations, Informed Opinions benefited from Shirley’s commitment to backing up her vision of equality with vital financial support. 

She funded both pragmatic essentials and visionary projects. Her most recent contribution to our work amplifying women’s voices helped launch our campaign against the toxic hush of online hate. She well understood how much of a target women who dare to speak up and share their insights through legacy or social media become, and how profoundly online attacks threaten the progress we’re making in the fight to ensure women are heard.

Now, with the benefit of her support, we are on the verge of releasing Every Woman’s Right to Speak Free from Online Hate – A Peoples’ Tribunal (streaming live via video on June 14th). Her early financial endorsement was pivotal both to the Tribunal and the research we’re gathering to support it.