B.C. receives grade of C- on women’s rights, says new report from West Coast Legal Education and Action Fund

    1 of 1 2 of 1

      A report card issued by a Vancouver-based group has given B.C. a low average grade when it comes to how well international standards on the rights of women are being met.

      Released today (October 18), the report from the West Coast Legal Education and Action Fund provides an assessment of the province’s performance in relation to the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women.

      "This year's grades reflect some of the promises that have been made regarding improved services for women and families, but the fulfillment of women's rights requires more than just words,” Kasari Govender, with the West Coast Legal Education and Action Fund, says in a news release.

      “Women leaving relationships require greater access to the courts, women with disabilities need better supports, and aboriginal women and girls deserve to know that their safety is a priority in our justice system," Govender says.

      While the group says the average grade was a “C-“, up from a "D" last year, failing marks were assigned in the areas of social assistance and access to justice.

      The report highlights concern about how well marginalized women are served by social assistance programs in the province. It notes that aboriginal, disabled, immigrant, refugee and other women face a higher risk of living in poverty.

      The report also expresses concern about the loss of aid for low-income women who have to deal with civil legal matters.

      Results from the West Coast Legal Education and Action Fund report card are as follows:

      Women and Social Assistance: F

      Missing and Murdered Aboriginal Women and Girls: C

      Violence Against Women and Girls: C+

      Women and Girls in Prison: B-

      Access to Childcare: C-

      Women and Housing: D+

      Women and Access to Justice: F

      Women and Health Care: C+

      Comments

      3 Comments

      Ray I

      Oct 18, 2010 at 1:41pm

      I would like to know what other jurisdictions scored as well. This offers no context for comparison.

      hmm...

      Oct 18, 2010 at 2:57pm

      Dude...so we passed, sweet...

      Taxpayers R Us

      Oct 19, 2010 at 12:03am

      Ahh, LEAF...the institutionalisation of the term "succubus" when considering the "greater access to courts" point.

      Because as LEAF would have it, the first thing a woman should do upon leaving a relationship is to strip the man of all property, money and pension he may have remaining, and if the clerk doesn't push her case to the front of the queue on account of her being a female, then the system is failing the woman.

      I'm just curious if taxpayers are funding these diggers and if they are, how to remove their funding..