[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]
Thursday, November 9, 1995
.1540 
[English]
The Chair: I would now like to call the meeting of the Standing Committee on Human Rights and the Status of Disabled Persons to order. I welcome the Minister for Human Resources Development, the Honourable Lloyd Axworthy, and his staff.
As you may know, we have embarked on a study or review of the national strategy for persons with disabilities. Before I call on the minister, I would like the members and the staff to introduce themselves.
I am Rey Pagtakhan, the chair of the committee, from Winnipeg North.
[Translation]
Mr. Bernier (Mégantic - Compton - Stanstead): My name is Maurice Bernier and I'm the member for Mégantic - Compton - Stanstead. Before going to the Minister's statement, I have a Point of Order.
On 26 October last, I asked to have tabled before the committee the statement of the Confédération des organismes de personnes handicapées du Québec, also known as COPHAN. Today, I have only the English version of that statement and the questions I had to put to the Minister were exactly on that statement.
If I'm not in any position to get the French version of that statement, I won't be able to put questions to the Minister and I don't see why I should take part in this meeting.
[English]
The Chair: Before I reply to your question, allow me to proceed with the introduction of the members. I'll come back to you right after.
Mr. McClelland (Edmonton Southwest): Ian McClelland, Edmonton Southwest.
Mrs. Brown (Calgary Southeast): Jan Brown, Calgary Southeast.
Mr. Maloney (Erie): John Maloney, Erie.
Mr. Allmand (Notre-Dame-de-Grâce): Warren Allmand, Montreal.
The Chair: Now I would like the staff of the committee to introduce themselves.
Mr. Bill Young (Committee Researcher): I'm Bill Young, the researcher for the committee.
The Clerk of the Committee: I'm Wayne Cole, the clerk of the committee.
The Chair: In reply to your question, I would request the clerk to please respond to that specific inquiry.
The Clerk: The only document that is available for the round table meeting at which COPHAN appeared is the blues, which is the unedited transcript of the proceedings. The translation is not yet available and the edited copy is not yet available. It ordinarily takes us fifteen working days to produce that, so it should be available next week.
[Translation]
Mr. Bernier: If that's the case, I shall have no questions for the minister today and I won't take part in today's meeting. Once I get the documents concerning COPHAN's statement, and if the Minister comes back before our committee, I'll be happy to put questions to him as a member of the Official Opposition.
[English]
Mr. Allmand: Mr. Chairman, I can understand the point of view of my honourable colleague. Why does it take fifteen days to translate the document in question when the document will serve as a basis for participating in this meeting? Shouldn't we take some steps to make sure it's translated sooner? I know English-speaking members of the committee would have an equal complaint if somebody had appeared with a document only in French that they needed in the English language to question a witness or the minister a week or so later.
Why does it take fifteen days? This won't solve the problem for today. I don't want to delay the questioning of the minister or the minister's participation, but I would like to have an answer, maybe by the end of the meeting. Obviously you're not going to be able to supply Mr. Bernier with a copy of the document in French for this meeting, but I think we should have a better answer.
I'm not accusing the clerk of being responsible, but somebody is responsible; fifteen days is too long.
.1545
Maybe we could leave it to the end of the meeting so we won't delay the minister's participation.
The Chair: Yes, Mr. Allmand. The chair would like to say that this is the first time the chair has heard of this. I share the concerns of the members of the committee on this issue.
Is your question on the same issue, Mr. McClelland?
Mr. McClelland: Mr. Chairman, with respect, the member representing the Bloc is merely grandstanding. This is pure rubbish. We have a room full of witnesses ready to participate. We've had two months' worth of witnesses speaking to this committee about problems in the disabled community and to hang it up over this one report is pure rubbish.
The Chair: Okay.
I would like us to keep cool on this issue because we have the minister before us. Questions may emanate from his presentation.
I would like Ms Catterall to introduce herself since she came in a couple of seconds late.
Ms Catterall (Ottawa West): With all due respect, Mr. Chair, I cannot let that last statement stand on the record.
This is not a question of grandstanding. It is a question of the law of this country and of the rules of this House. It's a serious breach of those rules, particularly with respect to a minister's appearance before this committee. In fact, I think it would be very gracious of Mr. Bernier if he agrees that the committee should proceed to hear from the minister, notwithstanding this serious breach of the rules.
Mr. Allmand: At the end of the meeting I would like to get more details -
Ms Catterall: Absolutely.
The Chair: Yes, we should address this issue in more detail. I did not hear Mr. Bernier even suggesting or hinting that we should not proceed. He was only conveying to us his predicament, which the committee, of course, shares very much, Mr. Bernier. The chair would like to call on Mr. Bernier to listen to the presentation of the minister, and if he has no questions at the time following his presentation, those questions may be posed to the minister later, either in writing or perhaps by inviting the minister to reappear at a later date.
On that note, I would like Minister Lloyd Axworthy to introduce his staff and proceed with his presentation.
Hon. Lloyd Axworthy (Minister of Human Resources Development): Thank you,Mr. Chairman. I'm joined today by Mr. Dean Moodie, director general of the intergovernmental and aboriginal programs directorate in the Department of Human Resources Development, and byMr. John McWhinnie, director general of human resource partnerships for the department. They both have been working actively in this area for many years and I'm pleased to be with them.
Mr. Chairman, with your kind permission, I'd like to offer some opening comments before taking questions. I will begin first by congratulating the committee on the work it's been doing. A number of hearings have been held and a dialogue has been created about a way of developing a more active and effective program as it relates to disabled Canadians.
Committee members will recall that about a year ago we tabled a discussion paper on social reform. One of the objectives we set forth in that paper was to achieve a greater independence for persons with disabilities. With the release of that paper we've had a very extensive response from Canadians with disabilities and the groups representing them about how to achieve this goal. Through a wide variety of communications such as the working group, letters and committee hearings, I think we've been able to clearly scope out both the interests and the concerns of disabled Canadians and of Canadians generally about how we can pursue a relevant program.
Today I want to respond directly to those representations and lay out for the committee a proposed strategy on disability that my department will be initiating and that we would welcome committee response to.
Before beginning to lay out the seven points of that strategy, I want to first take a moment to consider what we mean by disabled Canadians, what their lives represent in today's reality. Approximately 15.5% of Canadians have disabilities of one form or the other. However, the unemployment rate for disabled Canadians is over 20%, which is double the level of 9% or so for other Canadians.
The poverty rate for people with disabilities is very high. Some 60% do live below the poverty line. In other words, to put it in blunt terms, life for many disabled Canadians is a struggle. I think the whole purpose of government should be to provide assistance to correct that situation.
.1550
Some have questioned whether the federal government has any role at all to play in disability. It's important to point out that the human resources department spends $5 billion annually on people with disabilities, through the Canada Pension Plan disability program, through the UI sickness treatment, through transfers to provinces and through the disability tax credit.
It's clear that in developing the best use of those very substantial dollars we need to work closely together with provinces to ensure that our different programs are compatible and relevant and work together.
In setting out the strategy there are two fundamental objectives. The first is the integration of disabled Canadians into the workforce and the second is the promotion of independent living. Today I want to lay down seven principles on how we can achieve that strategy and how we can achieve the goals we've established.
First I want to underline and reiterate the responsibility I take as the lead minister in disability for the Government of Canada. Some concern has been expressed, and I want to emphasize that my role as lead minister is to ensure that all programs in the government work to the extent possible to achieve the goals we just laid out. I'm here to coordinate the other departments to build and commit themselves to disabilities as well and to be the representative and voice for disabled Canadians at the cabinet table.
I understand this is not necessarily an easy task, but frankly, I don't have too many easy tasks in this department. It is a very important one and I feel very encouraged in taking it on.
Over the last year as the Minister of Human Resources Development I have begun a number of very specific steps in my own program areas to begin to achieve the goals of employability and independence for people with disabilities. This summer, on August 1, we made major changes to the Canada Pension Plan program to remove disincentives to work and to help integrate people into the community.
For example, under the Canada Pension Plan, recipients with disabilities may now use those benefits to go to school full-time, to work for three months without losing any eligibility, to do volunteer work and still receive benefits, and in cases of cyclical disability, such as MS or other areas, people may, when necessary, go back on the Canada Pension Plan after working without having to reapply all over again.
The whole purpose of this initiative is to open up, and I want to thank the many representatives of the disabled organizations who were able to help us develop this major modification to the Canada Pension Plan.
Second, this summer we introduced a new grant program for disabled students, with up to $3,000 in grants per year to purchase equipment or services to attend higher education. Again, very strong representation was made during the public hearings on the social reform about the fact that there are extra costs incurred for students with disabilities and that this often is a deterrent to higher education. We believe the $3,000 grant will be a very important support.
[Translation]
Quebec, which withdrew from the Federal Students Loans Program will also be a beneficiary. I have written to Mr. Garon, their Minister of Education, and today I can confirm that the Quebec government will be getting $1.2 billion this year to help handicapped students in the province of Quebec.
[English]
A third area, which I don't need to spend any time on with this committee, because you've been seized with it, is the employment equity legislation, which again provides a major set of new rules in employment under the federal jurisdiction. I am pleased to report to members of the committee that I appeared before the Senate committee yesterday, and it appears as if we may be able to achieve fairly quick approval of the bill so that we will have it passed into law before Christmas. I'm certainly hopeful in that area.
So the first point of the strategy is to take that responsibility and to take the initiatives I've just announced.
Second, I want to fundamentally refocus the vocational rehabilitation program, which has very substantial dollars - over $188 million. It's a cost-shared program with the provinces to enable persons with disabilities to get back to work.
.1555
My officials will begin discussions with the provinces within the next month to extend the current arrangements beyond the end of this fiscal year, when they will come to an end, to ensure that there is a continuity. In these discussions with the provinces we will be exploring specifically how better to focus our joint efforts on the goals laid out by the people these programs are supposed to help; namely, the disabled.
Through the VRDP we need to build on what works, but also begin substantially to empower directly individuals and their community organizations so that in their own day-to-day lives they can integrate in the mainstream of economic and social life.
We will be putting that forward as a basic standard of our negotiation with the provinces.
The third part of our disability strategy is to integrate disabled Canadians into the economic mainstream. I see the new human resource investment fund that was established in the last budget as being a fundamental opportunity to address the needs of people with disabilities and help them get back to work.
I recognize the concern, which again was expressed during the committee hearings, that many disabled Canadians have had concerns about the operation of the Canada Employment Centres in the past. They have not served people with disabilities as well as they should.
We are now putting our full efforts behind creating an employment program and service that will be sensitive to the needs of people with disabilities while continuing to be accountable for the employment input.
For example, in the employment centres all 300 offices under the new delivery network will meet full accessibility standards. The new kiosk system, which will provide an additional 400 points of service for Canadians in the delivery of our social programs, will be fully accessible for all forms of disabilities.
For visual disabilities, kiosks have been equipped for the capacity to handle voice-recognition methods and script-size changes as the technology comes on stream. We are introducing them now.
Secondly, the kiosks will allow accessibility for 95% of wheelchair clients.
Third, for the hearing impaired we shall be applying TDD services, which are already available, and we will expand them with 1-800 coverage.
We will also be undertaking a major training program for all officials and officers of CEC delivery systems so that they can be both sensitive to needs and aware of how we can better enhance our services.
A second part of the strategy in this area is to dedicate funds for disability to provide two key elements in our human investment funding.
The first is individualized supports. As members know, in Prince Edward Island we have undertaken a major strategic initiative, probably the largest demonstration project in the country, between the Canadian government, the Prince Edward Island government, and the Canadian and the P.E.I. Associations for Community Living to develop a new pilot project on how to relocate existing resources into new models for supports of individuals.
I can report, again, to the committee hearings that in recent discussions with the government officials in Prince Edward Island evaluations were available and it shows a remarkable evaluation success story in terms of converting traditional forms of government programs into individual supports that can be accessed by individual Canadians.
Secondly, we are helping to develop a new system of community infrastructure that is designed and customized specifically to the needs of disabled Canadians. Let me give you three examples.
[Translation]
In Montmagny, in Quebec, the Director of the Employment Centre recently set up a partnership for planning and delivering services to the disabled. This partnership was developed together with community representatives including persons with disabilities. That local group will determine which are the best services and the best ways to deliver them.
[English]
In Oakville, Ontario we have recently funded a locally managed computer network, called the Wide Area Employment Network, that allows persons with disabilities to market directly their skills with employers. Through this accessible network persons with disabilities are able to construct their resumé for postings on this new job bank system and, in turn, employers are able to search through the network to match skills with available positions.
The ambition of the program, once it has been fully tested in the Oakville-Halton area, is that we would be intending to expand this on a national basis.
.1600
In Metro Toronto we have just established a program called ``A Window to Opportunity''. It is a consumer-driven, community-based point of coordination for all persons with disabilities in the Metro Toronto area to access the full range of human resource and other government community training and services.
It includes training for counsellors to be more responsive and develop those local partnerships. As I said in my speech this morning in the House in introducing the human resource bill, we are again trying to focus our attention on service delivery at the local level in programs that are managed by the users of the programs.
Our new employment services will thus be focused at the local level. That's really our definition of decentralization. Partnerships among disability groups, government and employers are key to making this work.
I would also like to report that in this community infrastructure there are already some very fascinating developments. I would like to mention, for example, a recent trip I took to Goodwill Industries in Victoria, which is establishing a one-stop centre for people with disabilities in the Victoria area.
Previously, as you know, it basically provided a shelter workshop opportunity. Now it provides a full range of services: counselling, computer training, on-the-job training, and work experience training. A full range of services is available when someone comes to the door and they can find the delivery of those services both physically within the new Goodwill Industries centre and through direct communication. It has developed a very extensive network of linkages between job-find clubs, employers and training agencies throughout the entire Victoria area.
Another example is the job accommodation network. Through this community-based initiative, information is provided directly to employers on how to accommodate persons with disabilities in the workplace.
Finally, in British Columbia we are about to invest in a major aboriginal network on disability as part of our strategic initiatives program. It will allow first nations people to develop that same kind of community-based information counselling in the employment service system.
I think it reflects a fundamental change in both philosophy and direction of the department in terms of developing this on the basis of local partnerships.
We also recognize that we need to continue to build upon partnerships with national disability organizations such as the Council of Canadians with Disabilities and other similar groups.
We need to become strategic in a time of fiscal restraint, and I think that's recognized by these groups. We also need to rationalize funding and work out other ways of incorporating that private sector involvement.
Through a transitional approach we will help organizations strengthen their capacity to work in a collaborative way, and encourage and develop further investments by volunteering in private sector organizations.
One of the key partnerships we have been involved in is the Independent Living movement, which has established centres across the country. Through support for other individuals with disabilities, individuals are learning to take control over their own lives and their own support and services.
Through partnerships we hope to be able to share our experiences and knowledge with other countries. I think it is most interesting how Canada has become a leader internationally in the provision of expertise, knowledge and technologies for disabled Canadians. As you know, we will be sponsoring a major conference on this in the forthcoming year.
I should say, by way of a commentary, that this summer when I was visiting China in my capacity as Minister of Western Economic Diversification, I had the opportunity to have a fascinating morning with the son of Deng Xiaopeng, the continuing leader of China. As you know, he was severely handicapped during the time of the cultural revolution, when he was thrown out of a window. He was able to get full medical attention and therapy here in Ottawa and has become a very great friend of Canada. He has expressed a real interest in coming to Canada to attend this meeting.
In talking to him I felt somewhat reassured when he pointed out that while we're dealing with some two million Canadians with disabilities, the present membership in his organization is in the area of seventy million disabled. You realize just how enormous a task he faces.
I think there's great scope for us in working with groups like the Chinese. You will notice that in the recent Memorandum of Understanding we signed with the Chinese government on a human resource agreement, we will be undertaking work with them in helping to develop a series of linkages on disability issues.
In some ways I think one of the most interesting and positive or exciting areas for the future is disability management. One of the key models we are developing and promoting within the federal government and Canada as a whole is this area of finding a partnership among government, labour and industry to work with individuals from the moment of injury until reintegration back into the workforce.
.1605
Studies have shown that the support given to a person in the days and weeks after he or she is injured is crucial to their long-term employment prospects. Not only is it good for the individuals, but it means savings for the employer, as they pay less for disability benefits, whether the employer is public or private.
Human Resources Development is currently the lead department in a disability management project within the public service. In addition, as part of the broad partnership, HRD is involved in the planning of the first ever Canadian conference on disability management, to be held next fall, bringing together labour, business and government to see how we might implement this model of disability management right across Canada.
The sixth part of the strategy is income support for disabled Canadians that helps work towards independence.
As we pointed out earlier, the human resources department is responsible for $2.5 billion in pensions for disabled Canadians. We are currently reviewing the Canada Pension Plan. One of the great areas of growth has been, as we know, in the last three or four years within the CPP disability section. We're going to take measures to ensure that CPP is sustainable over the long term while fully protecting benefits for disabled Canadians. We need to ensure that if people are able to work, we improve the incentives and provide a better linkage back to work.
We've already introduced the changes I announced at the beginning of this statement, but we also want to explore within this review of the Canada Pension Plan the notion of partial benefits for CPP recipients so that they can take part-time work and still receive benefits at the same time, and therefore provide an encouragement and incentive into the workplace.
Within this discussion on income support, Mr. Chairman,
[Translation]
I'm happy to see that at their meeting, this fall, the Social Services Ministers identified the question of persons with disabilities as an important sector that they'd have to look at together.
[English]
We are looking forward to sitting down with provincial counterparts as soon as they have concluded their work, which we are hopeful will be very soon, to talk about the key issues of mutual concern and how we can work together on a broadened program of income support for disabled Canadians.
We have already begun that work in specific areas. In Alberta, for example, we have just entered into an agreement with the Workers' Compensation Board whereby information on mutual clients will be shared. This pilot project in the Alberta context could lead to provision of joint medical and vocational assessments for clients instead of the current separate programs. It also leads, I think, to the continuation of an attempt to eliminate overlap and duplication.
The seventh point in the strategy is this. I've asked the Status of Disabled Persons Secretariat within my department to begin discussions with the disability community in Canada towards the establishment of a direct working group of disabled persons that can serve as a direct vehicle for advice on how to implement the strategies I've outlined above. This will be a time-limited group - it will be sunset - that will report directly to me as a minister and will help us in the implementation of the program. As was pointed out during the social review period, oftentimes programs are brought in without the direct involvement and input.... The working group can provide the liaison and conduit to the disability community and their organizations to make sure that on a day-to-day basis our secretariat, and myself personally, can make sure the measures we introduce and the discussions we hold with the provinces can be fully conversant with their interests and concerns.
So, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I've set out the initial disability strategy. I think it is responsive to the kinds of concerns we heard during the review, and it is also responsive to providing a much higher level of opportunity for both independent living and for full integration into the workplace throughout Canada.
In the consultations it became clear that the community wants a federal government that can provide leadership to meet these two key objectives and is quite prepared, and in fact feels privileged, to take on that responsibility. Through my own programs and discussions with other departments and through the negotiation with the provinces, I am very confident we can work on a series of fronts to achieve these ends.
Mr. Chairman, I would also say that I would very much welcome and look forward with some real anticipation to the work of this committee in the hearings you've been holding as to how we can further enhance and augment the kinds of initiatives we've announced today and put specific program developments on them, because I think the work you've done as a committee.... This committee has a very historical pedigree going back to 1980 when the Parliament of Canada took on real leadership in this role. I look forward to a continuation of that relationship.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Minister.
We will start with the first round, ten minutes from the three sides, starting with the opposition side.
.1610
Mr. Bernier, will you pass?
Mr. McClelland.
Mr. McClelland: Thank you for being with us today, Mr. Minister.
Over the last couple of months we have had quite a number of witnesses before the committee and there seemed to be one continuum among virtually all of them. It was that, in recognition of the changing fiscal climate in the country and the devolution of responsibility to the provinces through the Canada health and social transfer, there was a palpable fear among the people who were most vulnerable, they being those in our society who are disabled, that somehow they were going to fall through the cracks. It seemed as if there had been virtually no interest or that no one had said, look, we are aware of the difficulties that can be faced in this transition and we are making it a priority to get together with the provinces before the event to say, even though we're going to be retreating from the direct financing, these are the standards that we expect be met; let's work at it together.
Is it possible, Mr. Minister, for you to give an assurance to this committee, for the people who feel most afraid of losing all of their support and the very strength that got us to where we are today, that we're not going to retreat to 1980 or earlier than that?
Mr. Axworthy: The affirmation we undertook today in the statement I just finished, where we're prepared to continue the full leadership within the federal government apparatus but also with the provinces, should put those fears to rest, because in fact the proposed CHST also offers opportunities. By allowing for more flexible programming, it means that some of the limitations and rigidities that were in the CAP program will be able to be overcome by the provinces.
At the same time, as I indicated in my remarks, by maintaining our commitment to the vocational rehabilitation for disabled persons program we'll be able to use that as a very important area of joint work with the provinces. We want to redefine the role of the VRDP so it can aim more at the independent concept that I think disabled groups desire.
Mr. McClelland: But that's another story.
Mr. Axworthy: But I'm saying that specifically under CHST, when we were in contact with the provinces after the last budget and indicated that we wanted to hold discussions, they said they would prefer to wait until they were able to look at the full implications of the CHST.
Mr. McClelland: Mr. Minister, would it be possible, then, to come up with the name of some individual working in the federal government who is specifically responsible for maintaining or for working with the provinces to maintain a standard or to set standards nationally?
This seems to be the fear, that this has become such a great fuzzy barrel that when you put your hand into it, you really can't grab anything securely. Even the relationship between the minister and this committee or the direct relationship seems to be quite a bit less direct than it used to be.
We need to address the fact that there must be someone, somewhere, somehow, who is accountable for this.
Mr. Axworthy: With all due modesty, Mr. McClelland, that person is me. For better or for worse, I'm responsible. We have a secretariat for the disabled that is specifically charged with the full range of responsibilities, both in my own department and in the federal apparatus.
Mr. Moodie, who is with me, is the intergovernmental director general, who undertakes the discussions with the provinces directly and will be the official working with Mr. Ian Green, who is the assistant deputy minister for human resource investment funds, for the direct contact with the provinces.
As I said in my remarks, the decision by the provinces to establish their own council of ministers and work specifically on things pertaining to the disabled is an initiative that I welcome. Once their work will have been completed, we will be undertaking the full discussions on the federal-provincial level.
.1615
Mr. McClelland: A short additional question then. The second theme that seemed to come up across all of the disabilities, whether it was hearing, sight or mobility.... No matter what the disability happens to be, when people with the disability are able to find employment, then having found that employment, if they lose that employment, it becomes very difficult - it is kind of a catch-22 - to get back onto the very support system that allowed them to get the employment in the first place.
Secondly, a person with a disability, having gained employment, very often is in danger of losing the support that allowed them to get the employment in the first place and needs to be held harmless from the cost of their disability, as far as employment is concerned - not necessarily just a tax credit. I don't know what the answer is, but I would ask if the minister would undertake to meet with his colleagues to find out if there is some way that persons with a disability could be protected from the cost of that disability insofar as employment is concerned - whether it is transportation or a wheelchair, or whether it is for a person to have an interpreter, or blind Braille reading, or whatever that might be, which is an extra cost that others don't have.
Mr. Axworthy: Mr. McClelland, I know you are aware of this, but we in fact introduced those measures into the Canada Pension Plan, which is a major source of income support for disabled Canadians. Over 300,000 Canadians use the CPP. Those measures were brought into place on August 1 of this year. I think that is a major step forward, which was done as a result of the direct discussion with groups of disabled -
Mr. McClelland: There is no question that was a step forward, but that has been identified by many of the witnesses who came to this committee as their number one concern.
In private conversations with disabled people I have seen across the country...when I have asked them what is the number one concern they have as a disabled person it has been that catch-22 situation.
Mr. Axworthy: You are talking about the income support at the provincial level - workers' compensation or direct social assistance.
Mr. McClelland: However it gets there. It is still coming from one tax base, so it doesn't really matter whether it is coming provincially or federally.
Mr. Axworthy: I think it is a useful suggestion, Mr. McClelland, and I think when we begin discussions with the provinces, I can first put the model that we have established through CPP as an example of that, and we will certainly undertake to put that as one of the points of discussion.
Mr. McClelland: The third and final one is the question of the rate of disability, as identified by Statistics Canada in 1992, in the first nations community. It is dramatically higher, and they have different problems, in transportation and isolation, and literacy is said to be one of the primary problems within the disabled community of the first nations community.
It seems that if the disabled community is an orphan within Canada, then the disabled community within the first nations is even more of an orphan, and they of course find themselves in isolation as well. So I would ask that we pay particular attention to that.
Mr. Axworthy: In fact, Mr. McClelland, I will issue an invitation. Next week I will be in Edmonton, where we are completing discussions with the aboriginal community on setting up a disability strategic initiative. I know you are interested in that. If you are in the city, I would very much like to have you there.
Mr. McClelland: Thank you.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr. McClelland. Mr. Maloney.
Mr. Maloney: Mr. Minister, other than the fact that the federal government is reducing the transfer payments to our provincial governments and the fact that they are the major service deliverers to the disabled community, with these new federal initiatives what assurances will we have that the provinces won't perhaps further reduce their contribution to the disabled community and services or funding?
Mr. Axworthy: First for the record let me point out that the combined level of funding under the CHST, when it comes into effect next April, will be in the order of $27 billion, which is a very substantial amount of money. So suggestions that somehow the federal government no longer has a role to play when in fact we are transferring that amount of money demonstrates that we still have a major stake in the outcomes. Therefore, the negotiations we will begin as soon as the provinces have completed their round of discussions amongst themselves will clearly focus on how the application of that transfer would be relevant and important to maintenance of services for disabled Canadians.
.1620
Mr. Maloney: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chair: Mr. Allmand.
Mr. Allmand: Minister, we had a large number of disabled groups before this committee on October 26. Many of them repeated the very serious concern that with the repeal of the Canada Assistance Plan and its replacement by the CHST, the block funding money that went to the provinces, there was no assurance that they would be taken care of because political pressures within the provinces would more likely lead to a greater percentage of those block funds being spent on education and on health care, not on the services they require as disabled persons. They pointed out that whereas with the Canada Assistance Plan there was assurance that this money was used, at a great percentage, for social services, for their needs, now they are an easier political hit than post-secondary education or health care.
As a matter of fact, they pointed out that the Harris government in Ontario has already changed the definition of ``disabled'', leaving out a lot of people who were formally included. Those people are no longer getting help in Ontario because of the Harris government change that would not have been possible under the standards of the Canada Assistance Plan.
I guess all I'm doing is transmitting to you these very serious concerns of the groups that have appeared before us, but I'd like to hear your response. I have sympathy with them because I think this is likely to happen. With the block funds replacing the Canada Assistance Plan, the provinces will have much greater freedom and will spend less on disabled people and more on other things that are more politically palatable.
Mr. Axworthy: In response, Mr. Allmand, first we shouldn't assume the CAP program provides those guarantees; it doesn't. Under the present CAP program, which still exists until April 1, decisions made by provincial governments on the level of funding per person is something we have absolutely no control over. We could assure and ensure residency requirements and the principle of need, but we couldn't set the level. Decisions taken by individual provincial governments on determining that level leave us with no more federal accountability under CHST than we had under CAP. So I don't think we should overemphasize what CAP itself could do and not do, because you couldn't do those things.
What I think is important about the CHST is that it gives us an opportunity to do some new talking with the provinces. I was very encouraged by the statement of the provincial premiers at their meeting in St. John's, in which they outlined their specific program for discussion on the CHST, including a commitment on handicap programming. They clearly are conscious and aware of it, and so are we. The amount of money that would be allocated through existing CAP and converted CHST funding is approximately $2.2 billion. We would certainly, during the negotiations with the provinces, ensure that this figure is maintained, but I would hope we could be even more creative.
I don't look upon these negotiations as simply arguing about dollars. I see them as a way of discussing how we can provide better links; how we can provide better connections; how we can provide better integration of our programs so we get better value for the dollars.
.1625
I think for the first time, as you know, we've been experimenting. I know, Mr. Allmand, because you've been very heavily involved in the whole independent living notion and have spoken on it many times, that it's about time we incorporated those principles as part of government programs instead of just treating them as a whole series of pilot projects. The time has come to make that a fundamental operative principle. As I said in my opening statement, that is a principle in our disability strategy. It is a principle I will take to those negotiations, and we will use those discussions to see how we can best implement measures to fulfil such a principle.
So I think there is an opportunity to do some creative work with the provinces in this area.
Mr. Allmand: I agree that everything wasn't perfect with the Canada Assistance Plan. I guess the fear is that there will be even less control and less assurance for the disabled people under CHST.
Just by way of example, there is no appeal under the CHST, whereas there was an appeal process under the Canada Assistance Plan. I'd like to ask you if in your negotiations, through regulation or otherwise, there is any chance that you can introduce some sort of appeal process for disabled people who were formally covered but might be left out.
I think it was also suggested by Ms Richler and others on October 26 that there might be some sort of social audit, a committee whereby we could audit what happens under the block funding transfers to in fact see to what extent the provinces are being fair in their distribution of those funds with respect to the disabled community. All parties present in this committee said we would try to act as the social audit, but we don't have the full resources. It would be helpful if there was either an appeal or a social audit to keep a close watch.
What do you think the chances are of trying to put in place, either by yourself or through the discussions with the provinces, some kind of appeal or to have a social audit to make sure these funds are administered fairly with respect to the disabled communities?
Mr. Axworthy: It's my understanding, Mr. Allmand, that right now all provinces have an appeal procedure, which incorporates not only programs directly under their jurisdiction but also the cost-shared programs under the VRDP. I see no change in that particular appeal system being exercised. It perhaps can be strengthened because of the CHST itself so that there aren't again the bifurcations between the federal and the provincial of a block grant.
I place a lot of stock, as you do and apparently as the committee does, in the social audit notion. As you know, in the legislation that was passed to establish the CHST we included the provision that there would be a tabling of a report on an annual basis and that we would be using it as the foundation for a social audit agreement. I am hoping we can get the full agreement of provinces so that on an annual basis Canadians would see the progress or state of the nation. I am hoping we can do the same thing on the social side that we have done on the economic side. That in itself represents to me one of the most effective means of holding governments accountable: through the public light of good information that is publicly and transparently given so that the people know exactly how the money is being spent and what is happening to it, and particularly which sorts of initiatives are working and which are not.
We have a proposal from Prince Edward Island to help work with them in establishing a kind of joint centre for social auditing, if you like, to look at social programming. We're looking at a number of the social agencies, including those in the disabled community. They have given us proposals on what a social audit would look like. I certainly would see that as a major new instrument for Canadians generally, both at the federal and provincial levels, to be able to get a much better fix and a much better evaluation of how our social programming is being implemented.
So any advice or recommendations this committee can make on how that could be applied would certainly be welcomed, but I can guarantee you that it will be a matter of primary discussion with the provinces.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Allmand.
Would you like to start the second round, Mrs. Brown?
Mrs. Brown: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Welcome, Mr. Minister.
My colleague Mr. McClelland has focused on the broader structural context of supports for the disabled. I want to focus my remarks and my questions somewhat more narrowly to look at the service delivery elements and the changes that have been initiated at the local level. I'm talking specifically about the HRD kiosks.
.1630
This past summer I participated in a day-long event with the Canadian Paraplegic Association. Mr. Minister, I couldn't even open a door sitting in that chair. It made me realize from a very -
Mr. Axworthy: Sitting in which chair?
Mrs. Brown: Sitting in a wheelchair; I couldn't open a door when I was with the Canadian Paraplegic Association, so I'm going to focus on accessibility. I have arms and legs that work, but when you are sitting in a wheelchair and are looking for accessibility that is not there, it is very frustrating.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm almost positive I heard you say in your remarks that indeed we had accessibility for the disabled at the kiosks. I went to the press conference at which the service delivery changes that were going to be implemented were announced. I didn't hear anything about disability accessibility.
In the briefing notes I have from the department for today, the statement is made that the discussion paper, ``Improving Social Security in Canada'', suggested that for people with disabilities, reform should aim at improved access to disability-related supports and services to equip people to achieve greater independence.
I would really like to clarify for the record whether or not those kiosks are indeed accessible for the disabled. I'm looking at such things as people with sensory problems and low literacy skills. For example, are we going to have documents available with larger print? Will there be Braille available? Will there be phones for those with hearing impairments, and those kinds of things? Please help me with this.
Mr. Axworthy: As I announced in my opening statement, we recognize the importance of doing that and we have already undertaken it within the new kiosk systems. I should point out that the kiosks are also part of a broader network of telephone information systems. Increasingly, information can be gathered by touch phones with TDD systems and others applied to them.
In terms of the kiosks themselves, we've asked that they be specifically designed so that we would make available for those with visual disabilities the capacity to help, through voice recognition on the program and to have script size changes on the actual printed material or in the words that come up on the screen.
Mrs. Brown: So it is coming but it isn't effective yet.
Mr. Axworthy: It is coming. One of the reasons we wanted to establish this working group was to help us in the actual implementation of it as we move along. As you know, we have worked very closely with the Neil Squire Foundation and the centre in Toronto, Access Place. Access Place has been developing a whole series of new technologies in this area to help us develop the methodologies to make this happen. At this point in time, we're estimating that 95% of kiosks will be wheelchair accessible.
I think you've raised a very important point, Mrs. Brown. When we place a kiosk in a community facility such as a shopping centre or a library, one of the primary criteria will be whether or not that facility is accessible. That will be a very important consideration. Because many of our present HRD offices are limited, by lease or by past practices, to physical surroundings that aren't particularly accessible, it will also mean that we can move out into areas that are far more accessible than they were before. It won't be perfect right away, but I think it's a very important element.
I could ask the officials to talk about this, but we are now looking at initiating a series of training modules for our own officials, both in terms of the requirements and making them sensitive to the needs of access in this area. Our hope would be that in each of our major human resources centres, one officer would be assigned specific responsibility for disabled issues.
Mrs. Brown: You really touched on an important point in your last statement, and indeed that is communicating with those people who are most in need and who look to the provision of services. If we are indeed now in the process of ensuring that we are going to have accessibility at these points of service delivery, how are you going to incorporate the suggestions and the information from those people for whom you're actually targeting the service? Is there anything within this process that asks them what they need? How are you going to communicate these changes to them? How are you going to get opinions on new changes that perhaps may not address their particular need for full-service delivery?
.1635
Mr. Axworthy: Well, we're on the WEB, as they say now, like everybody else, so all of this information is now available on Internet. Changes of this kind would be available through computer access.
Mrs. Brown: But there's really no formal process for getting information.
Mr. Axworthy: Well, there is in the working group. That would be one formal process.
A second element is to develop partnerships with organizations at the local level. I used the example of the Goodwill Industries project in Victoria, where in effect we've turned over the implementation of our programs to them. They are also working with the province, the municipality, and the local agencies in that area. They've all come together to provide a one-stop shopping centre with an outreach capacity to it.
I've said this to many who represent organizations. This gives us an opportunity to establish this sort of partnership arrangement where they undertake the delivery of our programs, always in a properly accountable way.
Mrs. Brown: I applaud those efforts because I think we can't forget, as Mr. Allmand pointed out, that there is a group in society that is going to have to change its whole mindset and attitude in terms of how it's going to receive government supports. I would not want to see this group forgotten in that environment.
Mr. Axworthy: Could I make just one other comment, Ms Brown? In talking with disability organizations across Canada, I think that in this area - I hope I express it correctly - one of the other major objectives, which Mr. McClelland touched upon, was the need to give far more choice to them and not to have gatekeepers determining what services they would individually receive.
We want to provide those individual instruments to them so they can make those choices about the most appropriate level of transportation, about the sorts of physical arrangements and about new technology. We want to let them make their choice as opposed to having someone determine the best choice for them.
Mrs. Brown: Yes.
Mr. Axworthy: We want to move increasingly in that direction, but it will take discussion with the provinces to do that.
Mrs. Brown: I have one final closing comment. I want to point out again that we forgot a very significant group in our society in the design and the development of the kiosk. I think that's directly related to Mr. Allmand's earlier comments. Now we're going to have to go back and kind of reconfigure and rejig, and I think it's rather unfortunate.
The Chair: Thank you, Ms Brown.
Ms Catterall.
Ms Catterall: I've come to realize that in any kind of equality, economic equality is the first leg of the stool, because if you don't have the money to be equal to other people there are all kinds of ways in which you aren't fully involved in life. I want my questions to you - and thank you for being here, Minister - to focus on that.
Item number one is training. I think it's important to have the concerns and the interests of the disabled integrated into everything we do, but when I inquired about the expenditures on training, I think only about 2% of our training budget went to programs specifically for the disabled. That was about two years ago, and that's clearly far below their representation in the population and even much more below the representation among the unemployed in Canada. The unemployed may be the only group in which people with disabilities are dramatically over-represented.
You mentioned some measures you're taking, but I would like to know more broadly what kind of evaluation you have done of all the training programs, how well they're serving the disabled, how well the people with disabilities are being integrated into all training programs, and if they're being provided with specialized programs. In other words, what analysis has been done and what measures have been taken to improve our performance in that area?
Mr. Axworthy: First, through the new Employment Equity Act we'll be working with individual employers, both in the private sector and at the government level.
.1640
As you know full well, Ms Catterall, it requires not only identifying barriers but also identifying means of eliminating those barriers. This means it will put a much higher level of focus on employers developing training systems that will enable disabled Canadians to work, because there have been not just physical barriers but also labour market, human resource barriers in terms of hiring and promotion.
One of the major ways of overcoming that is through the employment equity human resource planning system that we're in fact implementing. That will affect 350 employers across Canada, and we would hope the lead will be taken up in other areas. It's an important initiative that will bring that about.
A second area we've been doing a lot of work on is again with the private sector, through the human resource sector councils. We bring labour and management together to look at their human resource needs and to establish areas of qualification, standards, classifications, etc.
We would be using the human resource sector councils as the venues for encouraging, again, a much higher level of investment in training for all Canadians, including those with disabilities. Within some of the programs we're offering - for example, the new youth internship program, which they are now operating - we have special programs specifically related to those with disabilities.
The third area I tried to set out in my strategy is that frankly we have to do a much better job in our own department. That 2% is not acceptable and we have not done as good a job as we should have. That's why we will change first our own focus, as I said to Ms Brown earlier, by bringing it down to a local level.
Part of the performance test of the new human resource centres at the local level will be how well they meet those equity objectives. That means we will make sure disabled Canadians have direct access to the training tools available through the new HRIF investment program, whether it's a wage supplement for on-the-job work and training or a direct loan kind of system, so they can make those individual choices.
As to the loans we've been talking about a lot, the question is how we integrate them with the provinces. That's why the P.E.I. experiment is a very important one, as is the new disability network we've established in the Oakville area, which can become national, as I've pointed out. We sometimes don't give full importance to the simple transmission of information about where jobs are and how you get to them.
When I was at the opening of this disability network, I was talking to a human resource vice-president from one of the large auto companies located in the area, who'd already started on a test basis to put this thing into effect and recognized how useful it was to them as an employment tool. They weren't doing anybody a favour; they were able to get into their workforce highly talented people whom they couldn't access before because there were simply too many of those barriers out there.
There are lots of ways. I can tell you I recognize the problem, and I hope the strategy we've outlined today can go a long way to improving it.
Ms Catterall: One of the things I was proudest of in my first term as an opposition member was an amendment to the UI legislation to allow UI training funds to be used to provide the support of services and equipment or devices to people with disabilities to participate in training programs.
From what I know, many of the employment centre people don't seem to know about that provision. They certainly don't make it well known to people with disabilities or to any applicant for training. Most disabled organizations I've talked to don't know about it. I'm just wondering if you have any idea of how often or how well that section has been used to provide support to people with disabilities in training. What measures have been taken to make the community at large more aware of it?
.1645
Mr. Axworthy: I don't have that information available. We could find that for you. It's the reason why I want to introduce a training program for our own officials, so they will be fully aware of all the scope of programs that are eligible, again having a working group reporting directly to me to give us guidance on a regular basis as to the various problems they run into in the implementation of programs.
I think you're quite right. Sometimes we can pass laws. I find it interesting that, even though the new CPP rules came into place on August 1, I still had a meeting a couple of weeks ago with someone with a disability who said, why don't you do this? I said, we just did, on August 1.
So there is an information question, and that's one of the areas in which I hope we can get some good advice from this working group on how to get it.
Ms Catterall: It's in my householder going out to my riding within a month.
Mr. Axworthy: Perhaps you will share that with us and we can give it to all members of Parliament.
Maybe this committee would provide a service by suggesting that all members of Parliament should use their householders to provide much better information on disability issues, frankly.
Ms Catterall: I have one final question on the economic theme. Besides women, the other group in society that tends to have a spotty employment record to work at less income than they are capable of earning is people with disabilities. They tend to be more often in and out of the workforce and therefore they tend to be poorer in retirement because they haven't had the opportunity to build up the pension funds that they would have if they had had equal opportunities in employment. How is this being taken into consideration in the reform of pensions?
Mr. Axworthy: In the last several years there has been a very substantial increase, until now. It's now levelling off, and in fact declining a little bit. There's about a 14% increase in the uptake on disability pensions through CPP. We've just finished looking at some new numbers, and if that's levelling off, then I think there was a certain series of reasons for it, some of which was that our provinces were suggesting that people should go and find CPP pensions as opposed to workers' compensation. But that's another issue that we can discuss at a later time.
I think we will try to make those rules as to eligibility and use much clearer. As I said - I don't know if you caught it, I think you came in a little bit late - one of the areas we're exploring as part of that CPP reform is a partial benefit system that will allow people to work on a part-time basis and still collect a benefit at the same time.
Mrs. Cowling (Dauphin - Swan River): I want to pick up on a couple of phrases you used: building partnerships and sort of tying that to the shortage of dollars. I come from rural Manitoba, and I'm wondering what the options for the disabled Canadians in rural Canada are.
Mr. Axworthy: If you'll allow me just to make a broader statement, I think that one of the areas of real improvement in the delivery of our service has to be to rural Canada generally, in labour market programming and other areas. We are working on that right now. The new delivery system improves that substantially, because it means that many points, smaller communities, that had not had any kind of service before will now have it. Plus, they'll have access to phones.
When we talk about kiosks, we are not talking just about a machine sitting in somebody's mall; we're talking about a partnership with a local organization. It could be the local school, the local chamber of commerce, or the local community futures organization that would help to man or operate that service centre and around it could start building some local programming.
In a speech this morning I used an example in Elgin County, where they're moving kiosks into the local Becker store and have developed a contract with a local merchant, who was very excited about it actually, because he said that a lot of people wanted to know, as they're in a farming community, how they can get access to programs. So there's room for developing a different kind of network in rural areas.
That applies in disabled areas, also. You'll be interested in knowing, for example, that in establishing a small group on child care, which we established under our Visions program, we specifically invited a couple of representatives from rural Canada. Having talked to them, I know right now that there is a combination of looking at access and child care for disabled children in rural areas.
As we go through the different categories of need, that's probably one of the most serious that we face, along with aboriginal children.
.1650
I come back to one point. This is where I think we have to really start changing our mindset, which is to say that I don't want to be in a position, as a Minister of Human Resources sitting in Ottawa, saying that this is what's going to happen in Dauphin. I want the officers of the human resources centre in the Dauphin area, in your area, to be able to sit down and work in such a way whereby they have specific guidelines about partnerships and arrangements and they know that their accountability will be by performance. At present, it's how much money in our programs do they spend. Now I want to see it be by performance.
One of the tests will be to what extent did they achieve serious improvements in the employability of that community. That means that they have a real onus of responsibility to work in that local community to define what the best use of our resources would be. That will include, as I said in the statement, a very clear commitment to provide those employment services to disabled Canadians.
Mrs. Cowling: Great, thank you.
The Chair: Before I give the floor to Mr. McClelland, I would like to pose one short question.
How can the disabled community be involved prior to the final determination of the structure and program elements of both the Human Resources investment fund and the Canada health and social transfer fund? Do you see a role for them in that?
Mr. Axworthy: We've been holding a lot of discussions with them directly, as you can imagine. I would also hope, Mr. Chairman, that your committee would be in a position to report or at least give us an interim report on your findings in that area.
Thirdly, as I said, we want to establish a working group that the secretariat and I could use as a constant sounding board in those areas. I've had the occasion to look at the list of witnesses and representations you've had in this committee. I think you've done as good a job as anybody in reaching out, and I would hope that you can present a report as soon as possible to help us in the implementation.
The Chair: Thank you.
Mr. McClelland: I have a comment to pass along from some of the witnesses.
One group of witnesses in particular was most concerned in regard to the Canada health and social transfer fund that persons with disabilities are now totally lumped together with the welfare mix. With the attitudes changing in Canadian society towards welfare, people who are in the disability community suffering from chronic situations are not the same people who are in the welfare mix. Lumping the two together really fuzzies the issue and is totally unfair to people with a disability.
Would you ask your officials, when they are speaking with the people in the provinces regarding this, to be particularly conscious that persons with disabilities suffer from chronic disability? It's not a temporary welfare situation and should be separate.
I'm sure the people from the independent living centres will be very heartened by your comments. When they were here as witnesses, I'm almost positive that I recall them telling us that they felt their existence was threatened because of budget cuts and that they were in fact closing down. This would be totally contrary to the comments that you, Mr. Minister, have used in saying how important they are in the delivery of service to the disability community, particularly in view of the fact that we have in the disability community a rehabilitation and medical practitioner industry competing with the independent living centres, which are not physician-driven, but are user-driven, consumer-driven. This is totally different from people, no matter how altruistic they are, who are driving this in order to have their own income.
I'm not making a value statement here. It's just a statement of fact. This is something that it would seem to me that your officials would want to check into very closely. How can they feel threatened while you feel they are going to be the primary deliverer?
.1655
The third issue - and I don't know if you can comment on this or not - is that we have a systemic employment problem in our country that is not likely to change in our lifetime. We have a situation where we know it's much less costly to care for people in their homes. Not only is it much less costly, but it's far better psychologically for everyone concerned.
Why can we not figure out some way whereby family caregivers can be compensated for providing care to people who require care, who we would have to pay for in an institutional setting anyway, so that these people would then be eligible for Canada Pension Plan benefits, etc.? It would be cheaper for the nation in the long run, it would be better for the people involved in the short and the long term, and it would provide some security for the caregivers down the road, particularly in their aged years.
So that's something that I would ask your officials to give some thought to, because it could be a matter of enlightened self-interest. It might cost a bit more in the short term, but it could save us a whole bundle down the road.
I have a final comment in regard to your comment earlier about the number of people.... We don't have a census question on disabilities this year, so we don't know whether we will have an enormous increase in the number of people from one census to the other who claim to be disabled. But we do know that under new legislation there may in fact be more people who will self-identify as disabled for one reason or another.
What are we going to do to make sure that people who are disabled - not inconvenienced but actually honest to God disabled, because we have a whole lot of people who are inconvenienced by a disability. My point is that it's entirely different being in a situation where you have to have help getting out of bed, going to the bathroom, or having a bath, because you can't do it yourself, and perhaps losing an arm, something like that. There has been a concern expressed to me personally about how our disabled community can be growing that quickly and as to what constitutes disability.
I don't know if it's possible to answer any of those questions, but I do want to get them on the record.
Mr. Axworthy: I thank you for the comments. I think they're very helpful. It does point out what I said earlier to the chairperson of the committee. I think these kinds of assessments that you have transmitted or brought forward would be very important for this committee to underline and present, because it becomes then a very important document for me to use in discussions with provinces and other groups.
Mr. McClelland: Additionally, in regard to the Canada Pension Plan, I have a letter from a constituent who is somewhat outraged because he had disability insurance through a private carrier. He claimed on the disability insurance and the private carrier had him apply for a Canada Pension Plan disability. He got the disability, and then the private pension carrier reduced the premium. It's absolutely ludicrous. It's just plain wrong.
Mr. Axworthy: Did you send me a copy of that letter, Mr. McClelland?
Mr. McClelland: Yes, I did.
Mr. Axworthy: Okay. We'll look into that.
Mr. McClelland: You see, these are people who are disabled. They're not trying to rip off the system. They're trying to get by, and when they see an insurance company ripping off the system -
Mr. Axworthy: Taking advantage of the system.
Mr. McClelland: - taking advantage of the system - it's just ludicrous.
That's the end of my comments.
Mr. Maloney: Perhaps we could have some more details on this advisory group. Would the representation be regional, provincial, or national, and who would they report to? What authority or responsibility would they have? Would it be mere tokenism?
Mr. Axworthy: I'd ask officials in the secretariat to talk to disability organizations about the best way of composing such a group. I want to make clear that it's not an advisory group per se. In a sense, it's a working group reporting directly to me with a sunset to it. So it's really designed to help in the implementation of this strategy, things like Ms Brown mentioned, the access questions in kiosks, questions of the proposals that we're talking about in terms of CPP and in particular any negotiations with CHST.
.1700
I want to make it something that doesn't hang around for a long time but does act as a place where my own secretariat and myself can get close access immediately and as a way to ensure that the different organizations, rather than having to convene on a constant basis, which is quite expensive, can find a place they can relate to and work with.
Mr. Maloney: What would you envisage as a sunset period?
Mr. Axworthy: I think it will be about two years.
Mr. Maloney: Thank you.
The Chair: Mr. Allmand.
Mr. Allmand: Minister, there was concern expressed in respect of the new Human Resources Investment Fund, that by its very nature, because it is part of the unemployment insurance system, the fund would not be able to help disabled people who weren't in the workforce, who haven't been in the workforce, which is the greater percentage of disabled people. With the setting up of the fund there seems to be concentration on those who have been in the workforce and not on those who have not.
How do you respond to those people to assure them that those who have not been in the workforce will also get the training they need to eventually get into it, if they're not being covered by the HRIF?
Mr. Axworthy: The HRIF is not exclusively unemployment insurance money. It also includes the CRF budget of my department. As I indicated, we have presently about $188 million in VRDP and we have a number of other programs, which all have CRF money, and we would use that to develop those direct employment services available under the HRIF program.
Mr. Allmand: So the fund would cover disabled people who are not already in the workforce.
Mr. Axworthy: To the extent possible. As you know, Mr. Allmand - and you've spoken on it many times - I have my own restraints, but we will ensure that -
Mr. Allmand: We'll recommend that you have more resources.
Mr. Axworthy: God bless you, then.
Mr. Allmand: Christmas is coming.
One other thing I wanted to clarify is that, from the document I've read, as the Minister for Human Resources Development you no longer have the title or the responsibility for the status of disabled persons. Today I thought you said you still are responsible, so I'm confused. I've read in some documentation we had that you were not and that nobody was any longer. This caused some confusion with respect to the status of the secretariat. Are you or are you not still the minister responsible for the status of disabled persons?
Mr. Axworthy: Yes, Mr. Allmand, I am, and the secretariat is being maintained. I don't know the document specifically, but the previous government had set up a five-year sunset program and that sunsets this year. But I said I want to move from pilot test, experimental programs into integrating the findings of that into the mainstream of the department, and that's what I want to do.
Mr. Allmand: I have one final question. Regarding this advisory council, was there consultation with the disabled communities beforehand with respect to the need for that council and how it should be struck, or have you announced it and will now have discussions with them?
In other words, did you discuss the possibility of moving on that with them in advance, or is this something that came out of the department, and now, having decided to do it, you will discuss its parameters?
Mr. Axworthy: Let me comment first that the department didn't decide; I did, because I felt the need for it.
I had discussed it individually with a number of people I know in the disabled community. As you know, Winnipeg is a very active centre for many of these developments, and on my weekly trips home I usually find myself with a lot of good conversation.
We did have an informal meeting with representatives of a number of the major national organizations on October 26 to sound them out on this proposal. I think the indication was that they didn't want a formal advisory group but saw that a working group that would be directly responsible, with a finite limit, could be helpful, particularly in directing the implementation of some of the specifics in the department, such as training, access, and so on. We'll have further conversations to determine its make-up and activities.
Mr. Allmand: Thank you.
The Chair: The chair would like to pose a couple of questions, Mr. Minister, following on the questions of Mr. Allmand.
.1705
Is the overall coordinating role of all departments of the federal government, as they relate, very clear? On the basis of presentations by witnesses, it appears as if there is not coherent coordination of all departments. I think Mr. McClelland also alluded to that by way of his question about a tax credit. Could you enlighten the committee, Mr. Minister?
Mr. Axworthy: In fact, I can report to you that in the next couple of weeks there will be a meeting of ADMs of all departments, with my department taking the lead, to begin looking at the range of services and what we can start doing. So we'll continue to supply that coordinating role.
The Chair: You said that, in relation to its work to consult with the working group now in the offing, the secretariat will report directly to you.
Mr. Axworthy: Yes.
The Chair: Of course, that is much -
Mr. Axworthy: The ADM, Mr. Green, who is not here today because he is working on some other things, would report to me through them and to the secretariat, and I see them quite frequently, actually.
The Chair: In fact, that's the question I would like to pose.
On the basis of some submissions by the disabled community, it appears as if the secretariat no longer reports to the assistant deputy minister, but to a director general, and in fact does not report or has no formal relationship with the assistant deputy minister involved with the strategic policy planning. These are concerns. How would you respond to them?
Mr. Axworthy: Well, they do report to Mr. McWhinnie, as the director general in this area, and he takes the lead.
I don't know if you were in the House today when I described the reorganization of the department. We're trying to bring a whole number of things together. We inherited five departments, in effect, and we're trying now, rather than simply to have an artificial merger, to take a look at the functions that a number of bits and pieces and parts of each of those departments provide and bring them together in some kind of a merging. That's just an organizational matter, but it certainly doesn't limit the access.
I have a very strong personal interest in this issue, and as long as I'm the minister I will make sure that the concerns, through the representations to the secretariat and others, will get my constant personal attention, because this is an area in which we can make headway. It's not just a matter of responding to concerns of disabled Canadians. I happen to believe strongly that this is enormous potential of human talent that we have not been able fully to take advantage of as a country. We'll pay a big price if we don't in the future, and I intend to do something about it.
The Chair: That's very reassuring, Mr. Minister.
On that note, at one time the Royal Institute made a proposal about a national disability resource program at the time of the social security review. It was considered to be potentially a good program. Has the department made any decision respecting this?
Mr. Axworthy: I'm quite familiar with the document, and I think it has been the source of some of the initiatives we've announced today.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Minister.
Any other questions? Mrs. Brown.
Mrs. Brown: In the briefing document we received for today's meeting, there was a question number 3:
- How does HRDC deal with the need to coordinate its approach to disability issues with the
Department of Finance?
- I'm not particularly concerned about that. I'm particularly interested in it, specifically for
constituents in Calgary Southeast, with respect to transportation, in particular flight.
.1710
Mr. Minister, it seems to me we have to do a lot of sensitivity training, not only with ourselves, but also with those who are interacting in a very intimate way with people with disabilities.
My interest in this question is how you managed to coordinate your function and your interest in disabilities with the Department of Transportation, because that is a whole area of discussion we haven't even touched on today. It's a small point, but a large question, and it's one you want to make too.
Mr. McClelland: To carry on, that point was made very often. If you get on a train, it's wonderful. Anybody in a wheelchair can get on a train. The trouble is who gets on a train? Whether you're in a wheelchair or not, the vast majority of interprovincial transportation is on a bus. A bus is not federally regulated; it's provincially regulated. So there is no requirement for transportation on buses.
If we're a country, surely we can figure out a way that persons with disabilities can get transportation on an interprovincial bus, or even a bus that goes from point A to point B within a province.
These are the leadership roles we're talking about. Maybe it's moral suasion; maybe it isn't. But if they can manage in the United States to ensure that all the Greyhound buses in the United States are accessible, then why the hell can't we do it here? They make the buses in the same place. It's just a question of leadership.
In speaking with disabled people, it seems to me that for the average disabled person, if they died and went to heaven, what they'd like to be able to do in the morning is get up, go to work, come home and live some semblance of a normal life. If we're looking for some way to bring this to a conclusion so that we can say at the end of the day that we've done something rather than just added to the three or four feet of reports that have been done on persons with disabilities, it would be the transportation issue, which is absolutely critical within municipalities.
As the downloading of responsibility comes from the federal government to the provincial governments to municipal governments, it's very difficult to get transportation. It's possible to get it, but not when they need it. It's going to cost more. We know that. But just try to get a disabled taxi from the Ottawa airport here. If you have nothing to do for a day or so, wait around the airport and see how long it takes to get anywhere. There's one taxi that's wheelchair-accessible at the Ottawa airport, in the nation's capital.
Mr. Axworthy: If I might be allowed to recount just a small amount of personal history, in 1984, when I was the Minister of Transport, I brought in the first set of rules and guidelines for the transportation of disabled Canadians. We tried to make at least the starting point at that period.
In the secretariat we're doing two things. One is exactly what you've talked about: training. We recently had training programs for Air Canada and Canadian Airlines personnel on this issue. One of the things we can begin to offer is a much more active program of training. Second, we have the interdepartmental committee, which will be at the ADM level so that we can bring to bear these particular matters.
I'm going to say something I probably shouldn't say -
Mrs. Brown: I'm listening.
Mr. Axworthy: Yes, I'm sure.
I would hope that the committee itself would again reflect the strong and important recommendations on transportation, and with that, I will be very glad to buy the Minister of Transport lunch to talk directly to him about it.
Mrs. Brown: That's all?
Mr. Axworthy: That's it.
The Chair: The committee in fact has planned to invite the assistant deputy ministers from the other departments.
Mr. Axworthy: Oh, good.
The Chair: Are there any other questions?
Ms Catterall: We're trying to move forward, and clearly one of the issues that has had more prominence than it did even when the strategy was first developed is the issue of violence against vulnerable people. We often talk about violence against women, but violence against people with disabilities is becoming an increasing concern.
.1715
You may know that the independent living centres in particular have done some substantial work - which I communicated to your predecessor but maybe not to you - on the issue of violence against women with disabilities. Is that going to be part of your revision, of your upgrading of the strategy in taking it into the next half-decade?
Mr. Axworthy: Yes.
Ms Catterall: Thank you very much.
The Chair: If there aren't anymore questions, I advise the committee that we have a short business issue to talk about.
Mr. McClelland: Mr. Chairman, may I make one more comment? It's just a short one.
The Chair: Yes, very short, please.
Mr. McClelland: From speaking with people in the disability community, I think the 1980s are highly regarded by the disability community in Canada. We made great strides. It was done in a pan-political process. Everybody said it was one thing they could all work together at.
People in the disability community with whom I have spoken said that it came about because there was the political will to make it happen. It seems to me that if we're grasping for things in our society today, one of the things we could hold in common politically in our society would be the political will to do this and make it happen, but we have to do it across all political parties, all ministries and all provinces.
Mr. Minister, could you use your offices to try to bring this to a higher level of political awareness within the government? I give you my commitment that I will try to do the same within my party. We'll have to ask Madam Catterall if she will do it with the Bloc. If we can raise the issue in terms of political awareness, and if we can raise it to a higher level, I think we could do something worthwhile.
Mr. Axworthy: I think that's a very good offer, Mr. McClelland.
I was a member of Parliament back in 1980 when this committee's predecessor tabled the Obstacles report, which was an incredibly strong document that I think got the whole thing moving. I was a minister at the time in both departments and we felt a really strong compulsion to live up to it. That is why we did the transportation items at the time.
To come back to the point, I think your work as a committee could have a real impact and it would provide the necessary arm I need to take that forward to government. I found in my own experience where there are issues such as this that aren't partisan matters, issues we just feel strongly about, it can have an enormous positive influence. With that offer and with others, I'm sure we can recreate those times.
Mr. McClelland: Thank you.
The Chair: Mr. Minister, on behalf of the committee I thank you for your contribution and for your reassurance as to your determination and commitment to the cause.
Mr. Axworthy: Thank you.
The Chair: I would like the members to finish our business.
Mr. Allmand: Could we have some order, Mr. Chairman?
The Chair: Order, please. A question was raised before the start of the meeting.
Mr. Allmand, would you like to speak to it?
Mr. Allmand: I simply want to know why it took fifteen days to do a translation.
The Chair: Mr. Cole.
The Clerk: Earlier I was speaking about the translation of the committee evidence, that is, the proceedings of the committee, not ``a'' translation.
Mr. Allmand: Yes.
The Clerk: Ordinarily, the blues are available the next day, within 24 hours. Committees hearing legislation have priority for the production of their evidence because they need it on a more urgent basis. For other committees, such as our own at the present because we are not studying legislation, the time lapse for the production of the evidence is fifteen working days.
Mr. Allmand: I understand the answer. I'd like to ask our chair something.
I used to be a member of the liaison committee, but I'm not any more. The liaison committee deals with problems like this.
I understand the difficulty. If you want to use evidence from a previous meeting - let's say the meetings of October 26 - in questioning the minister when he comes, you must have it in your language, whether you're French or English. I can understand how Mr. Bernier may have wanted to.... Today I quoted extensively from the notes of the meeting of October 26 in putting questions to the minister. Maybe Mr. Bernier would have liked to have done similar things, but he didn't have it in French.
.1720
I'm wondering if the chair could raise these issues once again and see if something couldn't be done to speed up the fifteen-day delay, especially when we have ministers appearing before us. When we have a minister, we like to refer to the evidence produced by citizen groups of all kinds, and that's difficult if we can't get it in our own language.
I won't pursue it further today, but I would appreciate it if you could raise this with the liaison committee or the House business committee or whatever. The clerk is simply reporting the temporary rules laid down by the House on these things, but maybe some more flexibility is needed.
The Chair: The chair makes the undertaking to pursue this issue with the liaison committee and the House leadership.
Mr. Allmand: Thank you.
The Chair: Mrs. Brown.
Mrs. Brown: I expect Mr. McClelland and I are both going to make comments on this.
Mr. Allmand, with all due respect to you and your endeavour for fairness on the committee, I really believe this was a political ploy on behalf of the Bloc. With every committee I've ever been involved with since I came here, which was not as long ago as you did, there has always been difficulty with translation of material. There have always been delays in receiving papers. This has happened often in the work of other committees I've been involved with.
I feel, as you did, that it was really unfortunate that our colleague Mr. Bernier decided to leave, but I really believe his behaviour is reprehensible, especially for him to turn his back on the minister because of the fact that it wasn't in French. He knows English as well as you and I do. I feel that kind of political grandstanding is unacceptable in this situation.
Mr. McClelland: Not to mention the fact that when we have all the people from the disabled community looking to us for some leadership and to protect and look after their interests, we have this damn grandstanding going on. I'm sick of it.
Mr. Allmand: For me it's a question of principle. I can't read the motives lying behind Mr. Bernier's intervention. I'm bilingual, but I'll ask something of any of us here who are English speaking. Say there had been a key document that had been given in French at the previous meeting with some very strong statements in it. We would have had the simultaneous translation on, but if we had wanted to use that document today to confront the minister and didn't have it in English, we might be pretty disturbed. We don't get the minister before us all the time.
I can't say whether Mr. Bernier was grandstanding or not. What I'm concentrating on is the principle.
Mrs. Brown, it's become worse because of the budget cuts. We used to get our documents translated much more quickly than we do now. I'm approaching this not from the personality of Mr. Bernier or whatever, but from the question of principle. If we're going to have meetings on a regular schedule, we need the documentation to be able to properly question witnesses and ministers. I would hope we could try to do something about that.
I understand there are limited resources, but when you have a minister here, you want to be able to have all the documents. I bring all my clippings and my notes because, as I say, we don't get them all the time.
I don't want to judge anybody's motives. I don't know Mr. Bernier personally at all, but it's the principle. All I'm asking is that the chair look into seeing whether there can be more flexibility in getting those documents translated. It never used to take fifteen days.
The Chair: The chair will make that undertaking to the liaison committee.
There is just one last item of business before I lose the quorum. The clerk has been wanting me to have this motion. Please read the motion.
The Clerk: This is a motion concerning working lunches. The motion is that the committee authorize the chair, from time to time as the need arises, including October 26, 1995, to take, in conjunction with the clerk of the committee, the appropriate measures to provide lunches for the committee and its subcommittees for working purposes and that the cost of these lunches be charged to the budget of the committee.
Ms Catterall: Is this a retroactive budget approval?
The Chair: Yes.
.1725
Mr. Allmand: Does the overall budget allow you to do that?
The Chair: We have to have a motion.
Mr. Allmand: The overall budget provides for something like that?
The Chair: Yes.
Ms Catterall: I so move.
Mr. McClelland: Provided that witnesses and any guests are invited to share the meagre offerings.
Ms Catterall: And make sure it is bread and water for this guy.
Mr. McClelland: No, I'm not the hair-shirt one.
The Chair: It is a given. In fact, I would say that it is a good reminder.
Motion agreed to.
Mr. Allmand: The only thing I wanted to ask - Ms Catterall asked me about it too - is when we are going to take up the report to the United Nations on our compliance with the human rights treaties and so on.
The Chair: I met with the new research staff - as you may know, Nancy has left - and we had one witness - I think that was when you were out of town, unfortunately - and, out of that presentation by that witness relating to that issue, we will have a preliminary report from the research staff. When that will come back to us, we shall have options to proceed with.
Mr. Allmand: Will we have it before Christmas?
The Chair: I will check with her. If in fact we could, then at the time when the draft report for this is being done, when we will have no meetings on this issue, we might take up that issue.
Mr. Allmand: Because we will have about one month left after we return after next week's break.
The Chair: Thank you for the reminder.
Mr. McClelland: Mr. Chairman, we have another notice of motion. Do we have a quorum?
The Chair: Yes, we still have a quorum.
Mr. McClelland: It is Andy Scott's motion to change the name.
The Chair: However, the mover of the motion is not here. Perhaps we should defer that. That is the only point. Thanks for calling it.
On that note, the meeting stands adjourned.