:
The clerk has advised me that we have quorum. I will call the meeting to order.
Welcome to meeting number 41 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities. Today's meeting is again taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the House order of June 23, 2022. People are attending in person and remotely using the Zoom application.
To ensure an orderly meeting, I would like to make a few comments for the benefit of the witnesses and members. Before speaking, please wait until I recognize you by name. For those participating virtually, please use the “raise hand” icon. Before speaking, click on the microphone icon to activate your own mike. For those in the room, it will be controlled by the proceedings and verification officer. The clerk and I will manage the speaking order. We appreciate your patience and understanding in this regard.
You may speak in the official language of your choice. If translation is interrupted, please get my attention. We'll suspend while it is being corrected. I would remind all participants that when the meeting is in progress, no screenshots shall be taken.
Pursuant to the order of Tuesday, October 18, 2022, the committee will commence its study of Bill , an act to reduce poverty and to support the financial security of persons with disabilities by establishing the Canada disability benefit and making a consequential amendment to the Income Tax Act.
I would like to take a moment to remind those participating in today's meeting, as well as those observing the proceedings in person and on video, that the committee adopted a motion on October 24 that included instructions for the clerk to explore options to allow for the full participation of all witnesses and members of the public in the context of consideration of Bill . In planning inclusive and accessible meetings, the committee has made arrangements for sign language interpretation in both American Sign Language and Quebec Sign Language for those witnesses appearing in person and by Zoom, and for those in our audience. The sign language interpreters are being videorecorded to be incorporated into the archived video recording of the proceedings, which will be made available at a later date on ParlVU via the committee's website. To assist the interpreters in their work, I kindly ask all members and witnesses appearing today to introduce themselves when speaking, and to speak slowly.
Finally, if a member of the audience requires assistance at any time, please notify a member of the staff or the committee clerk.
I would like to inform all members that the witnesses appearing virtually today have completed the technical test to check their connectivity, equipment and verification for interpretation in both official languages.
I would like to welcome our witnesses to begin our discussion with five minutes of opening remarks.
It is our pleasure to have with us in the room today the Honourable Carla Qualtrough, Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Disability Inclusion, and from the departmental staff, Alexis Conrad, senior assistant deputy minister, income security and social development branch and Policy Horizons Canada. Appearing virtually is Krista Wilcox, director general at the office for disability issues.
We'll start with Minister Qualtrough for five minutes, at which time I will open the floor for questions from the members.
Yes, Madam Gray.
[Translation]
Good afternoon, committee members.
I would like to thank the committee for its work to create a more inclusive country for persons with disabilities. I also thank all parties for supporting Bill at second reading.
[English]
Colleagues, you have before you legislation that is very straightforward in both its objective and its format. Bill would create the new Canada disability benefit, a monthly supplemental income payment modelled after the GIS and to be paid directly to working-age, low-income persons with disabilities. The objectives of Bill C-22 are poverty reduction and financial security. The harsh reality is that working-age persons with disabilities in Canada are twice as likely to live in poverty as those without. Approximately one in four working-age persons with disabilities lives below the poverty line.
Many persons with disabilities in Canada experience a modest level of financial security for the first time in their adult lives when they turn 65 and have access to OAS and GIS. The poverty level drops by over 60% for persons with disabilities between the ages of 64 and 65—from 23% to 9%. I know you all agree that is unacceptable—not the poverty drop, but the fact that it was 23%.
The Canada disability benefit would be established and implemented through Bill , which is the legal framework to create the benefit, and a subsequent public regulatory process through which the specific details of the benefit would be established. This is by design. This is intentional. This approach recognizes the important role the disability community must play in this process, as well as the complexity of existing provincial and territorial disability service and support systems.
Let me back up for a moment. From the outset, I have had two priorities in developing this benefit: first, that the disability community be involved at every stage of the process, and second, that there be rigour in dealing with provinces and territories, in order to ensure that people are better off and that existing benefits and services are not clawed back.
To my first priority, we worked very closely with the disability community. The principle of “nothing without us” is embedded in Bill . The Accessible Canada Act requirement that persons with disabilities be involved in the development and design of laws, policies, programs and services is embedded in Bill C-22, and Canada's obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities are embedded in Bill C-22.
[Translation]
We invested $12 million over three years in budget 2021 to work with the disability community on the design of the proposed benefit. We did an online survey, held roundtables and other forms of consultations. We also funded national disability organizations to engage the community directly.
We will not impose upon this community, and we will not create a race to the bottom.
[English]
Stakeholders such as Inclusion Canada have made it clear they don't want decisions being made without the disability community's meaningful participation. People First of Canada raised the key principle of having people with intellectual disabilities at the table during the design stage of the benefit. Disability Without Poverty wants this legislation to pass quickly through Parliament and is eager to participate in the regulatory process, so that a range of lived experiences are heard and listened to. There are more.
We've worked with the community at every step and will continue to engage, seek input from and respond to the community through this and every subsequent phase of benefit development and delivery, including the regulatory process.
[Translation]
With respect to my second priority, it is through the work with the provinces and territories where the rubber hits the road on both the delivery and potential impact of this proposed benefit.
Bill recognizes the leading role that the provinces and territories play in providing supports and services to persons with disabilities. Each jurisdiction in Canada has a unique policy environment with respect to disability benefits and supports.
[English]
Quite frankly, I cannot overstate the complexities of the systems we are working with. There are 13 different provincial and territorial systems in play, each with its own combination of supports and services. Some are grounded in legislation or regulations, while others are related to program delivery. There are different definitions of “disability” and a variety of eligibility criteria, not only across jurisdictions but also within them.
In some cases, eligibility for one disability program opens up access to another. In other cases, being enrolled in one disability program can exclude individuals from accessing others, or reduce the benefits provided. Across jurisdictions, there are differences in the treatment of other forms of income, different reduction rates and different treatment of spousal or family income and support.
For example, Alberta has a benefit structure focused on people with severe disabilities. Clients must be substantially limited in their ability to work, and their disabilities must qualify as likely to be permanent. The benefit dollar is significant, and couples can retain more than twice as much employment income as singles before they start to lose benefits.
[Translation]
Ontario provides broader, less targeted assistance. Qualifying disabilities need not be severe and can affect work, personal care or participation in community life. The disability must be expected to last at least one year. Benefits are calculated on a family basis. The employment income exemption is calculated separately for each member of a couple.
[English]
The Northwest Territories provides benefits that are geared to the high cost of living in the north. Eligibility is based on the ability to perform the activities of daily living. Benefit amounts cover the actual cost of low-cost shelter and utilities, with no fixed cap. Employment income exemptions are household-based.
These are just three of the 13 we're working with in here.
Bill grants the authority to enter into agreements with provinces and territories to carry out the purposes of this act. That's really important. The CDB is intended to supplement existing provincial and territorial support, not replace it.
Within this complex ecosystem I just described, we really need to harmonize our systems to ensure that there are no clawbacks and that everyone who receives the CDB is better off. This means ensuring that income supports are not negatively impacted and that eligibility for related services and programs is not negatively impacted. We need to lift people up. We need to lift people out of poverty. Across Canada, most disability programs and income benefit amounts leave recipients well below the poverty line. The average total annual income of working-age persons with disabilities who receive social assistance is $12,600. This comes nowhere close to the national poverty line, which ranges from $19,000 to $25,000 per year, depending on where you live.
I'm pleased to report that work with the provinces and territories is going well. There's an FTP work plan that all jurisdictions have agreed to. PTs are very supportive of the framework legislation approach. They appreciate and understand that there's no one-size-fits-all that will optimize the impact of this new federal benefit within the complex array of provincial-territorial systems, and they share our commitment to making people better off and lifting people out of poverty. This is really important. We absolutely need flexibility in working with the provinces and territories. I'll note quickly that we're also working across the Government of Canada on federal benefit interaction.
Colleagues, we have the opportunity for a once-in-a-generation change here. With Bill , we are doing things differently on purpose. Bill C-22 will allow us to work collaboratively with the disability community, as well as with the provinces and territories, to ensure that the benefit achieves its objective of reducing poverty among working-age persons with disabilities.
I'd be happy now to take your questions.
My name is Louise Chabot, member of Parliament for Thérèse-De Blainville, in Quebec.
Minister, thank you for being here with us today to answer the many questions that we have about the bill. You were correct in thanking all parties for supporting this bill in the House so that it could be studied here at the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities.
You said in your opening statement that your objectives are clear. I tend to agree. The goal is to reduce poverty without creating a race to the bottom. That being said, for the parliamentarians who will have to vote on the bill, there is something awkward from a democratic standpoint. Most of the bill, except for the objectives, will be implemented through regulations.
For example, subsection 11(1) mentions eligibility criteria for a Canada disability benefit. However, we do not know what the criteria are. We also do not know the amount of the benefit or how it is calculated. Both of these elements will be implemented through regulations. Without any more details, passing this bill would be akin to giving the government a blank cheque.
You tabled Bill , and then Bill a year later. We know why Bill C‑35 did not go any further.
It would be important for us to know two things. First, regarding the poverty line, do you have a minimum amount in mind? Second, you said in your speech that a lot of people have an annual income of $12,600 and that the poverty line ranges from $19,000 to $25,000. What is your department planning to do to actually lift people out of poverty? Surely you must have some idea.
:
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm Bonita Zarrillo from Port Moody—Coquitlam in British Columbia.
Thank you so much, Minister, for coming to the committee today. I know that last week, when we had a technical briefing, there were a lot of unanswered questions, a lot of questions still left unknown. I guess one of the things to think about is the context in which we're having this discussion. Around us, the cost of living is soaring, and we know that rents, the price of food, heating costs—all these things—are rising at exponential rates, and people living with disabilities are finding it even more challenging to pay their bills and to make ends meet.
You mentioned today around six years. I'm going to mention that in the seven years your government has been in power, people living with disabilities have not been able to get the help they need to put food on the table and to get security around life planning. While grocery store CEOs right now are lining their pockets, persons with disabilities are finding themselves even more at risk.
Canadians living with disabilities want to know when the Canada disability benefit will reach their bank accounts so they can get by.
:
Thank you very much, Chair.
I'm Rosemarie Falk, member of Parliament for Battlefords—Lloydminster, in Saskatchewan.
Thank you, Minister, for taking the time to be here with us today.
We know a benefit for persons with disabilities has the potential—and you've touched on this—to significantly improve the financial and overall well-being of many Canadians. As costs continue to soar and affordability is on everyone's mind, we know there is even greater financial pressure for Canadians with a disability, who already have a higher cost of living. While there seems to be general agreement on the stated intent of Bill , which is the legislation before us, it really is just a shell, which I would say is another word for a framework. All the critical details of this bill have been omitted.
It's very reminiscent of when this committee studied Bill in the 42nd Parliament. That was when your government chose, once again, to exclude any teeth from the legislation and leave it all up to the regulations.
My question, Minister, is this: Why did you decide to exclude all the critical details from the legislation and ultimately shield it from the scrutiny of Parliament?
:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I'm Michael Coteau, and I represent the riding of Don Valley East in Ontario.
Thank you so much, Minister, for being here today.
I know this is an exciting time for Canadians to bring forward a program of this type. I just want to thank you for your advocacy and for the work you've done, not only in the House of Commons, but even prior to coming to the House.
I guess my question is a bit related to the relationship between the provinces and the territories. We know there are going to be important partners on this journey. There's no question. Many of the provinces and territories offer their own suite of programs and services.
I guess the question is this: How do you ensure that at the end of the day, from coast to coast, there's going to be consistency in program delivery? There are such a wide variety of programs. I know in Ontario there are specific programs that may differ from those other provinces.
How do you bring consistency within that kind of model?
I will give an example we are all familiar with: the guaranteed income supplement as it relates to retirement benefits.
It seems simpler because they are retirement benefits. There is a maximum amount that one can receive under the GIS with an income of, for example, $20,700, to use a round figure.
I'll take that as an example and apply it to Quebec. It is only an example, not a real case.
Let us say that the basic income is $24,000 for people living with disabilities in Quebec. Eventually, by regulations, the poverty line is set at an income level of $24,000.
Does that mean that in provinces or territories that have more generous regimes, people with disabilities will not receive anything more? In other words, the amount of the benefits will be different depending on the jurisdiction. Is that correct?
The committee will resume its study of Bill , an act to reduce poverty and to support the financial security of persons with disabilities by establishing the Canada disability benefit and making a consequential amendment to the Income Tax Act.
To assist the interpreters in their work, I kindly remind all members and witnesses appearing today to introduce themselves when speaking and to speak slowly.
To the witnesses appearing virtually or in the room, you may choose to speak in the official language of your choice. If interpretation services are interrupted, please get my attention. We'll suspend while it's corrected.
Please wait until I recognize you before speaking. For those participating by video conference, click on the microphone icon to activate your mike. Please mute yourself when you are not speaking. When speaking, please speak slowly and clearly.
I remind you that all comments should be addressed through the chair.
I will now welcome our witnesses to begin the discussion. We have five minutes for opening remarks, followed by questions.
From the Canadian National Institute for the Blind, we have Thomas Simpson, executive director of public affairs and Bryanna Regimbald, program coordinator; from Disability Without Poverty, we have Michelle Hewitt, chair, board of directors and Rabia Khedr, national director; from the Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada, we have Julie Kelndorfer, director of government relations and advocacy and Marie-Ève Simard, marketing and communications director.
We will start with Mr. Simpson for five minutes.
Mr. Simpson, you have the floor.
My name is Bryanna Regimbald and I am the program coordinator for Come to Work at CNIB. I'm a person living with sight loss. I have had sight loss since birth. We at Come to Work aim to support participants who are fully blind and partially sighted. In my day to day, working with participants has brought up many barriers and concerns relating to social assistance and the low amount holding them in an impoverished state.
Throughout many aspects of my life...I have faced many challenges pertaining to education, employment and daily living activities. Many participants I speak with in the vision loss community are on social assistance and do not want to continue to rely on it. The cost of living has gone up for everyone. For people with disabilities, this has been compounded. Imagine navigating societal barriers every day because of your disability, then imagine the compounding barriers faced by living in poverty.
People with sight loss face increased costs associated with their disability, including private transportation, high-tech items that assist with independent wayfinding and, in some instances, even veterinary care for guide dogs.
I hope this legislation passes quickly, so the government can quickly work with the disability community to define eligibility criteria and a dollar amount, and to establish a process with the provinces and territories that realizes the intent of this Canada disability benefit.
I'm going to now turn it back over to Thomas.
Committee members, I ask you to consider several recommended changes to help strengthen Bill .
First, a Canada disability benefit must be implemented in tandem with a national employment strategy for persons with disabilities. This will ensure that the CDB does not keep people with disabilities who can work trapped on social assistance. The CDB must be designed to be a trampoline from poverty to employment rather than a net to catch people. This strategy must target employers and highlight the benefits of hiring people with disabilities, inclusive of sight loss.
While seniors are eligible for OAS and GIS, disability and poverty do not magically go away at age 65. In some provinces, once an individual reaches 65, some of their provincial supports end. For example, the guide dog benefit under the ODSP, which is an extra $84 per month to help with the cost of a guide dog, ends at age 65. Seniors with sight loss in Ontario must cover alone those costs that had been subsidized. Members of this community should remove references to age restrictions within the legislation.
As Bryanna and I work with our Come to Work program, we see first-hand how current and inadequate provincial and territorial disability support programs disincentivize people from finding employment for fear that they will lose their essential medical services or other benefits associated with provincial programs. Quite simply, this legislation needs to address this and ensure that money or other benefits are not clawed back in a way that disincentivizes people who can work and want to work.
This legislation will confirm important elements of the CDB within regulation. The CNIB recommends that the legislation be amended to require that these regulations are adopted within one year of the legislation coming into force, to ensure no delay for the millions of Canadians waiting for this program.
Finally, we believe that the Canada child benefit is a program that the CDB should mirror. The Universal Child Care Benefit Act, the legislation that governs the Canada child benefit, spells out the amount that the program must remit to Canadians. CNIB suggest that Bill be amended to identify a mandatory minimum that people with disabilities will receive from the CDB.
In conclusion, the CNIB is supportive of Bill . It must be passed and implemented as quicky as possible. The CNIB would also like to publicly support the briefs provided by the AODA Alliance and the Alliance for Equality of Blind Canadians.
We'd be happy to answer any questions you have.
:
Thank you for inviting us to speak today.
My name is Michelle Hewitt, and I am the chair of Disability Without Poverty. With me is Rabia Khedr, the national director of Disability Without Poverty.
We come before you today to talk about the Canada disability benefit bill, Bill , and the need for it to reach disabled people living in poverty as quickly as possible, including Black, indigenous and racialized people with disabilities, who are even further marginalized in our society.
The statistics relating to disabled people living in poverty are appalling. There are twice as many disabled people living in poverty than those who are not disabled. This is Canada in 2022. No one deserves to live in poverty, and certainly not from the lottery of life that saw them born with a disability or acquire one later on.
Disabled people do not live in poverty because they are worthless to society. It is quite the opposite; it is because their worth is not valued. In fact, people with disabilities contribute over $47 billion to the Canadian economy.
Being disabled is not cheap. Tylenol goes from being a headache pill to a daily pain control medication. Our most personal daily activities, like toileting, are not free. I have a friend who waited three years for a replacement power wheelchair through her provincial program, only to find that the only wheelchair offered does not fit her. It's way too big.
We talk about lifting disabled people out of poverty, but what does that really mean? Canada's official poverty lines use the market basket measure, which fails to take disability into account.
We hear the stories of disabled people living in poverty on a daily basis, as they are our friends and family. We can tell you about the man who approached Rabia in the parking lot of a grocery store offering to swap bus tickets for food, or my friend who lives month to month with MAID approved, wondering if this month will be her last because she can't afford to live.
Throughout these hearings, you are going to hear many unique stories about disabled people living in poverty, but there will be a common theme. We are all united on the fact that there needs to be an end to disability poverty, and that the time is now.
On October 19, we had the honour of being in the gallery when the vote for second reading of Bill took place in the House. It was very emotional for the 10 members of our delegation to see the unanimous vote unfold in front of us. We are here today to ask that you continue in that spirit of bipartisanship to move this bill along to third reading, get unanimous support there, pass it to the Senate with all speed and ultimately have it receive royal assent.
We believe that this benefit will be most effectively delivered if the details are co-created with disabled people like us. That collaboration cannot happen in this committee, in the House or the Senate. It can happen only in the development of regulations with disabled people as equals in that process of collaboration.
Take a second to reflect on that person in your life that you have crossed paths with who is disabled. Ask yourself what they need this committee to do.
Right now, they need you to move this framework legislation on. Implore your parliamentary colleagues to do the right thing for disabled people by continuing that bipartisanship and moving it through third reading unanimously, with no further debate. Tell your colleagues on the finance committee that they must put money in the spring budget of 2023 to start paying this benefit out in the fall of 2023. Urge the civil servants working on the implementation of the benefit to ask themselves if the processes they create truly benefit disabled people, or if they are caught up in the old ways of ableism that are so endemic in our systems.
Time is of the essence. Food inflation is at 11.6%, yet provincial disability payments are not index-linked. This means that in real terms, disabled people fall further behind every day.
There is yet another hard winter in front of disabled people, but you have the power to make sure it is the last one with so many living below the poverty line. Thank you.
:
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and good afternoon, members of the committee.
My name is Julie Kelndorfer, and I, along with my colleague Marie-Ève Simard, are here representing the Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada. We are honoured to present to your committee as you study Bill , the Canada disability benefit act.
To begin, Canada has one of the highest rates of MS in the world. With this autoimmune disorder, the body mistakenly attacks its own central nervous system, disrupting the signals coming from the brain and spinal cord. No two people experience MS in the same way. Symptoms vary from loss of vision or mobility to fatigue and incontinence. While some begin experiencing the disease as a progressive decline in ability from the outset, the majority experience MS in a cycle of relapses and remissions known as episodes, so this is an episodic disability. Unfortunately for many, the damage from these episodes accumulates over time, resulting in permanent disability progression.
Currently, we have no cure. For many like me—I was diagnosed 18 years ago, when my son was just one year old—living with MS means a life of uncertainty: the uncertainty of not knowing if a symptom like the tremors in my hands when I couldn’t even cut my own food at dinner will last a day, a month or a year, or if they will ever go away. Each day we wake up not knowing what lies ahead.
The MS Society’s goal is to ensure that Canadians living with MS and their families can participate fully in all aspects of life despite this uncertainty. Income security is fundamental to that. We’re here today to stress the urgent need for the Canada disability benefit act and to stress that it be inclusive of Canadians living with episodic disability by amending the act to include the same definition of disability as the one found in the Accessible Canada Act.
The effects of poverty for Canadians living with MS cannot be understated. Research on the disease has found that individuals with lower socio-economic status had a higher risk of disability progression and poorer prognoses, reaching physical disability milestones faster, like difficulty walking.
Research also shows that the serious economic consequences of MS begin within the first few years of diagnosis. Challenged by paying for medication, rehabilitation treatments and transportation, living with MS is compounded by the need for services and equipment to aid lost abilities. Feeding, mobility and bathing aids are just some of the items needed in a list that’s as lengthy as it is expensive. Imagine having to choose between heating your home or travelling to medical appointments, or between buying decent food or seeing a physiotherapist to help you walk.
Early intervention with life-altering, disease-modifying treatments can slow or halt irreversible disability, but the cost of treatments is significant. A 2020 Conference Board of Canada report found that in just one year, Canadians living with MS and their families paid over $39 million out of pocket.
If you or your family are unable to afford treatments, your MS can get worse, making it more difficult to work and live an independent life, putting further pressure on your financial situation and leading to even worse symptoms. It's a downward spiral.
The challenges that living with MS bring, coupled with multiple barriers in current government support systems, have only been amplified during the pandemic and by today’s rising cost of living, and there is a gender dimension, as 75% of Canadians living with MS are women.
Just as the Canada disability benefit targets working-age Canadians, so, too, does MS. Most people are diagnosed between the ages of 20 and 49, which are prime career, family-building and earning years for people.
Ray, who lives with MS, worries about his stop work day, as more than 60% of people diagnosed with MS eventually reach unemployment, which is high, given their educational and vocational histories. This HUMA committee in 2019 studied the needs of Canadians with episodic disabilities, describing the income and employment context, and produced an excellent report.
The committee has an important opportunity to align this act with the most current definition of disability found in the Accessible Canada Act.
The MS community, alongside episodic disability partners, worked hard during the Accessible Canada Act consultations to be recognized by having episodic disabilities included in the definition of disability. It was monumental for our community; we now had a definition of disability that included us. The expectation was that, moving forward, all legislation and programs would explicitly contain this inclusive definition of disability.
Each day, people with MS wake up to adversity and do everything in their power to persevere.
As they struggle to make ends meet, let’s work together to pass this legislation quickly, ease their struggle, reduce poverty, and support the financial security of working-age persons with all types of disabilities, including episodic ones.
Thank you.
Hi, everybody. I am Michelle Ferreri, the member of Parliament for Peterborough—Kawartha. I'm happy to be here. This is a very important bill that we are discussing.
I would like to start my question with Thomas—if I may call you Thomas. Thank you very much for your testimony.
Thank you to all of you for your testimony.
Michelle, yours was very powerful as well.
Your points about a national employment strategy really hit home. I think you're bang on with a lot of what you were saying about making sure workplace employers are open-minded to a lot of this. What I really want to delve into is.... You referred to the fact that you're supportive of this bill. I think everybody is supportive of helping and doing what we need to do, doing the right thing. There's a fine line, and I'm trying not to be too critical, but we have to be fairly critical to ensure that it is done properly. You made reference to the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act Alliance, AODA, and that you are supporting their recommendations. It's a fairly harsh letter.
If you don't mind, I'm just going to read a couple of things, and I'm going to get your feedback, if that's okay. It says, “In summary, here is what's wrong with the bill as it is now written”. I'm not going to read the whole thing, because there are a few pages here, but I'm going to read a couple of paragraphs.
The bill does not ensure that there is a swift, fair, non-bureaucratic and accessible way for people with disabilities to apply for the Canada Disability Benefit, or a fair and swift appeal process for people who apply for it and are refused it.
The bill’s stated purpose is itself impoverished. It does not seek to eliminate poverty among people with disabilities. It does not even seek to significantly reduce poverty facing people with disabilities. ... The most tiny improvement for people with disabilities would entirely fulfil that paltry goal.
It also talks about how the bill “sets no minimum amount for the Canada Disability Benefit or a start date for the Government to start paying”, as well as the age.
How do you feel about this? In trying to meet those timely...and get it done and get this rolled out, how feasible do you think these recommendations are?
As Thomas stated, there are many costs that people—and this is not to blame—often don't think about as we understand it, whether it be supplies for a guide cane or supplies for guide dogs and things like that, which may not be covered by certain finances. For example, for me, previously.... If I was living in an area on the outskirts, for example, in the suburbs, sometimes there might not necessarily be public transportation available, or there's a further walk that, across the board, people with sight loss sometimes don't.... There are people from partially sighted to fully blind who aren't comfortable doing certain things at different stages. Maybe someone is not comfortable with walking to an accessible bus stop, so they would have to call for a taxi to get to employment, and things like that.
Across the board, there are many finances that aren't considered, unfortunately, and that's just based on the knowledge of what comes with sight loss for different people. For me, throughout school, there were different resources I needed, which sometimes would cost various amounts of money. As for trying to get those supports, it varies.
:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and thank you to all the witnesses here today. I really appreciate their being here.
I want to ask a question of Rabia Khedr.
Thank you so much for coming to Parliament Hill on the day of the vote. I know you came to meet me with a group of individuals—
By the way, it's Michael Coteau from Don Valley East.
I want to say thank you for coming to meet and talk with members about the co-development piece. When you left my office, that was one of the messages that stuck with me: co-development and making sure we stick to the general principle of “nothing without us”.
There have been members here who have suggested that going straight into a framework that allows for the regulations to outline the program details, and focusing on that through co-development, is not the right approach. They would rather see it all in the legislation.
Can you speak to the importance of co-development through regulation?
:
Again, lived experience is what will bring the knowledge, expertise and nuances that people in positions of power, who are charged with developing regulations in their job descriptions, wouldn't necessarily know. That is information you can't get out of a focus group or a consultation or a research paper. When you're sitting around the table discussing every detail as equal partners, that's where lived experience comes in. It's key. It's like people feeling.... For example, I'm blind. Not every blind person is the same, but generally, we have some common need.
We like to know who's in the room. When people choose to overdescribe, because they assume we need to see every little detail the way they see it.... That's not necessarily the approach we need. It's important to have individuals at the table who have been on ODSP and know what's covered and not covered, and how clawbacks, in reality, happen in their lives.
Perhaps it says “no clawbacks”, but there are other elements of provincial supports and services that haven't been considered through the research and expert knowledge that come with co-creation. Again, it's the spirit in which we do the work. Doing the work with a genuine mindset of “nothing about us” means including us at the table as equal partners, not just through “engagement”. That is one way, and consultation is one way.
It's about co-creating and working together. Therefore, if there are barriers, we're able to address them, because we've lived those barriers on a daily basis.
:
I sincerely thank the witnesses. Thank you for sharing with us what you are going through as people living with disabilities and for speaking on behalf of the groups you are representing.
I think your message has been heard loud and clear.
I heard one group saying that we should pass the bill without amendments. I also heard the representatives for the MS Society of Canada mention that maybe the bill should be amended to include in the definitions the fact that MS is episodic in nature, as we know.
I would like you to tell us a bit more.
We agree that this should be done by and for people living with disabilities. However, as parliamentarians, it is very unusual to pass a bill when the most important aspects, like eligibility criteria, benefit terms and conditions and benefit amounts, are unknown.
During consultations, we asked for your opinion on these matters, because it seems important to us, especially when everything is to be set through regulations. We also appreciate the urgency of establishing that particular benefit, but we know that regulations can take a long time.
My question is for the representatives of the MS Society.
When you talk about amending the bill to state that some diseases and disabilities are episodic, what are you thinking about specifically?
Why is that important? In which parts of the bill could we make the required changes?
:
Essentially, in Ontario, for example, somebody living in a group home receives $1,227. The institution where they live charges them for room and board, approximately $1,075. They're left with just around $150 or so for their basic needs. With the recent 5% increase, essentially they received a $5 increase.
If they do not have family to supplement their basic needs, then they are forced into a life of poverty—again, by no doing of their own. They were born with a genetic condition that gave them the journey of life to live with autism, with global developmental delay, with cerebral palsy, with Down's syndrome and so on. In many cases, it's so severe that they don't even understand the concept of work, or it's simply that the nature of the disability they have prevents them from being productive enough to earn.
Everybody desires work. People with intellectual disabilities desire a job. They want to be productive. However, in terms of the barriers to employment they face, not every barrier can be remedied or accommodated. In many cases, as I said, there are people like my late brother, who did not understand the concept of work. My brother, who lives in a group home right now, wants to work, but he just cannot hold down a job due to the nature of his disability. If I were not there, if my parents were not there, if his family were not there, he would be offered charity for his clothes, for his hygiene products or for any personal care items that he would need, because the income he has left is insufficient. If he did not live in a group home environment, well, he would be on the street, because he wouldn't be able to afford rent.
:
Sure. Based on the last research that the CNIB conducted, people who are blind or partially sighted have a full-time employment rate of 31%, which is quite abysmal.
A national employment strategy must be one that takes into consideration a few things.
It needs to ensure that the skills development is there to enable people who have a disability to go into the workforce and be successful at the job they wish to do. It needs to take into consideration the cognitive load of job-seeking, what it means to have to compete again and again for a role, and the barrier that may create for someone who wants to become employed.
More importantly, it needs to take into consideration the cultural and attitudinal changes of employers. I don't think many Canadians who are employers actively seek not to hire people with a disability. However, I don't know that they know what they don't know, if that makes sense—the unknown barriers that they create. Employers need to understand that a bit better, and the benefits that an individual who has a disability—or is blind or partially sighted, in the case of the CNIB—will bring to employment.
Accessibility enhancements also need to be considered to ensure that people can get into their workplace, be it a ramp or those newfangled elevators, for example: You press a screen that has no tactile buttons that then visually shows you which elevator to go into. If you're blind or partially sighted and you can't do that to get to the floor you need to get to on your first day, how are you going to be successful?
There are a number of different things that need to be taken into consideration for a comprehensive employment strategy.