House of Commons Hansard #126 of the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was project.

Topics

Supporting Non-Partisan Agents of Parliament ActPrivate Members' Business

5:45 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

No.

Supporting Non-Partisan Agents of Parliament ActPrivate Members' Business

5:45 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

All those in favour of the motion will please say yea.

Supporting Non-Partisan Agents of Parliament ActPrivate Members' Business

5:45 p.m.

Some hon. members

Yea.

Supporting Non-Partisan Agents of Parliament ActPrivate Members' Business

5:45 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

All those opposed will please say nay.

Supporting Non-Partisan Agents of Parliament ActPrivate Members' Business

5:45 p.m.

Some hon. members

Nay.

Supporting Non-Partisan Agents of Parliament ActPrivate Members' Business

5:45 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

In my opinion the nays have it.

And five or more members having risen:

The recorded division on the motion stands deferred. The recorded division will also apply to Motions Nos. 2 to 7 and 9 to 11.

Normally at this time the House would proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded divisions at the report stage of the bill. However, pursuant to Standing Order 98, the divisions stand deferred until Wednesday, October 22, immediately before the time provided for private members' business.

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

Social DevelopmentAdjournment Proceedings

5:50 p.m.

NDP

Mike Sullivan NDP York South—Weston, ON

Mr. Speaker, back in June, I asked the minister a question concerning the Social Security Tribunal backlog, where it was discovered that some 10,000 cases of Social Security Tribunal work had been piling up, that the government had not yet filled all the positions at the tribunal, and that the backlog did not seem to be going anywhere. In fact, in the first year of operation, with a 10,000-case backlog, only 450 cases had been heard by the tribunal. At that rate, the backlog will never end. That is what I wish to raise again tonight with the minister.

What we have heard since June, when this was raised with the minister, is that the backlog is not getting any better and, in fact, some of the Social Security Tribunal members have quit, apparently because the government has refused to give them benefits, which is strange, given that is what the tribunal is looking after.

This 70-member tribunal replaced the 1,000 persons who were looking after these cases in the past. All of this was done purportedly to save taxpayers $25 million. Maybe it saved taxpayers $25 million, but what it has done to the persons with disabilities who are looking for answers to their cases is a disgrace.

We have signed the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, and that convention says in part that we should do no harm, that we should make the lives of persons with disabilities better at each step of their progress through society. In this case, we have made that much worse.

In one case, an individual, just this past month, finally heard that an appeal would be heard by the tribunal. The application for the appeal was made in January of 2012. That is now two and a half years since the application was made. The individual is now dealing with a delay of two and a half years, plus the amount of time it will take to actually schedule it, plus the time it takes to get a decision. It may be four years before that person hears. What is that person supposed to do in the meantime?

This is money that belongs to the individuals; it is not money that belongs to the government. Canada pension belongs to the people who have paid into it, and the people who have paid into it deserve a way of getting that money out quicker.

Imagine if someone had a car accident and the car insurance company said there were not enough adjusters to handle the person's claim, so the individual should call back in four years, at which time it would see if it had enough adjusters to deal with the claim. People would not wait for four years to get their claims done. They would change insurers, number one, but number two, they would get the work done and then sue the insurer.

That is not an option that is available to these individuals, who are among the poorest in the country. These are people who, through no fault of their own, have found themselves to be disabled and have fallen through a crack in the system, and that crack appears to be getting wider with every passing day.

I would therefore ask the minister what these people should do, given this delay. These are not people with huge portfolios of money that they can survive on for four and five years. These are people, generally, who are living paycheque to paycheque and are now unable to survive. Does the government think they should now beg on street corners? Should they stand outside the minister's office and ask for handouts while they wait for this tribunal to actually get around to their cases?

This is a disgrace and it needs to be fixed. We should not have taken a system that was slow but not broken, and then broken it. I would ask the minister to respond as to what the government intends to do for the thousands of individuals who are waiting for way too long.

Social DevelopmentAdjournment Proceedings

5:55 p.m.

Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley Nova Scotia

Conservative

Scott Armstrong ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment and Social Development

Mr. Speaker, I am glad to have the opportunity to address the question by the hon. member for York South—Weston regarding the Social Security Tribunal.

The tribunal began its operations on April 1, 2013. It was created to simplify and streamline employment insurance and income security appeal processes by offering a single point of contact for all cases.

The new appeal system operates from a different legislative and regulatory basis than the four former tribunals and includes two levels of appeal: the general division, which includes the income security and employment insurance sections, and the appeal division.

The income security section of the general division is responsible for old age security, the Canada pension plan, and CPP disability appeals, of which the latter represents more than 90% of the division's caseload.

On April 1, 2013, 7,224 appeals were transferred from the Office of the Commissioner of Review Tribunals. Approximately 3,500 new cases were received at the general division during the tribunal's first year.

During the first year, parties to all these cases were allowed a new 365-day period, provided by the regulations, during which they could file additional documents. Only if both parties signalled that they had no more documents to submit and file would they be able to proceed, and the tribunal could then, and only then, hear the case.

The good news is that in 2013-14 there was an 85% decrease in appeals to the SST compared to what was received by the Board of Referees previously.

Generally, the oldest cases are assigned first, and parties no longer need to confirm their readiness to proceed with a case. As well, parties are provided an opportunity to continue to file new documents closer to the hearing date, and all new documents received are shared with the other parties for a response.

All cases are assigned and dealt with by the 38 tribunal members who are dedicated to making quasi-judicial decisions on income security cases. These members can decide to hold a hearing through written questions and answers, teleconference, videoconference, or in person, or they can make a decision on the basis of the documents and submissions filed in the first place.

The decision is based on the particular case, with consideration of a number of factors, including, but not limited to, the complexity of the case, the number of anticipated parties and participants who will be involved, whether credibility is a prevailing issue, and any accommodation needs that have to be met to support the claimants. This flexibility in the choice of the form of hearing ensures that the parties will benefit from a fair and efficient appeal process that is convenient for all parties.

The new tribunal also continues to develop and improve its systems and operational processes to address all cases as fairly and as expeditiously as possible.

The Social Security Tribunal and its members are working hard to process the backlog as well as process the new cases that are coming in.

Our government believes that social programs such as employment insurance, CPP, and OAS are important to Canadians. That is why a faster, more streamlined approach to the process was introduced on April 1, 2014.

Social DevelopmentAdjournment Proceedings

5:55 p.m.

NDP

Mike Sullivan NDP York South—Weston, ON

Mr. Speaker, I heard the words “convenient for all parties”. I had to wonder what that really means.

It is faster and more expeditious. That is clearly not the case. We are now talking about legacy cases that existed prior to this new tribunal taking place. There are still 6,000 of them, and at the rate this tribunal is dealing with them, they will never be finished dealing with the legacy cases.

To suggest that one could take 1,000 umpires, referees, and others and drill it down to 70 people and that those 70 people would be able to work just as fast or conveniently or expeditiously as in the previous system is just absolute—well, I cannot use the word, because it is unparliamentary.

The parliament secretary has not answered the basic question, which is this: What are these individuals supposed to do for the period of time they are now forced to wait in order to live, survive, put a roof over their heads, and eat?

Social DevelopmentAdjournment Proceedings

October 9th, 2014 / 6 p.m.

Conservative

Scott Armstrong Conservative Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS

Mr. Speaker, as I said, the Social Security Tribunal is streamlining its processes and the operations it has in place. It continues to develop and improve these processes in order to review cases as fairly and expeditiously as possible. We want a system that treats all people fairly and operates quickly for both taxpayers and the recipients and claimants for these appeals, but we have to make sure we get the job done right.

Since April 1, 2013, when it began its operations, the income security section of the general division has concluded more than 1,500 income security cases. As of April 1, 2014, in order to better manage the IS caseload, the tribunal implemented a new process to ensure that all appeals are treated fairly and efficiently, and that generally gives priority to the older cases. The ones that have existed the longest are going to be dealt with first.

Members have flexibility in choosing the form of hearing, which ensures that the parties will benefit from a fair and efficient appeal process that is convenient for all parties. There are 38 tribunal members dedicated to making decisions on IS cases alone, and the SST expects to achieve significant progress by the end of this fiscal year.

The SST is committed to providing a fair, independent, credible, and impartial appeal system for all Canadians.

Social DevelopmentAdjournment Proceedings

6 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

The motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, this House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 6:02 p.m.)