This bill is from the 42nd Parliament, 1st session, which ended in September 2019.
Kirsty Duncan Liberal
This bill has received Royal Assent and is now law.
This is from the published bill. The Library of Parliament has also written a full legislative summary of the bill.
This enactment enacts the Accessible Canada Act in order to enhance the full and equal participation of all persons, especially persons with disabilities, in society. This is to be achieved through the realization, within the purview of matters coming within the legislative authority of Parliament, of a Canada without barriers, particularly by the identification, removal and prevention of barriers.
Part 1 of the Act establishes the Minister’s mandate, powers, duties and functions.
Part 2 of the Act establishes the Canadian Accessibility Standards Development Organization and provides for its mandate and structure and its powers, duties and functions.
Part 3 of the Act authorizes the Accessibility Commissioner to provide the Minister with information, advice and written reports in respect of the administration and enforcement of the Act. It also requires the Accessibility Commissioner to submit an annual report on his or her activities under the Act to the Minister for tabling in Parliament.
Part 4 of the Act imposes duties on regulated entities that include the duty to prepare accessibility plans and progress reports in consultation with persons with disabilities, the duty to publish those plans and reports and the duty to establish a feedback process and to publish a description of it.
Part 5 of the Act provides for the Accessibility Commissioner’s inspection and other powers, including the power to make production orders and compliance orders and the power to impose administrative monetary penalties.
Part 6 of the Act provides for a complaints process for, and the awarding of compensation to, individuals that have suffered physical or psychological harm, property damage or economic loss as the result of — or that have otherwise been adversely affected by — the contravention of provisions of the regulations.
Part 7 of the Act provides for the appointment of the Chief Accessibility Officer and sets out that officer’s duties and functions, including the duty to advise the Minister in respect of systemic or emerging accessibility issues.
Part 8 of the Act authorizes the Governor in Council to make regulations, including regulations to establish accessibility standards and to specify the form of accessibility plans and progress reports. It also provides, among other things, for the designation of the week starting on the last Sunday in May as National AccessAbility Week.
Part 9 of the Act provides for the application of certain provisions of the Act to parliamentary entities, without limiting the powers, privileges and immunities of the Senate, the House of Commons and the members of those Houses.
Parts 10 and 11 of the Act make related and consequential amendments to certain Acts.
All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from the Library of Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.
Bill numbers are reused for different bills each new session. Perhaps you were looking for one of these other C-81s:
Bardish Chagger Liberal Waterloo, ON
Madam Speaker, I am not sure what you heard, but if you would like an apology, you know that I have no problem apologizing. All I was trying to reiterate was that there was the ability to ask the question, but if you would like an apology, Madam Speaker, I apologize.
Accessible Canada ActGovernment Orders
The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes
I would just say that this was not quite sincere. Actually, the government House leader indicated that there would be enough time. There was not enough time. There was just a little over a minute for the member to respond to the previous question. If there had been 58 seconds left, then there would have been time, but even if he had ended at 40 seconds, there would not have been enough time for another question.
I am here and I am monitoring the clock. I am being very cognizant of people who are getting up. Should people want to get up the next time around, there will be an opportunity, but I do want to say that I did ask the government House leader if she was referring to me when she said that I was being biased, and she did say yes. Again, I very well know what I am talking about.
The hon. government House leader.
Bardish Chagger Liberal Waterloo, ON
Madam Speaker, Hansard will definitely show the record. I am sure that you do know, and I have full confidence in anyone who occupies that chair.
Accessible Canada ActGovernment Orders
The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes
I am not going to keep going. There are other members here in the House who did hear it.
The hon. member for Banff—Airdrie has a point of order.
Blake Richards Conservative Banff—Airdrie, AB
Madam Speaker, I want to address what I just heard happen here. You did get up and indicate what you had heard from the government House leader. I was here and I heard it too. Many other members heard her refer to you as biased, and when you questioned whether she actually had referred to you as being biased, she indicated yes. I heard it and I know many others did. I do not really believe that what you got was an apology: “If you heard it differently than I did, or if you experienced it differently than I did, I apologize.” You might want to ask the member again to apologize properly for calling you biased, because I did hear it very clearly.
Accessible Canada ActGovernment Orders
The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes
Thank you very much.
The parliamentary secretary to the government House leader has a point of order.
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Madam Speaker, I think I can provide a little clarity on the issue. As you know, when a member stands and gives a 20-minute speech, what usually takes place is that if an official opposition member speaks, it then goes to the government, typically, then it would go to the New Democrats, and often it will come back to the government.
The government House leader honestly believed that this was what was going to happen, and I think that is what was being referred to. It was not meant to be a negative reflection on the Chair; we just expected that this question would be coming to us.
Accessible Canada ActGovernment Orders
The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes
I appreciate the point of clarification by the hon. parliamentary secretary. It is up to the Chair, when people want to ask questions or make comments, as to the selection. There is no specific order. However, the government got a spot, the NDP got a spot, the Conservatives got a spot, as did the Green Party. The rotations will vary depending on how many people get up and when they get up. On that note, we will continue now with the debate.
Bardish Chagger Liberal Waterloo, ON
Madam Speaker, my apology was sincere and I wholeheartedly apologize. If I have offended you in any way, that was not my intention. I sincerely am sorry.
Accessible Canada ActGovernment Orders
The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes
I accept the apology.
Questions and comments, the hon. member for Red Deer—Lacombe.
Blaine Calkins Conservative Red Deer—Lacombe, AB
Thank you, Madam Speaker, for the way you have just adjudicated and comported yourself in this House. It was admirable, unlike some of the behaviour we have seen. It should not have come to that.
I want to let my colleague from Spadina—Fort York know that there is a young gentleman from the Maskwacis area in my riding who is deaf. He came to me seeking my help and guidance some time ago. The translator he was provided with understands the dialect and intonations. Even in sign language, much like in English, French or other languages, there are dialects or differences. He had an understanding with his provided interpreter, but when he applied to go to school to get a journeyman welder certificate, the college wanted to use a different service provider to provide interpretative services, who did not have the same dialect, and that was creating issues when it came to the ability of the student to understand in the terms and conditions that he was used to.
Is there anything in the legislation or were there any amendments to this bill, either at the House stage or at the Senate stage, that could have or should have been taken into consideration so that a constituent such as mine would have been able to use the interpreter he wanted for his educational purposes?
Adam Vaughan Liberal Spadina—Fort York, ON
Madam Speaker, this illustrates exactly the complexity of the challenges we are dealing with. It sounds like this is a provincial college that is making a decision as to what constitutes reasonable accommodation, and we do not have jurisdiction over how provincial governments provide the service. That is a provincial issue, and that is why there are many provincial accessibility acts across the country.
That being said, it also clearly illustrates that as we understand and broaden our comprehension of not just what constitutes a disability but what constitutes proper reasonable accommodation, we are going to have to have a program that is as flexible, dynamic and diverse as the community of people with disabilities. In this case, there are learnings at every opportunity for us to do better. When we talk about this process, one of the reasons we did not lock everything into legislation was that to make changes like that on the fly would require us coming back to Parliament, introducing a bill, getting it through the Senate and having it come back for royal assent.
That is why many of the things around the flexibility and fine-tuning of accommodation, the assessment of what constitutes reasonable accommodation and how we provide that accommodation systematically across the country are left to the regulations in this bill so that we have a much more fluid and dynamic way of remedying situations like the one the member referenced, which deserve to be remedied in the terms that he identified.
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
Madam Speaker, my sister-in-law was born deaf. My wife grew up with her. They were one year apart, first speaking their own form of sign language as infants and then learning ASL. My wife is fluent in American sign language and I have taken a course in it. I have become very aware of the beauty, the power and the independence of sign language as its own independent language. It is an integral part of deaf culture, and it is as full and expressive a language as any other.
I am wondering if my hon. colleague has any thoughts on the movement to have sign language in Canada recognized as an official language so that all people across this country, whether living in Quebec or any other province, would be able to access full government services in the language of their choice, their native language, in this case sign language, just like anybody else would in English or French. Does he have any thoughts on that?
Adam Vaughan Liberal Spadina—Fort York, ON
Madam Speaker, what we know, and we know it through this Parliament in particular, is that language is culture. Culture is expressed in language, but also human experience is defined by language.
When the member raised the point of how important it is to be able to communicate with people in their culture, in their language, as a way of not only recognizing the value of the community that speaks with this technique but also recognizing the culture of the community as it presents itself to itself, this is fundamental to the dignity of the people who identify as such.
I have no personal problem with the suggestion. However, working that into the way in which we have worked today, occupying a seat in the press gallery to make sure that those who are with us today get the services they deserve, we have not thought all of those things through, and the complexities of those thoughts require us to do much more work than simply passing legislation. We have to change the way we practice the delivery of government.
As technology arrives, as the communities gain their full place, politically in our communities, as much as they do through legislation, that is a conversation that will grow and become stronger, and we will see it become not an accommodation but rather part of the fabric of our country.
I wholeheartedly support the initiative, but the complexities of it give rise to concerns in terms of full implementation.
Kent Hehr Liberal Calgary Centre, AB
Madam Speaker, I appreciate the hon. parliamentary secretary's presentation, and in particular how he noted that we are almost taking a whole-of-government approach to disability, from the national housing strategy to our infrastructure investments.
He noted that 20% of our national housing strategy, one in five, is going to be dealing with barrier-free design or universal design. I think that is so important. I spent eight months in the hospital when I had my spinal cord injury. I did not need to spend eight months there. However, there is no room anywhere in the community to be able to find that housing.
Could the hon. parliamentary secretary speak to how the national housing strategy dovetails with many of these Senate amendments and how it will allow more people with disabilities to take part in their community, to live in their community and to thrive in their community?