Bill C-22

Canada Disability Benefit Act

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

This enactment establishes the Canada disability benefit to reduce poverty and to support the financial security of working-age persons with disabilities. It sets out general provisions for the administration of the benefit and authorizes the Governor in Council to implement most of the benefit’s design elements through regulations. It also makes a consequential amendment to the Income Tax Act .

[Rosemarie Hemmelgarn, As an Individual]

Thank you, Mr. Chairperson.

My name is Rosemarie Hemmelgarn. I live in St. Walburg, Saskatchewan. I am a retired office administrator, but more importantly, I am a wife and mother of three beautiful daughters, two having an intellectual disability.

Thank you for giving me this opportunity to speak on behalf of our family and other parents of disabled persons.

Our family's vision for our disabled daughters is a lifetime of inclusion in all aspects of life. Examples include education, owning their own home, being employed and involved in community, having valuable relationships and friendships, financial security, transportation, access to health care and being valued and participating members of society. Essentially, it's the same life as their older sister, a life they can look back on and know that it was worth living.

What follows is the reality I have experienced being a parent of disabled persons in Saskatchewan.

First is advocating. I am a full-time advocate for my daughters. I have had to advocate ridiculously hard for their supports as preschoolers, in the education system, and now in the social services system through SAID and CLSD.

The system is making it so hard to get supports that it seems to me they're hoping you'll just give up. Documents are lengthy, cumbersome and repetitious. Policies aren't flexible. Programs are complicated to access. If you don't have an advocate, you will be at a disadvantage and more than likely won't get any support until you are in crisis.

We as parents are tired physically and mentally. We are forever caregivers. Many are scared to speak up because they might lose supports.

Second is meeting criteria: assessments, testing and medical. I have had to watch my daughters go through numerous humiliating psych-ed assessments so that they could qualify for funding to get supports. We've had to share what I refer to as our “dirty laundry” over and over again to remind us of how much we cannot do instead of focusing on what we can do.

Third are the effects on the entire family. Our entire family is affected daily by having disabled persons in it. They are my responsibility for the rest of my life. Relationships between husband and wife and all siblings are tested. I worry about who will take over once I'm gone.

Fourth is financial security. Families are expected to risk their current and future financial security to care for their disabled loved ones. Adult siblings are expected to take on added responsibilities. The income support disabled persons are currently receiving is already inadequate, and financial support is being stretched. Disability support amounts haven't risen with inflation and are lagging behind. Disabled persons should be able to save money and receive an inheritance or gifted money without having their benefit reduced.

Fifth is being an employed disabled person and having their provincial disability benefit clawed back—for example, SAID in Saskatchewan. My daughter is employed, and she can only keep $6,000 per year of her employment income. After the $6,000 exemption, she loses a dollar from her provincial disability benefit for every dollar earned through employment income. This is clearly a disincentive to work if you are disabled. To top it off, the method the Saskatchewan government uses to calculate the monthly SAID benefit and employment income benefit puts her at risk of getting cut off SAID and having to reapply, and results in her income being unevenly distributed monthly. Saskatchewan Social Services expects employed SAID clients to budget their income.

I'll just leave it at that.

This is my recommendation: Pass the Bill C-22 legislation immediately. Work on the regulations and framework after legislation. Disability organizations, disabled individuals and family members expect to be at the table in the regulation planning.

The CDB must be a generous supplement in addition to provincial benefits. The CDB cannot be clawed back and must be a supplement to enhance provincial benefits, not replace provincial disability benefits.

I want to see the federal government administer the benefit federally and not pass the CDB funding on to the provincial governments to administer. The CDB must be fair, equitable and easy to access with no red tape, and have no barriers for being employed.

In closing, I'm going to pray that Bill C-22 gets passed in legislation immediately, and that the regulations are developed later, in conjunction with the disability community. For a disabled person, it would be the most historic time in history to see Bill C-22 passed and have disabled persons removed from poverty. Even more historic would be the intention of Bill C-22 not getting lost in the future—

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Welcome back, committee members. We'll resume the study on Bill C-22.

To assist the interpreters in their work, I would kindly remind all members and witnesses appearing today to introduce themselves when speaking, and to speak slowly.

I would like to make a few comments for the benefit of the witnesses, especially those appearing virtually. You may speak in the official language of your choice. Interpretation services are available for the meeting. You can choose either French or English by choosing the icon at the bottom of your screen. Please wait until I recognize you before speaking.

For those participating by video conference, click on the microphone icon. Remember to activate your mike when you're speaking and to silence it whenever you've concluded.

All comments must be addressed through the chair. I would remind all members and those appearing virtually that if there is a disruption in interpretation services, please get my attention. We'll suspend while it's corrected. For the benefit of our translators, please speak slowly so that they can follow the process. If there is a sound quality breakdown from those appearing virtually, then I will not be able to recognize you.

For the second hour, in the committee room we have Rosemarie Hemmelgarn, the parent of a disabled individual; and Michael J. Prince, Lansdowne professor of social policy in the faculty of human and social development at the University of Victoria, appearing virtually. Both are appearing as individuals. We also have Krista Carr, who is appearing as executive vice-president of Inclusion Canada.

I would ask those presenting to respect the five minutes for opening comments so that our committee members will have the chance to question you.

We'll start with Ms. Hemmelgarn for five minutes, please.

[Irek Kusmierczyk, Liberal, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

This is a question for Mr. Adair.

I know my colleague raised a question about accountability. It is written in this legislation that it will be reviewed by Parliament three years post-implementation and five years after that. Can you speak about the adequacy of those accountability measures that are built into the legislation, the review and accountability measures that are built into Bill C-22?

[Irek Kusmierczyk, Liberal, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I have a question for Mr. Lupien. I've heard your colleague beautifully describe the need to pass Bill C-22 through this committee and through the House, without amendment, as quickly as possible. He described it as a beautiful gift to persons with disabilities in Canada. I thought that was a beautiful statement to make.

We've just seen a release signed by a number of Quebec organizations, including your own, that supports persons with disabilities and again calls on the House of Commons to pass Bill C-22 without delay. Perhaps you can talk a little bit about the urgency to pass Bill C-22 in this committee and in the House. Why is that so important?

Can you also talk a little bit about the willingness of your organization to participate in the process, that regulatory process, that co-creation of Bill C-22, and, again, talk about what that would look like?

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Good afternoon, everyone.

Thanks so much to the witnesses for joining us. Bill C‑22, which is before us, is a major piece of legislation. As parliamentarians, we had to pass it in principle before we could consider it here in committee. Today's testimony and all the testimony that's come before will be very helpful to us as we move forward.

I want to begin by acknowledging all the work that's been done in Quebec. I know that it took a huge amount of consultation work to get to this point. We can therefore say that the basic income program, which will be introduced on January 1, 2023, is a first for Quebec.

Mr. Prévost, you know it, you told us so: things will get awkward if we proceed by regulation. For us, as parliamentarians, there is a legal vacuum as to how and to whom this new benefit will apply and how much it will be. The government believes that the guaranteed income supplement model, which we all know through our pension plans, will apply here. It provides an income supplement below a certain threshold.

Mr. Prévost, why do you feel it's crucial that regulations be developed in tandem with government, by and for organizations and groups of people with disabilities? I understand that this is how Quebec has seen it, but we need to look at the situation on a Canada-wide scale.

How can we be sure that the regulations will apply to all groups? Will all groups making up this disability community have the opportunity to be consulted?

What are your thoughts on the timeline for consultation, if people with disabilities want to be able to receive their benefit as soon as possible?

[Karen Wood, The Local Community Food Centre]

My name is Karen Wood.

I would first like to thank you for allowing me the opportunity to speak with you and for listening to me. I am a resident of Stratford, Ontario, and a recipient of the Ontario disability support program because of a spinal-related disability along with severe fibromyalgia.

I am not here to give you my hard-luck story. I'm not a professional lobbyist. I'm here to share my own experience with you so that you can make this potentially transformative bill the best it can possibly be and deliver it to folks like me who so desperately need it now.

Here with me is Matthew Maynard, who is an adviser and advocate at the Local Community Food Centre here in Stratford. The Local is part of a national network of 15 community food centres across the country, with two more on the way. In addition, we work with over 300 Good Food organizations to advocate for policy changes that will increase people's income so they can afford adequate, quality food accessible to all as a matter of human right.

When I heard about the Local, I came to help others who need it. I learned how to weave sleeping mats out of plastic milk bags and began making them for the growing number of Stratfordites who live unsheltered and are waiting for permanent housing. It's a small comfort, but I'm committed to doing whatever I can, because I believe strongly that, as neighbours, we need to stick together and take care of each other, especially during times as hard as these.

In that spirit, we stand united with local organizations like L'Arche, Community Living, and Facile Independent Living that support community members with disabilities in urging this committee to pass Bill C-22 with all possible haste and then co-create the Canada disability benefit along with the disability community as equal partners at the regulatory stage and have the resources allocated in the spring budget for distribution in the fall of 2023.

When fewer than half of the working folks in my county make a living wage, what hope do those of us who depend on shamefully inadequate social assistance have in accessing the basic necessities of life?

I recently saw the dietitian at the hospital. She spoke to me about following the recommended Canada food guide. She told me that a quarter of a cup of greens such as asparagus and broccoli were best. I told her to stop right there. As much as I'd like to, I could not afford to eat this way. It's not because I don't know how. I live below the poverty line, so how am I expected to follow Canada's food guide? There is very little choice in the matter for those of us who rely on food banks and community meal programs to get by.

When quality, nutritious food is out of reach, you can probably imagine that getting a haircut or sharing a cup of coffee with a friend at a neighbourhood café is a luxury that I can very rarely afford. In fact, sometimes even medical necessities and things that my doctor has recommended like a walker, a shower chair or safety bars around my tub and toilet come out of my already impossibly stretched budget. In July, for example, I broke my foot, and I had to purchase an Aircast boot. This was an extra $86 that I had to pay that caused me serious financial strain.

Even without these unexpected expenses, I struggle every month to make ends meet, and I battle with myself to determine what is more important. Do I buy what I need for my health and safety, buy a loaf of bread, or do a load of laundry? My day-to-day concern is on money, not my wellness. I live on $600 a month. Could you?

Something so simple should not be so hard. I do not remember when I bought a clothing article brand new, as I can only afford to shop at thrift stores. Why do I have to struggle and suffer so much because of my disabilities?

When we heard about the proposed Canada disability benefit, we reached out to our MP in Perth—Wellington, John Nater, to provide him with our thoughts, share our stories with him and, most importantly, show him that our community is fully behind the spirit of this potentially life-changing legislation. Many community members at this meeting expressed some doubt about getting involved in the political process after decades of being ignored, disregarded and let down by the system, but, following our meeting, there was a feeling of hope that our voices were heard.

Three days later, at our Monday night community dinner, we sat and watched a livestream of the House of Commons debate at which MP Nater described his meeting with us and voted along with his colleagues to move this bill to committee for debate. Our hope grew again.

We then held a rally of support at MP Nater's office on the day the bill unanimously passed at second reading. Again, our hope grew.

Please continue to seek out spaces like The Local in your communities and talk to those of us with lived experience. We are here—community members with disabilities—to help you, to advocate on our own behalf and to bring hope to everyone living with disabilities in Canada.

Too many of us have experienced the indignity of having to prove our disabilities to administrators of benefits after being denied several times. Too many of us have experienced how demoralizing it is to have one benefit clawed back when another is introduced, or to be penalized for even getting a part-time job.

We need this benefit to avoid those pitfalls. We need the Canada disability benefit to work in harmony with existing supports to lift every Canadian with a disability above the poverty line so that we can fully participate in the communities we live in to reach our full potential and to live in dignity.

Before the pandemic, one in eight Canadians and one in four Canadians with disabilities were food-insecure. It got significantly worse during the pandemic, and now there's also the rapidly rising cost of living, especially for those living at or below the poverty line because of their disabilities.

We have a real chance to end disability poverty. Please, let's not waste it. Ensure that this bill doesn't get bogged down in the committee stage and that it passes quickly; support calls for the government to co-create the Canada disability benefit with the disability community as equal partners at the regulatory stage; push for resources to be allocated in the spring budget for distribution in the fall of 2023; and ensure there are no clawbacks when the Canada disability benefit finally rolls out.

Thank you. I look forward to your questions.

[William Adair, Executive Director, Spinal Cord Injury Canada]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I am Bill Adair. I would like to acknowledge that I am presenting from Toronto. I am on the traditional territory of many nations, including the Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishinabe, the Chippewa, the Haudenosaunee and the Wendat peoples. Toronto is now home to many diverse first nation, Inuit and Métis peoples. These are the traditional custodians of this land, and I pay my respects to their elders, past and present.

I am speaking to you today as the executive director of Spinal Cord Injury Canada. Our federation of organizations was founded in 1945 by World War II veterans. We support people from the onset of injury and throughout the rest of their lives. We help people adjust, adapt and thrive in communities across Canada.

Thank you for inviting me to address HUMA. My comments represent the opinion of Spinal Cord Injury Canada. Additionally, what I have to say has been influenced by my personal lived experience with disability, my 50-year career promoting the inclusion of people with disabilities and a shared position on Bill C-22 formed with nine other disability organizations.

I will begin by declaring the urgent need for the proposed Canada disability benefit. We first heard about the benefit in the 2020 throne speech. We're nearing the end of 2022. People with disabilities living in poverty have waited long enough. During the recent pandemic, it was evident that people with disabilities faced widespread social and economic deprivation. General costs soared. People had extra expenses for things like masks and gloves. Sometimes they even had to cover the cost of masks and gloves for their support workers who might have shown up without any. Food banks that once might have provided support were unsafe because of the lack of transportation to get there and because other people could be carrying COVID. If your immune system is weak, your risk is more significant.

Sadly, expenses and risks have not eased up for people with disabilities. Many people live in excruciating poverty without access to support, services and other necessities of life. Some people with disabilities have now chosen to access medical assistance in dying as the only answer to end their suffering, even when their end of life is not evident.

This reality is not my Canada. In this regard, I am not proud to say that I am a Canadian. After reflecting on what I just said, are you?

The Canada disability benefit must ensure a minimum standard of good living and lift people out of poverty. It must be a catalyst to help people find opportunities to participate in society.

We appreciate that Bill C-22 is a framework bill, leaving the government to determine many details through regulations. Without a doubt, we need a rapid approval of Bill C-22.

We request that you strengthen the bill with the following two principles. Number one, there must be a robust and meaningful engagement of people with disabilities when developing the regulations. Number two, the Government of Canada must accelerate the regulation development process so that payments to people with disabilities can begin within a year of passing the bill.

Once the bill has passed, Spinal Cord Injury Canada will be ready to, and expects to, work with the government on the regulations, but for now, please be quick with your decisions. Pass Bill C-22. People's lives are at stake.

Thank you.

[André Prévost, Executive Director, Confédération des organismes de personnes handicapées du Québec]

Thank you, Mr. Lupien and Mr. Chair.

The Confédération is of the opinion that passing Bill C‑22 without amendment before the holiday season would be a beautiful gift for many people with disabilities. Involving these individuals as equal partners in the process of co‑creating regulations, in the spirit of “for us, by us”, would certainly be a great way to go.

Therefore, payment of the benefit by fall 2023 strikes us as a realistic and necessary target for all political parties in the House of Commons to achieve. We recognize the discomfort legislators feel in voting on a framework bill that contains few details. Nonetheless, consultations with people with disabilities are still ongoing and they will provide insightful advice.

The Canada disability benefit must complement and enhance programs already in place in the provinces and territories. This will require significant alignment, because the benefit must not run counter to local programs. If that were to happen, the powerful negative impact would be felt by people with disabilities. Nonetheless, we're confident that good alignment is possible without any significant delays, given the many experiences and consultations currently under way and what's already available to date.

Particularly in Quebec's case, the experience of developing regulations in conjunction with the basic income program framework legislation has so far been a success. This provincial program, which the Canada disability benefit is intended to complement, represents a major step forward in the fight against poverty for people with disabilities in Quebec. If that's true, then it should also allow the program to address needs that are still unmet. Achieving that will require major efforts to intertwine the two initiatives, in our view.

We will have to find a way to index the Canada disability benefit with Quebec's one-time payment program to avoid having the income of people with disabilities indexed annually in Quebec at a certain rate, but quarterly at the federal level at other rates. Considering the costs, or additional costs, of disability, we obviously subscribe to full indexation based on the cost of health rather than the cost of living.

Finally, the individualized benefit combining the federal benefit and the Quebec program should completely and unequivocally lift people out of poverty. It should take into account the costs of disability and accessibility constraints, in terms of education, employment or transportation, among others. We believe that this combined individualized benefit should not take into account spousal income or employment income, which should provide clear income progressivity for eligible individuals.

It's important that I bring up the need to avoid the harmful effects of bureaucracy. If the federal government were to introduce the Canada disability benefit without consulting the provinces and territories, it would expose people with disabilities to the harmful effects of red tape.

In Quebec in particular, if the benefit comes into force regardless of what the provinces decide, it should not replace any existing financial assistance programs, such as the social assistance program, the social solidarity program or the basic income program. Recipients of last resort financial assistance in Quebec should not be exempted from the federal program until they have reached the low-income threshold, as measured by Statistics Canada. If they are allowed to reach or exceed the low-income threshold, it will be imperative to maintain provincial program measures such as the health care claim booklet, employability services and other compensation for people with disabilities.

If money is transferred to the province, it must go directly into the basic income program to benefit individuals, not other financial items. It will also have to be used to meet and follow the low-income threshold defined by Statistics Canada, and redistributed by Quebec under the basic income program with the same eligibility criteria as the federal government, that is, one cheque per person, regardless of spousal income.

Finally, should the Canada disability benefit be transferred to Quebec, the surplus not paid out to people with disabilities should be reinvested in other disability-related programs, be it home support, adapted transportation or home adaptation, among others. The surplus should also be earmarked for inclusion and poverty reduction.

Thank you.

[Paul Lupien, Chair, Confédération des organismes de personnes handicapées du Québec]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My name is Paul Lupien, and I am chair of the Confédération des organismes de personnes handicapées du Québec. With me is our executive director, André Prévost. On behalf of the Confédération and all the organizations we represent, I'd like to thank you for giving us the opportunity to speak today and present our recommendations on Bill C‑22 to the committee.

The Confédération des organismes de personnes handicapées du Québec is a nonprofit organization founded in 1985 by and for people with functional limitations. It is an independent community action self-advocacy group whose mission is to make Quebec inclusive in order to ensure the full social participation of people with functional limitations and their families.

The Confédération is a francophone umbrella organization that brings together and supports more than 40 national and regional organizations of people with functional limitations and their families. These individuals may have motor, organic, intellectual, visual, auditory, or neurological functional limitations, or autism spectrum, speech and language learning or mental health disorders.

The Confédération is active on the Quebec, Canadian and international scenes in all areas that have an impact on the living conditions and social participation of people with functional limitations and their families. The Confédération is also the largest “multiple disabilities” group of francophone organizations dedicated to people with disabilities in Quebec.

Six major principles guide all action the Confédération takes: full inclusion, the rule of law, the right to equality, universal accessibility, accommodation and compensation for the additional costs associated with functional limitations. That last principle is highly pertinent to the Canada disability benefit. The Confédération believes that compensation measures must be put in place to meet the various needs of people with functional limitations. These measures aim to address the consequences and additional costs associated with disability situations, and compensation can come in different forms: goods, direct services, allowances, tax measures and others.

I will now turn the floor over to our executive director André Prévost, who will present the Confédération's recommendations for Bill C‑22.

[The Chair (Mr. Robert Morrissey (Egmont, Lib.)), Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Committee members, the clerk has advised me that we have a quorum and that all the witnesses have been tested and cleared with their sound checks, so I will call the meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 44 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 taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the House order of June 23, 2022, and therefore members are attending in person and remotely by using Zoom.

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” function before speaking, and please check to ensure you unmute yourself before you begin to speak. When you are done speaking, put your mike on mute again to minimize interference. For those in the room who wish to speak, the microphone is controlled by the verification officer. The clerk and I will manage the speaking order. We appreciate your patience.

You may speak in the official language of your choice. Interpretation services are available for the meeting. For those participating by video conference, you have the choice of floor, English or French. For those in the room, you can use an earpiece to select the desired channel. I would remind you again that the testing has been done with the witnesses, and the interpretation services are fine.

I would like to remind all participants that taking screenshots is not permitted.

Should any technical issues arise or we lose interpretation services, please advise me. We'll suspend while they're corrected.

Pursuant to the order of reference of Tuesday, October 18, 2022, the committee will resume its study of Bill C-22, 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 Monday, October 24, and instructed the clerk to explore options to allow for the participation of all witnesses and members of the public in the context of the consideration of Bill C-22, which included planning for inclusive and accessible meetings. The committee made arrangements for sign language interpretation in both American Sign Language and Quebec Sign Language for those witnesses appearing in person and by Zoom.

For those individuals in our audience, the sign language interpreters are being video-recorded to be incorporated into a video recording of the proceedings that will be made available at a later date on ParlVU, via the committee's website.

To assist 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, please notify me.

I would like to inform all members that the witnesses appearing, as I've stated, have completed the technical connectivity and equipment tests. I would like to remind those appearing virtually, including members of the committee, that if you do not have an approved parliamentary or House of Commons headset, I will not recognize you to speak.

I would like to welcome the following witnesses. From the Confédération des organismes de personnes handicapées du Québec, we have Paul Lupien, the chair; and André Prévost, executive director. From Spinal Cord Injury Canada, we have William Adair, executive director. From The Local Community Food Centre, we have Matthew Maynard, community connector; and Karen Wood.

We'll start with Mr. Lupien for five minutes, please.

Mr. Lupien, you have the floor.

Government Business No. 22

[Bardish Chagger, Liberal, Waterloo, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise and participate in this debate. It has been quite a fruitful conversation that has taken place today, and clearly there are a variety of opinions.

Following on the last commentary, I think it is really important that we have more time to debate. I know that when I was elected in the 2015 election, I committed to the constituents of the riding of Waterloo that I would listen to the diversity of their perspectives and have them represented in this place. There are many different ways to do that, and participating in the debate on the floor of the House of Commons is one such way.

In this chamber we have demonstrated time and again that we can work together; we can find ways forward. We saw that when the member for Fundy Royal moved a motion to ban conversion therapy in Canada and we were able to see it pass swiftly through this chamber and send it to the other place.

We saw just recently the advancement of Bill S-5, an act to amend the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, which received unanimous support.

Bill C-22 was referred to, an act to reduce poverty and to support the financial security of persons with disabilities. It establishes a disability tax credit, which has been long fought for, wanted and desired. We were able to get that legislation through second reading, and it is now at committee.

To show goodwill would mean seeing legislation move at a pace that delivers for more Canadians. I know it is important that we get to this vote, so I will not stop this House and this chamber from calling the question and making sure we can vote. However, I think something we have seen time and again is that most parties know where they stand on legislation, and they want to talk about it rather than call the question. This motion will provide them the opportunity to keep talking about it, but also to call the question.

With that, Madam Speaker, I hope you call the question really quickly, and if the opposition members want, they can save us the 30 minutes of bells and maybe see us walk in and get to a vote faster with the voting application, so we can all get to doing our constituency work and so forth. The Conservatives have options, should they wish to use them.

[Bonita Zarrillo, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Madam Speaker, right now we are looking at Bill C-22 at committee. That is the bill around the Canada disability benefit. We know that many persons with disabilities and many people in Canada are struggling right now with the price of goods.

Can the member share if her party believes there is time, right now, to be able to get to Bill C-22 before we break for the end of the year?

[Kerry-Lynne Findlay, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the NDP-Liberal attack on parliamentary committees in the form of Government Business No. 22.

This undemocratic motion is a crass attempt at frustrating the work of committees by further limiting their resources. On the face of it, the motion allows the government House leader to extend the hours of any sitting of the House to midnight until June 2023. The Liberals say they are simply seeking more time to debate their legislation, but we must look at the broader implications of the adopting this motion.

With the persistence of virtual Parliament, workplace injuries for interpretation staff have increased ninefold. Since 2019, there has been a 25% decline in the number of interpreters employed by the translation bureau and nearly 40% fewer freelance interpreters available to the House. These unionized professionals work each day to ensure that our business is conducted in both official languages.

The Liberals and NDP dismiss the plight of these workers, demanding that our work continue in a hybrid fashion against the objections of interpretation staff. Due to the lack of interpreters, there is a strict limit on how many parliamentary activities the House administration can facilitate in any given sitting week. As a result, every time the hours are extended in the House, two committee meetings must be cancelled. Put simply, more time for the House equals less time for committees.

Let us keep in mind the government is in complete control of the House agenda. It determines the business each and every day, including which of its bills will be debated. It has tools at its disposal to cut off debate as it deems appropriate. It even designates which days will be allotted for opposition days. With the blind support of the hapless NDP, the Liberals have the votes to pass their legislation.

In other words, the Liberals are in complete control of the House, propped up by the NDP. However, they do not control committees in the same way. Conservatives have secured several committee investigations that are holding the Liberals accountable for their failures. For example, the government operations committee is digging into the $54-million ArriveCAN app, including Liberal misinformation reported to the House that contractors were paid millions when they did not receive a dime. That committee is tasked with answering two key questions: Where is the money and who got rich?

The heritage committee is investigating the Minister of Housing and Diversity and Inclusion for providing funding to known racist and anti-Semite Laith Marouf. The procedure and House affairs committee is investigating the Prime Minister who has known for over a year about foreign interference in our elections and has yet to act. The public safety committee is investigating allegations made against the Minister of Emergency Preparedness for political interference in the investigation into the mass killings in Nova Scotia. It is shameful.

The veterans affairs committee is looking into allegations that a government employee recommended medically assisted suicide for a veteran struggling with mental health. The declaration of a public order emergency committee has heard considerable testimony that contradicts the Liberal rationale for invoking the Emergencies Act. The transport committee recommended the repeal of the Canada Infrastructure Bank, a Liberal-made organization that has failed to get any infrastructure built. Conservatives on the foreign affairs committee continue to advocate for the listing of the IRGC as a terrorist entity, so that this brutal regime about to execute 15,000 of its own citizens cannot fundraise and organize in Canada anymore.

These are just some examples of how Conservatives are making parliamentary committees work for Canadians. Under Government Business No. 22, this and all work of committees would be restricted and constrained. The motivation for this motion is clear, the Liberals want Parliament to serve only their purposes. To them, Parliament is only useful when they can control it.

Canadians expect Parliament to hold the government to account, and Conservatives will fight to maintain the dignity of this institution.

There was a time, if we can believe it, when Liberals believed that committee work was essential. In the 2015 election, they made the following promise:

We will strengthen Parliamentary committees so that they can better scrutinize legislation.

Better government starts with better ideas. We will ensure that Parliamentary committees are properly resourced to bring in expert witnesses, and are sufficiently staffed to continue to provide reliable, non-partisan research.

The Liberals made that promise when they still believed they were the party of sunny ways, but after seven years of corruption and cover-ups, the mirage of an open, transparent and accountable government has been exposed.

Last week, in mainstream media, the government House leader justified his motion, claiming that Conservatives were employing tactics that amounted to “parliamentary obstruction by stealth.” The irony of this claim is not lost on me. He is the one, under the pretext of expanding debate in the House, who is attacking committees by stealth. I will address his claim directly.

Conservatives do not obstruct for the sake of obstruction. In recent weeks, we have allowed several bills to proceed in a reasonable time frame. We supported the swift passage of Bill C-30, which provided GST tax relief for low-income Canadians. The government did not need to use time allocation to shepherd that legislation through the House.

On September 29, the Conservative member for Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, with whom I am splitting my time, secured the unanimous consent of the House to pass the national council for reconciliation act at second reading and send it for study at the indigenous and northern affairs committee.

We allowed for Bill C-22, the disability benefit act, to be sent to the human resources committee after just two days of debate. Again, time allocation was not required.

Just before the last constituency week, Conservatives supported Bill S-5, which will strengthen environmental protection in Canada. No time allocation was required.

Conservatives can be counted on when the government brings forward proposals on which common ground can be found. The government House leader's accusation about obstruction is simply not true.

Having said that, Conservatives are openly opposed to the Liberal agenda. There is no “stealth” about it. We use every tool available in the parliamentary tool box to both expose Liberal failure and corruption and propose our ideas for Canadians to consider as an alternative.

If the government House leader had been paying attention, he would know that the new Conservative leader and our Conservative team are putting the people first: their paycheques, their savings, their homes and their country. We are against deficit-driven inflation. Instead, we demand that all new spending be matched with savings found somewhere else. We are opposed to payroll and carbon tax hikes in the middle of this cost of living crisis.

We defend energy workers against the Prime Minister's attacks on their livelihoods. We would repeal anti-energy laws like Bill C-69 and remove other Liberal-made barriers to producing our natural resources. We oppose the failed climate change plan of this government, which has not achieved a single emissions reduction target. We say no to the oppressive carbon tax and yes to technology in the fight against climate change.

We abhor $6,000-a-night hotel stays for the Prime Minister while Canadians are visiting food banks in record numbers, like 1.5 million in one month. We oppose wasteful spending and the $54-million “arrive scam” app that did not work. We did not need it, and it could have been designed over a weekend for about $250,000.

We are vocal when the Prime Minister is silent about foreign actors interfering in our elections. We reject Liberal inaction while shelves that should be stocked with children's medication sit empty. We stand with victims, not criminals, as the rates of violent crime have spiked in our cities under this government's soft-on-crime policies, and we oppose this outrageous attempt at seizing control of parliamentary committees.

There is no “stealth” about our opposition to the NDP-Liberal government. We proudly oppose the costly coalition on all these fronts, in broad daylight, for all to see.

[Leslie Yee]

Unfortunately, there hasn't been much conversation in my group around an emergency benefit. Everyone's been really concentrating on Bill C-22 and moving forward with something a lot more permanent.

As Mr. Belanger said earlier, a lot of our supports come provincially. I know a lot of people are really working hard in order to find supports in order to make up the difference. It would be really nice to not have to always be fighting for that little extra support somewhere and to know that we are getting a base amount that at least allows people to live comfortably.

An emergency is a one-time thing that can help for a moment, but it doesn't help to create systemic change for a long-term change.

Thank you.

[Neil Belanger]

I expect there will be. We've been engaged in the process since the beginning with Bill C-22.

We've informed our clients about it. We've participated in the online survey. We've had meetings. We've worked with other disability organizations that have done consultations while helping them develop an indigenous-specific survey, which we sent out to communities.

Even before, when the Accessible Canada Act was passed, we did a lot of work on that, too, although that's different legislation. A lot of the information that we gained from those consultations had to do with provincial and territorial jurisdictions. A lot of that stuff came...not a lot came from the federal side. It was mostly the barriers that people faced provincially and territorially. A lot of information has come through that too.

I fully anticipate, moving forward, that our communities will be engaged and will provide their input to let the government know how it's going, as well as changes that are needed.