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

Sponsor

Carla Qualtrough  Liberal

Status

This bill has received Royal Assent and is, or will soon become, law.

Summary

This is from the published bill. The Library of Parliament has also written a full legislative summary of the bill.

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 .

Similar bills

C-35 (43rd Parliament, 2nd session) Canada Disability Benefit Act

Elsewhere

All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from 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-22s:

C-22 (2021) An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act
C-22 (2016) Law An Act to establish the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians and to make consequential amendments to certain Acts
C-22 (2014) Law Energy Safety and Security Act
C-22 (2011) Law Eeyou Marine Region Land Claims Agreement Act

Votes

Feb. 2, 2023 Passed 3rd reading and adoption 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
Oct. 18, 2022 Passed 2nd reading 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

Debate Summary

line drawing of robot

This is a computer-generated summary of the speeches below. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.

Bill C-22 aims to reduce poverty and increase financial security for Canadians with disabilities by establishing the Canada Disability Benefit. The bill creates a legal framework for the benefit, with specific details such as eligibility criteria, payment amounts, and application processes to be determined through future regulations, in collaboration with the disability community and provinces/territories. The goal is to supplement existing support systems and ensure that the benefit interacts effectively with provincial programs, without causing clawbacks or loss of other entitlements.

Liberal

  • Addressing poverty among disabled Canadians: Bill C-22 aims to reduce poverty and enhance financial security for persons with disabilities, who are disproportionately affected by poverty due to historical discrimination and systemic barriers. The bill seeks to close the income gap for working-age people with disabilities, promoting independence, dignity, and autonomy.
  • Building on previous accessibility efforts: The Canada disability benefit builds upon the Accessible Canada Act (ACA) and its principles of equality, barrier-free access, and the involvement of persons with disabilities in the design and implementation of laws and policies ('nothing without us'). It aligns with the four pillars of the disability inclusion action plan: financial security, employment, accessible communities, and a modern approach to disabilities.
  • Collaborative approach with stakeholders: The specifics of the Canada disability benefit will be determined through regulations developed in collaboration with the disability community and the provinces and territories. This collaborative approach respects provincial jurisdiction in disability support and aims to ensure that the new benefit complements existing services without unintended consequences like clawbacks.
  • Urgency due to MAID concerns: There is an urgency to pass the bill because poverty can drive disabled people to seek medical assistance in dying (MAID). Passing the bill to help lift people out of poverty, and allow them to live with dignity is of utmost importance.

Conservative

  • Criticism of Bill C-22: Conservatives are critical of Bill C-22, arguing that it lacks concrete details and relies too heavily on regulations to be determined later, leading to uncertainty about eligibility, payment amounts, and potential clawbacks. They believe the bill, in its current form, fails to provide sufficient assurance that Canadians living with disabilities will be lifted out of poverty.
  • Delays and Prioritization: The Conservative party accuses the Liberal government of delaying action on disability benefits and prioritizing political interests over the needs of disabled Canadians. They highlight the reintroduction of the bill after an election call and express concern that getting disability benefits to people who need them has not been a priority for the current government.
  • Clawbacks and Provincial Disparities: The Conservatives express concern about potential clawbacks of the disability benefit and criticize the government's approach of negotiating with provinces after introducing the legislation. They fear this could lead to provincial disparities and a patchwork of policies, leaving Canadians living with disabilities facing uncertainty and financial hardship.
  • MAID Concerns: Conservative members raise concerns about Canadians with disabilities considering MAID because they cannot afford to live or access services. They criticize the government for policies that they believe contribute to a sense of hopelessness and burden, potentially leading to people choosing assisted suicide.

NDP

  • Support with reservations: The NDP supports moving the bill forward quickly, despite the lack of details, in order to relieve unnecessary suffering for persons with disabilities, contingent on the Liberals following through with adequate supports.
  • Lack of details criticized: The bill relies too heavily on regulations to determine who will get the benefit, how much it will be, and when they will get it, leaving key decisions to be finalized behind closed doors.
  • Call for adequate benefits: The NDP fought to get adequacy enshrined in the legislation, emphasizing that the benefit should close the gap between provincial/territorial supports and the official poverty line, and accommodate the additional costs of living with a disability.
  • Emphasis on collaboration: The NDP emphasized the importance of including people with lived experience in the design and implementation of the supports, in keeping with the principle of 'nothing without us'.

Bloc

  • Support with reservations: The Bloc Québécois supports Bill C-22 due to the urgent need to help people with disabilities, who face precarious situations exacerbated by the pandemic and inflation. However, they have significant reservations about the bill's lack of detail and the government's broad discretionary powers.
  • Regulation concerns: The Bloc is concerned that the minister is taking too much power by deciding on every detail of the benefit by regulation, without parliamentary oversight or transparency. They worry that the regulations are being developed opaquely and that the final benefit may not adequately address the poverty faced by people with disabilities.
  • Lack of specifics: The Bloc criticizes the bill for being a 'blank slate' with no clear eligibility criteria or information on benefit amounts, application processes, or coordination with provincial programs. They emphasize the need for the benefit to meet the actual needs of people with disabilities and for the process to be open and transparent, involving relevant stakeholders.
  • Protecting Quebec's system: The Bloc seeks assurance that Quebec's existing social safety net, which includes a basic income program for people with severe disabilities, will not be negatively impacted by the new federal benefit. They want to ensure that individuals in Quebec do not lose out on benefits they are currently entitled to.
Was this summary helpful and accurate?

Canada Disability Benefit ActGovernment Orders

February 1st, 2023 / 5:15 p.m.

Conservative

Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON

Madam Speaker, that bill passed with all-party support and then the election happened, and people living with disabilities waited and heard that the government considers subsidies for television producers more important for Parliament to consider. Then the Liberals introduced their news media subsidy legislation, and we see that the Prime Minister considers money for bribing reporters more important than the disability benefit legislation. Finally, just so Canadians living with disabilities really understand where they rank among Liberal priorities, the government said harassing lawful firearms owners was more important than providing a disability benefit to those living with disabilities.

As spoken

Canada Disability Benefit ActGovernment Orders

February 1st, 2023 / 5:20 p.m.

Bloc

Louise Chabot Bloc Thérèse-De Blainville, QC

Madam Speaker, I thank the member for her speech.

Although I have a completely different point of view, there is one thing we agree on, and I would like to ask her a question. I, too, am a member of the committee that did an in-depth study of Bill C‑22.

What seems to be unique about this bill is that the amount of the benefit and the eligibility criteria will be established by regulations, without any parliamentary oversight on what the benefit level will be. Will this amount truly complement what is being provided in Quebec and the provinces? Will it meet its objective of reducing poverty? We moved an amendment in that regard in committee proposing that the eligibility criteria and the amount of the benefit be studied in Parliament and a decision be made. The amendment was not successful.

What are my colleague's thoughts on that? Would it have been a good idea?

Translated

Canada Disability Benefit ActGovernment Orders

February 1st, 2023 / 5:20 p.m.

Conservative

Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON

Madam Speaker, just before Christmas, I started receiving phone calls on Bill C-22, with people asking me to please vote for Bill C-22. I thought I better look and make sure I know what I am calling them about. When I looked at the bill and started scrolling through it, I thought my iPad was frozen because there was nothing there. I looked at it and it said “coming into force”, but what was coming into force?

I can already hear the grumbling across the aisle. Those members will claim they care about Canadians living with disabilities, but how many of them were in the House eight years ago when we passed the Disability Tax Credit Promoters Restrictions Act unanimously? I know the member for Papineau was there. He, too, supported the legislation to help Canadians living with disabilities, but then when he became Prime Minister, it took seven years to pass one regulation. I pray that is not the case with the Canada disability benefit. Given the greasy slope this country seems to be on, we do not have another seven years to wait.

As spoken

Canada Disability Benefit ActGovernment Orders

February 1st, 2023 / 5:20 p.m.

NDP

Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC

Madam Speaker, I bring a bit of personal experience to this debate, as my youngest child lives with a disability. She is 27 years old, and we have been working with other parents in the disability community, so I know how important this disability benefit is.

I really share my colleague's comment that it is cruel to continue to make promises to this community and not deliver. However, I was in the House from 2008 to 2015, when her government, the Conservatives, sat back while millions of people with disabilities did not receive a benefit like the one before the House today. Curiously, that is about the same amount of time it has taken the current Liberal government.

First, what amount of benefit does the member think is appropriate to support persons with disabilities? Second, we have a dental bill before the House that would bring dental care to millions of Canadians living with disabilities. Can she tell the House why she voted against it?

As spoken

Canada Disability Benefit ActGovernment Orders

February 1st, 2023 / 5:20 p.m.

Conservative

Cheryl Gallant Conservative Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, ON

Madam Speaker, the first question was about what we as Conservatives did when we were in power. I remember that our dearly beloved Jim Flaherty, who had two sons living with disabilities, brought in a number of disability savings accounts because he knew there would be a time when he and his wife would not be there to care for them. He not only put together a bill but implemented a savings plan so that people, when grown, would be able to have a disability benefit. However, not all families are fortunate enough to have money to put away.

As spoken

Canada Disability Benefit ActGovernment Orders

February 1st, 2023 / 5:20 p.m.

Bloc

Louise Chabot Bloc Thérèse-De Blainville, QC

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak to Bill C‑22, which seeks to establish a disability benefit.

I want to say from the outset that the Bloc Québécois will vote in favour of this bill. We will support it because we strongly believe that urgent action must be taken. Many people with disabilities and their advocacy groups, whom I have met with personally on several occasions, have stated unequivocally that the situation is serious for them.

If there is one thing we should remember, it is that people with disabilities have the right to be recognized, they are full-fledged members of our society and their rights and dignity should not be compromised because of their differences.

I am sorry that I did not think of it sooner, but I would like to ask for the unanimous consent of the House to share my time with our beautiful and beloved artist, the hon. member for Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d'Orléans—Charlevoix.

Translated

Canada Disability Benefit ActGovernment Orders

February 1st, 2023 / 5:25 p.m.

The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes

Does the hon. member have unanimous consent to share her time?

As spoken

Canada Disability Benefit ActGovernment Orders

February 1st, 2023 / 5:25 p.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

As spoken

Canada Disability Benefit ActGovernment Orders

February 1st, 2023 / 5:25 p.m.

Bloc

Louise Chabot Bloc Thérèse-De Blainville, QC

Madam Speaker, the Bloc believes that the government must ensure that every citizen has a decent social safety net. That safety net is currently torn and we have to fix it. We will support the bill, but allow me to share some of my reservations. These are the same reservations that I shared here in the House at second reading of this bill, as well as in the committee of which I am a member.

We are all concerned about the convoluted way in which the government went about this. We fear that the minister is taking absolutely all the power by deciding on every single detail of the benefit by regulation. We are concerned that parliamentarians are being called to vote on a bill that presents good intentions, that is a major step forward, but is nonetheless a blank page. We are especially concerned that the regulations are being developed without any transparency and that at the end of the day, the benefit will not satisfy the need, which, let us not forget, is to lift persons with disabilities out of poverty.

Yes, we will support the bill because there is an urgent need for action. People with disabilities are in a precarious position, and we need to help them. Do not forget that people with disabilities also face additional costs related to their disability, such as home adaptations, food delivery, and medication. Being disabled costs more. On top of that, there is the pandemic and inflation, which have further impoverished this segment of the population.

Here is an example from the Journal de Québec:

...Paul Awad, a 57-year-old man struggling to make ends meet and get the basic services he needs to live with dignity. The livable income in Sherbrooke, the city where he lives, is $26,299 per year. With his [income] of approximately $1,200 a month, he often has nothing left at the end of the month. “I want to be free of the stress of having to choose between food and rent every month. I want to live a dignified life on my own terms,” he says.

This benefit is of vital importance to him. Mr. Awad is one of many people with disabilities in the same situation.

That is why it is important to the Bloc Québécois to support creating this benefit. We believe the government's job is to redistribute wealth to level the playing field by creating a proper social safety net. However, as I said earlier, we have concerns. For one thing, we do not know a thing about what the government actually plans to put in the benefit.

Let us not forget that, in June 2021, during the 43rd Parliament, the government passed Bill C‑35, which was essentially an empty shell. One election later, the government was back at it with Bill C‑22, which is an exact copy of its predecessor and another blank slate.

For example, we have no information about the eligibility criteria. There is very little information about the amounts. Who is eligible? The government is failing to provide a clear definition of who will qualify for the benefit. People with motor, sensory or mental disabilities? People with a debilitating disease or permanent or temporary disability? All types of disability? We have no idea.

As for eligibility criteria, we have no idea how people with disabilities are supposed to apply. Will the government set up the simple, efficient process that many groups have asked for? There are no details about this.

We also have no idea how the federal government plans to coordinate with the provinces. Even the officials who appeared before the committee had a hard time explaining how the provinces handle this. What we do know is that no two provinces do the same thing. There is clearly a lot of work to do on that.

In her public statements and in committee, the minister has given a few hints about her intentions. For example, she said that the benefit would be similar to the guaranteed income supplement, that it would align with the provincial programs and that the process would be simple.

Those are fine words, but there is nothing in the bill to that effect. Basically, what she is telling us is to trust her and to vote for a blank page. That is a very worrisome and rather unheard of approach.

That brings me to another concern, which is the government's lack of consistency. Because the creation of this benefit is so important, we believe that it should go through the proper legislative process.

However, the government decided to call all the shots by doing everything through regulation. It is justifying its decision by saying that this is an urgent matter, but the Prime Minister did not seem to think it was too urgent when he decided to trigger an election in 2021 and let former Bill C-35 die on the Order Paper. We could have easily passed this law a year sooner, as advocacy groups wanted us to do. The government's argument does not hold water.

The right thing to do would have been to consult the groups, reorient the form and content of the bill, and submit it to parliamentarians. The other details could have been worked out later in the regulations. That is how the government would have proceeded if it had the least amount of respect for the work of parliamentarians.

Under the circumstances, in committee, I asked that the regulations, once drafted, at least be sent back to the House to be voted on. The governing party rejected my proposal. I think that is outrageous.

Under the circumstances, the Bloc Québécois will be on guard and closely monitor the development of this benefit. Certain things are non-negotiable. First, we are asking that the benefit meet the needs expressed by the advocacy groups. It will need to substantially improve the financial situation of persons with disabilities. We cannot accept a half measure that has no impact. We are also asking that during the development of its regulations, the government invite every relevant stakeholder to the table and that the process be open and transparent.

In committee, we received dozens of witnesses who all had important information to contribute to the debate. We need to listen to them. That is not to mention the hundreds of written submissions and briefs we were sent.

Let me share an example. As of January 2023, Quebec has introduced a basic income program, increasing the social assistance benefit for people with severe disabilities by 40%, as well as allowing for additional income.

Since there will be a virtually exemplary safety net, even if it is not perfect yet, how can we ensure that Quebec's superior social safety net does not get dragged down by the new benefit? How can we ensure that no one loses out on the benefits they are entitled to with the guaranteed income supplement? That is our concern.

That said, I think the majority of groups have said this is an urgent matter. People with disabilities need this support. We encourage everyone to move quickly on this and, most importantly, we ask that parliamentarians be updated on the progress and reality of this work.

Translated

Canada Disability Benefit ActGovernment Orders

February 1st, 2023 / 5:35 p.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, looking at the legislation we have before us, it is important to recognize that, whether today or during the pandemic, the government has recognized and supported our disability communities.

The minister and the parliamentary secretary made reference to the numbers and the impact it would have on millions of people. This is indeed progressive legislation, and it sets a framework to ensure that people with disabilities are provided with support.

Realizing that there is some ongoing work required to complete or complement the legislation, would the member not agree that this is a positive step forward? This is why we expect the legislation will pass, hopefully with support from all parties of the House.

As spoken

Canada Disability Benefit ActGovernment Orders

February 1st, 2023 / 5:35 p.m.

Bloc

Louise Chabot Bloc Thérèse-De Blainville, QC

Mr. Speaker, I said at the outset that the Bloc Québécois would support this bill. Yes, it is imperative and it is a step forward that could have been taken much earlier.

Our concern with this bill has to do with ensuring that it achieves the objective of lifting people out of poverty and that it does so in a way that complements, but does not duplicate, what is being done in the provinces. We have a humble suggestion to make. The government wants to decide on a benefit amount without any guidance and without parliamentarians being informed. How can we ensure that elected members get to provide oversight? That is what we are asking for. One more step is needed in the process.

This is unheard of. I defy anyone to show me another bill that commits money and sets eligibility criteria for claimants without any parliamentary oversight. That is the problem.

Translated

Canada Disability Benefit ActGovernment Orders

February 1st, 2023 / 5:35 p.m.

Conservative

Tracy Gray Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC

Mr. Speaker, I want to acknowledge the member for her speech. We sit at committee together and have collaborated together in opposition.

She did touch on this, but I wonder if she could expand a little bit further her thoughts on the fact that any of these items, whether it is how much people will receive, who will receive it, what the process will be and whether there will be clawbacks, will be done at regulation stage.

The work we did at committee will not be happening any longer. All of that will be behind closed doors, and nothing will be coming back to Parliament or committee for oversight. What are her thoughts on that?

As spoken

Canada Disability Benefit ActGovernment Orders

February 1st, 2023 / 5:35 p.m.

Bloc

Louise Chabot Bloc Thérèse-De Blainville, QC

Mr. Speaker, that is precisely the problem. In committee, we would have had that opportunity with the Bloc Québécois's amendment. It did not address the regulations as a whole, but focused on three elements: the eligibility criteria, which is not insignificant; the conditions under which the benefit will be paid or will continue to be paid; and the amount of the benefit or the calculation method.

This will all be established by regulation. In committee, I gave an example that may have seemed absurd. The government could decide that the new additional benefit would be $5. We know that will not be the amount, however, given that the amount will be set by the regulations, there is no longer any control and these amounts and criteria could change. We find that to be unacceptable. We agree that the benefit must be made by and for persons with disabilities. However, ultimately, we must be able to ensure that the objectives are achieved. That is our job as parliamentarians. I invite the government to strengthen this objective in its bill.

Translated

Canada Disability Benefit ActGovernment Orders

February 1st, 2023 / 5:40 p.m.

NDP

Bonita Zarrillo NDP Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC

Mr. Speaker, the member and I certainly share concerns about the emptiness of the bill. I really appreciated the member's work at committee trying to get some of that oversight.

I wanted to ask the member about the risk of impacts on provincial benefits. Does the member have anything to share on what the risk could be of the loss of provincial benefits?

As spoken

Canada Disability Benefit ActGovernment Orders

February 1st, 2023 / 5:40 p.m.

Bloc

Louise Chabot Bloc Thérèse-De Blainville, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague. I really enjoy working with her at the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities.

I think we all have the same goal when it comes to Bill C‑22, and that is to give it more teeth. Groups came to tell us how important it is to them to participate in this benefit. Yes, I think that the principle of “us” is there.

However, it is also important that we, as parliamentarians, become guardians of what the groups are looking for. There is an urgent need to act, and we could easily have combined the regulatory route with the parliamentary route.

When has the amount of the guaranteed income supplement for retirees ever been decided by regulation? Never.

Translated