Finance Committee on Nov. 23rd, 2017

[Frank Vermaeten]

A range of changes have been made in the administration, but the 14-hour threshold in the criteria has not changed, and neither have the activities that are considered eligible and the activities that aren't. For example, physical activity and calorie-counting are not considered eligible. None of that has changed.

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Mr. Chair, before we go on, I would appreciate it if you would seek a better understanding from the department as to—the word doesn't seem to be “criteria”, but something a little less than that—how that might have changed. When you request more information from the department, we can explore just a little bit lower than what the normal criteria are. I don't know what word you use, but it seems something's changed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

We'll take that under consideration.

Mr. Kmiec is next.

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

I will second the supplication to the chair for that information from CRA.

Something obviously has changed, because the minister sends out letters of refusal to T1b diabetics, and they are different because they have a different wording in them. It says, “In general, and with consideration given to recent advances in technology, adults who independently manage their insulin therapy on a regular basis are unlikely to meet the 14-hours-per-week requirement.”

Is that going to be removed? If nothing has changed, why was this added to the letter, and is that going to be removed from the letters that bear the signature of the Minister of National Revenue?

[Frank Vermaeten]

The communications with the medical community do change from time to time, absolutely, in all programs to try to administer the program as closely as possible to, in our case, the Income Tax Act—

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

What about diabetic sufferers? This isn't to a doctor; this is to a person. It has that wording in here.

[Frank Vermaeten]

Could I see it? Is it a letter to an individual?

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

My colleague will hand you the letter. We could find a copy or make one right away.

[Jennifer O'Connell, Liberal, Pickering—Uxbridge, ON]

Could we get copies for all the committee so we can see what—?

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

I wasn't the one requesting it. It's the witness who requested it.

[Jennifer O'Connell, Liberal, Pickering—Uxbridge, ON]

No, but you're referring to a document. I'm just asking if there is a copy.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

She is, in effect, on a point of order. Do we have copies that can go to other members?

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

I'm trying to assist the witness who asked me for the letter I'm referring to.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

That's not a problem. We'll not take the time from you. We'll give Frank time to read the letter.

[Frank Vermaeten]

What was the question?

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

If you said nothing has changed, will you then remove from the minister's letters, “In general, and with consideration given to recent advances in technology, adults who independently manage their insulin therapy on a regular basis are unlikely to meet the 14-hours-per-week requirement.”?

That is a new phrase that was not there before. Will that now be removed?

[Frank Vermaeten]

This is a letter that refers to the assessment of the fact that in cases of well-managed diabetes, it doesn't take 14 hours of eligible activities to do the therapy.

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

No, it doesn't actually say that. It says “with consideration given to recent advances in technology”. It doesn't talk so much about the management; it talks about technology changes, and that's being given as the reason to refuse people.

Just on technology, I have the forms here for disability tax credits, and according to what I see here, it has not been simplified. It says “life-sustaining therapy” on page 4. It was either the minister or the commissioner who said there has not been a freeze to those applications, directly contradicting what Diabetes Canada said to this committee.

Has there been a freeze to anybody who says “yes” to any of the three boxes here for life-sustaining therapy, yes or no?

[Frank Vermaeten]

I don't have the form in front of me, but I guess you're asking me about this letter and you're asking me if I believe that—

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

That was my previous question. I've moved on from that to ask specifically about the DTC application. On page 4, it refers to “life-sustaining therapy”. There are three boxes—yes, no, yes, no, yes, no—and then it goes into mandatory details about the therapy being sought by the individual applying here.

This is filled out by the medical doctor or nurse practitioner. The minister or the commissioner said there was no freeze on applications, which directly contradicts what Diabetes Canada said to this committee. I'm therefore asking you, if there was no freeze to the DTC, was there a freeze to anybody who said “yes” to any one of these three categories under “life-sustaining therapy”?

[Frank Vermaeten]

When this controversy started, I think about a month ago or something—

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

It's more. It's since May.

[Frank Vermaeten]

Yes. I think in terms of when—

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

When you changed the rules.

[Frank Vermaeten]

—it became a public issue, there was a short period of time in which we closely looked at some of the existing files to see whether there was something we were not processing properly, so for a short period of time we did stop processing, but that processing has started again.