Thank you very much.
Evidence of meeting #173 for Finance in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was research.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #173 for Finance in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was research.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:20 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
I don't want to take time away from you, Peter. You still have a minute left.
On this point, what's their reason for not responding to 941 people? All they have to do is put together a damn form letter and send it out.
11:20 a.m.
Director, Government Relations, Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation Canada
Yes, it was a bit strange to us. They say that it could cause.... In their experience when they've had similar problems in the past—because I don't think they've ever had this problem with adults with type 1 diabetes before—and they try to send out a second letter, it just causes extra confusion for people.
I'm not really sure what they mean by that, unless it means that their 90-day period to object or avail themselves of an appeal process would then shift to when they got the second letter, which is actually what we think should happen.
11:20 a.m.
Director, Government Relations, Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation Canada
You can have just over a year to ask for a review if you have new, chiefly medical, evidence to offer. Your medical practitioner can submit that within a one-year period of your decision, but you have only 90 days to file an objection. Some of the people who were denied back in May, June or July are already well outside that window. You can cite special circumstances and ask for an extension of that 90-day period, but it's not clear how many of those are going—
11:20 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Okay, we'll leave it there and come back to Peter.
I think we would feel that an individual has the right to know if he or she has been denied.
Mr. Julian, go ahead.
11:20 a.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC
Thanks, Mr. Chair.
As I said, I think we'll follow up when we go back to Ottawa. I find it pretty outrageous, and I think all members of the committee do.
Ms. Posluns, I listened very carefully to your presentation, but I didn't hear a specific ask. You made a very compelling case. What specifically are you asking for in budget 2019 that would help to address the extraordinarily high rate of degenerative brain diseases among women? I was unaware of just how highly it impacts women.
11:20 a.m.
Founder and President, Women's Brain Health Initiative
Through our partners, we want to increase the funding for research on brain-aging diseases through a sex and gender lens. This has started to happen. The ask is not for us but for the CIHR and the CCNA specifically, to up the number of dollars for the research they are doing and to make sure that it is sex- and gender-sensitive. For women's brain health initiatives, specifically, it is to take those research findings and get them into the hands of the public.
11:20 a.m.
Founder and President, Women's Brain Health Initiative
Yes, it's $10 million over three years.
11:20 a.m.
Whitby, Lib.
Thank you very much.
I have a few questions. I'll try to keep my comments quite brief.
Mr. Picov, first of all, thank you for your investment, taking your family's investment and putting it into brain health and research. Ms. Posluns, my background is in neurological research, so my first set of questions will be for you.
The Alzheimer Society of Canada had a report called “Rising Tide”, which spoke of the tsunami in 2008. We are now in 2018. Our government has made significant investments into research over the last three years. Why do you think we have not seen increased investment in this particular type of research on neurodegenerative diseases?
11:20 a.m.
Founder and President, Women's Brain Health Initiative
That's an excellent question, and one that bothers us as well. The amount of funding into research in this space is a fraction of what's necessary. As the population ages and mortality rates for cancer, heart disease and stroke come down, more people are dying from Alzheimer's. Today, AIDS research continues to get more funding than Alzheimer's or other dementias.
The proportion isn't in the right place. We wouldn't want to take money away from cancer, heart disease or stroke, but I think more funding needs to go into this particular area. Again, it needs to be sex- and gender-sensitive.
Equally important is getting that information into the hands of the public, because lots of things are coming out now in Canada and around the world that say lifestyle is significantly important. There's no advantage for organizations like the pharma companies to put their energy toward these lifestyle things, but people have more control over their cognitive destiny than they realize. This is important information to get into the hands of the public.
It's both the research and the education.
11:25 a.m.
Whitby, Lib.
Absolutely. I appreciate your mentioning the Canadian Consortium on Neurodegeneration in Aging and CIHR. Currently, the structure of CIHR is that they have an Institute of Neurosciences, Mental Health and Addiction, and they have an Institute of Gender and Health.
You stated very eloquently the gender bias of the disease, which disproportionately negatively impacts women. In your opinion, how do we change the structures that currently exist or how do we get a more gendered perspective on the research that we're currently doing? Do we put that in the funding application as well as the dissemination component? How do you think we should do that?
11:25 a.m.
Founder and President, Women's Brain Health Initiative
That has started with the CIHR because of the work we've been doing over the past five years. For a neuroscientist to get funding through the CIHR, they must defend why they're not considering sex and gender. We've definitely moved the needle for research for women in this area. We've also done some direct funding ourselves, such as funding Dr. Einstein at the University of Toronto. If you get somebody up there on the world stage advocating for more research for women, I think that's where you're going to start to see changes.
It is a combination of efforts through the government and efforts through organizations like ours. It has started.
11:25 a.m.
Whitby, Lib.
I'll move, then, to Ms. Carr, from Community Living, and Ms. Carroll.
I've held many town halls in Whitby related to persons with disabilities, and we know that there is that 93% retention rate. They're committed. We know the return on investment.
My question is specifically around the RWA. You said that the program goes to individuals with intellectual disability and autism. Is it expanded to others with other neurodegenerative conditions and diseases, or is the program only for intellectual disabilities and autism?
11:25 a.m.
Executive Vice-President, Canadian Association for Community Living
It focuses primarily on people with an intellectual disability or an autism spectrum disorder, or both. That's essentially the focus. First, that's because it's a partnership between our two organizations and those are our populations, but they're also the populations with pretty much the worst employment rates. Employment is a huge issue for people with disabilities across the board, but definitely for our populations.
Cynthia, I don't know if you have anything you want to say.
11:25 a.m.
Whitby, Lib.
Additionally, we just tabled Bill C-81, the Canadian disabilities act. Do you see workplace participation as a gap in the current legislation? Have you had a chance to look at it?
11:25 a.m.
Executive Vice-President, Canadian Association for Community Living
I have looked at it extensively. I could probably recite sections of it. It deals with eliminating barriers to employment, mostly in the federally regulated market, that type of thing. It certainly addresses those pieces. It does not address active measures to secure employment for people with disabilities. It's a bit of a different focus, an important one, of course, but not quite getting at what we're after.
11:25 a.m.
Whitby, Lib.
I hope you will attend the committee when that report goes to it.
11:25 a.m.
Whitby, Lib.
Ms. Reesor and Mr. Miller, we've heard about the economic impact in this region, in particular around an airport. It's clearly identified. You've clearly identified the economic impact of an agricultural hub in this region. Can you reiterate the importance of the agricultural sector, especially when we think about the growing need for food and agriculture, both domestically and globally?
October 4th, 2018 / 11:25 a.m.
Jim Miller Head of Research, Land Over Landings Inc.
The report we got from our consultants last spring stands on its own. We're talking about an additional 2,100 jobs in our area, and well over $200 million in economic impact. Most of this is from re-pioneering the farmland as a diversified agricultural area, but the most important economic impact is from agri-tourism, which is a huge multiplier in our area. With our proximity to the urban regions, the greater Toronto area, we see a huge impact there.