Evidence of meeting #30 for Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities in the 40th Parliament, 2nd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was housing.
NDP
Thomas Mulcair NDP Outremont, QC
Thank you very much for that.
Ms. Jetté, you talked about the Court Challenges Program. Do you have a few examples of cases that have come before the courts in the past regarding social rights? We think about language rights which remain in the program, and everything else has been excluded as you have explained very well. Can you give us past examples or tell us what you could do with other groups in Canada if the Court Challenges Program still existed?
Spokesperson, Front commun des personnes assistées sociales du Québec
Our organization, the Front commun des personnes assistées sociales du Québec, has used this program jointly with the Ligue des droits et libertés (Civil Liberties Union) to defend the rights of persons on social assistance. We challenge labour laws that are not respected as well as socio-economic and cultural rights. This is done in order to achieve progress and to make the Canadian government think about these things. The program is part of the resources we have to defend rights and have them respected. We organized a pan-Canadian reflection day on the right to work and the right to sufficient income in order to promote awareness of what it means in concrete terms if those rights are not respected, be it provincially or federally.
The Court Challenges Program allows us to move forward. Organizations like ours cannot afford to pay legal fees. If we want to see any progress in terms of rights, we have to have resources. I know that women's groups and movements have used this program in the past. I do not remember the exact case.
The point is really to defend rights contained in the Constitution. We work from a constitutional standpoint. However, no organization or individual can do that without this program.
NDP
Thomas Mulcair NDP Outremont, QC
I agree with you wholeheartedly.
Ms. Trudel, yesterday, the Standing Committee on Finance and the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology held a joint meeting to examine aspects of the credit card issue. This week, the study is focusing mainly on merchants, because they too have serious problems...
Coordinator, Association Coopérative d’Économie Familiale de la Rive-Sud de Montréal
Percentages.
NDP
Thomas Mulcair NDP Outremont, QC
... which are passed on to consumers. Obviously, these costs are “internalized”, but it is still a problem for our economy.
You made a very good point about interest rate levels. We have always felt that the maximum interest rates for a credit card should be limited to 5% above the banks' prime rate, for example. Have you given any thought to that?
Coordinator, Association Coopérative d’Économie Familiale de la Rive-Sud de Montréal
We have not gone that far. Our coalition really examined the phenomenon of solicitation, or over-solicitation. In our opinion, this is an individual right: a person can say whether or not they need a credit card. We have to stop the harassment because it goes as far as people receiving credit cards in their name through the mail. In fact, that is illegal.
NDP
Thomas Mulcair NDP Outremont, QC
It is completely illegal. You are quite right to point that out because that is a trick that is being used right now. For about 30 years now, the Consumer Protection Act has prohibited the mailing of unsolicited credit cards. Nevertheless, this is what is done now: you are sent a card without being asked to activate the pin. And then the company says that it is that request that constitutes applying for the card.
Coordinator, Association Coopérative d’Économie Familiale de la Rive-Sud de Montréal
Right now, that is a way to get around the law.
NDP
Thomas Mulcair NDP Outremont, QC
And that's prohibited, precisely in order to avoid overconsumption. This is their new trick to skirt around the law.
You talked about CEGEPs and universities. In the Outaouais, we see this problem even in high schools as soon as people turn 18 and sometimes even before then. We have youngsters working 10 hours a week at McDonald's who qualify for a credit card and end up with debts of $1,500 or $2,000. Your life is really off to a great start if that's what you're taught to do!
I have one last question. I know that strictly speaking, education is a matter of provincial jurisdiction, and I don't want to get into that whole debate about compulsory religious education courses. However, if we must dedicate time to something, would it not be a good idea to think about what used to be taught in the old days, that is home economics?
Coordinator, Association Coopérative d’Économie Familiale de la Rive-Sud de Montréal
Yes, of course.
In our associations, there are three major aspects we work on: the remedial aspect, i.e. the immediate response, the preventive aspect and the educational aspect. Right now, about 90% of our work involves the remedial aspect. We're responding to an emergency. This is what's going on in our schools and in our hospitals. We end up with the same problems.
With regard to the educational aspect, we know that and we do outreach to community groups. That's a win-win situation. We do a lot of work with the Maisons de la famille, with community groups, we go to youth centres. This is education that people need because they do not know their rights. If somebody doesn't know their rights, how can they defend themselves?
When it comes to credit, it's the same thing. If you are not aware of examples of credit...
NDP
Thomas Mulcair NDP Outremont, QC
It's true that education is part of the solution, but it seems to me that we also have to restrain these voracious banks.
Coordinator, Association Coopérative d’Économie Familiale de la Rive-Sud de Montréal
Yes.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Raymonde Folco
Excuse me, Mr. Mulcair. I have to ask you to stop because your time has expired.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Raymonde Folco
Yes, it has expired. I'm sorry, Mr. Mulcair.
Mr. Komarnicki, please.
NDP
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Raymonde Folco
I've no doubt that you'll be back, Mr. Mulcair.
Mr. Komarnicki.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I'd like to thank all of the witnesses for taking the time to appear here. Your recommendations are certainly something the committee will take into consideration. We appreciate hearing your point of view.
Annie Pothier, you indicated that your organization has been in existence for 18 years. Marie-Édith Trudel, your organization has been in existence for 35 years. You're concerned whether your programs are going to be renewed from year to year. You've been in business a long time, so to speak.
I found from previous testimony that there is concern about having to make various applications. They're complicated, and you almost have to hire professionals to do it if you want to access a pool of money. You don't have assurance of continuity from year to year in your operations. Maybe the calls for proposals that go out and the various grants out there are specific to a particular direction, and you have to work into it, as opposed to having the funds work into what you're doing, which has a proven record.
So do you have some suggestions on how the system might be changed? Could there be some systemic changes to ensure that programs like yours and others could have that assurance of sustainability, while at the same time making sure they're transparent, and taxpayer dollars are protected? Have we gone too far one way? Do we need to look at going another way? What recommendations do you have?
Ms. Pothier or Ms. Trudel can go first--or anyone else, for that matter.
Coordinator, Association Coopérative d’Économie Familiale de la Rive-Sud de Montréal
In our circles, we often hear that this is a proposperous recommendation. And yet it's not that proposperous. It's no more ludicrous than suggesting a tax be collected from credit card issuers, and having that money turned over to consumer protection groups. So why not?
Our most important recommendation, as I was saying to Mr. Mulcair, concerns the 60%. A lot of work has to be done on that. It may not help us in terms of funding, but it would greatly help the public which in the final analysis is what we are trying to do, that is to help the least well-off in our society.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
I appreciate that, but that wasn't the direction of my question.
Ms. Pothier, can you respond?
Coordinator, Maison de la famille de Laval Ouest
When we fill out the applications, it can take us one or two months to fill out the year-end report that is suppose to contain all the recommendations and account for everything that happened during the year.
Some of the questions are very specific. For example, we are asked how many children in the group are able to brush their teeth, how many cannot and why they cannot. It seems to me that the questions could be much more general, not so specific. For example, one question might be how many children aged two to three are able to do one particular activity. The questions should be less specific.
Then, when we send in the report, the person who is in charge of our file contacts us to review the various points raised within the report. For example, she will ask us exactly what we meant by one particular remark, because she is not sure how to interpret our figures. Eventually it all becomes very confusing, and we get the impression that they think we've done something wrong, but really, it's just a matter of how to interpret our activities.
Perhaps they should trust us more—I don't like the word—or they could be more flexible with—