Human Resources Committee on June 18th, 2009

[Yves Lessard, Bloc, Chambly—Borduas, QC]

For some reason, I'm not getting the translation any more.

[Karen Jackson]

Je m'excuse, monsieur.

As I said, yes, through that period of analyzing and designing the program, we were aware that in notionally allocating $30 million to that component for major projects, it was likely we were only going to be able to support between one and three, in the neighbourhood of two or three projects. We were aware of that.

To the second part of your question, I must say that I can't comment on the spot on what kinds of communications there might have been with one of the applicants who was not successful and had a $4 million application in last time.

But yes, we've just finished another period of application. This is, as I said, for small projects, and if there was a project from that applicant that fell within that funding range, that could be considered. But at this point a project valued at $4 million cannot be eligible for funding.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you very much, Ms. Jackson, and thank you, Mr. Lessard.

We're now going to move to Mr. Vellacott. Sir, you have five minutes.

[Maurice Vellacott, Conservative, Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, SK]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

My question may not even take my whole time, depending on the nature of your response.

Maybe not a lot of people are aware that under the small projects there can be some communication accessibility as a part of that too. Can you describe for me a little bit and give me some examples of what some of these communication accessibility issues would be? What are the devices and things being covered under the small projects for modifications in respect to that?

And has this always been a part of some other program, or is this a new and novel thing, Karen?

[Karen Jackson]

This is about things like the technical apparatus that will allow for voice activation of computers, for example, or special aids and other kinds of equipment needed by people with a vision disability to be able to use a computer in a community facility.

Laura, would you have other examples?

I would just say that we do know that with the growing use of the Internet, for example, there are a significant number of Canadians, perhaps in the order of 200,000, who because of some disability are impaired or impeded from actually using that as a type of communication.

[Laura Oleson]

Other examples could be, for instance, tactile signs in community centres so that someone can identify the rooms they're in. In board rooms you can put in devices so that somebody with a hearing impairment can fully participate in the meeting by hearing the conversation effectively. Those are some of the items.

I might put a pitch in for the Office for Disability Issues of the Government of Canada, where we have a model for accessibility. We have many of these instruments and would welcome the opportunity to show off that model to anyone who is interested.

[Maurice Vellacott, Conservative, Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, SK]

Some of this, then, might even be mobile headsets for seniors, where sometimes microphone systems or amplification doesn't quite work out for them, so they have to have special devices. I notice this at public session times with senior people. Is it that type of thing, maybe mobile--

[Laura Oleson]

That's correct. The spaces had to be publicly available, but those were the types of projects we funded. Often they were very small dollar value but could relieve a heavy burden on a small organization.

[Maurice Vellacott, Conservative, Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, SK]

Certainly. This is good news, of course, but what are our means and mode of getting this out to people?

I assume you have your typical ways of relaying this to these people we have on database already, seniors groups and so on. What are we doing to be sure they are aware of this? There's probably no doubt—I expect this from my riding and constituency—that some of these seniors groups and so on, various disability groups, would not be aware of the good program that is there for them.

[Karen Jackson]

I have just a couple of quick comments. Maybe Laura can add to them.

You're right, it's especially a challenge, when the government does establish a new program, to be sure that all who may be interested in applying for support are aware of the program.

In addition to all the information we do put on websites and make publicly available that way, we will make efforts at other kinds of awareness raising initiatives and outreach activities through Service Canada. In some cases, and indeed this case, we actually had a small contract with a consultant that targeted some of the hard-to-reach communities to make sure they were aware of this opportunity.

[Maurice Vellacott, Conservative, Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, SK]

There's something along that line that I'd like to encourage too. Sometimes we get from various groups and organizations, banks and so on, in terms of financial literacy for our householders, something of an electronic file that we could potentially use in our householders, because we obviously as MPs cover quite a swath of people when we get those out.

If it's not being done, it's maybe something I would encourage Karen and Laura to think of doing. We can then maybe even template letters. We have databases of our various community organizations, disability groups, seniors and so on, which we could relay as well in addition to template letters. There may be something you could provide us for our householders, which we do about four times a year.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Dean Allison]

Thank you.

I'm going to move over to Mr. Savage for five minutes, please.

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Thank you very much.

You've told us that the RFP was part of a communications package that was vetted by the government, so the finance minister and his EA would likely have seen the RFP before it went out. For clarity, I just need a simple answer. Did officials managing the file or consultants handling approvals have any contact with anybody in the Minister of Finance's office?

[Karen Jackson]

Just to set the record straight, the communications protocols and the approvals of documents do not, as a rule in a case like this, include the Department of Finance. It does include the Privy Council Office. In answer to your second question, no, not that I'm aware of.

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

You're saying clearly that the Minister of Finance's office did not have involvement with the RFP before it went out?

[Karen Jackson]

What I am saying is that I am not aware of that fact, whether they did or they did not. The RFP was prepared by program officers who work in my branch in Human Resources and Skills Development, but yes, as I did say previously, these documents are as a rule discussed and approved by ministers, and discussed or looked at by the Privy Council Office.

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

I want to ask you a question. You mentioned there was no regional component to this program, which is very funny when you look at a program like Canada Summer Jobs, for example. It's specifically designed down to the riding level based on population, based on employment. I would think there are people with disabilities who need assistance across the country. It strikes me as odd, for example, that not a single project, big or small, was approved in the Yukon or Nunavut, and one single project was approved in the Northwest Territories, that one for just under $20,000 in Fort Simpson.

We have a $45 million fund, of which $36 million to $37 million is approved, and one little tiny project in northern Canada gets approved. Are there not people with disabilities in northern Canada?

[Karen Jackson]

I'm sure there are people with disabilities in northern Canada. You're absolutely right. As I said, when you have a time-limited program such as this that you're going to deliver for three years and you have a budget of about $45 million, the decision was taken to run it nationally.

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

I understand, but it was time limited because the government decided that it was time limited. It was a three-year program, and the application process was one month long. It seems to me that the purpose of this should be not just to maybe say at three o'clock in the morning, “We have something; come get it,” but to go out and seek where people actually need help, as opposed to having an application process that's so tight.

As you know, a lot of organizations across the country that work with people with disabilities, or even organizations that are trying to become more accessible, don't know the ins and outs of government. I suspect that if you had--what was it?--600-and-some applications, there would be an even greater number of people who actually could use the help if we went out and sought their involvement in this.

[Karen Jackson]

On your point about the period for applications being open for four weeks, that was indeed the case in 2008. As I said, we have expanded that. We extended it in 2009 and made it a longer period, because we did hear those complaints as well.

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

There was $6 million for the small projects last year.

[Karen Jackson]

That's correct. And that was open for four weeks, and it has been a longer period this year. Okay?

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Of the 89 major projects that requested funding, were there a number that would have qualified had there been more funding?

[Karen Jackson]

There quite likely could have been, yes.

[Michael Savage, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

What would prevent them from being funded if there were more money? Did they fail the criteria, or did they just not grade as well as the people who got the two?