Human Resources Committee on Feb. 26th, 2013

[Yves Gingras]

I'm not aware that there are any quotas, but I think the Employment Equity Act is quite clear that any employer under the federal jurisdiction has to make efforts to accommodate. So it is encouraging employers. It's not like imposing a quota. I'm sure the Public Service Commission or Treasury Board would have statistics on how many people with disabilities we have in the public sector. There's no prescription on the numbers.

[Rodger Cuzner, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

There's no internal advocacy agent for persons with disabilities within that federal jurisdiction. The question should probably be directed to the Public Service Commission, I would think. Right? Are you aware of any?

[Sylvie Dubé]

It's the Treasury Board Secretariat that set the guidelines, but also under the labour program they do have the employment equity report that they put out almost on a yearly basis. Unfortunately, I don't have it in front of me so I don't know what the exact figures are. We could send it to you if you'd like.

[Rodger Cuzner, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

Okay. That would be helpful. As the federal government, we would want to lead.

Just for clarification, on the LMDAs, labour market development agreements, there is a separate deal altogether. Is there any reference to persons with disabilities within the bilaterals, within the LMDAs, or is a separate deal negotiated?

[Monika Bertrand]

LMDAs are a separate transfer, an EI part II transfer. They are supported out of the EI account, and no, there is no dedicated funding or dedicated pot for persons with disabilities. There are just the general eligibility criteria for clients.

[Rodger Cuzner, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

But in the one specifically for the transfer for disabilities, there are targets within those agreements, I would think.

[Monika Bertrand]

No, there are no targets within the agreements. The LMAPDs, labour market agreements for persons with disabilities, give a lot of flexibility to the provinces. The provinces get their share of funding, and the idea is that they decide where they would like to invest their funding for persons with disabilities.

There are five priority areas that they have to respect, and they are set out in the multilateral framework that they all signed onto in 2004, except for Quebec, but there are no targets. Provinces can set targets but we, the federal government, do not set targets for them.

[Rodger Cuzner, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

Are there provinces that have set targets?

[Monika Bertrand]

I'm not aware of that. We're talking about 300 different programs. It's one of those transfers that cut across several departments. It cuts across several responsible ministers, so with regard to targets, I'm not aware that there are—

[Rodger Cuzner, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

I'm just getting back to the fact that if you can measure it, then you can fix it. I'm trying to get a sense of where the opportunities to measure are and if they are within the bilaterals or whatever it might be, if it's just following five principles, then it's a bit tougher. I guess it would come down to the individual provinces after the transfer is made.

[Monika Bertrand]

Absolutely. Of course, there are the indicators that the provinces report on publicly. They have their annual reports that they have to publish for their citizens, so it depends on what they like to report to their citizens or what they think is important for their citizens to know about regarding how they spend their funding. That's about it.

Then we have evaluations we use to see how effective these programs are.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Komarnicki]

Thank you for that.

Thank you, Mr. Cuzner.

We'll now move to Ms. Leitch.

[Kellie Leitch, Conservative, Simcoe—Grey, ON]

Thank you very much for taking the time to be here today to talk to us as we start this new and important study.

One of the items that was brought up earlier this morning was Mr. McColeman's motion. One of the key components of that, to my mind, is the examination of the expert panel and the findings with respect to employers and the advantages of private sector led initiatives. You've had a couple of comments with regard to the reluctance on behalf of some private sector initiatives.

I wonder if you could provide us your perspective, from the programs that you've implemented, on efforts to deal with private sector employers to encourage them to allow individuals with a wide range of disabilities to participate. What have you noticed as being key issues or key challenges that either private sector employers have spoken to you about or, if they have not articulated them, you have witnessed over the course of implementing your programs in which private sector individuals are involved?

[Monika Bertrand]

There have been stakeholder consultations with employers. What is very much confirmed in the panel report is the idea that workplace accommodation is very expensive. We know that it is not. The majority of workplace accommodation costs range between $500 and $700. It's small amounts. That was one very big concern that employers voiced. We heard that repeatedly through the consultations.

The other concern that was raised had to do with the kind of legislation that is in place and how it could be tied to having an employee with a disability. Do they suddenly have responsibilities toward that individual that they do not want to have? There's a whole idea of misconceptions regarding what it means to have a person with a disability.

From the program perspective, that's what we have heard, and that's what we are trying to do with the various funding interventions and options that we offer through the opportunities fund.

Maybe, Sylvie, you can elaborate a bit more with regard to the consultations.

[Sylvie Dubé]

The panel heard from quite a wide spectrum. They consulted across the country with employers, all sizes of businesses from all sectors, but you can certainly put them under different themes.

There were questions along the same lines as Monika's. In addition there were questions such as what does it mean for them to integrate into the culture of the company. Will it slow the company's productivity? Where do they go if they want to hire a person with a disability? What tools do they have if they need help to assist the person, whether it's physical or whether it's coaching? There were all these spheres of questioning.

The interesting thing that came out of some of those consultations was the fact that most employers were quite willing and interested in finding out more and in being able to address it, either because of shortages in their company or their spheres of activities. Also, they saw the benefit of hiring persons with disabilities, to have them on their staff, and integrate them into the company. Those were some of the questions that came out and some of the concerns that were addressed.

They were also able to identify some good practices that some companies have come up with. Some are leaders, and there was a lot of discussion about enterprise and how leadership must come from the top. Some of the businesses, some of the private sector companies, need to have a champion at the top. Then it goes down from there.

There are lots of barriers, but also lots of good practices.

[Kellie Leitch, Conservative, Simcoe—Grey, ON]

One of the other components of the motion that has been put forward to the House is to establish a significant focus on young people. One of the items Mr. McColeman speaks about in his motion is increasing the involvement of young individuals with disabilities and how we do that.

What are the components of the youth employment strategy or other programming that's available through human resources? It may have been identified in the report.

I was wondering if you could comment on that, but also in relationship to what partnerships you already have as established relationships that have been able to augment employment among young people who have disabilities.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Komarnicki]

We'll conclude with the response.

[Monika Bertrand]

The issue of youth is so consistent across all the research we have studied. We know that integrating people early on in the labour market while they are still in high school, be it persons with disabilities or Canadians in general, has huge benefits later on but especially for persons with disabilities or youth with barriers to employment. It could be any barrier. A disability is just another barrier to employment. It's definitely something we look at very closely, how we can best do that through our youth employment strategy or through the opportunities fund, something dedicated.

One program that does address this issue is skills link, the stream under the youth employment strategy, YES. It's a $100 million program that helps youth with multiple barriers to employment either get into the labour market or go back to school. So yes, we've had some good experiences with that program. We have good outcomes. Youth with disabilities account for about 17% of skills link clients.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Komarnicki]

Thank you for that.

Does anyone else wish to comment? If not, we'll move to Ms. Charlton.

[Chris Charlton, NDP, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I'm going to split my time with Madame Boutin-Sweet.

Thank you to the witnesses for being here today.

I have two quick questions. I'll ask both at the front end and leave you the time to respond.

The first one is that my colleague is quite right in that we've been studying this since 1981, in a formal way, anyway. All committees in the past have been able to put partisanship aside on this issue. They've made some really solid recommendations. I think it would be in our interest not to waste time in this committee by revisiting work that's already been done. So I wonder if you could provide us with a report card on the recommendations that have been made in the past and tell us which ones have already been implemented, so that we don't go back over old work.

My second question is.... I suppose it's a question, but it will start with a comment. If we want to be serious about having a comprehensive economic strategy to deal with challenges experienced by people with disabilities, I don't think it's good enough to just talk about the training and assistance that we're providing. It would be really helpful if we could also broaden that conversation to talk about systemic barriers to that participation. I'm thinking about things such as access to housing, access to transportation, income supports, and all of the broader range of issues that, obviously, would have an impact on somebody's participation both in the economy and in society. I wonder if there's a point person, either in your department or at HRSDC, who coordinates with other ministries to develop that comprehensive approach, and if we could perhaps get that person to appear before the committee.

I'll just leave it at that.

[Yves Gingras]

On your first question about the report card for what was recommended in the past and where we stand, this is something we would have to do. I'd be happy to take that back to the department to try to do what we can and then have it sent to you.

In terms of an economic strategy addressing systemic barriers, I would say that we have a number of targeted programs in the department, including transfers that directly target the needs of persons with disabilities. So our programs do address some of the needs.

The transfers that are provided to provinces are quite flexible and allow them to develop a multitude of programs that are handled from health departments to employment departments and education departments. There are a lot of approaches that are there to support, such as housing, transportation, and income support. This is covered by an array of programs that goes beyond the federal government; it goes into the provincial sphere of activities. We address many types of needs through a variety of programs.

I'm not saying there are not gaps, but it is a complex area where there are so many programs available, including wage subsidies. I could go on and on.

[Chris Charlton, NDP, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

But the reality is that if you're transferring money, and it could go to all of those things, then it could also go to none of them and end up in some very loosey-goosey program that perhaps doesn't deliver, which goes to Mr. Cuzner's point: where is the accountability; where is the bang for the buck?

Anyway, I'm going to leave it at that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Komarnicki]

You certainly chipped into the time of Ms. Boutin-Sweet. The loosey-goosey part is what took you longer.

[Monika Bertrand]

[Inaudible—Editor] an annual plan to the Government of Canada to set out where they plan on spending the money we send to them, and it has to be within the five priority areas. We do have a pretty good sense of where that money goes. Plus, we get an expenditure account where we actually look at where the money has gone. They have their plan, and we actually see how the money was spent. Also, they do an annual report for the public, so there is reporting. We do have a sense of where the money goes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Komarnicki]

Madame Boutin-Sweet, you have about a minute.