Human Resources Committee on Oct. 28th, 2014

[The Chair, Conservative, Phil McColeman]

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the 34th meeting of the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities.

Today is Tuesday, October 28, and we are here to begin our consideration of private member's Bill C-247, an act to expand the mandate of Service Canada in respect of the death of a Canadian citizen or Canadian resident.

We have another three-part meeting today. For the first half-hour, we have the mover of Bill C-247, Mr. Frank Valeriote, the member of Parliament for Guelph.

Mr. Valeriote, welcome. You have 10 minutes, and then we'll open it up for questioning.

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Thank you so much, Mr. Chair. I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you.

Colleagues, before you today is my private member's Bill C-247, an act to expand the mandate of Service Canada in respect of the death of a Canadian citizen or Canadian resident.

As a parliamentarian, I believe one of our foremost responsibilities, both to our constituents and to all Canadians, is to find ways to ease their burdens. Where we can, we should provide relief and facilitate interactions with the federal government, especially during difficult times.

Few would argue that without doubt the loss of a loved one, family or friend is among the most difficult times a person can face. Beyond the pain of loss and the considerations surrounding arrangements for mourning and burial, there are multiple notifications to various authorities required.

Currently, a bereaved Canadian husband, wife, child or estate representative may have to contact many separate federal government departments and send death notifications to each because Canada has no single point of contact for the information to be submitted and processed. This process, which can involve the repetition of submitting the same information to different departments, can often be at the very least confusing and tedious, and just as often, painful for a grieving individual.

When I chose to champion this particular bill, I felt it was important to put forward non-partisan legislation for the grieving seniors, survivors, caregivers and estate representatives who are responsible for settling those obligations. We can and we must deal with the issue of bereavement in a professional and compassionate way. Bill C-247 will improve a federal government service and reduce the burden on Canadians during a difficult life transition. This bill will call on the Minister of Employment and Social Development to implement all measures necessary to make Employment and Social and Development Canada, and more specifically Service Canada, the single point of contact for the Government of Canada programs for all matters relating to the death of a Canadian citizen or resident. From consultation with department officials, I understand that there will need to be some further specification to provide that this is for government programs authorized to use the social insurance number of the deceased.

Allow me to offer a few scenarios which necessitate changes such as those that I'm proposing.

According to the Service Canada website, the department must be contacted with the notification of date of death when an old age security and Canada pension plan beneficiary passes away. They would also have to be contacted for the application of any survivor benefits. If the deceased was receiving employment insurance benefits before their death, the legal representative must also complete a form to cancel those benefits. If the deceased person had not applied for EI benefits to which they were entitled, the legal representative may apply for the benefits in the name of the deceased person. If a deceased individual had lived in Canada and in another country, their survivor could be eligible to apply for pensions and benefits because of a social security agreement.

Besides Service Canada, a legal representative would also have to make a separate effort to contact the Canada Revenue Agency to provide a deceased's date of death. In addition, the estate is responsible for the completion of final tax returns and making arrangements to stop payments on any GST or HST credits. If the deceased was receiving the Canada child tax benefit, the universal child care benefit, or the working income tax benefit, those benefits must be stopped and, if applicable, survivor benefits can be applied for.

This labyrinth of possible contacts is often frustrating and difficult to navigate in the immediate wake of someone's passing. When I practised law, often clients would come to me to do this work on behalf of estates because of the confusion and aggravation faced by family and estate executors, who were simply trying to carry out the last wishes and settle affairs. What many Canadians find is that often the requisite information provided by departmental websites is not comprehensive. In fact, the Auditor General of Canada found similarly in a recent report under “Access to online services” and said that the integration of service delivery and the sharing of information among departments are “limited”. Individuals must work with departments separately, which frequently requires them to provide the same information multiple times. Moreover, the Auditor General found that instructions provided on the Service Canada website about the process for certain life events were incomplete. He noted:

...departments are focused on delivering the statutory programs and mandates for which they are accountable. There is no incentive for departments to share information.

This is particularly important when it comes to death notifications, where the Auditor General found: When a death occurs, for example, someone must contact each department separately and follow different processes, as this information is not generally shared and departments do not offer the ability to do this online. This makes it difficult for users who may be trying to stop the payment of certain benefits to prevent overpayments...while trying to apply for others....

Committee members may be aware that our G-7 partners in the United Kingdom already have the Tell Us Once registration process, and France has the online service portal mon.service-public for death notifications, which assist their respective governments to address many of the concerns highlighted.

It is estimated that Tell Us Once in the U.K. will save the government over $300 million over the decade. It is my hope that Bill C-247 could similarly save the Canadian government millions of dollars.

Service Canada, located within Employment and Social Development Canada, already gives Canadians access to a range of federal governmental services and benefits and is ideally situated to improve the delivery of those services. It was already created to serve a single window for Canadians to access government programs and services. Bill C-247 is a practical expansion of Service Canada's mandate and the logical choice for bereavement reporting.

The absence of a government-wide strategy on something so universally experienced by Canadians certainly interferes with any government's ability to move towards cost savings and the reduction of red tape while improving client services and addressing the needs of Canadians.

For their part, the Minister of State and officials at Employment and Social Development Canada recognize that gaps exist in the provision of information, even where programs exist, and have signalled a willingness to make this clearer for Canadians. Moreover, ESDC signalled as recently as this year's report on plans and priorities the importance of making changes such as this.

The minister's message states:

ESDC will focus on achieving service excellence for Canadians by further modernizing service delivery, focusing on its core business priorities and increasing the use of technology. Through Service Canada the government will ensure that Canadians quickly receive the benefits to which they are entitled and access to a wide range of programs and services.

It continues later stating:

Service Canada will continue to work with other departments so that Canadians can better access more Government of Canada services through Service Canada.

The creation of one point of contact at Service Canada would remove the guesswork for survivors and estate administrators who are not fully aware of the deceased's obligations to the federal government. A first contact to Service Canada would trigger a notification process to all relevant departments, which would then communicate to the deceased's estate representative the responsibilities for the cancellation of benefits, the return of identification documents, and access to any survivor benefits.

Bill C-247 would also reduce the costs of the administration of estates, making it good consumer legislation as well.

You'll note that this bill has the support of groups like the Funeral Service Association of Canada, the Bereavement Ontario Network, and Hospice Palliative Care Ontario. I believe it is significant that these groups, which deal most closely with Canadians in the immediate aftermath of losing a loved one, support the bill before us today.

As I draw to a close, I sincerely would like to thank a former colleague of ours, Bryan Wilfert, who initially put forward this legislation. I genuinely wish to thank the Minister of State for Social Development and her officials who were welcoming of the aim of this bill and who provided truly meaningful guidance on ways we can improve the bill before us.

Canadians expect their legislators, both government and opposition, to work together to improve services and access while reducing the burden and red tape. I believe this bill can and will be a powerful vehicle for modernization and that passage of this bill will make a real and substantial difference in the lives of all of our constituents.

I'm honoured and thankful for the consideration that you will give it. Thank you so much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Phil McColeman]

Thank you very much, Mr. Valeriote.

Now we'll open it up to five-minute rounds of questions.

Go ahead, Madam Sims.

[Jinny Sims, NDP, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Mr. Chair, first of all, I think I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge the anguish, I would say, of the whole nation today as the funeral for Corporal Nathan Cirillo carries on. We all mourn the tragic loss of a life taken too soon. Our thoughts and prayers are with his son and his family and those he served with and, I would say, with the Canadian people today because Canada's attention is on that today.

Carrying on with the business of the day, thank you, Mr. Valeriote, for bringing forward this piece of legislation. I think it's long overdue and I do support the intent of this bill. Every one of us wants to remove the red tape, as you said, that stands in the way of families when they experience the loss of a loved one. At the same time, I appreciate the intent of this bill, but I also do have some serious concerns.

We've noticed significant cuts to services for Canadians both under the previous and the current governments, and those losses have led to the system being truly stretched inside. I think that the previous governments and the current one do bear some responsibility that things are so cumbersome in the first place. However, for all of us now it's very important to support accessible, less cumbersome services for families in mourning, which I believe this bill tries to do.

I am concerned about some vagueness in the bill. I'm hoping that we will be able to address some of that vagueness.

It doesn't specify all services it would encompass under the single point of contact within the Government of Canada. It does give us some examples. For example, it lists CRA, passports, social insurance number, old age security, Canada pension plan, and veterans benefits. This allows us to deduce which departmental services would be consolidated, but the bill includes the caveat “not limited to”. As a person who has dealt with and read legislation many times, collective agreements as well, whenever you get language “not limited to”, it actually creates more questions than answers.

For clarity, do you think the bill ought to include all the services beyond those listed which the bill would potentially affect?

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

First of all, thank you for the question. I too was going to open with acknowledging that our hearts and minds are with WO Patrice Vincent and Corporal Nathan Cirillo and their families today. I know all of us are thinking of them and their families, and I thank you for saying that.

With respect to the first part of your question, particularly in times where restraint has to be shown and where there are cuts, I know from my previous practice of law and having various businesses, you had to think of ways to utilize the services that you did have. I think this is a tremendous opportunity for us to refine those processes so that in the age where we have to be very cognizant of our spending, this gives a perfect opportunity to eliminate some of the difficulties, the hurdles that exist right now. By eliminating some of those hurdles, we refine the system and work more effectively and not only for our constituents but also more cost effectively for the taxpayer.

The words “not limited to” were intended to explain exactly as I expressed in the bill; that is, we didn't want to be exhaustive in the bill, because frankly, I don't know, none of us know, all of the services that exist today or may exist tomorrow or a year from now that could be integrated into this one point of contact system. I also have become aware, thanks to the minister, that there are some departments that we will not have access to through this legislation. The legislation has to be currently restricted to those that use the SIN, the social insurance number. It is the intention over time to have all departments eventually aligned so that the SIN would be used and this would apply, indeed, to all the departments with whom a deceased representative would have to communicate on behalf of the deceased. There was nothing nefarious about the use of the words “but not limited to”. I just know as a lawyer who has worked on legislation and interpreting legislation that you try to be broad so that if you've missed something, it's not excluded later.

[The Chair, Conservative, Phil McColeman]

Thank you for that.

We move to Mr. Armstrong, for five minutes.

[Scott Armstrong, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS]

I want to thank my colleague for bringing forward this legislation and working so cooperatively with the minister and the department to try to put forward a piece of legislation that is going to provide excellent service to Canadians.

In your opening remarks, you touched on the process that currently exists for someone who tries to work their way through a labyrinth-like federal government when a family member dies. The goal of this legislation is to try to make that a little easier, to have a single point of contact to deal with the many phone calls. You talked about it in technical terms, but could you talk about it in layman's terms? If someone currently passes away and a family member is dealing with the federal government, provincial government, and other authorities as they're trying to deal with the grief as well, just what do they have to go through to try to deal with this as it's currently set up?

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Thank you for that question. It's a very practical question.

I practised a lot of estate work and I'll put myself back into that role for a moment and give you a picture of what can happen as a lawyer. I certainly know what funeral directors go through as well.

Somebody would come into my office after one of their family members had died. Some of them were well aware of what the affairs were of the deceased. Some were completely unaware of what the affairs of the deceased were. Some had been given documents from the funeral director, thankfully, who told them to fill the documents out and apply for a death benefit or any other benefits that may be available. Some funeral directors help them with the completion of that documentation. Some don't have the resources to do that.

Some who hadn't filled them out would come to my office. I naturally would encourage them to do it themselves, because you don't want to pay a lawyer to do these things. Some of them don't have access to a computer, or if there is a computer, they don't know how to use it. If they do know how to use it, they're confused and confounded by what might appear on the Service Canada website. Even the Auditor General and the minister said it can be confusing. There are those who still go to the blue pages in the telephone book; I know I've used those recently. Some of them will try to make the phone call. Some of them will leave the work with the lawyer.

We're at that stage of already a daunting task and confusion. They may have to apply for Canada pension plan or OAS either for payments that are owing to them or in another situation returning the payments because no notification was given. You'll hear later of circumstances and I've seen it week after week after week where months of payments are made because nobody advised the government that the person was deceased. You have to apply separately for the HST or GST credit to stop, depending on the province you're in. You have to apply separately with the CRA to notify them of a death. Each department might require different documents. Some want just the death certificate. Some want the will and the death certificate.

That in general is the confusion, the matrix that someone, the representative of the deceased, faces when someone dies. That's the practical perspective. It's our obligation I think, and I think you agree with me, to help them through that by having one single point of contact, one single amount of information that has to be given, and given once.

[Scott Armstrong, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS]

Thank you for those comments.

Basically what this legislation will do is take some of the onus, which at some point can be quite troubling for someone who is actually going through a very difficult time, off the family member and put it on the shoulders of Service Canada, who quite frankly are equipped to deal with this if they only have the information. As you said, not every department right now can use this information, but it's sure going to make things a lot more streamlined than they currently are. Would you agree with that?

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Absolutely, I agree with that perspective. It relieves the grieving estate representative of the task at the moment, so it's compassionate legislation. Frankly it will relieve them of having to pay a lawyer, like myself in my previous life, to do it, so it's good consumer legislation. It places it at the doorstep of the government, but in a good way. While the government will relieve them of the burden, the government will refine its processes in such way I'm sure as to reduce the costs overall in the system and make it far more efficient.

[The Chair, Conservative, Phil McColeman]

Mr. Cuzner, you have five minutes.

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

Mr. Chair, this is more of a comment than a question. I want to thank Frank. I'm still having trouble thinking that a lawyer is pushing any billable time back across the table to have somebody fill out their own forms, but listen: I know you're a noble guy and a great colleague.

My comments are just that you did include caucus and me as the critic early on in your discussions, when you were looking at bringing this bill forward. I want to thank you for that. Also, I know that your thanks to the minister and her staff was genuine, and I know she's excited about this piece of legislation coming forward. This is just what private members' bills should be about. I look forward to asking a couple of questions of the officials, but I just wanted to commend you and thank you for bringing this bill forward.

[The Chair, Conservative, Phil McColeman]

Mrs. McLeod, you have five minutes.

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Mr. Chair, I too want to congratulate Mr. Valeriote. I think it's rare that private members' bills get to this stage. To have something that so clearly, at least on the surface, is seen to make a lot of good sense to everyone....

Interestingly, I was on the Red Tape Reduction Commission, which was focused on the business world. In many ways this is very similar, but it's more focused on the personal elements.

We certainly heard consistently that Tell Us Once wants interaction and how difficult and time-consuming it is for businesses to deal with government. I think we can all imagine what happens when someone who's grieving and the difficulty of finding out many months down the road that they have to pay the government back. That's extremely challenging. It's better to get that stopped in the first place.

This might be a better question for officials, but perhaps I will send it your way to see if you've had any thoughts. In my role with Canada Revenue Agency we looked at the implementation. It created the need for some systems and structures to be put in place that weren't already there. Have you had any conversations with officials around the practical implementation of this particular measure?

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

It's interesting that you mention CRA, because when someone dies, you have to contact CRA and stop any HST credit that might be coming. You have to contact them with respect to a terminal return. Also, if income was received after the date of death, you have to contact a completely different department within CRA, which may require different documentation. I called my old law firm this morning and spoke to the estate section to confirm my memory, and that indeed is the case.

I have not had a conversation with the department you speak of specifically about that, but I have had practical experience with it. I know this bill will encourage them to refine those systems, and that would be a good thing.

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

You indicated you had a good conversation with the Minister of State and some of her officials. Could you talk a little about their guidance, suggestions, and comments?

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

They raised one specific issue, and that was the fact that not all the departments will be able to immediately engage in this Tell Us Once application simply because they do not all use the social insurance number. One such department, I believe, is Veterans Affairs. I know the minister and her department are anxious to expand it to Veterans Affairs so that they too can be included in the system I speak of, the single portal, but until then, those who die and our veterans will not benefit from it. They made it clear that there may have to be an amendment to that effect, so that reference to departments that use social insurance numbers is found in the legislation, and as more departments start to use the social insurance number, they will fall into the single portal through Service Canada.

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

You gave a good example with Veterans Affairs. Are there some other departments that would be significant that currently do not use social insurance numbers?

[Frank Valeriote, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

From what I understand, National Defence doesn't for survivors' benefits. Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada doesn't. Our first nations are entitled to separate benefits, so they wouldn't fall in there. Those are just a few more examples. Fisheries and Oceans doesn't, I understand. I'm talking about these large fishing licences that people have on the east and west coasts. They don't fall into the system, and they would have to be included over time as well. Those fishing licences could either be terminated, or if they were sold, a notification of their sale could be accommodated.

[The Chair, Conservative, Phil McColeman]

Thank you. I think we'll end it there. That's the end of our first round of questions. We won't move on to the second round.

Mr. Valeriote, thank you so much for first of all introducing the bill. As we know, there's unanimous support around the table for this. Anyone who has been through the situations you've mentioned is very appreciative of your initiative to simplify things and to eventually streamline and save government money all at the same time. Thank you so much for being here.

We'll take a short recess while the government officials come up as witnesses.

[The Chair, Conservative, Phil McColeman]

Welcome back, ladies and gentlemen. We're continuing with witness testimony on Bill C-247.

We are joined by officials from the Department of Employment and Social Development for the next half-hour. We welcome Mr. Robert Frelich, the acting director general for identity policy and programs, and Ms. Bev Davis, the director of policy and partnerships.

We'll pass the floor over to you.

Mr. Frelich, please proceed.

[Robert Frelich, Acting Director General, Identity Policy and Programs, Department of Employment and Social Development]

Mr. Chairman and committee members, as stated, my name is Robert Frelich, and I am the director general of identity policy and programs within Service Canada. I'm pleased to be appearing before the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities to assist you in your review of Bill C-247.

I will begin by explaining how the current process works with respect to death notification, what Service Canada does in the event of a death, some key issues in implementing Bill C-247 as written, and improvements we are making to better communicate with Canadians with respect to death notification.

As director general for Identity Policy and Programs at Service Canada, one of my duties is to administer the social insurance number program. This program is underpinned by the social insurance register, which houses the information on SIN holders. This register is where we store death information received electronically from provincial vital statistics agencies.

Through interjurisdictional agreements, Service Canada currently receives daily death information electronically from nine provincial vital statistics agencies. Implementation in the 10th province, Saskatchewan, is planned for fiscal year 2015-16. This approach was implemented following the Auditor General's report on the social insurance number that recommended Service Canada make better use of authoritative sources of information. With respect to death information and death data, those are the provincial vital statistics agencies.

The department began to sign agreements in 2005 with all 10 provinces, starting with Ontario, to develop electronic links between the vital statistics agencies and the social insurance register.

Under these agreements, we are able to validate the information found on provincial birth certificates, as well as to receive death data from provinces. This allows the department to identify records of deceased individuals, and to prevent further payments from federal programs from being issued, which is important as it avoids overpayments.

Service Canada discloses death information to key Government of Canada benefit programs, including the Canada pension plan, old age security, the employment insurance program, the Canada student loan program, the Canada Revenue Agency, as well as Veterans Affairs Canada through an agreement with the old age security program. These programs then, according to their own processes, update their client files or suspend benefits. These programs cover the Government of Canada benefits program that are of the greatest importance to Canadians in terms of numbers.

With respect to the bill as currently drafted, there are four key implementation considerations that I would like to bring to the attention of the committee today.

First, there are technical issues related to data matching that must be considered. To be able to match data accurately, to be able to say with certainty that the John Smith who has died is indeed the right John Smith, we need to have a unique identifier. For the purposes of the federal government, that is the social insurance number; however, not all federal departments and programs are authorized to use the social insurance number. It is currently limited to specific programs, and authority is granted through legislation or regulations. To implement the bill as drafted, all departments and programs that want to receive death notification would need to become authorized users of the SIN.

The second consideration relates to service delivery. The bill introduces the notion that the representative of the estate would be the one communicating information on death to Service Canada. By prescribing this specific mechanism, implementing Bill C-247 would require the introduction of new measures to ensure that the representative is who they say they are, that they are the official representative of the state, that the death information is accurate, and that the representative has all the required documentation.

From a client perspective, this process will be more cumbersome than what is currently in place. We receive information on deaths directly through nine provinces through the vital events linkages. For deaths in jurisdictions where the vital events linkages system is not in place, or for deaths outside of Canada, we require official documentation on the death, that is, a death certificate, but we do not require the individual to prove their own identity or authority as the representative.

The third consideration is the time that would be required to implement the bill as drafted. To protect the privacy of Canadians, there are specific legislative requirements that authorize the disclosure of information. To be able to disclose information—such as the fact that an individual is deceased—departments must enter into information sharing agreements. Our vital events linkages agreements with provinces, for example, took between three months and over a year to finalize, depending on the complexity of the negotiations and capacity of the partner, in addition to time for proper implementation.

The last consideration I would like to bring to the committee's attention relates to the cost of implementing the process proposed in the bill. There would be cost implications for Service Canada and all federal departments requesting death information. To allow electronic transmission of the information as our current processes allow, new connections to Service Canada's social insurance register would need to be established. This would cost up to $900,000 per link and $50,000 per connection for annual maintenance.

The current system works well, but we recognize there is a need to improve communication to Canadians about how it works and what they need to do when faced with the death of a loved one.

Modifying the bill will allow for quicker implementation and demonstrate a level of responsiveness to Canadians. We recognize that there are gaps in the information that Service Canada currently provides to Canadians on what to do following a death, so we are currently improving our website to increase coherence and consistency of our messaging regarding the processes in the event of the death of a Canadian resident or Canadian citizen.

We are also working with key stakeholders, such as the Funeral Service Association of Canada, building on existing practices and identifying opportunities to better inform survivors of which federal programs and departments are automatically informed of the passing, which other programs and which departments survivors may need to inform, as well as which benefits survivors may be eligible for and for which they may need to apply.

In closing, I would like to underline that as a client-facing organization, Service Canada continues to be committed to improving services that better meet our clients' needs and expectations.

I thank you for the opportunity to appear before the committee, and I would be pleased to answer any of your questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Phil McColeman]

Thank you, sir.

Are you going to speak, Ms. Davis? Okay, thank you.

We'll move on then to our first round of questioning.

Madam Groguhé.

[Sadia Groguhé, NDP, Saint-Lambert, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would also like to thank our guests.

Clearly, this private member's bill will simplify the lives of many of our constituents when faced with the death of a loved one. We agree on that. That being said, you pointed to quite a number of constraints.

How will this single point of contact guarantee easy access for everyone if it does not require access to an online or telephone service?

I am thinking of seniors and persons with disabilities in particular.

How can additional constraints be avoided in this bill?

[Robert Frelich]

Mr. Chairman, I can say that with any service that Service Canada provides, there are considerations made for in-person, using the Internet, as well as telephone availability through 1-800-O-Canada, etc. With any type of service that Service Canada puts in place, that is available.

Any type of service with respect to death notification would be the same as well. If we were to provide information using, for example, the network of funeral directors, similar information would be available on our website, in Service Canada centres in person, as well as the 1-800-O-Canada network. It would be available for all, in all different channels of service.