Human Resources Committee on Oct. 16th, 2018

[Blake Richards, Banff—Airdrie, CPC]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

I will say first of all that it's fitting for this committee to begin this study today, because last night many parents across this country participated in the International Wave of Light, in which they light a candle in remembrance of the child they have lost. There were events all across the country over the last number of days. I had the privilege of attending some of those memorial events and being there to support many of the families that are still experiencing a lot of grief. This is an appropriate time for this study to begin.

I want to start by applauding the fact that everyone was so firmly behind our colleague Mr. Kmiec yesterday when he spoke of his loss and his grief and called on all to show some compassion for others. I think everyone was united in the House of Commons in supporting him and showing compassion for his situation. I would ask that we give that same support and that same compassion to all families and all parents who are suffering from grief and from loss.

We certainly had a chance just now to hear from officials about the programs that exist now, but there are gaps in what's there now. There was a lot of talk about the sickness leave benefits. I can tell you that those do not apply to many families. They don't work for many families. Sarah and Lee will share their story here this morning about the letter they received from the government asking them to repay benefits.

I can think of so many other families all across this country. Rachel and Rob Samulack are from here in Ottawa. They had to tell their story many times to numerous Service Canada agents to be able to try to fight for benefits to get some kind of opportunity to grieve. She was ultimately forced to return to work. She cut back her hours but returned to work before she was ready.

I think of Paula Harmon in Nova Scotia, who wasn't able to get the sickness benefits by claiming she was receiving them for grief. She was told by a Service Canada official that the bereavement of a child was not something that would qualify her for sickness benefits. If she were just to go back to a doctor and get them to say something else was the reason, maybe she could qualify for sickness benefits.

I think about the mother who is a teacher in Saskatchewan, who was in much the same situation and had to go back to work and be asked questions by her young elementary school students over and over again about what happened to her child.

I can think of people in similar situations all across the country. I can think about a mother in Manitoba who was told she had to go back to the bank to repay the benefits. She couldn't even do that online or anything else. She had to go in person to repay the benefits the government was asking her to repay, and she couldn't bear it. She physically could not do it. She was physically ill in the parking lot thinking about the idea of going into the bank, because she was in a small town and she was going to be asked, of course, where her baby was.

I can think of another fellow I just met the other day in Vancouver by the name of Timothy, who just lost his child about a month ago and was clearly still in horrible stages of grief. You could see it in his face and you could hear it in his voice. He is still having a really difficult time. He was sent home by the hospital with no information, no idea as to what to do next, and no information on what support might be available, and not in a position to be able to even approach the system to figure that out.

I clearly have heard far too many heartbreaking stories. This committee will hear some of those stories as well. I can't imagine anyone hearing those stories and not wanting to help. There are parents who have experienced the same frustrations. They all have the same plea. They are asking for a system that is more compassionate, a system that helps to ease that burden of grief they are suffering from.

Parents are forced to fill out needless bureaucratic paperwork. They have to personally visit Service Canada locations. They are being forced to share their stories countless times with Service Canada agents, and they are simply not ready to do that. They are simply not ready. When they are forced to put themselves through this ordeal, they often end up traumatized as a result.

It really affects their ability to properly heal. We have to fix this situation. We have to look at ways that we can provide a benefit that will allow parents a little time to grieve. We have to find a way to make it so they don't have to suffer and fight through the system. Many are not in a position to do that. That's just not something that they're in a mental or emotional state to do. We shouldn't force them to do it.

In the absence of government support, many parents have turned their sorrow into action. They've taken opportunities to advocate for better support and compassion for the thousands of other families affected by this situation every year. They raise funds. They organize walks. They speak up and courageously share their stories.

You'll hear from the Cormiers, who are one of those families. They do that over and over and over again, but they shouldn't have to do that. We should be there for them and provide what they need. The emotional turmoil a family is going through when they discover that they've lost a newborn is difficult enough; when we force these parents to visit Service Canada and make these phone calls to banks and other institutions to find out what's available to them, it is not something they should have to do. That's clearly a flaw in our system. It's a problem that we can and must fix.

It's time for us as parliamentarians to join in helping the families that have suffered through this tragedy of pregnancy and infant loss. We believe we can do more to stand up and find better ways to support Canadian families by listening to the parents who have lost an infant.

I want to thank all of those who've helped to get this motion to the point where we're studying it here in committee. People have written letters, signed petitions and called their members of Parliament. I want to thank the MPs from all sides who've helped to push this issue along, but we aren't done yet. Having a study at committee isn't enough. There can't be any excuses. Words aren't enough. Symbolism isn't enough. We can't just stand by and have this study and then let it gather dust on a shelf somewhere. We actually have to take action.

Please, please, committee members, I urge you to make some recommendations and to be forceful about the fact that you expect the government to take action.

Please, we need to do this.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

Thank you, Mr. Richards.

We will now hear from Lee and Sarah Cormier.

The next seven minutes are yours.

[Lee Cormier, Chair, Quinn's Legacy Run Society]

Thank you. We'll take our quick seven minutes here just to give you an idea of our story.

Picture yourself the day after you've lost your four-month-old child. What does that look like? What goes through your mind? Your child is gone. You have to tell your friends and family. You have to explain death to your other child and why her sister is gone. A husband has to tell his work why he can't come in. Your wife's breasts ache to feed your baby, because that doesn't end with the death of a child.

What do you do now? Why don't I feel like getting out of bed? Did we eat today? What day is it? How do we get through the next few minutes, let alone weeks or months? Is there someone else like me? This hasn't happened to anyone else I know.

What doesn't go through your mind is: Who do I call about parental benefits? Do I need to inform anyone? What happens if I get another payment now that my child is gone? How do I pay my bills?

I can't answer the first questions for you. I still don't have all of the answers, but I'd like to talk to you about the things you don't think of.

When your child dies, parental benefits are cut off. If you do not inform the federal government of the loss and you receive any other payment, you'll be required to repay it. In 2014, we had to pay back January's child tax credit. Quinn died on December 28. On January 3 we had her funeral and on January 5 we stood in line at Service Canada. The employee told us we were lucky that we didn't have to pay back the next week's benefit. The words she used were “Your child ceases to exist, so therefore the benefits will cease to exist.”

Your bills will continue to come to you. The world doesn't stop. This means that most Canadian families will be required to return to work long before they're ready.

We are personally blessed with an amazing support system. Our family and friends rallied around us and cared for us. We had people to ask the right questions and sit on hold with Service Canada to get the answers, and still we had to go to the office. I personally know families that had to pay back one, two, three, or even more months of benefits. We have family members who would pay our bills out of their own pocket so that we could have the time to grieve. I know of families that have had to return to work the next week because they couldn't afford to be off.

The trauma of losing a child is not something that should be taken lightly. The victim of an accident is covered by disability insurance and someone who has lost a limb is covered, but someone who is not in their right mind because of their loss has nothing.

We're asking for a commitment of 12 weeks out of the lifetime that should have been spent. The federal government is already committed to funding 12 months of dirty diapers and sleepless nights. We're asking for a commitment of 12 weeks of tears and sorrow, remembering and grieving.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

First up is MP Barlow, please.

[John Barlow]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank the Cormiers for coming here and telling us your story. I can't imagine how difficult that is, but all of us are touched. What our colleague Mr. Kmiec also went through brings it much closer to home as well, as it does when one of your good friends has to experience it, as I'm sure your family and friends know.

To my colleague Mr. Richards, I appreciate the work you've done on this issue.

I honestly didn't realize the obstacles and hurdles that you as parents had to face. The testimony we had today from you and from the officials shows that we have a significant gap in our system when we are asking parents to go through this process. Whether it's the language that was used at Service Canada or the fact that your child passing away on a Tuesday was more beneficial than a Thursday, it can be quite frustrating.

Sarah and Lee, from your own experiences—and you heard the officials here this morning as well—what would you like to see come from this? What are some of the obstacles or hindrances that you would like to see changed as part of this study, to make that very difficult situation at least a little easier for you and your family?

[Sarah Cormier, Vice-Chair, Quinn's Legacy Run Society]

I can answer that. For me, the sickness benefits were mentioned quite often this morning. I had used the sickness benefits prior to the birth of Quinn because the pregnancy was considered high risk, so I wasn't entitled to that. I believe I'm not the only person who would use those sickness benefits prior to the birth of a child. I know I had used them previously, again, with our most recent birth of a child. The biggest hindrance, I guess, is just as Lee said. There we were on the Monday, just two days after we had laid Quinn to rest, at the Service Canada office, standing in line with everyone else, holding that death certificate, just shaking, not knowing what to do. That was the first time we had to tell the story, and we were telling it very publicly. That's a huge hindrance.

We had family and friends try to call on our behalf, but they needed to hear from us, so that's why we ended up down there.

We looked online. Obviously, our generation looks online automatically, and there was nothing online on the Service Canada website that directed us as to what to do. There was information on what you should do if you lost a parent or you lost your spouse, but not on what you should do if you lost your child.

He spoke this morning about cancelling cards. Quinn was four months old. We had just received her birth certificate and we had just received her health care card, and now we were receiving a death certificate. We got the death certificate way faster, within minutes, versus getting a birth certificate. We kept them both. It's so painful to hold them both in your hands and know that someone else holds that in their hands, not knowing what they're going to do next.

[John Barlow]

Thank you.

Blake, maybe it's a bit easier for you to talk about some of the things. I know you've had lots of discussions with lots of families who have experienced this. I know the work you've done on this. Maybe you can articulate a little on what you're hoping to achieve. From the stories from people like the Cormiers, what are some of the things that you'd like to see changed as part of this study, and some of the recommendations? Are there some specific things you'd like to see come out of this study?

[Blake Richards]

I think the key to this whole thing is that we have to find a way to recognize the grief that these parents are suffering with a special benefit that applies to them. We're hearing, and we heard it this morning from the Service Canada officials, that this or that might work or maybe could apply, and everything is about trying to find a way to put it in another place where it doesn't belong.

Sarah correctly mentioned that many people going through a difficult pregnancy might use those sick leave provisions that are available during the pregnancy, so then they're not eligible to access them. That's most frequently cited here as something that could be used, but it won't be possible if someone's used them already.

I can tell you the story of Paula Harmon, in Nova Scotia, and how she went through a whole process. These are the people who are strong enough to be able to even go through the process. You heard Sarah just now talk about how difficult that was. Some people just aren't able to bear putting themselves through the numerous phone calls and visits that are required to do this stuff. If they can bear to do that, if they have the strength, they still may not be able to get the sickness benefits. Her story was that the Service Canada person came back and said, “Look, bereavement of a child does not qualify you for sickness benefits, but maybe if you could get back to the doctor and get them to write something else, like stress, maybe you could get them then.” Could you imagine being told that by a government official?

I think what is needed here is the ability. There are other examples of similar situations in which we provide benefits like this for specific situations. Anyone who's a parent should be able to appreciate and understand that losing a child would be the most difficult situation that any of us could ever go through. Could we not show a little compassion and provide some kind of benefit to allow people a little time to grieve and get over this terrible, tragic circumstance, and not force them to spend that time dealing with Service Canada agents, banks, and other institutions, with numerous phone calls?

I can tell you stories of people who had to share their story 10 or 12 times with government officials in order to try to fight for benefits. Why are we doing that to these people? Let's make this something that they can receive automatically that will be tailored for their needs. I think it's the least we can do.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

Thank you.

Now we'll go to MP Boissonnault. Welcome to our committee, sir.

[Randy Boissonnault, Liberal, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and thank you, everybody.

Mr. and Mrs. Cormier, thank you for being here and for your story.

I experienced what you experienced as a sibling and as a child. When I came into the world, my parents had already lost one infant in 1969. I was born in 1970. I saw my dad cry for the first time in 1975 when we lost my sister, Lisa, and then Gilles didn't come home from the hospital. He was hydrocephalic. He was missing a ventricle in his heart and died 10 days after he was born. That's when I started my battle with faith and God, because how do you take a 10-day-old baby away? Then we lost my sister at 20 years old.

I don't know how a marriage survives after losing four kids, but they did it. The government wasn't there. Nobody was there. We had family. We had faith. We had friends. I remember days and weeks of food just arriving, because nobody was cooking. You don't know what day of the week it is. You don't even want to get up.

This was as a sibling. When I took my sister's books back to MacEwan and they asked me why I wanted to take the books back, I just looked at them with steely eyes and said, “Death.” I wasn't Mr. Nice Guy. I was still grieving over the loss of my sister.

We don't need a piece of legislation to go to see Minister Duclos today and tell him that his people in Service Canada need better training. You don't talk about a human being ceasing to exist and so your benefits cease to exist. That's just wrong. We can do that today.

You are here, and you're very brave. I want to thank you both. My condolences to you for your loss.

Mr. Richards, thanks for putting this on our radar screen. I know you've been in politics a lot longer than I have. Is employment insurance the best place for this idea? I'm not sure that it captures the full Venn diagram of who you're intending to catch and who I would want to catch, as an uncle.

You don't have to agree politically with the CCB, but it's clean. If you're on the tax rolls, you get the benefit. I wonder if this is a similar thing, so that if you're a parent and you have a child and that child passes away, the death certificate at Service Canada is all you need. It doesn't go through the EI system. It's automatic that if your child dies, and they're 18 or younger—because they would qualify for the benefits otherwise—those benefits should go to you for the 12 weeks that the guests are proposing.

You could do it out of the maternal/paternal benefits for the first zero to 12 months, but that won't cover everybody from one to 17. Maybe there is a CCB parallel here that's just a child bereavement benefit program. We could run it through finance and run it through the tax rolls, because people won't qualify through EI. There are two million claims. People are going to get lost in the shuffle. Quite frankly, they're not going to fight to the same degree that somebody's going to fight for in the case of the weekly benefits, because they don't have their full wits about them.

I know how difficult it is to get to where you are with your piece of legislation. I'm not suggesting that you're going to change the whole world about this. Would you be prepared to look at whether there was a cleaner way to get the benefits to the people who were asking for them? I'd be happy to go talk to Minister Morneau and his team to say that this seems to me to be a cleaner way to get to this end state.

[Blake Richards]

First of all, that's the purpose of the study—for the committee to look at the options that are available and make some recommendations in terms of what this would look like. The key for me in this and in my thoughts, having talked to many of these parents and families all across the country, is that it's a fairly widely held belief that the crucial aspect is that something be done that will provide a reasonable period of time to grieve. Through the course of your study, we'll certainly hear from experts in grief and medical experts and others who can give us some suggestions on how long that should be.

Then there must be something that would replace the income so someone doesn't have to return to work. Also, it would be automatic, or very close to it, so that the parents don't have to go and fight for it and they don't have to tell their stories over and over again. I'm certainly not married to how that would be delivered, but that it be done. Those are the key principles in that.

[Randy Boissonnault, Liberal, Edmonton Centre, AB]

I don't sit at HUMA, so I'm coming in with fresh eyes. If you can have a clean way.... It seems to me that one of the cleanest things we've done is the CCB. It's automatic. Nine out of 10 families get it.

I have a question for Mr. and Mrs. Cormier. You mentioned that the 12 months of diapers were going to get paid for anyway, so why couldn't we have three months? Does it make sense to you to have one benefit—whether it's the maternity benefit or the Canada Child Benefit—for three months, or should both be in place? Does it matter to you? What would have helped you?

[Lee Cormier]

Really, again, we're kind of of the same intent, the same attitude, as Mr. Richards. At that point in a family's grief, they're not really concerned with where the benefits are coming from or who is supporting them. It's just that there is a place for the government to support these families, no matter which way it comes.

[Randy Boissonnault, Liberal, Edmonton Centre, AB]

I appreciate that, because the bills pile up and you don't want to open the mail.

[Lee Cormier]

They do.

[Randy Boissonnault, Liberal, Edmonton Centre, AB]

You just want to make sure that at the end of the couple of months, everything's going to balance—

[Lee Cormier]

Right.

[Randy Boissonnault, Liberal, Edmonton Centre, AB]

—and you're not going to be in the hole.

I appreciate your sharing your story with us today. Thank you both.

Thanks, Blake.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

Thank you very much.

MP Sansoucy is next.

[Brigitte Sansoucy, NDP, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I would like to thank my colleague Mr. Richards for getting us to reflect on this issue.

I would also like to thank you, Mr. and Mrs. Cormier. I understand all the courage it took for you to come and live these moments before us and share your story with us. Thank you for doing so on behalf of all the parents who have experienced the same situation as you.

As MPs, we have heard stories from fellow citizens in our respective ridings, and I find it interesting to see how our questions go in much the same direction.

In the first hour, Service Canada officials told us that we could consider excluding special benefits from the employment insurance program, and I found that interesting. I think the employment insurance program is not the right vehicle for special benefits, as your testimony has shown. A person experiencing bereavement or illness cannot be asked to navigate the same path as a person who has just lost their job.

The senior official told us that it would be possible to have government programs that are not funded from the employment insurance fund, which, in any case, is already insufficient to meet the benefit demands of those who lose their jobs.

You made it clear: women, especially those living in provinces where there is no preventive withdrawal system as there is in Quebec, find themselves in situations where they no longer have access to benefits. To access other benefits, they would have to return to work to accumulate enough hours.

As you said, it is difficult to access or navigate Service Canada programs. In Quebec, organizations such as the Mouvement action-chômage help people navigate the employment insurance program. These organizations receive many requests, but they are underfunded. The Government of Quebec gives little recognition to their contribution because they are linked to a federal law.

These advocacy organizations are therefore the least funded of all community organizations. Senior officials told us that it is not just a matter of benefits. There is also all the support that can be given to those who make requests.

While we were preparing our study, we found that there were benefits for victims of crime. It is a full-fledged program that allows the recipient to return to work part time while continuing to receive benefits, under terms and conditions specific to the program. This is really a smart way to avoid having to use the employment insurance fund. It is a dedicated program that takes into account the particularities of what people in this situation experience.

In your opinion, should we consider implementing a program similar to the one that exists for victims of crime and that is not part of the employment insurance program?

[Blake Richards]

Again, I'll reiterate that I'm not married to how the benefit would be delivered. I think the key principles here are that it be something that allows the correct period of time for parents to grieve and deal with the situation that they're suffering through, that it be something that replaces income so they don't have to worry about work when they're not in a position to be able to do that, and that it be something that be automatic, or close to automatic, so that they don't have to deal with all the bureaucratic hurdles and nightmares that we're putting families and parents through right now. I believe it certainly could work under the EI system because there are other special types of benefits that are available under the EI system and we've proven that it could work that way, but I don't think that's the only way it could be done, certainly. If there are other ways this could work that can be suggested.... As long as those principles are intact in terms of the three things I've outlined there, I believe that it could work in other ways as well.

[Brigitte Sansoucy, NDP, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

I also think that our committee must have the necessary openness to explore various avenues. If we think, for example, of the Service Canada system, could we make a recommendation that the government, which stopped contributing to the employment insurance fund in the early 1990s, should make a contribution that reflects our willingness, as parliamentarians, to help these people?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

Thank you.

Wayne, you're up.

[Wayne Long, Liberal, Saint John—Rothesay, NB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

To the Cormiers, I'm so sorry for your loss, and I do thank you for the courage to come in and tell us your story so that we can learn and we can work together. As Mr. Richards said, this isn't a partisan issue. This is an issue on which all parties should come together and do what's right.

Lee, one thing you talked about when you were speaking to us was that you couldn't have gotten through it without the support of family, friends and what have you. It's quite obvious that a lot of people who go through this don't have that family support system. Can you just share with us what's out there for support through non-government organizations and other organizations? I want to focus on the support available.

I'm so sorry about what happened to you at Service Canada. As MPs, we deal with that day in and day out. People are calling and complaining that they were treated like a number and weren't treated with any compassion on many issues. Not to defend the Service Canada workers at all, but I think after a certain amount of time they almost become dehumanized because the phone calls just keep coming and coming. You see it all the time.

I guess this is where my head is right at this moment: Are there organizations out there across the country that potentially government could work with and support—whether it's financially or what have you—to offer that personal touch and show compassion to people who need it? Can you share with us your opinions?

Blake, I'll get your opinion on that afterward.

[Lee Cormier]

Sure. Thank you.

All I can speak of is our own experience, really.