Evidence of meeting #117 for Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was standards.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Marina Mandal  Assistant General Counsel, Canadian Bankers Association
Mary Ann McColl  Professor, Queen's University, Canadian Disability Policy Alliance
Teri Monti  Vice-President, Employee Relations, Royal Bank of Canada
John Barlow  Foothills, CPC
Tasmin Waley  Senior Legal Counsel, Canadian Bankers Association
Gordie Hogg  South Surrey—White Rock, Lib.
Kerry Diotte  Edmonton Griesbach, CPC
David Errington  President and Chief Executive Officer, Accessible Media Inc.
Robert Lattanzio  Executive Director, ARCH Disability Law Centre
Scott Shortliffe  Chief Consumer Officer and Executive Director, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
Kerri Joffe  Staff Lawyer, ARCH Disability Law Centre

10:40 a.m.

Executive Director, ARCH Disability Law Centre

Robert Lattanzio

It's certainly better than.... If that's going to be the system, then we want to make sure that the complaint lands where it needs to land. I think the real issue is that when you have an overly complex system, it's best to remedy that system, as opposed to creating band-aid solutions.

As we discussed earlier, we already have various incredibly complex tribunal processes that persons with disabilities really struggle through. There is a lack of legal representation and a lack of legal aid that covers a lot of these areas like human rights, for example. It's really difficult for us to say that this is a solution.

We also might think about, from an accessibility perspective and an access to justice perspective, what it means if someone can make a complaint to a body, and it's up to that body, up to a bureaucratic decision, where that complaint goes. I think we would have some very serious concerns around the lack of control and the disempowerment that this mechanism plays on the complainant.

Again,if we had a system in which we had assurances of legal support, for example, I think my answer might be a little bit different—probably not—but there are no supports in place here.

10:40 a.m.

Liberal

Wayne Long Liberal Saint John—Rothesay, NB

Thank you for that.

I also want to get your opinion on the CASDO board, diversity on the board, and subclause 23(2). Is there a way to amend that, potentially, that allows for more diversity on the board in the disability community?

10:40 a.m.

Executive Director, ARCH Disability Law Centre

Robert Lattanzio

Certainly we would suggest, as do our colleagues in disability communities, that we would want as much representation as possible given the diversity, intersectionality and multiple disabilities.

I want to make a point that I haven't heard yet. We talk a lot about the makeup of the CASDO board, but we haven't really talked about the makeup of the committees that are doing a lot of that work in standards development. I think we have a concern that there hasn't really been a lot of attention to ensuring representation on those committees.

10:40 a.m.

Liberal

Wayne Long Liberal Saint John—Rothesay, NB

Thank you.

10:40 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bryan May

You have about a minute left.

10:40 a.m.

Liberal

Wayne Long Liberal Saint John—Rothesay, NB

Well, if we have a minute, does anyone else want to comment on the makeup of the CASDO board? Should each disability community be represented as best possible? Should it be 50% plus 1 or 70%? There are those who say 100%.

Mr. Shortliffe, would you comment?

10:40 a.m.

Chief Consumer Officer and Executive Director, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission

Scott Shortliffe

As a regulatory body, we try to avoid commenting on the government's decisions on the compositions of boards and other regulatory bodies. Certainly we believe there should be strong representation, but we don't have a specific formula that we would advise.

In our case, when we're doing consultations, we consult regularly with groups. Whether they're national like CNIB and the Neil Squire Society or the alliance for deaf Canadians in Alberta, we see that having different points of view represented is key, because as with any Canadians, disabled Canadians have a variety of different views. It's not a monolith. The greater diversity you have, the more informed your decisions will be.

Having said that, we have no specific formula to propose.

10:45 a.m.

Liberal

Wayne Long Liberal Saint John—Rothesay, NB

Thank you.

10:45 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bryan May

Thank you very much.

I'm afraid that's going to have to be the last word.

Not only are we coming up to our time but we can see that the bells are ringing for votes.

I want to remind committee members that some unique times are associated with the next few meetings.

We are going to be meeting tomorrow evening, October 24, from 6:45 to 8:45. Then on the 25th we will be here very early, at 8 a.m., so it will be a late night and an early morning.

I want to thank the witnesses for being here today to contribute to our study on Bill C-81.

As well, thank you to my colleagues and all the people who made today possible.

The meeting is adjourned.