Human Resources Committee on Oct. 24th, 2018

[Marie Bountrogianni]

I can speak from the post-secondary education point of view about having people with disabilities be the professors teaching these topics—teaching any topic, quite frankly, but particularly teaching these topics. That's what we are doing, and it's incredibly enlightening for the adult students.

[Patrick Falconer]

There are always learning opportunities.

When the first AMA was being passed in Manitoba, there was a standing committee like this. It was an earlier bill. We knew many people were coming who were going to require accommodation supports or communication accommodations. I spoke to the clerk at the legislative assembly and asked if these things were being arranged. The person said, without missing a beat that they didn't have those fancy things there.

That was a moment for me to be able to say that participation in the democratic process is a right of citizenship, and this is not a fancy thing. That person will never say that again. It wasn't a rebuke. I was just saying that they had to think this through differently. I think those learning opportunities become really important.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

Thank you.

We'll go back to MP Ruimy, please.

[Dan Ruimy, Liberal, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Mr. Falconer, when we're trying to understand where we've been trying to go.... I'll correct the record, you didn't say “failure”. I understood something differently, but you said there was great disappointment with the 10-year timeline. You mentioned that you felt part of the reason was that there wasn't a champion for that. Governments will come and go. Maybe you get one champion, but then when the next government comes along, you don't have a champion.

Would you say that creating a framework with CASDO...? Would you see them as the champion because they're the ones creating that framework, putting things in place?

[Patrick Falconer]

I think they can be a more effective champion if they report to Parliament than to the government. That would be one area regarding some independence.

I would have dismissed some of the discussions regarding having timelines and having language that required action. Ten years ago I would have said we didn't need those kinds of things, but the reality is that we are now much more able to advocate for government to fulfill its obligations, when we have real obligations for them to fulfill, than when it's a matter of being permissive and saying we're doing the best we can and we're making progress. It's better now than it was five years ago. To have hard deliverables gives us the opportunity as a community to be able to say this is what was promised, this is what's required and they need us to be making stronger efforts.

I also think allowing the community to be a champion is important, and part of that is by having requirements and timelines.

[Dan Ruimy, Liberal, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Coming to timelines, listening to some of the testimony.... When we're talking federally built infrastructure, and we look at a lot of the banks and the federally regulated infrastructure, a lot of them are already up to date with ramps and so on.

We heard from the banking system. Royal Bank already has the technology where you can go to a machine and it will talk to you, but then we started hearing about a whole different range. When we're talking about disability, we're no longer just talking about somebody in a wheelchair or somebody who is physically disabled, but who has speech, hearing and vision impairments. Technology is changing so rapidly, the fear is that putting something on a hard timeline will take away from innovation.

Again, looking at some of the federally regulated departments, a lot of them are on the cutting edge, such as airports. For example, at Vancouver International Airport, I was coming back from a trip and I saw about 20 people in wheelchairs wandering around. I asked them what they were doing and I found out they were employees. They were going through their training, which is fantastic, but you're not mandating that. Somebody said they needed to figure out this part. They needed to be able to think like their customers who are coming in and how they are accessing services there. That wasn't mandated. That wasn't legislated. That is going beyond.

How do we capture that, but not put that in the legislation? Because you'll never get that in legislation, I don't think.

Marie.

[Marie Bountrogianni]

I can talk about the AODA. The standards are reviewed and updated every few years. It's not just the customers who are coming in; it's also employees, as you mentioned. Through lack of education, some people may not know the real cost of accommodating an employee, but the average cost is only $500. It's not very expensive to have an accommodation for someone with a disability to work anywhere. Of course, some are more and some are less, but a $500 average isn't very much. What that does to the education and the culture of the rest of the office, or wherever they're working, is an incredible gain.

The employment standard review is now unfrozen, so we'll get on with it, but it's a 2011 standard. If there are innovations, and there certainly have been innovations every day in technology, they can be addressed through the reviews.

[Dan Ruimy, Liberal, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

I agree. It's a matter of what those timelines are based on.

I'm going to share the rest of my time with Mr. Harvey.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

That's less than a minute. It's very generous of you.

We will likely have time for an additional mini-round, so Mr. Harvey, do you have a brief question or maybe Bobby has a follow-up one?

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Yes. I'd like Mr. Adair to speak about what we got cut off on earlier.

[Bill Adair]

Remind me.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

If you've slipped a bit....

[Bill Adair]

I think it was about—

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

It was about accessibility versus rights, but I'll leave that because—

[Bill Adair]

Yes, I can speak to that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

Be very brief.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Be brief, because I have two questions.

[Bill Adair]

Access and inclusion are really vital. That's where it's at, so I would add inclusion to the work that's under way with the act. The access and the inclusion open all kinds of possibilities.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Okay.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

MP Diotte, please.

[Kerry Diotte, Edmonton Griesbach, CPC]

This is to Mr. Belanger. You said that Bill C-81 will impact first nations substantially, so substantial resources must be allotted to the first nations. Can you give me any idea of what that looks like? Do you have a dollar figure?

[Neil Belanger]

I don't but it will be significant, I would imagine.

[Kerry Diotte]

What is significant? What does it look like, then? What kinds of resources, at least?

[Neil Belanger]

I would say that the majority of the resources that will be necessary are to the built environment, the physical environment when it comes to roads, housing, accessible buildings and that type of thing, and then a review of the policies. It will be millions upon millions of dollars to look at all communities in Canada.

[Kerry Diotte]

Are you especially concerned about northern communities, isolated communities?