Human Resources Committee on Nov. 7th, 2018

[The Vice-Chair, Mr. John Barlow (Foothills, CPC)]

I call the meeting to order.

We have a long night ahead of us, so we're going to get started. We have a bit of an introduction before we get started on clause-by-clause study.

I also want to take a quick moment to say for all of us that our thoughts are with our chair Bryan and his family. To our Liberal colleagues, please pass that on to Bryan when you see him.

We've gone through this in previous meetings, and I understand that most of you know about it, but we will just go through the introduction to explain a bit about some of the infrastructure that's here in the committee room with us.

Welcome to today's meeting on Bill C-81, an act to ensure a barrier-free Canada. The objective of today's meeting is to begin the committee's clause-by-clause consideration of the bill.

I would like to take a moment to remind those participating in the proceedings, as well as those observing the proceedings of the committee in person or on video, that the committee adopted a motion on September 18 that included instructions for the clerk to explore options to allow for the full participation on this study of all witnesses and members of the public.

As a result, the committee has made arrangements to make all meetings in relation to Bill C-81 as accessible as possible in a variety of ways. This includes providing sign language interpretation and near real-time closed captioning in the room.

Please note that both American Sign Language and Quebec Sign Language are being offered to those who are in our audience. For those who would like to watch the American Sign Language interpretation, please sit on the benches to my left, and for those who would like to watch Quebec Sign Language interpretation, please sit on the benches to my right.

In addition, please note that the first two rows of benches have been reserved for those who wish to avail themselves of these interpretation services. Screens displaying the near real-time closed captioning have also been set up, with the English text to my left and the French text to my right. The sign language interpreters in the room are also being videorecorded for the eventual broadcast of this meeting on ParlVU via the committee's website.

In light of these arrangements, the committee asks that if you need to leave the room during the meeting, please do not walk in front of the sign language interpreters. Instead, please use the extremities of the room. In addition, we would ask that those in the room remain seated as much as possible during the meeting. We want to ensure that everyone in the audience can clearly see the sign language interpretation.

Finally, if a member of the audience requires assistance at any time, please notify a member of the staff or a committee clerk and we will try to address the issue.

In addition, for my colleagues, as you are well aware, please speak in a relatively slower tone so that our interpreters can keep pace with the discussion that's happening here this evening.

I'd like to take a moment to welcome the officials who are with us here this evening and are going to be helping us with any questions that we may have on some of the amendments in the clause-by-clause study. Also, we have some guests with us this evening. We'll get to that in a moment.

From the Department of Employment and Social Development Accessibility Secretariat, we have with us James Van Raalte, director general, accessibility secretariat. James, thanks very much for being with us again. We also have Benoît Gendron, director, and Erik Lapalme, senior policy analyst.

Also, we have with us Ms. Elizabeth May. Thank you very much for joining us this evening, Ms. May. You'll have some opportunity to put your amendments forward.

Pursuant to the order of reference for Wednesday, September 26, 2018, Bill C-81, an act to ensure a barrier-free Canada, is what we are discussing this evening.

We've introduced our witnesses from the department, and now we will begin our clause-by-clause discussion.

Pursuant to Standing Order 75(1), consideration of clause 1, the short title and the preamble are postponed, and we will now begin with clause 2.

(On clause 2)

We have amendment CPC-1 on clause 2. Is there any discussion?

[Kerry Diotte, Edmonton Griesbach, CPC]

Yes, Mr. Chair.

I think clause 2 should be amended by adding the word “law” to the definition of “barrier”. This change would help ensure that the barriers created by federal laws are identified, removed and prevented. I move that Bill C-81 in clause 2 be amended by replacing line 11 on page 2 with the following:

that is the result of a law, a policy or a practice—that hinders

[The Vice-Chair, Mr. John Barlow]

Thank you very much, Mr. Diotte.

Is there any discussion on CPC-1? Seeing none, I will call the vote.

(Amendment negatived)

We'll move to LIB-1. Is there any discussion on LIB-1?

Go ahead, Mr. Morrissey.

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

The amendment to this particular clause is to add

an impairment, including

and it continues. This will ensure that the list of impairments in the definition is not an exhaustive list.

We're also adding “cognitive” to the list of potential impairments that, in interaction with a barrier, could hinder a person's full and equal participation in society.

[The Vice-Chair, Mr. John Barlow]

Thank you very much, Mr. Morrissey.

Is there any further discussion on LIB-1? Seeing none, I will call the vote.

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings] )

Moving on to LIB-2, is there any discussion?

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Mr. Chair, we're adding the word “cognitive” to the list of potential impairments that, in interaction with a barrier, could hinder a person's full and equal participation in society.

As well, it adds “evident or not” to ensure that invisible disabilities are recognized in the definition, and “any impairment, including” to ensure that the list of impairments in the definition is not an exhaustive list.

[The Vice-Chair, Mr. John Barlow]

Thank you very much, Mr. Morrissey.

I want to mention that if LIB-2 is adopted, CPC-2 cannot be moved as it will be in conflict.

Is there any further discussion on LIB-2?

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

I'm wondering about the difference here between having “cognitive” and “intellectual”.

You're proposing to add “cognitive” there?

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

Yes.

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

How does that affect “intellectual”?

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

This simply adds to the list on interaction with a barrier that could hinder a person's full and equal participation. This came from testimony that was given during the witness hearing process.

[The Vice-Chair, Mr. John Barlow]

Is there any further discussion on LIB-2? Seeing none—

Sorry; go ahead, Ms. Falk.

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

I'm just trying to gather my thoughts. I feel that we're moving very quickly. I want to make sure this gets done correctly, if that's okay.

[The Vice-Chair, Mr. John Barlow]

Yes.

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Can you reread the amendment, please?

[Bobby Morrissey, Liberal, Egmont, PE]

We're adding the word “cognitive” to the list of potential impairments.

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Could we propose an amendment to your amendment? If we added “disability includes”, it would be “includes any impairment, including”.

[The Vice-Chair, Mr. John Barlow]

Can you clarify where exactly in the amendment you would want that added?

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Right at the beginning, so it would read “disability includes any impairment, physical, mental, intellectual, cognitive”.

[The Vice-Chair, Mr. John Barlow]

I see what you're saying. Rather than saying “disability means” you want to say “disability includes” any impairment.

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

That's correct.

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

Does that change the essence? We have it as an “impairment, including a physical, mental, intellectual, cognitive, learning, communication...”. Does the way that you're proposing it actually change anything because of the order that it's going in? I don't know.

[The Vice-Chair, Mr. John Barlow]

The clerks are just taking a look.

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

The clerks are doing what clerks do.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!