Evidence of meeting #124 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 clause.
A video is available from Parliament.
8:25 a.m.
Liberal
Bobby Morrissey Liberal Egmont, PE
Mr. Chair, these are consequential as a result of the amendments made and approved in LIB-5 and LIB-6.
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
8:25 a.m.
Conservative
Rosemarie Falk Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK
This clause would be amended to say:
The accessibility plan must include a statement on how it will contribute to the realization of a Canada without barriers.
Basically, it's adding a provision requiring accessibility plans to relate to the purpose of the act and to be prepared and implemented in accordance with the principles of the act. Plans should address how they will contribute to achieving a Canada without barriers by the date specified in the act. These changes would strengthen the effectiveness of the accessibility plans and help to ensure that barrier identification, prevention and removal address issues of intersectionality and poverty.
(Amendment negatived)
8:30 a.m.
NDP
Cheryl Hardcastle NDP Windsor—Tecumseh, ON
Mr. Chair, once again, this amendment is just underscoring the need for the effectiveness of Bill C-81 moving forward, and the accessibility commissioner is the rightful office that should be notified, not the CRTC.
Basically the CRTC is enforcing and notifying itself where they need to be answerable to the accessibility commissioner.
8:30 a.m.
The Vice-Chair Mr. John Barlow
Thank you very much, Ms. Hardcastle.
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
8:30 a.m.
NDP
Cheryl Hardcastle NDP Windsor—Tecumseh, ON
There are several of these.
I do want to underscore that the way it's articulated here, because it is federal jurisdictions, these will be people who work in the public sector and have a collective agreement so we need to be able to work that in just for the logistics of being able to carry out these specifics. For people who have collective agreements, these agreements also need to be included in the process.
8:30 a.m.
NDP
Cheryl Hardcastle NDP Windsor—Tecumseh, ON
Could we have a recorded vote, please.
(Amendment negatived: nays 7; yeas 1 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
8:30 a.m.
Liberal
Wayne Long Liberal Saint John—Rothesay, NB
Mr. Chair, when we had witnesses before the committee, there was a concern expressed that regulated entities are not required to develop an effective accessibility plan. Even before regulations are in place, this amendment which I will read in a second will help ensure that accessibility plans developed under the act are effective and consistent with the principles that define our approach to accessibility.
I move that Bill C-81, in clause 42, be amended by adding after line 3 on page 17 the following:
(9) The regulated entity must take into account the principles set out in section 6 when it prepares an accessibility plan or an updated version of its accessibility plan.
(Amendment agreed to)
(Clause 42 as amended agreed to)
8:30 a.m.
Conservative
Rosemarie Falk Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK
Mr. Chair, we're moving quite quickly. Is it okay if we have a three-minute suspension just so we can catch up?
8:30 a.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
8:40 a.m.
The Vice-Chair Mr. John Barlow
We're back.
I'm sure everybody is refreshed after a few minutes' break. Another handful of bacon will get everyone's energy up for sure.
(On clause 43)
We now move to clause 43, on which we have NDP-10.
8:40 a.m.
NDP
Cheryl Hardcastle NDP Windsor—Tecumseh, ON
Once again, any regulated entity that is expected to comply with this accessibility act and seeks an exemption or is going to fall short of the mark doesn't report to the CRTC in this case but reports to the accessibility commissioner.
November 8th, 2018 / 8:40 a.m.
Gordie Hogg South Surrey—White Rock, Lib.
I'm in agreement with a number of the principles that have come forward, but the procedure or the placement of them becomes questionable, whether it's legislation, regulation, or as we heard yesterday, with respect to accreditation and the other areas and responsibilities that they fall in.
As a principle, a number of things that have been said are positive. I just don't believe they should be placed in the legislation. I believe they should be followed through another place. I just need to clarify that for my own sense of well-being—which, of course, goes with the bacon.
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
(Clause 43 agreed to)
(On clause 44)
8:40 a.m.
NDP
Cheryl Hardcastle NDP Windsor—Tecumseh, ON
Once again, I do appreciate that we're going to have nuanced and finessed regulations that are going to be constantly evolving. This is the foundation. This is historic legislation that needs to create the strong foundation of how this is going to take place.
Once again, it is extremely important that the accessibility commissioner be the one who is notified. That has to be in the legislation. That is foundational; that is not regulation.
8:45 a.m.
The Vice-Chair Mr. John Barlow
Is there any further discussion?
Do you want to wait until they have more bacon and then we'll see?