Human Resources Committee on Sept. 26th, 2024

[The Chair (Mr. Robert Morrissey (Egmont, Lib.)), Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

I call the meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 125 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities. Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, meaning some are participating virtually as well as some in the room.

I would like to make a few comments before we begin.

Please address all comments through me, the chair. Wait until I recognize you before you speak. You can get my attention by raising your hand. Those appearing virtually, please click on the “raise hand” icon, and wait until I recognize you.

I also want to advise that, for the protection of interpretation services, when you're not using the earpiece, put it in the assigned location. If you have devices with you, make sure all alarms are turned off, because these noises can cause hearing damage to the interpreters.

As well, you have the option of choosing to participate in the official language of your choice. Again, by using the headset, click on the French or English channel. Virtually, click on the globe icon and choose the official language of your choice. If there is a disruption in interpretation services, please raise your hand. I will suspend while they are being corrected.

With that, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) and the motion adopted by the committee on Thursday, February 8, 2024, the committee commences its study of Canada without barriers by 2040. This motion was moved by Mrs. Falk.

I would like to welcome our witnesses in the room today. From the Department of Employment and Social Development, we have Stephanie Cadieux, chief accessibility officer, office of the chief accessibility officer, via video conference. From the Office of the Auditor General, we have Paule-Anny Pierre, senior assistant auditor general; Milan Duvnjak, principal; and Susie Fortier, director.

We will begin. You have five minutes for your opening remarks.

I understand Ms. Cadieux will be giving the five-minute opening statement.

[Tracy Gray, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Mr. Chair, before we begin, there's something important that I think needs to be brought up at this committee.

I would like to start off by saying that I am wearing a black blazer with a blue shirt, and I have blond hair.

We received, shortly before this meeting began, an email that I was copied on. It was sent to the chair of the committee by one of the witnesses who was supposed to testify today, Christopher Sutton. I reached out to Mr. Sutton, who has given his permission for that email to be read at the committee.

I want to start off by reading the email that came from Christopher Sutton.

He says, “I'm writing to express my disappointment and frustration regarding my recent invitation to appear before the HUMA committee, which was scheduled to discuss the goal of achieving a Canada without barriers by 2040. I was invited to participate at the last minute and dedicated the entire day preparing for my appearance. Unfortunately, I was informed shortly before the meeting that I would not be able to attend due to not using the approved headset. When the committee clerk contacted me, I made it clear that I am deaf and that I use both a cochlear implant and a hearing aid. I also explained that my audio assistive technologies connect directly to my Apple devices for streaming audio, and that I utilize an external microphone for transmitting sound. Wearing a headset is not possible for me. This is not the first time I've met with a government committee, and this accommodation has always been understood as necessary due to my accessibility needs.

“It is deeply ironic that, despite the subject matter of this meeting, my participation was prevented due to barriers related to accessibility. Given my long-standing experience navigating the ableism embedded in government policies and systems, I find this situation not only disappointing but also revealing. It raises important questions about whether the challenges facing the Accessible Canada Act are due to inherent structural issues, and whether the commitment to a barrier-free Canada is as strong as it should be.

“As someone who takes pride in being collaborative and building bridges, I hope this situation can serve as an educational moment for this committee. I encourage you to consider how the committee can take the lead in ensuring its work is truly inclusive and accessible. I've attached the speaking notes I prepared for today's committee meeting. I hope that, along with this email, they can be included in the record.

“I look forward to your response and hope the issue can be addressed so that future engagements are genuinely inclusive and accessible.

“Sincerely, Chris.”

That is the letter this committee received.

It is completely unacceptable that Christopher Sutton is not able to participate in this committee and that the Government of Canada does not have the ability to have Christopher Sutton and others like him testify at a parliamentary committee. Therefore, we need to address this.

Based on that, I would like to move the following motion, which is relevant to this. It's relevant to this committee's work and to the study we're doing.

I move that:

Given that Mr. Christopher Sutton of the Wavefront Centre was invited to participate in the committee's study on the goal of achieving a Canada without barriers by 2040, that Mr. Sutton was blocked from participating in this study because his audio assistive technologies did not meet the committee's or House administration's headset rules, and that this represents a clear barrier to access for deaf, deaf-blind and hard-of-hearing Canadians, the House of Commons administration unreservedly apologize to Mr. Sutton, reschedule the appearance of Mr. Sutton, and investigate the committee's audio device rules and report back on what changes they will be making, within a month, to remove this discriminatory barrier to access.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Mrs. Gray.

Before anybody else wants to speak to this, I have a couple of points.

I will get to you, Mrs. Falk.

I'm as disappointed as you. I was advised late yesterday of the issue. I have a couple of clarifications. You referenced the Government of Canada. This committee is not the Government of Canada. It is the Parliament of Canada. It's the House of Commons. It follows the House of Commons' approved rules and takes direction from the House of Commons.

The information given to me by the clerk was that when Mr. Sutton was tested, the translation bureau said that it was not acceptable. That is independent and related to the House, but I do agree. I cannot proceed with a committee meeting unless it is available in both official languages. I do welcome your comments and agree that we as the House of Commons have to take the steps necessary to ensure that those with disabilities have the ability to appear, especially before the HUMA committee, when they are referenced as a witness.

Before we go to comments on this, I'll ask the clerk to address the steps taken in trying to accommodate Mr. Sutton. It was not my decision. When the translation bureau advises me that a witness communication is not acceptable to the translation bureau, then I cannot proceed.

Again, I just want to be clear that this is not the Government of Canada. This is the Parliament of Canada and the House of Commons. We can collectively give instructions to correct any deficiency that may be there. The rules that this committee operates under are the rules accepted by the House of Commons.

I want the clerk to address the committee on how we arrived at this. Then Mrs. Falk had her hand up and Mr. Fragiskatos.

Witnesses, just bear with us. This is a procedure that the committee has. I accepted the motion moved by Mrs. Gray, and I want it discussed until it's clarified.

The motion of Mrs. Gray is currently being translated, Madame Chabot, but I'm still allowing it to proceed.

The clerk has just advised me that the translation bureau identified to the clerk that they need more time working with the witnesses to address the issue that caused the bureau to advise the committee clerk that they could not provide adequate translation services with the device that was being tested. The timing was not there to correct that. All the proper steps were taken by the clerk and the translation bureau. It was the translation bureau that made the final decision.

That is the approved procedure that I must follow as chair of your committee.

Mrs. Falk is next on the motion by Mrs. Gray. Then it's Mr. Fragiskatos.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

This is really embarrassing. Some of us, MP Long as well as yourself, Chair, were here when we debated Bill C-81, the accessibility act. That was a couple of parliaments ago, but our committee made exponential accommodations to ensure that every Canadian, no matter their disability or ability, was able to be heard.

It was half a decade ago that this was passed. Bill C-81 received royal assent in June 2019. I have the expectation, when we pass legislation in this place and when regulations come into effect, that it be purposeful and that it does what it should be doing.

We've seen with the airline industry that it's not doing what it's supposed to be doing. We heard testimony on that earlier this year; it's not doing what it's supposed to be doing.

From my understanding, I believe the House administration is a federally regulated entity, which would fall under Bill C-81. Therefore, I'm even more gravely concerned that this committee has accommodated persons with disabilities' abilities before, and now, all of a sudden, we can't. We've had a draft working calendar since September 9, the beginning of September. This absolutely shouldn't be happening. We need to make sure that all Canadians are able to be heard, especially.... The irony of this, on the barriers that those with disabilities have, is just outstanding. It's unacceptable. I know that when we had the debate on Bill C-81, when we were studying it at this committee, the Conservatives, the NDP and also the Greens brought up concerns about this, about making sure that the bill had teeth and making sure that employers would have to comply with making sure that all Canadians could participate.

I am so disappointed that we're not able to hear from this witness on such short notice as well. Maybe this does speak to inherent structural issues, but it's just unacceptable.

Chair, absolutely, the comings and goings of this place, of Parliament, the administration of this place is federally regulated, and we just have to do better, especially this committee. It's the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities. This is supposed to be the place, for sure, where Canadians with disabilities should be represented, be heard and be listened to.

Given the fact that this committee has made accommodations in the past, more than once—because this isn't the first time that we've studied disabilities—it's just unacceptable, and I'm just disappointed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Mrs. Falk.

We'll go to Mr. Fragiskatos, and then I'll have comments.

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

My comment is very short, but I agree with the sentiment that's been expressed by colleagues already. It's not just unfortunate but also unacceptable.

I want to see the motion because I want to make sure that it says “House of Commons” so that we can ensure that it's dealt with in the right way. As we know, in the management of committees, all parties can contribute ideas through the Board of Internal Economy, I believe, if I'm not mistaken. Regardless, a Canadian had something of great importance to say here today. The committee would have benefited, and unfortunately that's not going to happen.

Therefore, yes, I don't think you'll find disagreement on this side at all.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

I still do not have Mrs. Gray's motion in both official languages, so I will not deal with it until it has been interpreted and has been circulated.

While we're doing that, Ms. Zarrillo, do you have your hand up...?

It's Madame Chabot.

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I find it utterly deplorable that we find ourselves in this situation. I don't have the motion in front of me yet. There may be things that need to be changed, but I agree with the principle that every effort should be made to allow accessibility for witnesses. This is fundamental. We're talking about that very subject today, and groups have asked us if they could appear.

I asked myself the question because, in my riding, there's a group of deaf and mute people. We checked to see if it was possible to have them testify here. We were told that it was, but we were wondering if there were any barriers to interpretation tools. There shouldn't be, but I think it's more difficult.

I'll agree with the part of the motion that calls for us to invite the witness again. We have to make all the necessary arrangements and ask ourselves some essential questions. Are we in a position, as a parliamentary committee, to receive witnesses, in accordance with the rules of the House of Commons? I'm thinking of interpretation, which is very important.

Are we able to adapt and have the flexibility and accommodation needed to receive this testimony, which is very important for our study?

I will wait until the motion is distributed, but on the principle and the substantive issue, I will agree.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Madame Chabot.

Ms. Zarrillo, do you wish to speak on the motion?

[Bonita Zarrillo, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank my Conservative colleague for bringing this forward. I think it's absolutely a manifestation of the reality of Canada and the ableism in Canada. It manifests right here in the House of Commons.

On a similar note, at our last meeting, our witness was misgendered multiple times. That also deserves an apology.

I'd like to apologize to this witness that the time wasn't taken to ensure that everyone could be involved in this conversation. What I'd like to do is adjourn this meeting. I don't think it's fair that we leave people behind. We can come back at noon so that we can have our witness at noon, but for now, I'm not sure that we should carry on with a meeting when we know that people have been left behind.

I do want to respect the witness Mr. Paul Clark at noon and then get the House of Commons to work on getting our other witness back. Thank you.

I move that we adjourn this until 12 o'clock with that witness.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

[Inaudible—Editor] meeting in total?

[Bonita Zarrillo, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

I don't think it's fair that we all enjoy our privilege while there are others who can't be heard.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

You've called a motion to adjourn, but before we do, just so everybody is clear, the House services are working with Mr. Sutton to accommodate him. That is not an issue. The witness list was submitted. The motion was moved on September 9, but the witness list was submitted over a period of time. Everyone whose name was submitted was contacted by the House administration and by the clerk and analyst. Only two expressed availability. As soon as they did, we reached out to begin the process of seeing how they were going to present.

Mr. Sutton chose to do it virtually with a device that he indicated he had used before. When it was tested by the independent translation bureau, they would not provide notice to the clerk and the team that it was adequate to provide translation services. He was advised of that, and we are still.... Members, I'm trying to clarify. The team is working with Mr. Sutton to accommodate him, and they can only do that when they know the situation they have to deal with, so they're dealing with that.

This committee can choose at any time to schedule and hear from Mr. Sutton, and that will be accommodated. I just wanted to be clear on that particular part so everybody understands. This is in the hands of the committee team, which is bound by the adopted official languages of this country, which I have to respect. That's what we're proceeding with from that perspective. We have the witnesses who are prepared to proceed as well as an independent witness. The rest of the list will be worked on, and the schedule will be adjusted to accommodate that.

With that, I do have a motion to adjourn the meeting, which, actually, I'm going to put to a vote because there was a motion to adjourn the meeting in total. Understand what you're voting on. You brought witnesses here. Witnesses were invited. The motion of Madame Chabot, which I'm going to entertain, is a motion to adjourn the meeting as a whole.

Clerk, call a—

[Bonita Zarrillo, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

It was me.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

I'm sorry. It was Ms. Zarrillo, so we're clear. Ms. Zarrillo made a motion to adjourn the meeting totally, which would mean all the witnesses currently here would be dismissed.

Clerk, call a recorded vote on adjourning the meeting as a whole.

(Motion negatived: nays 10; yeas 1)

We'll now return to the motion of Mrs. Gray, which is a very valid motion that this committee can decide, but I have two people who want to speak on the motion of Mrs. Gray: Mrs. Falk and then Mr. Van Bynen.

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

For sure—

[An hon. member]

[Inaudible—Editor]

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

No, I still do not have it translated.

With that, I'm actually going to suspend until I have Mrs. Gray's motion in both official languages, because I will not proceed until it's circulated in both official languages. We'll suspend until that occurs. Thank you.

We are suspended.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

The committee will resume. When we suspended, it was to await the circulation of Mrs. Gray's motion in both languages. I'm advised that you should have that on your P9s now.

I'm moving to a vote on Mrs. Gray's motion, unless somebody advises or puts up their hand.

Mr. Van Bynen.

[Tony Van Bynen, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

I have a few comments, Mr. Chair.

I very much appreciate the intent and the effect of the motion. However, I have just had a look at all of the websites of every committee member in this room, and everybody's website, except mine, is not accessible. I'm just saying that if we have this awareness now as a committee on how important it is for us to have accessibility as a priority, then try vanbynen.ca and find out what an accessible website should look like.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Mr. Van Bynen.

Madame Chabot, I'm going to a vote on the motion of Mrs. Gray.

We have Mr. Collins.

[Chad Collins, Liberal, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

I'm just reading what was sent to me. This says that Mr. Sutton was blocked from participating in this study “because his audio assistive technology did meet the committee's”. It should say “did not”.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Good catch. It's a friendly amendment correction, so is that the only one. Are we okay?

Madame Chabot.

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to point out a discrepancy between the French and English versions of the motion. In point B, in French, it says, “de l'Administration de la Chambre en matière de casques”.

Shouldn't it say “du comité” instead of “de la Chambre”?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

They're the House's rules.