Basically, this paragraph says that it will be developed in regulations. We're saying this is so important that we want to take it out of the part that says it will be solely developed in regulations and put some wording in the legislation.

That's what this is. You can see right there that the wording is “recovery of overpayments”. It's not to replace anything. It's just about making sure we put some wording in there to draw out how important it is. We want to make sure it's actually in the legislation itself.

I just wanted to draw everyone's attention to that.

5:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey

Thank you, Mrs. Gray.

Is there any further discussion?

Go ahead, Mr. Kusmierczyk.

5:35 p.m.

Liberal

Irek Kusmierczyk Liberal Windsor—Tecumseh, ON

Mr. Chair, we're all trying to wrap our heads around this particular amendment. There is confusion around it because it's not clear. Again, there are concerns about unintended consequences.

I know we have a lot of work ahead of us. If it's possible, could we skip this amendment and come back to it, either later today or at a later date, and seek a legal opinion on it?

I think this is critical. We share the spirit of having no clawbacks, but this particular amendment may be problematic and may cause unintended consequences because, again, it's not clear.

5:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey

The committee can, by unanimous consent, suspend clause 9 and then return to it.

5:35 p.m.

Liberal

Irek Kusmierczyk Liberal Windsor—Tecumseh, ON

Does that work?

5:35 p.m.

Conservative

Tracy Gray Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC

Can we suspend for a few minutes, Mr. Chair?

5:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey

We'll suspend.

5:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey

The meeting is resumed.

Go ahead, Mrs. Gray.

5:40 p.m.

Conservative

Tracy Gray Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

We'll push this one aside for a bit while we work on other amendments.

5:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey

For the formal part, we have to get unanimous consent to suspend clause 9 and return to it before the end of the bill.

Do I see unanimous consent to suspend clause 9?

(Clause 9 allowed to stand)

Shall Clause 10 carry?

(Clause 10 agreed to)

(On clause 11)

On clause 11, PV-6 is deemed moved.

Go ahead, Mr. Morrice.

5:40 p.m.

Green

Mike Morrice Green Kitchener Centre, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

This is the first of several amendments being proposed by several parties with respect to how regulations will be made. This first one would replace paragraph 11(d), which currently says:

11 (1) The Governor in Council may make regulations

(d) respecting the manner in which a benefit is to be indexed to inflation;

The amendment would replace that text with this:

(d) requiring a benefit to be indexed to inflation and respecting the manner in which it is to be indexed;

We read many briefs on this and heard from many members of the disability community who called for indexing to inflation to be more clearly articulated in how regulations would be made. Certainly as an MP from Ontario, where ODSP is not indexed to inflation, I recognize that there are members of my community who have not seen increases to their existing disability supports for some time. The intention of this amendment is to address that in the Canada disability benefit.

5:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey

Is there any further discussion on amendment PV-6?

Go ahead, Mr. Kusmierczyk.

5:45 p.m.

Liberal

Irek Kusmierczyk Liberal Windsor—Tecumseh, ON

I just wanted to again thank my colleague. That's an excellent recommendation. It clarifies the bill and provides additional clarity in terms of making sure that the benefit is indexed to inflation. It's something that we heard very clearly from so many witnesses who came before the committee, so we will be supporting PV-6.

5:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey

Go ahead, Ms. Gray.

5:45 p.m.

Conservative

Tracy Gray Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC

Thank you, Mr. Chair. We thought that this was a good recommendation as well, and we'll be supporting this.

5:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey

Shall PV-6 carry?

(Amendment agreed to)

PV-6 is carried with unanimity.

Next is PV-7.

December 7th, 2022 / 5:45 p.m.

Green

Mike Morrice Green Kitchener Centre, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll just start by saying thanks to my colleagues for their collaborative approach to this process.

PV-7 is similar with respect to paragraph 11(1)(f) in terms of how regulations are made. Currently it says:

The Governor in Council may make regulations

(f) respecting applications for a benefit;

The new text of PV-7 would change paragraph 11(1)(f) to read:

(f) respecting applications for a benefit, including regulations providing for an application process that is without “barriers”, as defined in section 2 of the Canada Accessibility Act; .

This follows from the recommendations of many of the organizations we heard from, including the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act Alliance and the 25 signatories to their letter. They are calling for the Canada disability benefit to be as accessible as possible. Ideally, it might even be automatic when a person files their income taxes, and this would encourage—in the recommendations for that—accessibility to be put front and centre.

5:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey

Go ahead, Mr. Kusmierczyk.

5:45 p.m.

Liberal

Irek Kusmierczyk Liberal Windsor—Tecumseh, ON

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Again, this is another excellent amendment suggested by my colleague. It goes to show that teamwork makes the dream work.

I did want to just raise one small flag and perhaps ask for a friendly amendment, if that's possible, which is that the amendment should refer not to the “Canada Accessibility Act” but to the Accessible Canada Act, which I believe is the act that my colleague was seeking to reference. If we can just again change it from “the Canada Accessibility Act” to “the Accessible Canada Act”, that would be terrific.

I'm not sure if we need a motion or a subamendment or....

5:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey

Let's see what the discussion is.

5:45 p.m.

Green

Mike Morrice Green Kitchener Centre, ON

I certainly see that as a friendly amendment.

5:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey

Madam Clerk, do we need to deal with it separately?

If there is unanimous consent on a minor change, the committee can agree to a subamendment.

I am seeing unanimous consent, unless somebody objects.

(Subamendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Shall PV-7 carry as amended?

Go ahead, Ms. Gray.

5:45 p.m.

Conservative

Tracy Gray Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I just wanted to comment that it absolutely makes sense to have this in here. It's too bad it wasn't in the legislation previously, because it definitely makes sense to ensure that the application process is accessible and barrier-free.