Industry Committee on Oct. 22nd, 2018

[John Rae]

I agree with your notion that consistency of definition would be helpful.

[Dan Albas]

Would the CNIB wish to respond?

[Lui Greco]

“Perceptual disability” would exclude people with physical disabilities who are unable to physically handle a book, with ALS, for instance, and other neurological diseases that would be a barrier. I don't think we've had a chance to really decide whether “perceptual disability” or “print disability” would be the language of choice, but what we would strongly advocate for, and my colleague will correct me if I am wrong on this, is that the language must be inclusive.

It must be inclusive of anyone with a disability that, for whatever reason, due to a disability that is physical, perceptual or cognitive, which is the same thing, bars them from being able to visit the bookstore and buy a book.

[Dan Albas]

Thank you for that. I certainly appreciate the expertise you're bringing to this issue.

I've also heard from disability advocates. In my area, for example, in Kelowna, we have Michelle Hewitt, who is championing local accessibility issues. She said to me that she and many of the people she works with are often unaware of many of the exemptions in the Copyright Act for people with disabilities, that they even existed.

Is that something that either group has found consistently as well, that even though there are carved exemptions in the Copyright Act, people don't necessarily know about them?

[Thomas Simpson]

To be honest, I would assume that a lot of Canadians probably don't know the intricacies of the Copyright Act, so the limitations are probably somewhat problematic. We as an organization haven't looked into those. As we've discussed, our primary focus is in sharing. If a copyright is to be given to a producer, it should ensure that the literary work is done in accessible format.

[Lui Greco]

Academic institutions, libraries and production houses such as the one that CNIB operates—and Simon Fraser University used to and probably still does have a production facility—those players are well aware.... We are well aware of the intricacies, what we're allowed to do and what we're not allowed to do, and where the line exists.

For consumers, when I take my hat off at the end of the day and I want to access material, my only concern is what's available. Where do I get it, and what barriers or hurdles do I have to overcome in order to access it?

[John Rae]

I would assume that producers are aware. I've seen publishers that are aware. As Lui just said, at the end of the day, our community wants access to more material to read. That's what we're after. Therefore, our work in CCD has really been more in trying to get publishers more involved in producing more accessible materials.

[Dan Albas]

Then you would say that there's a fair number who know about the exemptions, but the knowledge of the general public and those who are working with disabilities is inconsistent with that. Is that correct?

Should government be playing a role in that, other than establishing the Copyright Act and those exemptions?

[John Rae]

It certainly can't hurt to expand Canadians' knowledge of what the act says and what it provides for. I think a lot of people who produce it, whether it be producers of alternate formats, or whether we're talking about colleges and universities—I suspect those people are reasonably well aware, but it can never hurt.

[Dan Albas]

I go back to Mr. Greco's case about his inability to take an exam. Does government have a role?

[Lui Greco]

Of course. But in the current context, you can shout it from the rooftops. In my case, with the Project Management Institute where I paid a fee to write an exam, they chose not to comply under a false pretext that it would be too onerous on them and simply shut the door on their moral obligation to accommodate me. I don't see how government or any organization providing education would help.

I needed a stick, some kind of mandate or obligation to say to them, this is how you can provide the resources to me as a paid member in a format that I can be successful. You must do it, and here is the piece of legislation that says you must do it.

Quite honestly, in an ideal world, I shouldn't be having those conversations. I should be able to identify myself as a blind person, and as a producer I require the materials in an alternate format—be it Braille, electronic text, DAISY, whatever—and the publisher, or in my case the PMI organization, as a producer should simply deliver it. I've paid my fees, I've met their credentials, I've jumped through the necessary hoops, and then I encounter a wall. It's not just. It's not fair.

[Dan Albas]

Thank you.

[John Rae]

I think an area that would help here would be more resources to the human rights commissions across Canada so they can do a better job of informing Canadians of the duty to accommodate, of legal obligations that in my mind already exist in human rights law.

That's why so many of us go to commissions; why over 50% of cases taken to the human rights commissions every year fall under the prohibited grounds of disability. If harder awards and more public education were done, maybe we could cut down the need for some of those complaints.

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

Thank you very much.

From the NDP, we have Brian Masse.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

When I had a real job, I used to be an employment specialist on behalf of persons with disabilities at Community Living Mississauga and the Association for Persons with Physical Disabilities of Windsor and Essex County, and I was on the board of directors for the CNIB.

It's frustrating to have to continue to prove how your own taxpayers' dollars have to be used for basic things that should be a right. I'll give you a card later, but I'll give an example of the barriers we create. I have a Braille card from the House of Commons that I use, and I'm allowed to have this, but my staff is not. Despite the fact that I could get this business card printed in Braille, our public policy here, that I have been unable to change in the 16 years I've worked here, will not provide my staff with the same accommodation, despite the complete accessibility of something like this. This is the type of stuff we continue to see.

I want to talk a little about your amendment, subsection 3(2), and where the philosophy for that comes from. I think it's important. Government and also sponsored investments have the onerous responsibility to be accessible. I can tell you once again we have a 50% unemployment rate for persons with disabilities, which is a chronic problem, a systemic problem in our society, and then on top of that, if we don't have these materials, not only is it social exclusion from the workplace, but also socio-cultural.

Please explain a little more about section 3(2) and how that turns the tables to be more proactive. There are those who argue that accessible doors or accessible washrooms are too expensive, but you can use them as good examples that the investment makes a better society for all.

[Thomas Simpson]

CNIB recently did a study, which we've also commissioned internationally, to compare levels of employment for persons with sight loss. Our findings, which we hope to publish shortly, indicate that in Canada a person who is blind or partially sighted has a full-time employment rate of 28%. Of those people who are employed, half make under $20,000 a year. So we already have the problem of trying to get an education. Trying to then go into post-secondary education, to get books and studying material in an accessible format is hard enough as well, so you have that barrier. Trying to be on a level playing field culturally—you know, what's happening; what is the newest Harry Potter book; what is Stephen King writing; trying to be able to compare with society—is difficult as well.

There are so many barriers in just trying to access a book that you then can't compare with your sighted peers and citizens.

Lui, do you want to further comment?

[Lui Greco]

I'd say take the word “compare” and replace it with “compete”. The shelves, I assume, are full of leadership books: how to manage your career, how to get ahead, how to write the ultimate resumé, how to leverage social networking for job-searching skills. We're all just between jobs. The days of lifelong careers are long gone. I'm at the end of my career. I've got more years behind me than ahead of me. In fact, I've got very few years ahead of me, probably 10 or 15, but in those 10 or 15 years, whether they're with CNIB or with someone else, I need to be competitive. I need the skills and knowledge and toolset to be able to compete with Mr. Simpson or Mr. Rae or our two colleagues from Toronto for whatever opportunities come along. I don't have those now.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Then 3(2) will require some of the works to have that available. Is that...?

[Thomas Simpson]

Our creation of subsection 3(2) would ensure that if a copyright is to be issued for literary work, it must be published in an accessible format.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

I guess there are many persons with disabilities who are taxpayers and have contributed to some of the programs and services. I can't tell you how many announcements I've been to over the years where I walk into a place that's inaccessible, getting millions of dollars of funding from the public and not even having accessible doorways or other things of that nature. Things are changing, but the reality is that we need more of an assertive approach, a more upfront approach.

Mr. Rae, do you have anything to add?

[John Rae]

I agree with everything you're saying. We have hopes that the accessible Canada act will have a positive effect on our lives. I think it needs strengthening, but we are delighted that the government introduced it. I think what would also help is some harsher words from human rights commissions. I think at the moment a lot of these small awards are not a deterrent to organizations to stop discriminating against the disabled community, or other groups for that matter, so I think that would help as well.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

It would certainly be much more of an advantage, similar to the example I used of accessible washrooms and accessible doorways and the mechanics behind them, because currently in the literary works and with Braille and other things now, we're still at the point where we have to continue to raise awareness and almost beg for inclusion versus this being part of the process. If we had to still go around our government buildings and our different places and beg for accessible washrooms and accessible doors to this day, it would be a lot of energy, a lot of wasted time. By the way, those things there actually improve the workplace for everybody else, as they lower work-related accidents and so forth.

Mr. Greco, your notation about competing is very valid because that's not even often mentioned. I would argue that the low-vision Brick Books that have been introduced by so many different libraries across the country have helped that inclusion, but it's still not completed in terms of the works that are necessary.

[Thomas Simpson]

I would say to that point, as well, that as our society ages and people live longer, most of you in this room probably will also have sight loss affecting you in some capacity, so at some point you may also have a barrier when trying to access printed works if we don't do anything about it.

[John Rae]

I would also suggest to you that the low level of unemployment you mentioned has an additional negative effect. It's not just the economic deprivation that comes to us, but the fact that we are not represented in adequate numbers means that many organizations do not have expertise on disability in-house.

Increasing our representation in places where decisions are made that affect the lives of all Canadians, in the boardrooms, in Parliament, in the newsrooms of our nation, would reduce the extent to which our issues are either just forgotten about because we aren't there, or callously not dealt with.

Bringing more of us into the mainstream is what we're looking for.

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

Thank you very much.

Now we go back to the Liberal Party. Mr. David Graham, you have seven minutes.