Status of Women Committee on June 13th, 2017

[Karen Vecchio, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

The reason I'm indicating this is that we know we'll come back to finish this study, but we may also want to consider what some of the other studies are that we want to start in the fall and early winter as well. Because we know there's a good 50-50 chance the House will adjourn on Thursday, maybe this is something we could do on Tuesday, so that we can start preparing this summer so that we're ready for the next study as well.

I'm just thinking that I don't want the officials to be called too soon, because I prefer it to be an actual wrap-up. From looking at all the testimony we get from the individuals, there may be questions from these last 12 witnesses that we really want to ask the departments about.

That said, we also have the opportunity to discuss what we want to do in the fall, following this report.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Could I recommend that we do one panel and one hour of discussion about what we're going to study next?

Ms. Damoff.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

After we hear those panels in the fall, if we want to call the department back again we always could.

[Karen Vecchio, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

Yes, my take is that this would mean calling them back three times; that's all. I'm just looking at efficiency.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Yes, I think it would be great to have the department come in on Tuesday, just because they're here and we don't know what the schedule is going to be next week.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

It would also give us more time to think about what we want to study next, all summer long.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Oakville North—Burlington, ON]

Well, yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Is that okay?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

We'll go with the departments, then, for Tuesday, and if we're still here Thursday then we'll talk about what we'll do in the fall. Very good.

We'll suspend while we get our next panel going.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

We're ready to begin our second panel as we continue to study the economic security of women in Canada.

We have with us by video conference, from the Canadian Association of Retired Persons, Wanda Morris.

We also have in person, from the Island Crisis Care Society, Violet Hayes, the executive director; and Ronell Bosman, the programme director.

From my own Sarnia—Lambton riding, we have Bob Vansickle, from the Sarnia and District Association for Community Living. He is the manager of employment services and is world-renowned for promoting disabled people in employment and leveraging that model around the world.

Welcome to all of you.

We're going to begin with the Canadian Association of Retired Persons for seven minutes.

[Wanda Morris, Vice-President , Advocacy, Canadian Association of Retired Persons]

Thank you very much.

We are a member organization, with 300,000 members across the country. Primarily, our members are retired, but not exclusively so. While our members tend to have above-average education and income, they are very concerned about the plight of other seniors who may not have enough to live on in retirement.

I'm going to address some general factors contributing to low income in retirement for women, and then, time permitting, I'm going to talk specifically about issues related to caregivers and new Canadians.

Starting off, one of the issues for Canadians in retirement is that their retirement savings are too low, and there are a number of reasons for that. The panel will have already have heard about the traditional low wages of women in certain sectors, but there are things that can be done. One thing that CARP would like to point to and support as a model is the recent pension plan that was introduced by the SEIU, called My65+, which is a plan specifically targeted at low-income wage earners, to give them some financial security in retirement.

Another issue we see that affects low-income earners is that many of them who do save end up being advised to save in a registered retirement savings plan, an RRSP. You are probably aware that it's one of the worst things for low-income earners to do, because that directly impacts their ability to access programs later on in retirement. Perhaps the committee could make a recommendation to have an amnesty so that low-income earners could transfer their RRSP amounts to TFSAs so they wouldn't be penalized.

Another thing that CARP would love to see is the elimination of mandatory RRIF withdrawals. These made a lot of sense in a previous environment, where we had high earnings and lower lifespans. But now, particularly for women, who have such longevity, in a low interest rate environment many people are outliving their savings, and many more are losing their peace of mind for fear that they will do so.

Another issue affecting women in retirement, but really affecting both genders, is the lack of investor protection. That's something that we at CARP have talked about. Frankly, Canada is a bit of an international laggard when it comes to protecting our investors. We see that in the fact we pay some of the highest investment costs in the world. So that should be addressed.

Another related issue is elder abuse. Women are particularly prone to that. Financial elder abuse is the most common type of elder abuse, and that can, of course, directly impact the financial security of individuals in retirement.

Moving on, I'd like to talk about government programs to support people in retirement. Let's start with the CPP. We had a recent increase in CPP coverage, or we're moving towards that, which is a good step. But on behalf of our CARP membership, I would say that it's not enough. We need to do more for our lowest income earners, and the new CPP coverage of 33% of income isn't sufficient.

But the bigger issue with CPP and OAS is when we have two individuals, let's say a husband or wife or two individuals, living together quite comfortably on two OAS payments and a combined CPP. Then when one of them dies, typically the man because women do tend to live longer and marry slightly older, the other find themself single, widowed and, all too frequently, impoverished. Are there some things that can be done to address that situation? In private pension plans there's often an election that the pension earner can make about spousal sharing of the pension. Perhaps we could provide that, so that the pensioner receives less CPP on retirement, but on their death the survivor pension increases because of the election that's been made.

With OAS, we look at OAS irrespective of the marital or the living arrangement of the individual. Two people, both getting the maximum OAS, can live very comfortably. It's harder for one individual, particularly in centres like Vancouver or Toronto, to live well on just the single amount. So perhaps it's time to look at OAS on that basis. Perhaps we could save a bit on the amount paid to couples, and use those savings to provide a bit more for the lowest earners and singles.

I already spoke about the importance of increasing the overall CPP contributions.

I'd like to touch on a new survey that we've just done. We haven't yet released it publicly, but I want to share it with the committee, because I think it's critical to what you're talking about here, which is the idea of a universal basic income. With the many things that have happened in our economy, with increased outsourcing and automation, I think the assumption that people can obtain good paying jobs as a matter of will alone is being challenged.

One of the ways to support people now and in the future is through the introduction of a universal basic income.

When we asked our members if they were in support of it, 29% were against, and 49% were for it, with the balance either being neutral or not having an opinion. Just to encapsulate that, for every CARP member polled who opposed a universal basic income, one and a half members supported the idea. Clearly, that's something that doesn't just impact women, but because women are disproportionately represented among the poor, it would be a measure that would help women, both through their working lives and then through retirement.

Finally, we can protect women in retirement, not simply by raising the income they earn during their working lives or in retirement, but also by controlling the expenses they face during their working lives and in retirement. Housing, for example, is usually the highest expense that anyone pays, so I would urge the committee to consider tangential solutions, because the provision of housing options would do very much to increase the financial security of women and their ability to live in retirement with dignity.

We hear many of our members talk about the fact that they want to live in a more financially sustainable way, but the options they're looking for just aren't available. For example, this could mean people cohabiting together to share expenses but not being quite room mates.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

That's your time.

[Wanda Morris]

That's my time, okay. I will stop there.

If there are questions, I'll happily provide the rest of our suggestions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Very good.

Now we're going to go to the Island Crisis Care Society and Violet Hayes for seven minutes.

[Violet Hayes, Executive Director, Island Crisis Care Society]

Good morning. It's a privilege to be here today. I'm here with Ronell Bosman, who is the programme director at a homeless shelter for women in Nanaimo.

Island Crisis Care Society is a non-profit society that helps people in crisis. We hope to help them stabilize and move forward with their lives, especially as we look at housing options and different things that are in place for people with multiple challenges and maybe concurrent disorders.

Today, as I say, we are very privileged. I want to speak, first of all, about the lack of affordable housing in our area. Prices of housing have skyrocketed in Nanaimo, and on Vancouver Island generally, so we're seeing many landlords who are deciding to just sell their properties and cash in. That leaves people not able to find a place to rent. People who have lived in their rental units for 15 years are calling us, because now they're not going to have anywhere to go. The possible places they can go to and afford at this time are very slim. Landlords with vacancies are able to charge extortionate rates because there's so little available.

As I said, Samaritan House is the homeless shelter for women, and it's the only one on the mid-island. We operate out of a 100-year-old building, so of course there are many stairs and many challenges. We also provide supportive and transitional housing for women, and rent subsidies. Since we added these additional supports in 2013, through a project with BC Housing, we've seen how beneficial it is to have the option to move the women—as they need more supports—in and out of these different programs. We've found the positive relationships they've built with the staff have really been helpful as they move through those transitions. When they have a change in circumstance or need more support, we find that it doesn't seem as much of a failure when they have to accept more support.

This year, we had an 82-year-old woman and a 76-year-old woman, who so far have accessed our homeless shelter for the first time. We have 14 shelter beds and six supported units in this 100-year-old building, but we're finding it extremely challenging due to the lack of space. It's so hard to turn women away, and to what alternative? To sleep in the bush, or to go back to unsafe rental conditions or perhaps a drug house?

Women often return to violence, or back to these different places, because they have nowhere else to go. These are very challenging times. We put as many women as we can on mats on the floor in our dining room, but in the daytime they simply have to leave, because we can't be all mixed up with one another. Our building is just too small.

Another concern has to do with disabilities, mental disorders, and addictions, and our ability to provide a therapeutic community for these clients. Having eight women sleep in a dormitory on bunk beds is not helpful when you might have one person who's experiencing psychosis, another who's in active drug addiction, and then perhaps a senior lady who's never been homeless before.

Persistent patterns of victimization are not only a barrier to housing, but also a barrier to opportunities for healing and for moving forward. In the last two months, we have had two different clients with terminal cancer staying at our shelter, because there was nowhere else for them to go.

In 2012, we purchased the lot next door to Samaritan House, and we've been trying to expand and upgrade the shelter. We received about $50,000 for pre-development from the homelessness partnering strategy—federal money for capital projects—but it's no longer available for us because HPS no longer supports capital funding. We are desperately trying to find ways to expand our shelter so that we can effectively serve the women with more than just a bed.

We would like to be able to offer our clients the skills and life training they need, but we don't even have a room for group meetings. There have been opportunities provincially for capital funding for affordable housing, but not for shelters, and we recognize that it's extremely important to rapidly house clients when they come in—preferably within a month—so that they have the best opportunity to stay housed. It's very challenging to do that, but we really try our best, and Ronell does an amazing job.

Last summer we were so excited when we heard that there was federal money available for us—$10.9 million across Canada—for the construction and renovation of shelters and transition houses for victims of family violence. We were told to quickly get the quotes together for the needed renovations—much needed renovations, I can tell you. We did that. We got the quotes together, and that was no easy feat with the busyness of the trades in Nanaimo. We put those quotes together in July, and we still have not heard anything. So much time and effort was put in, and now the quotes are too stale to use anyway.

Our society also works in Parksville, about a half an hour north of Nanaimo. In 2014, we were successful and received funding through the rural stream of the HPS. We started a housing first initiative. We hired an outreach worker. We were able to find leases for five apartments and, therefore, house five people through this program. But then the next year we didn't receive that funding. We were faced with whether or not to evict these clients whom we had finally been able to stabilize. What did we do? I'm so happy to say that we were able to find funding just through fundraising, and now we continue that process, but every year we have that struggle of how to raise the money for this program.

On the HPS funding, I would really like to recommend that recipients not to have to make an ongoing annual annual application for the rural stream. We would like to see a three-to-five year application so that when you start a program, you're not having to backtrack and try to figure out how to put it together. I also would like to recommend that HPS start to fund capital again, because that is so important to us.

Investment in affordable housing is imperative, but just as important is that safe environment where women can be helped to move through the challenges. After trauma they may not be ready right away, but we want to help them to be empowered as the women they were meant to be.

I want to close very quickly with a comment from a client, who said:

I stayed in the shelter for a week to ten days. Little did I know that Sam House programs and the incredible staff and clients would be my home away from home for the next four and a half years. This includes living at Mary's Place for just over a year and for the past few months at Martha's Place. Mary's Place, a house in the north end of Nanaimo, within walking distance of Walmart, is transitional housing through ICCS (Island Crisis Care Society). Six women share this house; I was one of two people who lived in what I called the in-law suite downstairs. Martha's Place is supported housing at Samaritan House. There are six rooms. I am in one of the upstairs rooms, it's small but has a bar-sized fridge, a microwave AND an ocean view!

Samaritan House was a gift from God on a cold winter's day. Both Mary's and Martha's Place were and are ships in the storm of life. I am grateful to everyone involved in ICCS from the people on the board to the front line workers and everyone in between.... You will never know how much you change lives for the better. Thank you!

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

Very good.

Now we'll go to Bob Vansickle for seven minutes.

[Bob Vansickle, Manager of Employment Services, Sarnia and District Association for Community Living]

Thank you.

Good morning. First of all I'd like to thank Marilyn Gladu for her wonderful introduction this morning. It's great seeing you.

I've worked in the disability field for 24 years, spending that time assisting people with a broad range of disabilities, some with varying degrees of disability. Currently I'm the manager of employment services at Community Living Sarnia-Lambton. I am also one of the founding members of the Ontario Disability Employment Network. Maybe many of you have heard of it; it's called ODEN, and I served as the board chair for six years.

Today, I have two key areas I'd like to talk about, first of all ensuring that women with more severe disabilities have access to the services they need to escape poverty, and second, redirecting federal tax dollars to boost support for activities that are known to be more effective. Although men who have a disability are overrepresented among Canadians who live in poverty, women who have a disability often face challenges related to gender inequality and child care needs.

Based on the participation and activity limitation survey, PALS, of 2006, people with disabilities make up 16.5% of the adult population 15 years of age and older in Canada. It's important to keep in mind that it's the largest minority group in Canada, or nearly 4.2 million people.

The overall poverty rate for Canadian adults was 10.5% in 2006, comprising 2.6 million people. The Conference Board of Canada recently found that Canada ranks 15th out of 17 countries in poverty among working-age people and gave Canada a D rating on that basis. For people with a disability the poverty rate was 14.4%, comprising nearly 600,000 people.

Some 55% of adults with disabilities are women and 45% are men, compared with 50.7% and 49.3%, respectively, for people without disabilities. Among people with disabilities living in poverty, 59% are women compared with 55.4% of people without disabilities living in poverty. It is also important to note that people with a severe to very severe level of disability are overrepresented among people in poverty.

Women who have a disability can work and have the capacity to make a significant contribution to the workforce. This is a fundamental fact that we must understand and accept. Another fact is that we in the non-disabled community, in both government and in the disability profession, have only just begun to scratch the surface in our understanding of how to recognize the capacity of the disabled and how to best exploit it.

No tool or instrument that we have today can effectively measure or assess capacity or help us determine the employability of people who have a disability. Whenever we set out to measure employability or capacity to work, we invariably set the bar too high and discriminate against those whom we deem to be too severely disabled to work.

You may be familiar with the Walgreens story. Walgreens is currently number 19 in the Fortune 50 and has become a beacon of success by ensuring that 20% of its employees openly identify as having a disability. Other corporations across the world are working to emulate the Walgreens' model for inclusion to increase corporate profits.

Of interest is a statement made recently by the retired executive vice-president Randy Lewis. Mr. Lewis recounted their early hires when they embarked on this journey of hiring people with disabilities. He talked about a young woman with severe autism and significant behavioural problems who was to be their first hire. Mr. Lewis was asked if he deliberately started by hiring someone with very significant challenges. Was that intentional? Mr. Lewis responded that they did because they thought if they could get that first difficult one right, the rest would be easy. What they learned, though, is that they didn’t go low enough, because the capacity of people with disabilities was far greater than they had ever imagined. This is a very profound statement.

Indeed, perhaps the most effective measure of employability is more properly gauged by each individual's motivation to work. Having said that, it is important that services and supports that each person needs be available, and in a way that makes sense regardless of the level of disability.

There has been a shift within Service Canada and its partners in Ontario to refocus programs to aid individuals who are more job ready or requiring light-touch services.

The federal government must ensure that its programs and services and those of its partners in the provinces and territories provide necessary services and supports to ensure that all Canadians, including women who have more severe disabilities and who are overrepresented among people in poverty, have access to services to ensure their successful attachment to the workforce to escape poverty.

The federal dollars that are invested by way of wage subsidies, or, as they are often termed now, “training incentives”, could be better spent. At a time when the federal government and provinces are struggling to spend the Canada job grant, I would suggest that a portion of these dollars be redirected to remove barriers for women who have severe to very severe disabilities. Labour market agreements for persons with disabilities and the federal opportunities fund for persons with disabilities should transition dollars away from wage subsidies and boost support for the wide range of activities that are known to be more effective, such as employment counselling; career planning; pre-employment preparation, including time-limited curriculum-based workshops; post-secondary education; skills training; self-employment assistance; technical aids; and other accommodation supports such as job coaching. Assistance in accessing job opportunities and support for transportation and child care needs are also critical.

Business people are experts at running their businesses. They do not have the expertise or the capacity within their operations to understand specialized technical aids, workplace modifications, and other accommodations that may be required across a broad range of disability types. Employers also need post-placement support, which has the greatest impact on job retention and career growth. Employers need to see the employment agency as a specialist or as a disability consultant. One employer once told me that he was an expert at making tire rims, not at understanding disability.

Workplaces evolve and jobs change. Often retraining and revisiting and revising accommodation are necessary. Wage subsidies or training incentives for people with disability could be better spent by providing businesses with the specialized support they require to include women who have disabilities.

In summary, we need to invest in women who have a disability and ensure that all Canadians, regardless of gender or severity of disability, can move out of poverty and become successful contributors to our economy.

Thanks so much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Marilyn Gladu]

That's very good.

We'll start with Mr. Serré.

You have seven minutes.

[Marc Serré, Liberal, Nickel Belt, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I want to thank all the witnesses for being here and for taking the time to prepare their presentations on their work in this field.

Obviously, all the witnesses spoke of the housing issue. I encourage them to follow the work of the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, in September and October. The committee will hear presentations on the development of the national housing strategy with Minister Duclos. A great deal of important information will be provided.

I also want to thank Ms. Morris, from CARP, for her support for M-106, my motion to conduct a study on the development of a national strategy for seniors.

Ms. Morris, your association and a number of your members supported the motion, which Parliament passed on May 17.

I want to switch over.

Madam Morris, can you provide the committee with a copy in English and French of your “2017 Impact Report & 2016 Annual Review” from CARP—good job.

[Wanda Morris]

I'd be delighted to provide it in English and, hopefully, you have somebody who can translate it into French.

[Marc Serré, Liberal, Nickel Belt, ON]

Okay, thank you.

I know of a lot of the advocacy you've done over the years for seniors, and I'll just cite one line from the document: “In a typical year we've been excited by one big win, but in 2016 we saw us score five major victories.” When we look at increasing the CPP, you mention in that document you're looking at restoring the OAS eligibility to age 65. You also mention the $3 billion in home care, and the acknowledgement of caregivers, so I appreciate your summarizing this in this document that looks at what we've done in our first two years, but much more is needed.

Ms. Morris, one of your documents talks about elder abuse, and in a CBC article of June 1, you were quoted on the seriousness of elder abuse. We've heard, and I've heard from other committees, that police forces are grappling with the reported cases of elder abuse. Can you comment on that a bit, please?

[Wanda Morris]

Thank you.

I think that elder abuse, whether it's in long-term care, as in the recent situation, or just generally among the population, is far more widespread than we realize and has caused incredible damage to individuals.

CARP has been calling for a public inquiry particularly into long-term care. We have heard so many incidents from our members or from their adult children that we believe what's going on in long-term care today could be something akin to what used to happen in residential schools, with widespread neglect, abuse, and disinterest.

[Marc Serré, Liberal, Nickel Belt, ON]

Thank you.

Also, Ms. Morris, in one of your documents you mentioned older workers and some of the barriers they face. Could you in about a minute or so outline some of those barriers that older workers face for employment, in your experience?

[Wanda Morris]

Some older workers face no barriers, but certainly what many older workers face is ageism. For example, if there's a downsizing, companies often look to let go older workers, perhaps to protect the wage-earning of younger workers with families or because the older workers are at the top of the pay scale, so that it's a better win financially.

Unfortunately, what has happened for many of our members is that they haven't retired when they wished but rather had retirement thrust upon them. Typically, they planned their financial lives to buy a house, put their children through school, and then save for retirement, and when that last piece is truncated they end up living a much less financially secure retirement than they had hoped.