Debates of Feb. 7th, 2013

Veterans

[Eve Adams, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member opposite for his question because it allows me to highlight our government's ongoing commitments to Canadian veterans and their families.

The funeral and burial program provides financial assistance to the families of all veterans in financial need who die of a service related disability. That is the sole purpose of this important program, to ensure that veterans receive a dignified funeral and burial, and it is working. In the past year alone, our government has helped the families of more than 1,300 veterans through a profoundly difficult period of their lives. Since our government took office, close to 10,000 veterans' families have benefited from the funerals and burials program.

Of course, we are always looking for ways to improve this important program and to serve Canadian veterans. We are always looking for ways to strengthen the services we provide and the many benefits that are available to our veterans.

Looking internationally, Canada can be proud of our robust funeral and burial program. Unlike many of our allies, the funeral and burial program covers the entire cost of the burial itself. Benefits available in Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom all provide equal or lesser benefits to their veterans. This fact, unfortunately, gets lost in the opposition parties' spin. That truly is unfortunate.

Our track record on veterans issues is unmatched by any political party in the House and, frankly, by any previous government. We have improved or maintained benefits across the board and have done it during very challenging fiscal times. We have also improved customer service to our veterans. We have eliminated millions of individual transactions between veterans and the federal government, including by moving to a grant model for the veterans independence program, saving veterans time and money.

Finally, I will not take any lessons from the opposition, in particular from the member's party. They talk about supporting veterans, but if they had their way, veterans would lose benefits and services at an unprecedented rate. Believe it or not, the member actually voted to reduce the Veterans Affairs budget by almost $2 million quite recently and with one swoop would have closed over 600 new sites where veterans can gain access to information on the benefits they need.

All of the initiatives that I have described represent real and meaningful action for veterans and their families. They also demonstrate how the government is always looking ahead and adapting our programs and services to meet the needs of all veterans. Canada's heroes deserve this and we are very proud to deliver.

[Sylvain Chicoine, NDP, Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to the parliamentary secretary's non-answer to my question. She inundated us with figures. I too can throw out numbers: 8, 12, 46, 94 and bonus number 72. These are not winning numbers in Lotto 6/49, and the numbers that the parliamentary secretary gave us are not winning numbers either. There are only losers in this case. The funeral companies lose out because they have to cover the cost of veterans' funerals when necessary.

All that the government is offering to ensure that that our veterans receive a burial is $3,600. That is hardly enough for a dignified burial.

I will ask my question again. Will the government improve the burial fund to cover the entire cost of giving our veterans a dignified burial? That is the question I would like to have answered.

[Eve Adams, Conservative, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

Mr. Speaker, our government has provided more than most of our allies. It is a very proud Canadian record and we are always looking to see how we might go about improving the services and benefits for our veterans.

What is truly appalling though is the record of the member's party in funding veterans. The NDP has voted against just about every service or benefit we provide to veterans. I will give a couple of quick examples. The NDP actually voted against $35 million to increase the grants for disability awards to our veterans. It voted against funding for the education of the children of deceased veterans. Who truly votes against funding the education of the orphans of veterans? That is despicable. That is appalling. The NDP has also voted against funding cenotaphs. It voted against funding over $1 billion for our new veterans charter. The list goes on and on.

Persons with Disabilities

[Manon Perreault, NDP, Montcalm, QC]

Mr. Speaker, on October 23, I asked the President of the Treasury Board to explain the problems with the funding of the public service disability insurance plan. He did not answer my question.

He stated that the government would establish a plan for the future to support and protect the interests of public servants and to be accountable to taxpayers. In fact, nothing has been done and there is no reassurance that public servants are covered by a disability plan that is adequately funded.

My question had to do specifically with the fact that barely two years after recording a $102 million surplus, the public service disability insurance plan was posting a deficit.

Nevertheless, the President of the Treasury Board said he was standing up for public servants in this matter. However, the reason why the disability plan was suddenly in the red was because the government had stopped paying millions of dollars into the plan a few months earlier, even though claims were up. The plan is in the red because of the government's inaction.

The board of management that oversees the public service disability insurance plan had warned the government in its 2011 annual report.

An unexpected negative plan experience resulted in a $69 million deficit. The warning was also designed to force the government to be more vigilant over the course of the following months. The government did the opposite. It stopped funding the plan as claims were increasing.

To top it off, the Treasury Board report clearly shows that the plan began declining in the last seven months of 2011. This coincided with increasing claims related to mental health issues.

The government's inaction leads us to believe that the Conservatives intend to reject claims from people with mental health issues, as well as those from other people truly in need. The government claims that it is protecting the interests of public servants. Our understanding of this issue is quite different.

If this trend continues, the plan's financial outlook will only worsen—the number of claims has gone up by nearly 13% over last year. A large part of this increase is attributable to people with mental health issues. They are entitled to compensation.

Why does the government continue to neglect those living with limitations instead of improving services for them?

The government's management of this file is dismal, and the government does not seem to want to take the situation seriously. It has not presented a credible strategy for ensuring proper funding. The plan's current funding is extremely problematic and it is people with mental illness who are paying the price.

As is the case for the vast majority of federal programs that lack planning, it is the people with chronic or episodic illness who slip between the cracks.

This is not the time for the government to stand idly by. It has a duty to help the growing number of struggling public servants get better.

There is cause for concern if the government does not put in place adequate corrective measures.

I will repeat my question: will the Conservatives ensure that this plan has proper funding?

[Eve Adams, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to rise in the House to speak to the issue of the disability insurance plan and disability management in the public service. I would like to begin by correcting some of the statements made by my hon. colleague on these issues.

First, the disability insurance plan is not in a deficit position. It currently has a surplus of about $100 million.

Second, the government has not stopped funding this important plan. The government continues to pay 85% of the cost of annual premiums. What has happened is that the level of the surplus has declined due to an increasing volume of claims.

We understand that other employers are experiencing similar trends at this time. We continue to work with both officials and the public service unions through a board of management established under the National Joint Council to ensure that the plan remains viable and adequately funded in a manner that balances the interests of public servants and taxpayers.

The real issue here is the need to find ways to reduce the incidents and duration of long-term disability in the federal public service and to improve workplace wellness. I am happy to report that progress in this area is already being made.

In consultation with bargaining agents under the disability management initiative, we have developed resources, tools and services for departments. These include training for disability management advisers and a web resource, which contains a manager's handbook, a manual on establishing a disability management program in departments and an employee wellness resource.

Tools have also been enhanced to provide deputy heads with more current data on the state of disability and sick leave management across the federal public service.

We have taken some positive steps forward and we are vigorously continuing our work toward finding better ways to support public service employees who are facing disability.

The Government of Canada is committed to workforce wellness and fundamentally reducing the incidents and duration of disability over the long term. The federal government offers a comprehensive package of benefits, such as health, dental and disability insurance plans, and provides for certain types of leave and other flexible work arrangements to promote workplace well-being. This increases the effectiveness and productivity of departments and agencies in achieving their program objectives.

Through the disability management initiative, we have made improvements to the current system that we believe would help reduce the incidents and duration of disability. We are continuing our efforts to find the best possible solutions to deal with these issues.

We look forward to working with stakeholders to make further progress in the future.

[Manon Perreault, NDP, Montcalm, QC]

Mr. Speaker, of course I would be delighted to forward the source of the figures I gave earlier. You will see that they are accurate.

When we look at the government's record regarding disability issues, we see just how inadequate the programs are. The government's refusal to provide adequate funding for the public service disability insurance plan is unfortunately part of this appalling trend.

The government must understand that it needs to fulfill its commitments to persons with disabilities through fair and balanced programs. Otherwise, the government's commitment is worthless and the programs in place will not meet the objectives that were set.

So, instead of ending funding to the public service disability insurance plan, which would explain why it is in a deficit position right now, the government must take action. The number of compensation claims is on the rise, and now is not the time to abandon these people in need, many of whom also have mental health problems.

What does the government plan to do about this? Will the Conservatives provide adequate funding for the plan?

[Eve Adams, Conservative, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to reiterate that the disability insurance plan has a surplus of about $100 million. Moreover, the government continues to fund this important plan.

We are proud of the work the public service does every day to serve Canadians. Canada's public service employs the best and the brightest people, whose work is intimately tied to the well-being of our nation.

Our government is committed to the well-being of the men and women of the public service. Within our first year, the Prime Minister established an advisory committee of eminent Canadians to advise him on the renewal and future development of the Public Service of Canada. Many of their recommendations have led directly to tangible actions and real results across the public service.

We look forward to building on this good work to enable the public service today and in the years ahead.

Housing

[Marie-Claude Morin, NDP, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Mr. Speaker, before Christmas, Food Banks Canada reported that reliance on food aid had reached an all-time high in Canada.

The report also indicated that government measures to increase the number of affordable housing units were the primary solution to this problem. I said at the time to the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development that there was no such commitment in her government's most recent budget.

When we ask questions on this issue, we are told that the government has invested over $2 billion in affordable housing through its economic action plan, and so on. According to the Conservatives' talking points, the government helps 755,000 Canadian households every year. The problem is that the Co-operative Housing Federation of Canada reports that some 3 million Canadian households, including 750,000 children, are in core housing need.

The government does not seem to understand that it will take more than just funding to solve the housing crisis in Canada. We need a long-term plan that includes programs to end homelessness and to ensure that all Canadians have a roof over their heads. Canada needs a national strategy. We are the only G8 country that does not have a housing strategy.

With 3 million Canadian households living in housing insecurity, it is obvious that Canada has fallen behind when it comes to investments in affordable housing. Of all the developed countries, Canada has one of the least developed social housing sectors, and fewer and fewer Canadians can become homeowners.

In May of last year, this House unanimously adopted Motion No. 331 introduced by the hon. member for Shefford. This motion confirmed that the federal government has international obligations respecting the right to housing under the UN International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The motion also recognized the duty to support efforts by Canadian municipalities to combat homelessness. Bill C-400 is a logical extension of these efforts.

Canada will undergo its second universal periodic review by the UN Human Rights Council in 2013. It will have to report to civil society organizations and member countries of the United Nations human resources committee on its accomplishments in the area of housing.

A number of groups think that the conclusions of the UN special rapporteur will be worse than those in the 2009 review. At that time, the special rapporteur criticized this government's inaction in dealing with the crisis, which is getting worse. This shows the importance of a housing strategy, which is supported by hundreds of organizations.

Can the parliamentary secretary explain to me why the government refuses to discuss such a strategy when it would greatly improve the situation?

[Eve Adams, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member again asked about a national housing strategy for Canada. The hon. member clearly believes that the federal government should be telling the provinces and the territories what they should be doing, and we on this side of the House simply do not agree.

Our government has invested unprecedented amounts in a multi-pronged approach that respects provincial jurisdiction in housing to ensure that Canadians have access to affordable, sound and suitable housing.

Our approach works, because governments at all levels recognize that housing needs differ across the country. Local challenges need local solutions and we all recognize that provinces and territories are best positioned to design and deliver programs to address housing needs in their jurisdictions.

By not recognizing that social housing is largely a provincial jurisdiction and moving away from the local delivery of social housing programming, this approach could lead to more bureaucracy and, as a result, most costly social housing.

Our approach is collaborative. We engage with the full spectrum of housing stakeholders and we respect provincial, territorial and on-reserve jurisdictions. That is why we do not support Bill C-400.

Rather than being a solution to housing challenges across Canada, we believe that a prescriptive, national approach would slow progress, cause unnecessary friction between governments and actually impede the development of effective local solutions.

That is why, instead of holding meetings and developing discussion papers, we have opted for action. We worked closely with the provinces and territories to deliver more than $2 billion in social housing investments under Canada's economic action plan, and Mississauga—Brampton South, my community, certainly benefited from that important investment.

As reported earlier this year, this funding was supported an estimated 16,500 social housing units and first nations housing units across the country. It was delivered quickly and effectively, thanks to collaboration between all stakeholders. Tens of thousands of Canadians have benefited as a result.

In fact, our government is already investing more in affordable and supportive housing than any other government in Canadian history. Last year we announced a new investment in the affordable housing framework with the provinces and territories to guide the delivery of federal housing investments through to 2014. This framework provides for combined federal-provincial-territorial spending of $1.4 billion over three years.

Provinces and territories are responsible for program design, delivery and administration and they have the flexibility to invest in a range of solutions to improve the living conditions of Canadians in need.

Since 2006, our government has invested an estimated $13.1 billion in housing and homelessness programs. During this period, we have witnessed a tremendous level of co-operation between governments and other housing stakeholders, in fact, a truly national collaboration.

This is not the time to interrupt progress by shifting our attention to holding meetings rather than implementing actual housing solutions.

[Marie-Claude Morin, NDP, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Mr. Speaker, first, I would like to tell the hon. member that Bill C-400 is not just about holding meetings. A national strategy is also about taking action.

Housing is not just a provincial responsibility. It is a shared responsibility. The federal government has responsibilities when it comes to housing. It must make appropriate investments and work with the provinces. Working with the provinces means talking with them, consulting them. When I talk about the provinces, I am also referring to the territories, of course. Talking with the provinces means consulting with them, being open and listening to their needs. However, this does not seem to be what the government is doing right now with regard to housing in Canada.

The housing crisis is a growing problem. I would like to provide another statistic. Right now, in Canada, between 150,000 and 300,000 people are homeless. It is not normal for a so-called rich country such as Canada to see families in core housing need and people living in the streets—

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

Order, please. The hon. parliamentary secretary.

[Eve Adams, Conservative, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I certainly understand the hon. member's concern for those who require assisted housing, but as I have already said, the current approach our government has is working.

Since 2006, we have created 46,000 new affordable housing units and we have renovated more than 100,000. Every year our government is providing support for more than 605,000 individuals and families with subsidized housing needs.

Since 2006, more than 8,900 new rental units have been committed under the on-reserve non-profit housing program. In addition, under Canada's economic action plan, more than 10,000 new units were created on and off reserve.

These projects not only improved living conditions for tens of thousands of Canadians, but they also put people to work quickly and stimulated local economies.

This year alone we will spend close to $2 billion through a range of programs to help Canadians with housing needs. We continue to build on the progress that has been achieved to date.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

The motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m. pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 6:45 p.m.)