Debates of Oct. 3rd, 2024

Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities

[The Deputy Speaker, Chris d'Entremont]

I just want to make sure that that was a retraction, just a retraction, and not an “I retract, but” statement.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I do not think I said the word “but”. If I did say the word “but”, I am so sorry. I ask the Conservatives to please forgive me.

The bottom line is that, at the end of the day, the Government of Canada looks at the issues that are before us and develops programs, whether through legislative measures or budgetary measures, that make a real difference in all regions of Canada. When we focus in on an issue, such as that being proposed in the concurrence motion today, which is the issue of disabilities, I would challenge any member of the House to demonstrate a government, whether it is at the provincial level, and there are a lot of provincial governments out there, or a national level, that has done more and invested more in the interests of people with disabilities in the last 50 years.

[An hon. member]

Jim Flaherty.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Did the member say Jim Flaherty?

Mr. Speaker, we legalized it. I do not know where he gets Jim Flaherty as one of the individuals. Maybe the member can explain in his question why he believes that Jim Flaherty has done more.

I was here when Jim Flaherty was Minister of Finance. Maybe if we did a quick Hansard search we would find that it is very lacking in showing support for the disability community. That is the reality. I will wait for the question. Maybe the member will come back with some specific quotes from Jim Flaherty using the word “disability”. I will not hold my breath.

As I was saying, members can take a look at the initiatives. We are not only focused on yesterday, but also on today and the types of initiatives we are taking. I made reference to the enabling accessibility fund, which is broken into a few sections. Let me just give members a sense of the types of things that it deals with. It deals with purchasing para hockey sleds; building raised garden beds in community gardens; providing accessible beach mats and beach wheelchairs; purchasing voice recognition software; building ramps, accessible doors and accessible washrooms; installing screen reader devices and hearing loop systems; constructing a universally designed office; and creating an accessible playground. When we talk about the EAF, members can think about the benefits of a program of this nature.

By the way, the Conservatives voted against this stuff. Anyway, that is beside the point. Members can think in terms of some of the things that have been dealt with, such as ramps, accessible doors, accessible washrooms and elevators. I was at a facility a while back where they were able to put in an elevator, in part, because of the federal support to do that to assist people with disabilities and elders. There are also pool lifts, multi-sensor rooms and stations, accessible playgrounds, accessible parking, accessible—

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, I recognize that members have quite a bit of latitude in their speeches, but I am rising at this moment because we are just at the outset of what is meant to be a three-hour debate on the Canada disability benefit. The parliamentary secretary has now spent the last several minutes speaking about a completely unrelated fund. I would ask, if this is meant to be a debate about the Canada disability benefit, and we are hearing about money for a ramp from some other fund, whether that would be relevant to the debate at hand.

[The Deputy Speaker, Chris d'Entremont]

The Chair does allow a lot of latitude, as long as the hon. member can refer it back to the debate. I will call for a quick relevance and call on the hon. member for Winnipeg North to continue.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr Speaker, that is one of the most bizarre points of order I have heard on relevancy. We are talking about the funding and support for people with disabilities, and I am talking about money that is going towards people with disabilities and what it is doing for them. That point of order makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

The member from the Green Party might not like to hear it, but these are the types of financial supports that are going to people with disabilities that are actually making a difference for them. I would suggest that we should be looking at not only the disability program, which is providing much-needed funds, but also the other types of funding the government has to support people with disabilities. To imagine some world where that is not associated with each other is just absolutely bizarre because—

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, we are talking about the Canada disability benefit, not every program under the sun.

I would also like to remind members to talk through the Speaker and not directly at members. This is unacceptable to me. We are here talking about the Canada disability benefit.

[The Deputy Speaker, Chris d'Entremont]

I thank the hon. member for the intervention. I will remind our learned members here in the chamber to speak through the Chair.

The hon. parliamentary secretary.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, we can take a look at the type of funding and the legislative actions, virtually from the very beginning, back in 2015, when we saw tax measures to support Canadians, including those for individuals with disabilities, all the way up to the budget in which we announced the creation of the disability program. It was the first-ever national program. That is a program that is helping Canadians with disabilities.

I believe that we would love to be able to see that program continue to grow. One of the concerns we have is with the Conservative Party and its sense of commitment to the national disability program because, when it talks about fixing the budget, that was a $6-billion commitment that was in the budget line.

Can we have the Conservative Party members stand in their places for questions and comments to make a commitment that they, in no way, will take away from the national program that we created and put into place? I think we need to recognize that the Conservatives have an issue with wanting to cut government expenditures. I would like to hear from them on their commitment to leave this program alone. Will they do that? I know they get the opportunity to ask me some questions, and I hope that, prior to asking those questions, they will make that commitment.

With those few words, I am happy to take questions.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Wetaskiwin, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the subject of Jim Flaherty will probably come up over the next three hours. I want to make sure we are clear on a couple of things because the hon. NDP member did not know who he was, and the Liberal member mocked him and his legacy a little in the House. Of course, Minister Flaherty passed away in 2014. He had a son with a developmental disability and was very public about it.

The CBC said, “although Flaherty's legacy may be measured by his effectiveness at keeping the books balanced during one of history's most calamitous economic periods, he was also passionate about improving quality of life for disabled Canadians.” André Picard, of the Globe and Mail, wrote, “Disability community ‘has lost a true champion’ in Jim Flaherty”.

As we are having the conversation about this important issue, which affects many of us and many of our families, I am just going to make this comment. I am not even going to ask a question. I hope that we can all show some respect in this place and understand that we all want the best for Canadians living with disabilities.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I agree with the member in that I like to believe that all of us want to support our disability community. All of us want to do that. However, let us remember, prior to the member standing up asking a question, I asked that the Conservative member make a commitment that the finances that we have committed will in no way will be cut by the Conservatives. He is a Conservative, and we did not get that commitment.

I was here when Minister Flaherty was the minister of finance. They can be a strong advocate for disabilities, but at the end of the day, what did Stephen Harper actually do? That is why I challenge the Conservatives when they try to give the impression that the Government of Canada is not moving forward on the issue. The Conservative government did not do anything.

I was asking for tangible—

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Wetaskiwin, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I believe misleading the House is against the rules of the House. The hon. member can look at every single budget from the Conservative years—

[The Deputy Speaker, Chris d'Entremont]

We are descending into debate. I know the hon. member does have an opportunity to speak further on down the road on the same issue. That was not a point of order.

The hon. member for Kitchener Centre.

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary secretary shared that he was surprised by the disability community's reaction to the Canada disability benefit. He is right on one thing: There was deep disappointment.

I will give him a few quotes. Inclusion Canada said, “Our disappointment cannot be overstated”. The Quebec intellectual disability society noted that this is worse than any worst-case scenario. Disability Without Poverty stated, “To say we are disappointed is an understatement.” Here is why. The government promised four years ago that the Canada disability benefit would lift folks with disabilities out of poverty in the same way the GIS did. The GIS is $15 billion a year and gives a maximum amount of over $1,000 a month. This benefit barely lifts anyone out of poverty, only 25,000 people in total.

The second reason for the disappointment is that the government took four years to get it done. The whole way along it kept saying it needed to hear from the disability community to understand more about it. Well, the benefit is nothing that was asked for, being 200 bucks a month that is tied to the disability tax credit, which cuts out a ton of people, and not even starting until July 2025.

Does that help the government understand better why the disability community is so deeply disappointed?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, not to discredit those organizations, but there are many different organizations out there doing a phenomenal job advocating for people with disabilities. I applaud their efforts. I really and genuinely do. I would expect that they would continue to lobby whatever government is in office.

However, to draw a conclusion about what the federal government did by creating a national program and to say it is a bad program does a disservice to it. In fact, it is the first time we have seen a national program for this. No other line item in the budget had such a substantial increase. Does that mean we cannot grow the program? A good number of us would like to see the program expand. There is no doubt about that.

Everything has to come in time, I would suggest. We will continue to work with the members of the disability community.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I have a question for my colleague, who spoke on the important committee report we are debating this morning. I will be quoting heavily from an amazing organization in my riding called Dynamique des handicapés de Granby et région, which works to address the challenges facing persons with disabilities.

The organization has a very dedicated executive director, Marie‑Christine Hon, whom I would like to recognize this morning. She told me something that really struck a chord. She criticized the fact that there may have been a lack of consultation with organizations on the ground. I am going to follow up on the question my colleague asked earlier.

Were organizations on the ground adequately consulted? Will the measures that have been adopted be able to help the largest number of people with disabilities with the greatest needs? Lastly, will the measures we will be putting in place truly meet the needs of these organizations?

I would like to hear what my colleague has to say on this subject.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I think of the Manitoba League of Persons with Disabilities and the many other non-profit organizations throughout Manitoba, and they are not just limited to Manitoba, obviously. We could talk about the different advocacy groups in every region of the country and the absolutely incredible work they do in representing people with disabilities. I would want and encourage them to continue the excellent advocacy they have been doing for people with disabilities, not only to the federal government but also to provincial governments, municipal governments and other stakeholders. It is not the case that only Ottawa deals with individuals with disabilities.

Ottawa needs to step up to the plate. That is exactly what we have done. We have stepped up to the plate in a very real and tangible way. We are not backing away from the plate.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, that was probably one of the most ableist speeches I have ever heard: patting people on the back and telling the disability community to keep advocating. The government has an obligation to uphold the human rights of all persons, including those with disabilities, who have indicated very clearly that $200 a month is inadequate. It is hidden behind the disability tax credit and is at risk of provincial and territorial clawbacks. This is a total failure by the government, and it is shameful that the member is choosing to tell those in the the disability community they should be grateful for having their human rights violated.

Is the member's government willing to raise the amount, to ensure an adequate income that would lift persons with disabilities out of poverty, or is his government prepared to continue violating the human rights of people with disabilities?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, this government does not violate individuals with a disability any more than I have seen in 20-plus years of New Democratic governments in the province of Manitoba. They have done a disgraceful job in things such as housing.

The member opposite likes to take the holy road, believing everything she says is at a high moral standard. However, I would challenge the New Democrats on a number of fronts that have actually worked against individuals in dealing with the issue of poverty. They do not get a gold star for their performance in helping the people who need help. I have lived it, when driving to the Manitoba legislature, for virtually 20 years, through the north end of Winnipeg and the inner city when the New Democrats were the majority government. I saw the disgraceful job they did at protecting the interests of the poor.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, the member for Winnipeg North was speaking to me directly, screaming at me across the aisle. Perhaps he was put off by my question about his government violating human rights, but I would ask—

[The Deputy Speaker, Chris d'Entremont]

That is continuing the debate. Ultimately, I do want to remind members to try to work through the Chair and keep things in check. I know sometimes these conversations can get very emotional.

The hon. minister.

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I really appreciate your moderation today. It is very refreshing to hear you speak about how we should treat each other in the House. However, when a member begins a statement by accusing another member of being “ableist”, in fact, that is the name-calling that you just called out.

We may have different perspectives on how to get to a better Canada that is fairer and kinder, but we are all here for the same reason. We are here fighting for our communities, fighting for our constituents, and trying to put forward a vision of Canada where people are going to have a fair chance to succeed. I think that when we talk about name-calling, it includes labels like “ableist”.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I did not call the member ableist. I said that was an “ableist speech”, and I will not retract that comment, because it was a very ableist speech.

[The Deputy Speaker, Chris d'Entremont]

We need to remember that we cannot do indirectly what we cannot do directly here in this chamber either. I did call out the member for a statement he made, and I will call that one out as well. We should probably refrain from using those kinds of terms when we are talking here in the chamber. Once again, let us all take a deep breath.

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Kelowna—Lake Country.