Equal Citizenship For Canadians with Disabilities The will to act Federal Task Force on Disability Issues Government of Canada Gouvernement du Canada Produced by: Federal Task Force on Disability Issues For additional copies or alternate format, please contact: Enquiries Centre Human Resources Development Canada 140 Promenade du Portage Phase IV, Level 0 Hull, Quebec KIA 0J9 Fax: (819) 953-7260 Catalogue No. SDDP-019-10-96E Ce document est également disponible en français, intitulé “Donner un sens à notre citoyenneté canadienne: La volonté d’intégrer les personnes handicapées” © Minister of Public Works and Government Services Canada 1996 Cat. No.: MP80-2/9-1996E ISBN: 0-662-25115-6 415 KING/ 412 QUEEN ST. SUITE 160 FREDERICTON, N.B. E3B 5G2 (506)462-4110 Fax: (506) 452-4076 HOUSE OF COMMONS CHAMBRE DES COMMUNES CONFEDERATION BUILDING ROOM 244 OTTAWA (KIA OA6) (613) 992-1067 Fax: (613) 996-9955 OTTAWA, October 21, 1996 Last May, my colleagues Clifford Lincoln, Andy Mitchell, and Anna Terrana and I were asked to form a Task Force to look at the appropriate role for the Federal Government in the area of disability issues. During the course of our deliberations, we received remarkable co-operation from many quarters. Representatives of 22 national organizations assisted us in framing the content and organizing the process for our inquiry. A reference group was formed, working groups identified and Fred Clark, Lucie LemieuxBrassard and Traci Walters were selected to sit as observers to the process. The Task Force is grateful to the organizations and, most particularly, the observers for their willingness to participate. The Office for Disability Issues within Human Resources Development Canada provided support to the Task Force under the direction of Cathy Chapman. Their professionalism, good humour and genuine commitment to the issue served us all well. Bill Young of the Library of Parliament added invaluable insight based on almost 10 years of work with the parliamentary committee on Human Rights and the Status of Persons with Disabilities. As we traveled across Canada various officials from the Departments of Revenue, Finance, Justice, Health, Indian and Northern Affairs and, most noticeably. Human Resources Development Canada lent their time and talent as resource persons, facilitators, rapporteurs, and active participants. Their assistance and interest was appreciated. Canadians associated with a multitude of organizations, once again, placed their faith in a process that has not always produced results in the past. Their confidence inspired our work. And individual Canadians poured out their hearts to us appealing to their government to prove worthy of their commitment to Canada. The members of the Task Force are grateful to the four ministers who made our work possible, our parliamentary colleagues for their support, and the constituents of FrederictonYork-Sunbury, Parry Sound-Muskoka, Vancouver East and Lachine-Lac-St-Louis for their understanding as we undertook this important assignment. Andy Scott, M.P. Chair TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. The gap between saying and doing — Message received 1 Consistent, equal and inclusive outcomes 2 An echo of wise voices 3 “Just DO it!” 6 What citizenship is really all about 8 Changing federal-provincial realities 13 The need to know 18 2. Aboriginal Canadians with disabilities — Keeping hope alive 20 Bleak Choices 20 A long way to go 22 Key principles for reform 23 3. Federal organization and approach to disability issues 25 A disability policy framework 25 A Canadians with Disabilities Act 27 A Minister with Responsibility for Disability Issues 30 A central focus for federal government action 32 The need for accountability 34 III An annual report on government actions 35 Support for organizations 36 4. Legislative reform — A responsive government 39 This is not just a good thing to do 40 Short-term legislative and program changes 43 The Court Challenges Program 49 5. The opportunity to work — Labour market integration An inclusive labour market 50 52 Employment Insurance measures can increase employment IV among Canadians with disabilities 52 VRDP — Vocational Rehabilitation of Disabled Persons Program 61 Getting into the workforce 64 Adjusting existing labour market programs 65 Policy and program expertise 67 Service delivery 68 6. Disability income 72 Canada’s disability-income “system” 73 The long-term vision 75 A comprehensive approach is needed, based on collaboration 77 Moving in the right direction 79 Short-term actions to promote workforce participation 81 7. Dealing fairly with the costs of disability 85 Taxation and the costs of disability 86 You can’t do it alone 87 Short-term changes in tax measures 89 A new Disability Expense Tax Credit 97 Involve the community 99 8. Thanks 101 V CHAPTER ONE The gap between saying and doing — Message received Sometimes a whisper has a more profound impact than a shout. For the last several years, Canadians with disabilities have quietly stated their case for action that recognizes and promotes their full and equal participation in the life of our country. While their arguments have been listened to at the political level and by governments, there has been a growing gap between “saying” and “doing”. Over the course of the last fifteen years. Members of Parliament produced a series of reports and recommendations that started in the early 1980s with the Obstacles report and finished with the most recent. The Grand Design. Each of them tried to show how Canadian society and governments could move toward achieving equality and inclusion. In 1993 the federal and provincial governments, working together, produced a joint vision for people with disabilities. Pathway to Integration, the final report of their collaborative review of services for people with disabilities. But implementation of these visions and the recommendations has left a lot to be desired. At the federal level, responses to reports have been equivocal and in some cases, non-existent. The response to The Grand Design, the last report of the Standing Committee on Human Rights and the Status of Disabled Persons, seemed to indicate that the status quo was good enough. After this, people with disabilities abandoned whispers and quiet arguments and forcefully told the federal government to treat their concerns seriously. 1 Their message was received and this is why the Task Force on Disability Issues was created. CONSISTENT, EQUAL AND INCLUSIVE OUTCOMES By asking us to prepare this report, the Ministers of Human Resources Development Canada, Finance, Justice and National Revenue recognized that policies, laws and programs do not always lead to outcomes that are consistent, equal and inclusive for people with disabilities. The Ministers asked us the question: “What is the federal role in the area of disability?” We quickly realized that to answer this question, we had to try to answer several others: What overall vision will promote the inclusion of Canadians with disabilities and allow • them to participate equally in the life of the country alongside their fellow citizens? How does this vision fit into the larger debate about the nature of our society and our • country? • What general recommendations flow from this vision? • What specifically can the Government of Canada do in the short, medium and long term? 2 We knew that in undertaking to study these questions, we were continuing on a voyage that others began before us. We are optimistic that this report can be used as a compass so that governments and the community set the course and move in the right direction. “Canadians with disabilities do not want any more papers to present, commissions to attend, or research to conduct. Canadians with AN ECHO OF WISE VOICES disabilities want action under Any public inquiry runs the risk of having its recommendations ignored, and countless reports the thousands of pages of like ours are gathering dust on shelves. A good number of fine and innovative solutions to recommendations and difficult issues have been dismissed because an inquiry was not perceived as fair, open-minded or complete. creative solutions that have been tabled by a multitude of groups since 1981.” From the outset, we knew that unless we carried out our work as publicly and as thoroughly as possible, our report and our recommendations might share the same fate. — Participant in Fredericton consultation We have mobilized every available resource from across the country both to develop a long­ term vision and to provide knowledge and expertise aimed at producing practical and “do-able” recommendations. Not since the Special Committee that produced Obstacles in 1981 have disability issues been explored with such breadth or such depth. During the past four months, we listened to men and women with disabilities and many others who came to our meetings. We received briefs from organizations of people with disabilities, businesses, unions and community groups. We commissioned research studies from experts who would give us an independent perspective. We also involved officiais from federal departments so that they could contribute their knowledge to our search for realistic approaches. 3 While it is important to remember that processes are only a means to an end, we learned a lot from the very model that we used for our consultations. Observers from the community “I see the federal government role as one of leadership participated fully and freely with members of the Task Force during the consultations. This and setting expectations. created a dynamic environment that encouraged debate and exploration of differences of Protecting disadvantaged opinion. The greatest value of the process was the level of expertise and common sense that Canadians, making sure people with disabilities — individuals as much as organizations — brought to our study of people do not lose their the issue. rights, simply because they have to ask for help to do the To begin our work, we called together representatives of over twenty national disability things that others take for organizations — organizations that once again made the commitment to participate in a granted — living, learning consultation. They set aside their concerns that this process, like others before it, might not and working in our make any real difference in the lives of men and women with disabilities. They formed a communities.” Reference Group that refined the issues that we used to organize our consultations and research. — Participant in Their framework of six subject areas — civil infrastructure, legislative reform, labour market integration, income support, the cost of disability/tax and Aboriginal peoples — ensured consistency in our approach to our mandate from the ministers. The Reference Group also selected three observers, two of whom participated at each of our public meetings. The members of the Task Force want to acknowledge their very great debt to the two thousand people, most of them Canadians with disabilities, who participated in our 15 forums from coast to coast. Although we know that we could never capture their 4 Fredericton consultation eloquence in this report, we hope that they see in it a true echo of their ideas and suggestions. They reminded us that our true subject remained the day-to-day lives of people with disabilities across the country To complete our investigation and to avoid reinventing the wheel, we asked experts to assess the substantial research that has already been completed, to evaluate existing options and to provide us with their views on realistic strategies for the government to remove barriers and promote the inclusion of people with disabilities. Each researcher collaborated with a working group made up of representatives of national organizations of people with disabilities and from relevant federal departments. These working groups provided a “reality test” for strategies and policy options. Throughout the life of the Task Force we have unapologetically borrowed good ideas from every available source. It should surprise no one that our report contains recommendations that have appeared elsewhere. 5 i “JUST DO IT!” “It seems that thousands of reports have been produced As we listened to those who came to our forums across the country, one message came but there has been very little through loudly and clearly. action on any of those. What we need is action. Come on, Individuals with disabilities spoke forcefully about the conditions that they, as Canadians, believe are essential: • They want a country that demonstrates vision and leadership; common principles and values for disability issues. • They want a country that ensures that people with disabilities have input into policy, programs and decision making; that takes a holistic approach to disability issues, spanning issues related to income, employment, education and other areas of life; that recognizes the importance of sharing information to achieve this end. • They want a country that makes it possible for all to achieve a decent standard of living, and to contribute to the standard of living of all; that addresses the social causes of disadvantages related to disability. • They want a country that adopts a common approach to disability issues in all jurisdictions but that is sensitive to individual differences and needs; that guarantees access to similar disability-related supports in all regions, and that holds governments accountable to ensure that this is so. 6 get it done. We have done enough talking, we have had enough discussion, we have had enough, we have got to do it.” — Participant in Vancouver consultation “Someone suggested that we • They want a country that makes disability program arrangements secure and predictable; that ensures that core funding and other financial supports are available for disability-related organizations. are a group of excluded and vulnerable people, and that is how we should be perceived • They want a country that uses legal and other carrots and sticks to promote social and economic equity and equality of outcomes. by the federal government. Not as a special interest group.” People were equally clear about how they felt current circumstances limited their inclusion in — Participant in Canadian life no matter where they lived. Toronto consultations • They pointed to barriers that they face in trying to participate in the country’s social and economic life. • They expressed fear that current attitudes of support for “leaner and meaner” governments, the shift to private responsibility, and a growing burden on those who provide services will lead to greater inequities. • They spoke of poverty, a state that too many knew only too well. • They spoke of barriers to their mobility in Canada because disability issues generally, and services in particular, are the responsibility of many separate governments and organizations. • They lamented public ignorance about disability and the inadequate support for disability organizations that could help effect changes. 7 • They said they were looking for leadership, for a sense that governments — and particularly the Government of Canada — have a vision of what should be. “We are Canadian citizens and we are not asking for privileges, we are asking for • They said that they were excluded from decisions about things that affect them and they pointed out that society often blames individuals for the consequences of disability instead of looking for the causes of inequity in the social environment. simple basic human rights.” — Participant in Fredericton consultation As people brought these issues to our attention, they urged the Government to act on the recommendations of previous reports, and expressed complete frustration that worthwhile action had been postponed for no apparent reason. People told us in three blunt words: “Just do it!” WHAT CITIZENSHIP IS REALLY ALL ABOUT The women and men who expressed these views most often used a short form — a single word — citizenship to describe why the federal government should take responsibility for disability issues. Everywhere we went, we heard people express a positive, passionate and unanimous Canadianism. People with disabilities are looking to the Government of Canada to spell out, in concrete terms, the vision and the specific steps that will allow individuals across the country to live their lives in a way that is consistently equal and inclusive. 8 Citizenship offers a sense of belonging in one’s country and gives each individual the right to participate in society and in its economic and political systems. It confers the protection of the State within Canada and abroad, while requiring individuals to obey this country’s laws. “Citizens of Canada, persons with disabilities are watching the results of this, yet another committee. But there is another audience, an The legal and constitutional basis for civil and political rights is in place and is unambiguous. The Canadian Charter ofRights and Freedoms enshrines civil and political rights in the highest law of the land. The Constitution Act, 1867 enumerated the areas of jurisdiction of the federal international audience of public opinion, which has and provincial governments, but did not include the egalitarian principles included in modern looked to Canada for guidance human rights statutes such as the Canadian Human Rights Act, or section 15 of the Charter, and for emancipation and for which was part of the Constitution Act, 1982. The federal government therefore has authority enlightenment.... your group to legislate on disability issues only in areas of federal jurisdiction. must help us achieve a truly enlightened position in regard The Constitution, however, binds the federal and provincial governments under section 15 to disability. Both inside of the Charter. It guarantees to persons with disabilities the right to equality before and under our country and in the the law and to the equal protection and benefit of the law without discrimination in all international sphere.” jurisdictions. Further, the Charter was influenced by international conventions which the — Participant in federal government has signed; it is accountable for their implementation in Canada, Toronto consultation regardless of the domestic division of power. 9 A more complete set of rights But popular conceptions of citizenship incorporate an increasingly complete set of rights. “These are not disability issues. These are human From “civil rights” such as freedom of speech, thought and faith, citizenship came to include rights issues.” “political rights” as expressed by the right to hold office or to vote. Most recently, twentieth — Participant in century citizenship is understood to comprise not only these but also “social and economic Fredericton consultation rights”. These are the level of well-being and security that are required to exist in a society. They represent a commitment that there will be no internal “borders” and that all those who call a particular country home can participate fully in the life of the community. Section 15 of the Charter has become a touchstone for people with disabilities and its guarantees of equal rights for men and women with disabilities form the basis for many of their, and others’, arguments for inclusion. But the Charter too has its limits. These are most obvious in dealing with the place of social and, to some extent, economic rights. This set of guiding principles is more a result of a consensus in society than it is the outcome of constitutional protections. The consensus that the federal government had an obligation to address these rights formed the basis for th social programs established during the three decades after the Second World War. It was the rationale for the introduction of the original programs in the 1950s and 1960s that made provision for pensions for people with disabilities, and later for the Canada Assistance Plan, which provided many of the disability-related supports and services that they require to participate in the life of their community. Paul Martin, the Minister of National Health and Welfare during the 1950s, in fact called them “a matter of right”. “Many of the programs that have helped our equality in Canadian society have been federal programs.... VRDP, CPP Disability, and the old The arguments that were used to build support for these income, education and health initiatives rested on the requirement of the federal government to provide leadership and to acknowledge the rights of Canadian citizens to have access to inclusive social and economic Canada Assistance Plan, programs to help support measures. These initiatives can be seen as the complement to equalization measures that have housing, accessible housing been put in place to deal with regional inequities. for people with disabilities.... Some are shocked that the As a result, citizenship has come to be understood as a commitment, by governments and particularly the Government of Canada, that individuals will not be discriminated against or federal government appears to be withdrawing from marginalized. It is also a commitment to provide, in an equitable way, high quality accessible support to people with services from sea to sea to sea. disabilities.” — Participant in Winnipeg consultation Inclusion The principle of inclusiveness implied in Canadian citizenship gives the Government of Canada a base for its approach to today’s requirements. The federal government can — and should — promote the equality commitments contained in the international and national instruments that underpin full citizenship. It should also support programs and policies that help all Canadians participate effectively in the economic and social mainstream. 11 Canadians have the right to expect inclusiveness, equality and the opportunity to achieve equal outcomes, no matter where they live. The federal government should concern itself with ways to minimize or eliminate additional disadvantages of costs and lack of mobility that Canadian citizens face because they have disabilities. This means that every government program should, as a matter of principle, incorporate the individual and particular needs of persons with disabilities in the very core of its design. A good example of what we mean is the Canada Student Loans Program. Certain criteria such as the number of courses a student can take, or the length of time to complete a program, are flexible so that all eligible students with disabilities can qualify for a loan. At the same time, we recognize that the additional disadvantages that result from disabilities cannot always be accommodated in each and every “mainstream” program. Where this is the case, a complementary measure, designed to mesh with the generic program, can be put in place to ensure that no one is denied the opportunity to participate just because of disability. The Canada Student Loans Program, again, provides a model. Individuals with disabilities can receive an additional, non-repayable grant to cover the disability-related cost of attending a post-secondary institution. 12 “Fundamentally, it is our Neither our public consultations, nor our own research, nor the information provided by government departments proves, in a definitive way, that the cost of inclusion outweighs the hope that, as a country, many real, quantifiable and intangible benefits. On the contrary, an initial program design Canada can ensure that that accommodates people with disabilities and that links to other programs will have a persons with disabilities reasonable cost and might save money. For example, the cost of making a television are treated with the same commercial with closed-captioning quadruples when the captioning is added at the end of degree of dignity, access production and not built into the production design. Arguments that justify postponing and opportunity across all action due to the cost of accommodating disability usually exaggerate all these costs without provinces and territories.” providing definitive proof. — Canadian Bankers Association We recommend,.. 1. The Government of Canada should acknowledge and act on its responsibility for citizens with disabilities to ensure equality and to promote their full inclusion and participation in the life of the country. CHANGING FEDERAL-PROVINCIAL REALITIES We know that Canada is changing. Many of these changes cannot be avoided — globalization has given any national government far less control over levers that once were unquestionably within its grasp. We also know that the federal government is engaged in discussions with the provinces and territories around appropriate roles and responsibilities for each level of 13 government for the future, consistent with jurisdictional mandates, demographic trends, fiscal capacities and other factors. This has already resulted in changes to traditional responsibilities and will inevitably lead to further significant changes to social programs. “It certainly may be true that there are some areas where it would be helpful or constructive to have a diminished role for the But many of these shifts are failing to address the reality of daily life, here and now, for the two thousand men and women that we met as we travelled across the country. People with disabilities are worried that the consensus within our society that encouraged governments to federal government, but I am not sure how we ever put in place programs like the Canada Assistance Plan has disappeared. They believe that the came to the idea that it Government of Canada, which had taken the initiative and shown the leadership that allowed should be a diminished role them to participate more fully in the life of the country, is now abandoning them. They seek with respect to people with guarantees that a “new system” will not abandon them to a fragmented, patchwork array of disabilities. It certainly never regional activities that mitigates equity and sentences them to return to a marginal existence. came from our communities.” — Participant in The tension is the push and pull between the scope for regional or provincial diversity in public programs, on one hand, and the equal treatment — or the opportunity for equal outcomes — of similarly placed citizens, irrespective of where they live, on the other. This balance has never been static. Today, as people with disabilities see the pendulum swinging towards regional diversity, they see growing internal borders that compromise their ability to participate in core elements of our life as a country. They feel that they risk being shut out of being able to do what other Canadians do. Men and women with disabilities are afraid that their basic citizenship rights are being lost. 14 Edmonton consultation When they articulated their fear, their perception of federal responsibility led people with disabilities to call for national standards. This term, in effect, became a short form for a guarantee of inclusion. It also reflects their view that a pan-Canadian approach must strengthen the capacity of civil society to allow people with disabilities to achieve their social “rights”. We recognize that current discussions on Canada’s social and economic union will identify areas where action is required by one level of government or another. They may also identify some common areas for action and others where further negotiations will be necessary to achieve mutual agreement on how to address policy and program gaps. While respecting this process, we believe the federal government possesses several levers within its jurisdiction that it can use to affirm the citizenship of Canadians with disabilities and advance their civil, political and social rights. Available tools include the tax system, the machinery of the federal government, federal legislation, and federal fiscal transfers to the provinces. These, however, cannot be effectively used to achieve equality or equal outcomes for persons with disabilities without a coordinated and overarching approach that includes all relevant departments and agencies of the Government of Canada, and where appropriate, working in partnership with the provinces and territories. On the other hand, we like to think that these changes will generate a few new ideas. If we can get these new approaches right, they can be the kernels that will grow and play a vital role in assuring Canadians with disabilities that the federal government affirms their citizenship 15 i “Access to social programs rights. All of the recommendations in this report are founded on this assumption. We hope that they will re-orient the federal government’s thinking about disability issues and point policies and programs in the right direction. should be a matter of need, not of geography.” — Participant in Halifax consultation Mobility Canadas history and its federal system have always allowed for diversity among the provinces and territories. It would be naive, therefore, to support any concept of rights or social citizenship that implies a rigidly uniform set of social programs in all jurisdictions across the country. On the other hand, the Task Force has been made acutely aware of the fact that the unmet necessities of life very often dictate where Canadians can live in their own country. No province or territory would willingly be seen as a place that is inhospitable to individuals with disabilities. None would want to fall short of the others. And yet, this reality is a fact of daily life for many people with disabilities across Canada. The list of assistive services supported with public funds is different in each province and territory. An individual who wants to enrol in an employment or training program may only be able to find an accessible one in another province or territory. However, the services he requires to help him live independently may not exist in that region. A woman or man with 16 disabilities may have to ignore education or employment opportunities elsewhere, not because of a free choice to move or not, but because income support, accessible housing or other vital community services are not available in that part of Canada. “Federal endorsement of equitable standards across the nation is essential. There needs to be the ability for mobility across the country. To avoid this situation, Canadian governments can work together to establish pan-Canadian objectives, principles and, perhaps most importantly, common values so that all can be inclusive of and accessible to people with disabilities. This does not have to involve any level There needs to be a critical minimum of what those are of government telling another what to do. These objectives, principles and values can be and that needs to be clearly negotiated and developed jointly by the federal, provincial and territorial governments with stated. And there needs to be input from the citizens they affect. They can also reflect regional variations. The discussions dedicated services specific to would focus the means that will be used to ensure equity and equality of opportunity and to disability within any transfer ensure that all Canadians have full rights. The key point is that they would provide for of dollars from the federal consistent outcomes, not that provinces and territories would provide exactly equivalent programs or services. government to whatever level of government may end up actually delivering those We recommend.,, 2. Given its own significant role in ensuring a broadly based Canadian citizenship, the Government of Canada should invite the provinces to establish a pan-Canadian approach services.” — Participant in Edmonton consultation to disability issues that builds disability considerations into mainstream policies and programs in all areas. Where mainstream programs cannot completely eliminate the additional disadvantage of men and women with disabilities, this process must identify complementary action that enables them to benefit fully from mainstream programs. : 17; 3. The Government of Canada should include in these discussions clear statements of values, principles and objectives which fully include people with disabilities in Canadian society. “People with disabilities are equal to other people and should be able to make their own decisions about their lives and have the means to THE NEED TO KNOW take their place in society.” Information remains a critical necessity for all levels of government and for the disability community in its efforts to break the circle of rehashed arguments and find solutions to difficult issues. Municipalities, provinces, territories, the federal government, and all of Canadas citizens require information to respond to real needs and to reflect the reality of life, to plan their activities, and to anticipate future requirements. Information also provides a means for citizens to hold their governments accountable for their tax dollars and to ensure that government actions are achieving their stated purposes. A social audit, as proposed during the consultations, would strengthen the capacity of civil society to monitor social needs, to articulate emerging problems and to highlight program deficiencies. 18 — Participant in the Montreal consultation We recommend,.. 4, The Government of Canada should invite the provinces to work out a common approach to presenting information regarding disability-related spending — and other social spending, including the Canada Health and Social Transfer. In particular, the Government of Canada should provide better means of: • continuing to support surveys that capture data on persons with disabilities; • tracking and reporting on social spending in areas of its own jurisdiction; and • continuing the broad public dissemination of research, reports and other information products. 19 CHAPTER TWO Aboriginal Canadians with disabilities — Keeping hope alive Aboriginal Canadians with disabilities face challenges that are well beyond the capacity of many Canadians to understand. The Task Force held two consultations with Aboriginal people with disabilities, and was overwhelmed by participants’ efforts to keep hope alive, given the daily realities they and their families must live with everyday. In our report we cannot even begin to do justice to these realities. While the Task Force identified five themes that guided its work, we recognized from the outset that the needs and concerns of Aboriginal Canadians with disabilities are broader still, and even more complex than others. Aboriginal Canadians with disabilities have many needs that parallel those of other Canadians with disabilities, but they must seek solutions in a morass of jurisdictional forces that have led to fragmented policies and a patchwork of supports and services, where these are available at all. BLEAK CHOICES The net effect of this jurisdictional morass is that Aboriginal Canadians with disabilities are much more disadvantaged than their fellow Canadians. For on-reserve Aboriginal people with disabilities, the lack of supports and services in their home communities means that they may have two stark choices: 20 “As the parent of a disabled • to stay in their community and not have access to the basic types of services and supports that would allow them to exercise some control of their own destiny, or child, I have been forced to move off the reserve because • to leave their homes and communities to search for the basic necessities of life. of the lack of services.” — Participant in The irony is that in the end, whatever they do, they may be denied access to those necessities, Edmonton consultation because it is the overlapping and lack of collaboration among jurisdictions that dictate their eligibility. For Aboriginal Canadians with disabilities living off reserve, access to services and supports may be only marginally better, since mainstream programs do not usually deliver services that respond to their needs. And without adequate resources, they do not have the purchasing power to buy what they need. The message to the Task Force was very clear: the jurisdictional issue, defined in terms of who is responsible for providing what supports and services to whom, and under what conditions, is the cross-cutting issue for Aboriginal Canadians with disabilities, regardless of where they live. The discussions around jurisdictional complexities very quickly led to the issue of citizenship rights, and in that respect the voices of Aboriginal Canadians with disabilities echo those of their non-Aboriginal brothers and sisters. 21 A LONG WAY TO GO What does it mean to be a citizen of Canada? More so than any other Canadians, Aboriginal Canadians with disabilities have the farthest to go to be able to participate fully in the economic and social lives of their communities. The responsibility for this is a shared one, and the Task Force heard from many Aboriginal Canadians with disabilities who emphasized that this responsibility must begin at home, with individuals and with the community of Aboriginal leaders. But without a doubt, the Government of Canada has significant responsibility as well. So much has been said about this responsibility, so much has been written about it, and still Aboriginal Canadians with disabilities find themselves caught up in jurisdictional wrangling, coping with a lack of awareness and understanding of their needs both within and among their communities, and struggling with getting and keeping control of their personal destinies. The Task Force was asked to speak about the federal role in the area of disability. If we believe that the courage to speak, which was so evident in our consultations, must be matched by our wisdom to listen, then the Government of Canada should first of all remind itself that Members of Parliament studied and responded to the situation of Aboriginal persons with disabilities in the 1993 report of the Standing Committee on Human Rights and the Status of Disabled Persons, called Completing the Circle. It is fair to say that not much has changed since the Committee issued its report, a sentiment that was echoed clearly, with great patience but overwhelming sadness, by the Aboriginal Canadians with disabilities we listened to during the course of our work. 22 KEY PRINCIPLES FOR REFORM “As far as Aboriginal people are concerned, although The Standing Committee’s recommendations reflect key principles that were stated again and we have the same problems, again in the Task Force consultations: the same people, the same • The situation of Aboriginal Canadians with disabilities is a serious one that requires disabilities, when we immediate and comprehensive action on the part of all those whose decisions have a approach a problem with a direct or indirect impact on the lives of these Canadians. disability, we have a new set • Aboriginal Canadians with disabilities themselves know best what their issues are and of rules. The rules may apply how they can be resolved. to everybody in Canada, they • Federal government departments whose mandates directly affect the lives of Aboriginal Canadians with disabilities must acknowledge their responsibility to ensure that the do not apply to Aboriginal people.” programs and services they provide are flexible, transparent and coordinated. — Participant in We recommend.,. 5. Vancouver consultation The Government of Canada should recognize the ways in which it has contributed to the jurisdictional complexities that prevent Aboriginal Canadians with disabilities from gaining access to the supports and services they need, and begin to work in collaboration with provincial governments and Aboriginal communities to provide flexible, clientcentred services and supports to Aboriginal Canadians with disabilities. 23 6. The Government of Canada should assess the appropriateness of using the accountability mechanisms outlined in chapter 3 of this report to ensure that federal commitments made to address the needs of Aboriginal Canadians with disabilities are captured, assessed and evaluated in a way that ensures continued action. 24 CHAPTER THREE Federal organization and approach to disability issues Because disability issues cut across the federal government’s organizational lines, they often get lost in a bureaucratic shuffle. In some instances, a positive action by one department may be lost because of an action of another that unintentionally cancels out the first. In other cases, a department may have the will to act but need the support and input of others to get the job done. While government departments are able to join forces to meet disability-related goals, it is important to establish clear lines of accountability at the federal level. Accountability begins at the ministerial level and extends to questions of process — how government works and how citizens access government programs and services. It also includes measuring the effectiveness of government actions. A DISABILITY POLICY FRAMEWORK We suggest that the federal government adopt a disability policy framework to help it achieve the objective of an inclusive society. The framework should follow the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms as a constitutional beacon to guide the creation and review of public policies and laws. The equality guaranteed by the Charter before and under the law must define the purpose of the disability policy framework. The Charter applies to all activity of 25 the federal government and the provinces and territories, including the development of strategies, regulations, policies, rules and practices. It serves as a guide to conducting the business of government, including the work of: • drafting laws and regulations; • developing policies, strategies and initiatives; • assigning priorities and resources; • negotiating how services will be provided; and • implementing and administering all of the above. The goal of equality means that self-determination, autonomy, dignity, respect, integration, participation and independent living must be the effects of all federal programs, laws and activities. The extent to which these effects are achieved must be measured by the concrete results of programs, laws and services. The effects of all government actions on Canadians with disabilities must be examined in a complete social, political, economic and historical context. Policy makers and legislators must acknowledge that, for individuals with disabilities, equality sometimes means receiving the same treatment as others, as in access to “mainstream” 26 programs and services; other times, it means complementary measures are necessary. A “one- “One shoe size does not fit size-fits-all ” approach would result in a barrier to participation. In line with these all. You cannot make one set considerations, some of the principles that should help shape the disability policy framework of rules that will cover all of are the following: the disability community and • Legislation is bound to make distinctions and not all distinctions are discriminatory. all of the different people that are a part of it.” • Only distinctions that impose burdens, obligations or disadvantages on individuals who are members of groups that are already disadvantaged should be studied and considered for removal. — Participant in Fredericton consultation • Where people require different treatment to achieve equality, the failure to provide it can impose burdens, obligations and disadvantages. • Affirmative or proactive measures may be needed to remove some barriers and eliminate systemic discrimination. We recommend... 7. In its own jurisdiction, the Government of Canada should immediately proceed to put in place a disability policy framework using this report as a guide. A CANADIANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT Canadian human rights legislation has not addressed a number of issues of systemic discrimination, that is, discrimination that is the unintended effect of a program, policy or law 27 had to introduce legislative measures such as pay equity and employment equity laws. An “There needs to be an Act, additional legislative measure is needed to prevent many of the problems being experienced a department, and a minister today from continuing over the coming years. It is time for the Government of Canada to responsible for Canadians introduce a Canadians with Disabilities Act. with disabilities.” — Participant in A Canadians with Disabilities Act is the complementary measure that can make the rest of the human rights legislation and government structures work for persons with disabilities. It is our assurance that a broad interpretation of their citizenship rights will be applied by the Government of Canada in areas that fall within federal jurisdiction. The Act should provide for the appointment of a minister or secretary of state with responsibility for disability issues, and should enumerate the principles and values to be embodied in the relationship between persons with disabilities and the federal government. To address disability issues in everyday government business, the Act could also require the federal government to set out the powers, duties, and functions of federal institutions, including private-sector organizations delivering public services, on disability issues. Because these activities would require a coordinated inter-departmental approach to disability issues, the Act should specify appropriate policy and program support and describe responsibilities. The Act could also establish an independent office with the power to monitor departments’ compliance with the Act, report to the public, and advocate within government on behalf of the disability community. The legislation could also require the government to consult regularly with the disability community and to conduct specific studies. 28 St. Johns consultation We recommend.., 8. The Government of Canada should provide tangible evidence of leadership by introducing a Canadians with Disabilities Act that ensures consistent action, coordination and accountability at the federal level. 9. In order to permit action within the shortest possible time frame, the Government of Canada should proceed to implement recommendations 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 forthwith and make statutory provision for them, as appropriate, in a Canadians with Disabilities Act. This Act can initiate certain measures immediately and proceed with a phased implementation for others as follows: a) Year 1 Put in place a statement of principles and values, establish the position of minister or secretary of state in law and create the appropriate policy and program support to the Minister. It could also incorporate, by reference, the duty to accommodate as put forward in amendments to the Canadian Human Rights Act (see recommendation 21). b) Years 2-4 Make provision for the establishment of enforcement and reporting mechanisms and other elements identified for inclusion in the Act. c) Year 5 Legislatively provide for a review of the Canadians with Disabilities Act itself conducted by an appropriate evaluation mechanism. 29 A MINISTER WITH RESPONSIBILITY FOR DISABILITY ISSUES “We need that vision to work together. The changes made Policy decisions are ultimately made by Canadians’ political representatives. Because disability on a piece-meal basis will be issues have to be dealt with in legislation, in the mandates and activities of a number of departments and agencies, and in new administrative processes, it is essential that a voice at the Cabinet table specifically represent disability issues. This can best be accomplished both ineffective and wasteful without a vision, a sense of through the designation of an existing secretary of state or a minister as the Minister with what this country is going Special Responsibility for Disability Issues. to be like, of what you and I want Canada to be when The federal government also needs to ensure coordination between laws and policies created by different departments. For example, in 1995, the Minister of Human Resources Development Canada introduced Special Opportunity Grants for Students with permanent disabilities. As part of the Canada Student Loans Program, these grants help students with disabilities purchase the adaptive equipment and other services they may need to pursue a post-secondary education. Unfortunately, Revenue Canada considers these grants to be taxable income. As a result, students must pay through the tax system a percentage of the cost of the equipment or service that they had thought would be defrayed. A minister has access to colleagues across governments and in other governments, to information and to necessary resources. With political will, after all, there is usually a way. With a designated minister, Canadians with disabilities will know that their concerns are being addressed at the highest levels. 30 we call it home.” — Participant in Edmonton consultation We recommend.., 10. The Government of Canada should demonstrate its commitment to consistent action and accountability by taking action at the political level to formally designate an existing “I said to him, ‘What is your disability?’ He said, ‘It is that people think I have one.’.” minister or secretary of state with the additional responsibility to serve as the Minister or — Participant in Secretary of State with Responsibility for Disability Issues. Halifax consultation A "disability lens" The machinery of government does not run solely on the efforts of ministers and their departments. Much innovative work is done through the collaboration of ministers in Cabinet. All ministers and members of Treasury Board, which is a committee of Cabinet, should apply a “disability lens” to their decisions, like the lens that is currently used to assess the impact of policies and programs on women. This disability lens should include an assessment of the effect of policies, programs and decisions on people with disabilities. We recommend... 11. The Government of Canada should demonstrate its commitment to consistent action and accountability by taking action at the political level to put in place a “disability lens” for use by all ministers and members of Treasury Board when they are taking decisions. This would include an assessment of the effect on people with disabilities in all relevant items that are submitted to Cabinet and to Treasury Board. 31 Government programs It is important for the Cabinet and the Government of Canada to decide, finally, that all relevant government programs, such as the proposed extension to the Infrastructure Program, must set as a priority support for activities that will promote accessibility for people with disabilities. We recommend,.. 12. The Government of Canada should demonstrate its commitment to consistent action and accountability by deciding that relevant government programs, such as the renewed Infrastructure Program, must set aside funds to promote accessibility for people with disabilities. A CENTRAL FOCUS FOR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ACTION If government activity is spread across many departments and agencies, it is difficult to assess its effectiveness. For this reason, it is important for an organization to take on formal and effective responsibility for coordinating actions and responses on disability issues across the federal government. This policy and program infrastructure could follow the model of the National Literacy Secretariat, which is part of Human Resources Development Canada but which has its own responsible minister. Alternatively, it could follow the model of Status of Women Canada, a separate government organization, with a responsible secretary of state. 32 The organization must be an integral part of a larger process for setting the government’s policy agenda. It must also have the scope and authority to work effectively with other departments and central agencies such as Justice, Transport, Health Canada, Treasury Board and others. The organization responsible for disability issues must establish and maintain strong links with the disability community. It must have the capacity to sponsor innovation and experimentation within the government and in the community at large. The federal organization could also support tests of new approaches to policy issues by other levels of government. These pilot and demonstration projects can also involve private-sector businesses and others interested and involved in disability issues. recommend,.. 13. The Government of Canada should demonstrate its commitment to consistent action and accountability by: a) Taking action at the bureaucratic level by putting in place a policy and program infrastructure to support the minister or secretary of state. b) Putting in place under the authority of the Minister or Secretary of State with Responsibility for Disability Issues, a social policy research and development fund that will support projects that build on the work of this Task Force in all areas including citizenship development, income support, the cost of disability and legislative reform. 33 THE NEED FOR ACCOUNTABILITY An accountability mechanism is needed to ensure reconcilitation between the needs of Canadians with disabilities with changing programs, policies and laws and to ensure that the change process continues apace. There are advantages and disadvantages with any approach to keeping government accountable for its actions. In consultation with the disability community, the Government of Canada can determine whether it is better to act proactively, in the manner of the Auditor General, to react to complaints, like the Canadian Human Rights Commission, or to create another type of mediation agency or function to resolve problems as they occur. recommend,.. 14. The Government of Canada should demonstrate its commitment to consistent action and accountability by establishing an accountability mechanism to analyze social spending and all federal activities in support of disability and to monitor and report on checks and balances throughout the federal system. 34 The federal government should make use of the existing accountability mechanisms at its disposal. It would be useful, as a way to track government action across issues and departments, to submit all departmental Estimates dealing with disability issues to the Standing Committee on Human Rights and the Status of Persons with Disabilities. This process should apply to the Minister or Secretary of State with Responsibility for Disability Issues and all relevant departments. We recommend,,. 15. The Government of Canada should refer the Estimates of the Minister or Secretary of State with Responsibility for Disability Issues, as well as those of other relevant departments, and important policy and legislative issues, to the Standing Committee on Human Rights and the Status of Persons with Disabilities of the House of Commons. AN ANNUAL REPORT ON GOVERNMENT ACTIONS Whatever accountability mechanism is created, it is important to publish an annual report of findings that has the straightforward approach and thoroughness of the Annual Report of the Canadian Human Rights Commission. The report should analyze social spending as well as activities throughout the federal system. An annual report should provide information on how governments implement the standards they have agreed to adopt. This kind of report can give individuals and organizations 35 “If you do not have national representing Canadians with disabilities the information they need to determine if the servie they require are available to all, all across this country. One report should be available on ho voluntary organizations, the programs and services of each province and territory measure against any agreed-upon national organizations principles, values and objectives; another should detail the federal government’s annual prog speaking on your behalf in meeting its stated objectives for inclusion and accessibility. and communicating with other people with similar disabilities, you are alone and We recommend... 16. The Government of Canada should demonstrate its commitment to consistent action; accountability by publishing an annual report setting out the results of any assessment you are disempowered. If you don’t support these types of organizations, there is no intervention measures and referring this report to the Standing Committee on Human infrastructure for disabled Rights and the Status of Persons with Disabilities of the House of Commons. This report should outline the problems, challenges and successes of policies, programs and legislat It should be analogous to the Annual Report of the Canadian Human Rights Commis SUPPORT FOR ORGANIZATIONS Voluntary organizations of all types articulate the policy and program requirements of people with disabilities and other Canadians, and inform governments of the impact of the action of the State. They are the voice of individuals who face disadvantages in Canadian society, including those living on low incomes, people with disabilities, and those facing discrimin; Concerns about poverty, discrimination and more are important to Canadians with disabil 36 people.” — Participant in The federal government should provide adequate support to voluntary organizations. This would strengthen society’s capacity to monitor social needs and identify emerging problems. It would also allow these organizations to bring their expertise to government to help develop responsive programs, policies and laws. One of the strengths of the process adopted by the Task Force on Disability Issues was its reliance on consultation. The members invited scores of organizations representing Canadians with disabilities across the country to share their insights and views and to recommend courses of action. The organizations did this on short notice and in a spirit of openness and constructive guidance. This involvement required them to take time from their professional work and personal lives, and to divert energy, time and resources from other important work. We believe that the decision about which disability organizations get money should not be made by the same federal department that receives their proposals and has to implement social and economic policies. Therefore, we feel that it would be more appropriate for the Department of Canadian Heritage to have responsibility for funding national disability advocates, than for this function to stay with the Department of Human Resources Development Canada. 37 We recommend... 17. The Government of Canada should continue to support national organizations of people with disabilities in recognition of the extraordinary demands that participation and advocacy place on these organizations, which are least powerful and able to sustain this demand to begin with. This commitment should include, but not be restricted to, providing assured core funding, with a base amount of $5 million, to sustain national organizations as a recognition of the additional disadvantage of people with disabilities in having their voice heard at the federal level. 38 CHAPTER FOUR Legislative reform — A responsive government The disability policy framework suggested for government action and described in chapter 3 must address problems in Canadas laws and regulations. Historical stereotypes and prejudices persist in some federal laws, characterizing people with disabilities as dependent, incapable and in need of charity. This depiction must be replaced with a model of equality that promotes: • the right to full participation in society; • an entitlement to adequate supports to live in the community; • the right to choice and control over one’s life; and • the right to dignity, respect, autonomy and self-determination. The framework must also ensure that existing and proposed laws do not create additional disadvantages for Canadians with disabilities. Out-of-date laws and programs reflect a belief that the needs of people with disabilities could be handled through income-support programs, institutional care, and programs, policies, laws and regulations that would “protect” them. Unfortunately, “protection” does not get a person an audio-tape version of a just-published and critically important report, adequate warning of dangers in the workplace and public areas, or a job. The reality is that in a THIS IS NOT JUST A GOOD THING TO DO majority of cases the needs The Canadian Charter ofRights and Freedoms and the Canadian Human Rights Act prohibit discrimination based on mental or physical disability. Federal laws and policies, indeed all and concerns of persons with disabilities are seldom government activity, must follow the principles and values set out in the Charter. The Charter considered at the legislative is Canadas constitutional beacon, guiding policy makers to create rules and guidelines that respect human dignity and social justice. One of the principles that the Charter states must be reflected in all government activity is that: drawing board stage. Consequently, Canadian laws are remarkably silent Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on...mental or physical disability. on disability issues. — Currie, Goundry and Peters Designing a Legislative Reform Strategy for Persons It is essential for the principles and values in the Charter to be applied in a more effective way to: with Disabilities: Priorities • new laws, regulations, policies, programs and procedures as they are developed; and • existing laws, regulations, policies, programs and procedures that put Canadians with disabilities at a disadvantage, before these are challenged in the courts. While the federal government aims for and expects that its laws will not discriminate in their intent or effect, the reality is that, while many laws do not actively discriminate against Canadians with disabilities, their effects are discriminatory and the object of complaints to the Canadian Human Rights Commission under the Canadian Human Rights Act. Other laws simply ignore the needs of this large group of citizens. 40 and Options “We want parity, not charity. Legislative review process The Government of Canada needs to establish an ongoing strategy and process to review laws, regulations, policies, practices and rules to remove barriers to full participation and ensure The federal government has to listen. And it has to ask the equality of people with disabilities. This process can be used to apply a disability-based us prior to the fact, not after analysis to new policy, program and legislative initiatives and to plan for a comprehensive the fact.” review of existing ones. To keep the disability community and others informed of the progress — Participant in of these efforts, a public awareness campaign is also needed. People with disabilities, as do all St. Johns consultation Canadians, have a right to information about their rights and the impact of the government’s activities on their daily lives. Through educational campaigns, individual Canadians will also be better informed and able to help ensure that the private sector complies with these new directions in program development in areas of federal jurisdiction. To ensure that the Charter is applied vigorously to all existing and new laws, the federal government needs to involve people with disabilities in legislative reform. It may seem easy enough to review existing legislation and policies and change any that place Canadians with disabilities at a disadvantage. The sheer volume of laws and regulations makes this a lengthy task, however. What is needed is a process to involve Canadians who have disabilities in decisions on whatever laws, regulations, policies, programs and procedures should be reviewed as priorities. The consultants should then be part of the decision-making process that determines what other laws need to and should be reviewed over a given period of time, and the revision process itself. 41 We recommend,.. 18. The Government of Canada should develop a legislative reform strategy that proceeds from the conceptual framework of principles and values in the Canadian Charter ofRights and Freedoms and that aims to remove barriers to full participation and ensure the equality rights of people with disabilities. The Task Force recommends that this process should begin immediately and any resulting legislative changes be in place by the year 2000. The strategy should include: a) a mechanism to incorporate disability-based analysis in the design and development of all policy and legislative initiatives; b) a process and timetable to examine the policies, rules, practices, interpretive bulletins and guidelines that are responsible for implementing legislation; c) a permanent central mechanism to coordinate an ongoing and systematic legislative review process; d) complementary policy, public awareness and education capacities to ensure full implementation of legislation; e) a mechanism to deal with the question of private-sector compliance; and f) a process to take into consideration meaningful input from the disability community. 42 19. In conjunction with people with disabilities, the Government of Canada should, by 1998, include in its legislative reform strategy measures that address emerging issues of “To have positive leadership and action we need value importance to people with disabilities, including genetic and bio-medical technologies, statements from governments privacy, and information technologies. and parties that articulate that citizens with disabilities SHORT-TERM LEGISLATIVE AND PROGRAM CHANGES are equally valued and are entitled to the support Canadians with disabilities have been telling governments about legislative and other changes necessary to enjoy the same needed over a period of many years. There are, therefore, many laws, regulations and programs life as any other Canadian.” that can be changed swiftly if the government puts in place a mechanism to involve individuals and organizations in the disability community in the change process. Any mechanism should allow adequate time for organizations to review the terms of the laws. — Participant in Edmonton consultation We recommend... 20. a) The Government of Canada should ensure that bills currently before the House of Commons adequately encourage the participation of, and remove barriers for, people with disabilities. b) The Government of Canada should act immediately to use the legislative process to remove barriers and to promote the inclusion of people with disabilities. This action should begin with the immediate introduction of legislative measures that are ready for first reading and the setting of legislative priorities for the short, medium and long term. 43 Some other legislation that can be introduced immediately or in the near future is described below: The Canadian Human Rights Act Under the Canadian Human Rights Act, if a work process that is not generally discriminatory puts an individual with a disability at a disadvantage, the employer must take reasonable measures to accommodate the individual. If the employer can show that making the change would cause “undue hardship”, he does not have to accommodate the employee. Persons with disabilities have long argued that the Act should be changed to require employers to accommodate workers who have a disability. The Canadian Human Rights Commission has also called for this change to be made to the Act. By introducing a duty to accommodate employees, the Government of Canada would be making a statement to the effect that employing individuals with disabilities is just “business as usual”. recommend,.. 21. The Government of Canada should proceed immediately to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act to introduce a duty to accommodate people with disabilities. 44 The criminaljustice system The Criminal Code and the Canada Evidence Act present a number of barriers to the participation of persons with a disability in the criminal justice system. Amendments are needed to, among other things: • remove barriers to receiving testimony from persons with a disability, • allow witnesses to use the medium with which they are most comfortable when they testify in court, • allow individuals with a disability to use alternative methods, such as the voice, to identify the accused, and • eliminate any discrimination against persons with a disability in the jury selection process. We recommend,.. 22. During the current session of Parliament, the Government of Canada should introduce amendments to the Criminal Code and the Canada Evidence Act to improve access to the criminal justice system for persons with disabilities. 45 The Immigration Act Not long ago, Canadas Immigration Act prohibited many people with disabilities from immigrating here, along with other classes of “undesirable” immigrants including criminals, subversives, terrorists, drug traffickers and persons with contagious diseases. While this provision of the Act is easily described today as discriminatory and offensive, it also presents a stereotype of individuals who have a disability as people who are sick, in what is referred to as the “medical model” of disability. The medical model has been widely used to legitimize what might be called discrimination against persons with disabilities. In February 1993, the government amended the Immigration Act to remove disability as a criterion for prohibiting someone from immigrating to Canada. The Act does, however, allow authorities to refuse immigration status to anyone who might place an “excessive demand on health and social services” in Canada. The point at which a cost becomes excessive has not yet been defined. While the new provision will clearly be an improvement over the old, participants in the Task Force’s consultations pointed out that, by determining that potential immigrants to Canada may be an “excessive” burden to our society, the law sends a message to Canadians with disabilities that they too may constitute an excessive burden. 46 Treasury Board guidelines on access to information Canadians with a disability have the same need for information as other citizens. The lack An individual who uses a wheelchair for mobility is of availability of government information in alternate formats prevents them from gaining prevented from entering a access to the information they need. Alternate formats are relatively easy to produce using building at the top of a flight common computer technology, scanners and photocopiers. The Treasury Board guidelines of stairs by the fact that there on access to information must be amended to guarantee that Canadians with disabilities can are stairs, not because he or receive information from the federal government in a format that is usable by them. The she uses a wheelchair. If the guidelines should also ensure that this access is extended to people with any type of disability, same building had a ramp, including one related to the agility needed to turn pages, for example. instead of or in addition to stairs, that same individual Broadcasting policies The federal Department of Canadian Heritage has asked the Canadian Radio-Television and would no longer be considered handicapped Telecommunications Commission to be more stringent in applying its licensing requirements or disabled in relation for television broadcasters’ efforts to serve people with disabilities. The CRTC requires all to gaining entrance to English television stations earning more than $10 million a year to caption all local the building. programming, including live segments, from September 1, 1998. By the end of the term — Currie, Goundry and Peters of their current license, these broadcasters will also have to caption at least 90 percent of all Designing a Legislative daytime programming. Smaller stations are being encouraged to achieve these same goals. Reform Strategy for Persons with Disabilities: Priorities and Options 47 Because French language programming differs from English programming, French broadcasters follow different CRTC guidelines. The CRTC should work with French television broadcasters “Transportation is a major, major concern. Many people to put in place a plan to achieve parity in captioning requirements for English and French with disabilities have skills television. and abilities, but, if you cannot get there, you cannot use them. Twenty percent We recommend,.. of people considered 23. The Government of Canada should establish and make public a timetable for short-term unemployable are working legislative and regulatory changes where substantive work has been completed. These as volunteers, but they legislative changes should include: volunteer within the capacity a) Regulations pertaining to section 19(1) (a) of the Immigration Act to take social factors into account and should not impose barriers to people with disabilities on the basis of of their disability. Many disabled people can work “excessive demand’ considered solely from a medical perspective. in some capacity and have b) Effective Treasury Board guidelines on access to information to ensure that Canadians with disabilities are able to receive information concerning their own government in a intelligence and skills and want to be out there format that is usable by them. working. It is about being c) Action by the Canada Transportation Agency to ensure accessibility for people with disabilities to federally regulated modes of transportation, including inter-provincial able to get there.” — Participant in buses. Parry Sound consultation 48 d) Action by the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission to “Way back in the early ’80s, ensure access to federally regulated broadcasting for people with disabilities, including we started using that word, those with visual and hearing impairments. consumer.... As a consumer, you have particular rights THE COURT CHALLENGES PROGRAM that are quite limited. But we are not consumers. Damn it, The Court Challenges Program is operated by an agency outside the federal government and we are citizens. And as supports test cases brought forward by individuals and groups who are challenging federal laws and regulations that they believe go against the principles of the Canadian Charter ofRights and Freedoms. The program is restricted to challenges of federal laws, and should be expanded citizens, we have obligations and rights under the law.” to cover all equality rights test cases of national importance. The provinces and territories — Participant in should be invited to participate in the program if they wish. Fredericton consultation We recommend,.. 24. The Government of Canada should explore ways for the Court Challenges Program to fund legal challenges in cases of national importance for individuals with disabilities. The federal government should offer the provincial and territorial governments the opportunity to participate in the program if they choose. 49 Because French language programming differs from English programming, French broadcasters follow different CRTC guidelines. The CRTC should work with French television broadcasters to put in place a plan to achieve parity in captioning requirements for English and French television. “Transportation is a major, major concern. Many people with disabilities have skills and abilities, but, if you cannot get there, you cannot use them. Twenty percent recommend... 23. The Government of Canada should establish and make public a timetable for short-term legislative and regulatory changes where substantive work has been completed. These legislative changes should include: a) Regulations pertaining to section 19(1) (a) of the Immigration Act to take social factors into account and should not impose barriers to people with disabilities on the basis of “excessive demand’ considered solely from a medical perspective. b) Effective Treasury Board guidelines on access to information to ensure that Canadians with disabilities are able to receive information concerning their own government in a format that is usable by them. c) Action by the Canada Transportation Agency to ensure accessibility for people with disabilities to federally regulated modes of transportation, including inter-provincial buses. ‘ 48 of people considered unemployable are working as volunteers, but they volunteer within the capacity of their disability. Many disabled people can work in some capacity and have intelligence and skills and want to be out there working. It is about being able to get there.” — Participant in Parry Sound consultation d) Action by the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission to “Way back in the early ’80s, ensure access to federally regulated broadcasting for people with disabilities, including we started using that word, those with visual and hearing impairments. consumer.... As a consumer, you have particular rights THE COURT CHALLENGES PROGRAM that are quite limited. But we are not consumers. Damn it, The Court Challenges Program is operated by an agency outside the federal government and we are citizens. And as supports test cases brought forward by individuals and groups who are challenging federal laws and regulations that they believe go against the principles of the Canadian Charter ofRights and Freedoms. The program is restricted to challenges of federal laws, and should be expanded citizens, we have obligations and rights under the law.” to cover all equality rights test cases of national importance. The provinces and territories — Participant in should be invited to participate in the program if they wish. Fredericton consultation We recommend... 24. The Government of Canada should explore ways for the Court Challenges Program to fund legal challenges in cases of national importance for individuals with disabilities. The federal government should offer the provincial and territorial governments the opportunity to participate in the program if they choose. 49 CHAPTER FIVE The opportunity to work — Labour market integration “Our greatest wealth is not in mining or forestry or fishing, it is in the people of Canadas labour market is evolving. New types of jobs are appearing in the workplace as others this country. Whether they disappear. Governments are trying to respond to these changes and are working to ensure that are able to see, or whether all Canadians can participate in the new economy. At the same time, the federal, provincial and territorial governments are reorganizing responsibilities for training and other programs and they are able to walk, it does not make any difference — services related to the labour market. Naturally, there are many uncertainties in this transition period. People with disabilities, who have been marginalized in the past, must be included in all planning for new and existing labour market programming at all levels if they are to become part of Canadas economic mainstream. Work is important. Our consultations and research told us that this is among the top concerns of Canadians with disabilities. It is important for the dignity of individuals. People told us about the dignity of work, the sense of accomplishment it brings them, its value to the community and to society, and the way it contributes to a sense of belonging. The tangible benefits of income, learning, and participating in the goals of an enterprise give us a sense of control over our destiny. Work is fundamental to one’s sense of well-being and to citizenship. While Canadas skilled workforce is at the centre of our competitive advantage in the world, this country is not capitalizing on the potential of a large segment of the working age population. At the same time, despite our struggle to create employment programs and 50 the resource is there.” — Participant in Fredericton consultation supports that respond to the needs of workers with disabilities, and of some potential employers, there remain significant barriers to employment for Canadians with disabilities. “We do not want to sit in The environments of the Canadian workplace and our economic system have a greater impact our communities, in our on the extent to which people with disabilities become employed or find themselves out of the houses, being unemployed workforce than does the nature of any individual’s particular disabilities. for our entire lives. We want to get out there and we want Working age women and men with disabilities face attitudinal, systemic and physical barriers to work. And we want to that make it difficult for them to prepare for, find, get and keep jobs. While quotas are not the contribute to the economy, answer, fairness is. It must be acknowledged that many of the barriers to employment and and contribute to the independence are the result of policies, regulations, guidelines and administration that simply communities in whatever ignore the individual circumstances of women and men with disabilities. capacities we can, whether that means working or Additional investments required to address these barriers will be worthwhile. Experience and participating in volunteer research have shown that many Canadians with disabilities are ready to join the workforce and activities.” await only the necessary preparation and opportunity. Indeed, the Canadian Association for — Participant in Community Living has done some singular research to produce an estimate of the value to Halifax consultation the economy of including people with disabilities in the workforce. It estimates that if a participation rate similar to other Canadians were achieved, there would be billions of dollars of savings. 51 AN INCLUSIVE LABOUR MARKET The Task Force’s vision of an inclusive labour market is one in which programs and services are designed in consultation with people with disabilities, in which employers hire individuals on the basis of their skills and abilities, and accommodating different ways to get work done happens as a matter of course in the workplace. Inclusiveness should be a matter of “business as usual”. The ideal world would be one in which “mainstream” labour market programs fully accommodated the needs of people with disabilities and provided for additional complementary programs for these Canadians where necessary. This is the vision the Task Force has for the not-too-distant future. In the meantime, the Government of Canada must work to make its mainstream employment and related programs fully accessible to people with disabilities. The federal government must also recognize that there is a need for some programs for persons with disabilities designed as an integral part of its labour market activities and additional measures to meet the very real, very current needs of these working age Canadians with disabilities. EMPLOYMENT INSURANCE MEASURES CAN INCREASE EMPLOYMENT AMONG CANADIANS WITH DISABILITIES The same types of measures that help other unemployed Canadians find and keep jobs can assist people with disabilities to do the same. The federal government does not have to design a whole new set of programs to promote the participation of people with disabilities in the 52 workforce. Instead, it can use the benefits and supports available under the Employment Insurance Act to increase the number of Canadians with disabilities who are in paid employment. “Stop putting the emphasis on disability and start putting the emphasis on what we can do.” The federal government can change the way it administers the Human Resources Investment — Participant in Fund (the HRIF), to give Canadians with disabilities fair access to its employment measures and other services and supports. The HRIF is the fund that provides everything that Canadas Fredericton consultation Employment Insurance (EI) system offers besides bi-weekly benefit cheques. The measures and services available under the HRIF include simple supports such as help with a job search, and access to workshops on how to prepare a résumé, to job-finding clubs and to employment counselling. The HRIF also includes more substantial supports in the form of employment measures such as financial assistance during the first year of starting a new business, a wage subsidy to encourage an employer to hire an individual, and access to employment opportunities created through job-creation partnerships in the community. The changes that the federal government can make to the HRIF quickly will make some of this mainstream programming accessible to Canadians with disabilities. Other changes involve creating parallel programs to serve Canadians with disabilities while additional work is done to ensure their full integration in labour market programs. 53 Eligibility for the HRIF's employment measures Few women and men with disabilities are eligible for the employment measures offered under the HRIF, because only people who are eligible to receive Employment Insurance qualify for “If you don’t include us in the work force, you will continue to pay through these more substantial supports. Since many Canadians with disabilities have not had long-term income support to keep us jobs — indeed many find themselves locked out of the workforce because they cannot find a out of the work force. The first job or a new job after a lay-off — they are not eligible for EI bi-weekly benefits or for the $3,000 I took out of my HRIF employment measures. own pocket to purchase the adaptive technology to make For Canadians with disabilities who are eligible for employment measures under the HRIF, my computer accessible has it is a matter of fairness for them to be included as priorities for access to active measures. now made me employable. Research has shown that the employment measures available under the HRIF can meet the You quickly realize the lost needs of persons with disabilities; some were designed to do exactly that. The first challenge value that you are paying out is not to redesign the HRIF, it is to make it work for those Canadians with disabilities who in your income assistance.” are eligible under the Employment Insurance Act. — Participant in Vancouver consultation We recommend... 25. The Government of Canada should ensure priority access for El-insured participants with disabilities to active employment measures. This means among other things: a) At all local points of service (and eventually, all provincial/territorial points of service, should they choose to accept delivery responsibility), El-eligible persons with disabilities should be included as priorities for access to self-employment assistance, 54 I “The federal government job creation partnerships, skills loans and grants, targeted wage subsidies, targeted earnings supplements and any other similar programming which meets HRIF objectives as outlined in the EI Act must recognize the existence of systemic discrimination and recognize that 44 percent b) This inclusion of El-eligible persons with disabilities as priorities for access to active measures must be stated clearly in policy and in implementation guidelines and procedures, and the HRIF accountability framework must measure its success. of working age people with disabilities are excluded from the workforce.” — Participant in Employment services available to all Montreal consultation The second challenge is to make the HRIF work for the millions of other Canadians with disabilities who are not El-eligible. Under the Employment Insurance Act all Canadians — those who are eligible for EI benefits and those who are not — can get access to employment services. Anyone can walk into a Human Resource Centre of Canada (HRCC) or another office that provides this service on behalf of the federal government, and search the job postings. Anyone can join a job-finding club or attend workshops on preparing a job-search strategy interview techniques, or résumé writing. These services are administered at the local level across the country This means that, in HRCCs and other offices, the amount of funding allocated to these services is decided locally, the range of services offered is decided as part of the process of preparing a business plan, and the local manager and regional office make decisions about the overall priority these services merit. These decisions are critical to Canadians with disabilities. Because few of them can have 55 access to employment measures, they have a particularly acute need for the kinds of services that help them to find a job. Job counselling, for example, can help an individual identify his strengths and channel his interests towards a field that offers employment opportunities in the community. The federal government can advise HRCCs and other agencies offering these services that access to employment services for persons with disabilities must be a priority. This does not mean that offices need to set quotas. It means providing equitable access so that there can be equitable participation in the use of these services and, ultimately, equitable results. By emphasizing the importance of providing equitable access to employment services for persons with disabilities, the federal government can ensure that services are available all across the country. This is essential, because the population of people with disabilities is spread across the country. In many areas, the population may not be big enough for the local HRCC to consider including them in the office’s resource plan. People with disabilities must not be left out of the employment picture because their numbers would not substantially increase the performance results in a given area. These employment services need to be widely promoted so that individuals with disabilities will know about the opportunities available. The federal government must also ensure that any province or local agency that delivers the services makes it a priority to offer these services to Canadians with disabilities. 56 Community partnerships HRDC also provides funding for partnerships and activities such as research and pilot projects. These must also be made available to the disability community. Many employers need assistance in learning how to go about employing people with disabilities. — Burt Perrin recommend,.. 26. The Government of Canada should fully implement Part II of the Employment Insurance legislation to ensure that people with disabilities are served through its employment assistance services (both insured and uninsured participants with disabilities). Disability and Labour Market Integration; Clarifying Federal Responsibilities in the Evolving Social Union Section 60 (4) of the EI Act offers a full range of employment services to all Canadians, be they insured or uninsured. It permits these services to be delivered through third parties when those parties can best meet the needs of clients. It also permits EI funds to be invested in research and innovative projects to better identify ways of helping persons prepare for, return to or keep employment and be productive participants in the labour force. Negotiations with the provinces and territories The Government of Canada has begun negotiations with the provinces and territories to offer them the responsibility and resources to deliver the Human Resources Investment Fund active measures under Part II of the Employment Insurance Act. The federal government’s negotiating 57 position deals with the issue of equity but does not formally commit to ensuring access for working age people with disabilities who must have a fair opportunity to prepare for, find, get and keep jobs. The shift from the typewriter to a word processor on a personal computer, combined with a voice synthesis application for the computer, Part of the concern about equity must address the share of resources allocated to this community. It is important for Canadians with disabilities to receive a fair share, proportionate to their representation in the population of each province and territory, of the available funding, services and supports. Again, the concern is not about quotas. It is about two fundamental values: • equity in participation and • equity in outcomes and results. meant that persons with visual impairments could “see” what was on the screen, along with what they would type. The computers ability to convert text to Braille assists those with visual It is, of course, also essential that any offices delivering employment measures to Canadians be impairments. Voice-operated fully accessible, along with any materials provided to assist people in their job search. computers have meant that those with impairments to Negotiations on the labour market offer are at various stages as this Task Force reports. The Task Force is very confident that the provinces will embrace the need to ensure that the requirements of working age women and men with disabilities are included in the delivery of these measures. It also understands that, given the current federal accountability framework which is part of the negotiation process, provinces and territories are in effect encouraged to “cream” clients, choosing those who are most job ready. This will exclude the majority of 58 persons with disabilities. We presume that in the negotiations now nearing completion, conditions with respect to ensuring access to measures are in the process of being formally reflected in the pending agreements. manual dexterity can operate computers and their applications. And, more recently, these advances combined have opened the We recommend... electronic world of the 27. For discussions still in preliminary stages, the Government of Canada should explicitly Internet to those with reflect in its opening position, a requirement that there be: disabilities. a) A commitment to serving people with disabilities proportional to their — Havi Echenberg representation in the working age population of the particular province or territory, Labour Market Integration and that the accountability framework be revised so that it does not systemically for Persons with Disabilities: exclude people with disabilities. Issues, Overlaps and Options b) A commitment to ensure that supports and measures delivered to people with disabilities through third parties are delivered by organizations of and for people with disabilities where such organizations exist. People with disabilities are best qualified to serve this population. The expertise of these organizations extends from their work in coaching governments on how programs and services should be delivered to their everyday work with individuals. c) A requirement to ensure that third parties or other service deliverers are held accountable for making facilities, programs and services accessible to people with disabilities. 59 Provide access to active employment measures Funding is available for two other groups of women and men struggling to find, get and keep jobs: young people and Aboriginal Canadians. Like most persons with disabilities, many of these Canadians are not eligible for the active measures offered under the HRIF, so the Government of Canada provides a special funding allocation that offers other supports that are responsive to their needs. Additional, similar funding is needed for Canadians with disabilities. The funding should be used to offer a range of employment measures available to other Canadians, including: • targeted income supplements • job creation partnerships • self-employment supports • skills loans and grants • targeted wage subsidies If necessary, these employment measures should be further adapted to better meet the needs of people with disabilities. 60 We recommend,.. 28. The Government of Canada should ensure access to appropriate active employment measures for non-EI-eligible Canadians with disabilities. a) In the short term, for non-EI-eligible Canadians with disabilities, the active measures cannot be funded through the EI account. For these Canadians, a special allocation is The trouble with targeted programs is that they are usually limited in funding and scope, and thus become restrictive to choice and necessary to give them access to the supports they need to prepare for, find, get and opportunity in themselves. keep a job. To maintain the levels of service offered to persons with disabilities under The far better and less the predecessor to the Human Resources Investment Fund, the Canadian Jobs discriminatory route entails Strategy, a fund of $45 million is required to provide innovative approaches to opening up the full range integrating individuals with disabilities into the labour force. of training, education and b) In the future, the Government of Canada should ensure that all amendments to employment opportunities the Employment Insurance Act provide for access by people with disabilities, so that to people with disabilities. activities funded by the EI account are more inclusive. —Jane Atkey The Future of VRDP VRDP — VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION OF DISABLED PERSONS PROGRAM The VRDP Program has supported a variety of supports and employment-related measures for persons with disabilities. It has provided funding, for example: for students to help them participate in vocational training; for professional support to people who are experiencing a job crisis because of the onset of a disability; and for mentors for individuals with an intellectual disability. The cost of the program is shared between the federal and provincial 61 governments. After 1996-97, the federal government is planning to discuss with the provinces If one were to consider and territories an option to refocus the VRDP so that it better responds to the employment the totality of funds that go barriers faced by people with disabilities. into training, education, employment placement, retention and advancement The program should focus on individuals not covered under other programs supporting vocational rehabilitation and employment. The goal should be to assist people in gaining access to mainstream programs and employment; any accountability measures should reflect of the general population... the amount of $168 million this. It is important for those who deliver services under the new program to have specialized under VRDP is minuscule in training in working with people with various types of disabilities. proportion to the percentage of people with disabilities in An additional component of the new program should be funding for partnerships and the population. innovations. This component should deal with the complex issues that keep people with —Jane Atkey disabilities from participating in the workforce. A fund should be available to support projects The Future of VRDP that have national importance, so that the federal government can learn the best ways to enable people with disabilities to find long-term employment. VRDP clients have earnings potential but need vocational supports to allow them to move into, return to, or stay in jobs. For many individuals with disabilities, for whom the active measures described in recommendation 26 are not appropriate or for those who are not El-eligible, VRDP is the first investment in an effective, long-term attachment to the labour market. 62 We recommend... 29. The Government of Canada should work with the provinces and people with disabilities to renew VRDP. This program should be funded at the current level of $168 million. In view of current realities VRDP should focus on the broader needs of people with disabilities. The overall objective of this refocused and renamed Employability Program Access Fund would be to prepare people who have longer term earnings potential for participation in the labour market or mainstream programming. This program would have two components; a) Support for individual vocational rehabilitation — the opportunity to support provinces or other service deliverers to provide a flexible range of vocational supports and services to individuals with disabilities, including the option for individualized funding. This component should be funded at $140 million; b) A partnerships and innovations component that would support, among other things: research, innovation, demonstration projects, best practices, public awareness and education through partnerships within and between sectors. The scope of this fund should be broad enough to allow it to support activities that, while not directly connected to labour market participation, indirectly affect the ability" of people with disabilities to participate in the labour market. This component should be funded at $28 million. 63 GETTING INTO THE WORKFORCE “Employers need education. They need to be educated In the United States, the federal government has, since 1990, offered the Targeted Job Tax to the needs of the disabled Credit to employers. This tax credit represents 40 percent of the first $6,000 of the annual salary of a new employee who has disabilities and who is referred through a network of local, state and federal agencies. Recent data from the U.S. Census Bureau suggest that the tax credit person, and they need incentives to hire disabled and other measures are having an impact on the number of people with disabilities finding people.” employment. While 23 percent of Americans with disabilities were employed in 1991, — Participant in 26 percent were employed in 1996, an increase of 800,000 people. The Government of Canada Parry Sound consultation can apply the lesson of the United States to create a hiring incentive that follows Canadian principles for consistency in the tax treatment of various income sources, as reflected in recommendation 28(b). Any tax credit for employers should extend over more than one year, to ensure that new employment is sustainable. While the federal government does not offer a tax credit to employers, a wage subsidy is available under the Human Resources Investment Fund. An additional measure is needed to compensate new entrants to the workforce for employment costs — for transportation, for example — that relate to their disabilities. A work-income supplement could provide an incentive for persons with disabilities to move into the workforce. 64 We recommend... 30. a) The tax system should be used to provide incentives that encourage the employment of persons with disabilities. The approach of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is an example of the choice and opportunities b) To reduce the tax rate for low-income employees with disabilities, the Government of Canada should introduce in the 1997 Budget, for those eligible for the Disability Tax Credit, a refundable Work Income Supplement of up to $1,000 modelled on the supplement in place for the Child Tax Benefit. approach. And it is working. On the sixth anniversary of the ADA on July 26, 1996, Mr. Bob Dole stated that “because of the ADA, the ADJUSTING EXISTING LABOUR MARKET PROGRAMS percentage of severely The federal government should make an explicit commitment to adjust its existing labour market programs and services so that they are fully accessible to Canadians with disabilities. disabled Americans with jobs has increased from While the ultimate goal should be to design programs that are fully accessible at the outset, in the interim it is important to act to fill in the gaps in existing programming. 23.3 percent in 1991 to 26.1 percent in 1994, a jump of about 800,000 jobs.” With respect to programs designed to help Canadians get into the workforce or get back to work, a portion of funding can simply be allocated to people with disabilities, as is done —Jane Atkey The Future of VRDP for Aboriginal Canadians and young people. For services provided to employers, other governments, and non-governmental organizations, it is a matter of using expertise and technology to improve accessibility generally. ! 65 In its collaborative work with the provinces and territories and other partners, the federal government must show leadership by explicitly including the needs of Canadians with disabilities in the planning for, and design of, strategies and specific initiatives. We recommend,.. 31. The Government of Canada should ensure the participation of people with disabilities in mainstream programming by: a) dedicating a portion of youth programming to ensuring the participation of young people with disabilities in regular youth programs; b) dedicating a portion of Aboriginal funding or transfers in support of Aboriginal people to ensuring the participation of Aboriginal people with disabilities in labour market programming; c) ensuring that young people with disabilities and Aboriginal people with disabilities are also provided with the disability-related supports they require to participate in mainstream programming; d) ensuring that pan-Canadian labour market matters such as labour market information, responsibilities with respect to interprovincial mobility, as well as national sectoral partnerships, explicitly include the needs of working age Canadians with disabilities; 66 e) ensuring that all programs the department develops in the future to address labour market issues include provisions for the participation of people with disabilities. POLICY AND PROGRAM EXPERTISE As Canadas labour market needs change, so will the need for new programs and services for Canadians. This means that the Department of Human Resources Development Canada (HRDC) will require a continuing ability to plan and design programs that are inclusive and accessible to people with disabilities. The Department must, therefore, build its policy and program expertise in disability issues. An important facet of the process of developing and maintaining this expertise is to develop ongoing consultative relationships with organizations of and for people with disabilities. These organizations can undertake the innovative research and analysis that are critical to building successful integration strategies. An expertise in disability issues will enable HRDC to include these issues in all negotiations with the provinces and territories and, ultimately, to achieve the goal of designing inclusive programs, not “mainstream” programs and “parallel” programs for Canadians with disabilities. We recommend,.. 32. Given the critical role that labour market integration plays in the equality of persons with disabilities. Human Resources Development Canada should ensure that it maintains policy and program expertise in the area of disability. This policy and program expertise 67 will help ensure that HRDC negotiations with the provinces on the transition and devolution of responsibilities, and implementation of the future federal role, are inclusive of people with disabilities. This expertise can be sustained by: a) Maintaining policy and research expertise attached to the Minister of Human Resources Development Canada to help inform and provide support to policy development and program design; b) Ensuring that people with disabilities and their organizations are consulted on program design and policy issues that are likely to affect their participation in government-supported activities aimed at improving labour market activity; c) Working in partnership with organizations of people with disabilities that undertake research, innovation, advocacy or service delivery to study, develop and test new and “If we are citizens like everybody else, then we have the right to be socially involved and to achieve full social participation on whatever ground and level we decide — education, employment, volunteerism, recreation, whatever. These are activities that everybody can participate in. Why can innovative ways of meeting the employability and integration needs of people with we not expect the same?” disabilities. — Participant in Whitehorse consultation SERVICE DELIVERY The full and equal inclusion of people with disabilities in Canadas labour market will not be achieved simply by correcting defects in program design. The way programs and services are delivered in the community is a critical indicator of the federal government’s commitment to its vision of the inclusive society. 68 All sites offering employment services and programs to unemployed Canadians and those who are out of the workforce must be fully accessible. This includes architectural and safety “If you use a wheelchair and you hop on a plane, your considerations, accessibility of technology, information and services, and the attitudes of staff wheelchair might not get and contract service providers. Human Resource Development Canadas corporate culture on the same plane. If you must support openness to the needs of this population. Staff, particularly in Human Resource are deaf and if you are in a Centres of Canada (HRCCs), but also in headquarters and regional offices, must be able to building, you might be the create strategies to reach out to the community, serve individuals with disabilities effectively, last to know that there is and make resources accessible to all. an emergency.” — Participant in All HRCCs must make accessibility an operational norm. Similarly, all organizations under Fredericton consultation contract with the federal government to provide programs and services must be required to operate as fully accessible operations. Any improvements in program design and standards for service delivery must be communicated effectively to HRCC managers and agencies under contract to serve Canadians. Service manuals must reflect the fact that all labour market programming is required to conform to the federal government’s designated group policy and the principles of employment equity. Where programs and services in a community are delivered by third parties, the federal government should ensure that local organizations of and for people with disabilities are among the service providers. 69 A focus on results The test of HRDC’s ability to create truly inclusive programming is in the measurement of its results. The Employment Insurance program is focussed on results — results in the numbers of Disability is only one characteristic of people. People who have this people employed and in the amount of savings to the EI account achieved for government. The characteristic are the same accountability framework for the EI program must take account of meaningful measures that as everyone else. reflect the extent to which people with disabilities are assisted in finding work. The measures of: —Jane Atkey, • equity of participation and • equity of outcomes and results for people with disabilities must be part of the framework. The framework should include success indicators that are relevant to people with disabilities. This might include, for example, providing an individual with sufficient information and supports so that she undertakes her first job search in eight years. It might mean counting the savings in CPP/QPP benefits for individuals who are able, after an improvement in their condition, to re-enter the workforce and find paid employment. It might also mean considering it a success to help an individual identify and become involved in volunteer activity that will be an appropriate preparation for paid employment in the future. With information on the results achieved for people with disabilities, HRDC and its partners can identify any problem areas and work to improve them. 70 The Future of VRDP We recommend,.. 33. The Government of Canada should put in place operational, administrative and evaluative mechanisms to ensure that the labour market needs of people with disabilities are served by programs and services for which it retains or shares responsibility. It should: a) Ensure that the EI accountability framework uses success indicators and measures that are appropriate to the needs of Canadians with disabilities, especially those who may need longer term support to prepare them for labour market participation. b) Provide appropriate supports to local managers to help them include people with disabilities among their clients and ensure that local managers are aware that they will be measured or evaluated on their ability to serve people with disabilities. c) Articulate the designated group policy and the principles of equity in manuals and training provided to staff, and measure performance accordingly. d) Introduce contract clauses to ensure that third parties and other potential deliverers of HRIF programs and services will be held accountable for making services and programs accessible for people with disabilities. e) Commit to ensure that supports and services funded by the government of Canada and delivered to Canadians with disabilities through third parties are delivered by organizations of and for persons with disabilities where such organizations exist. 71 CHAPTER SIX Disability income “Right now you have a hodgepodge of systems — A secure income is fundamental to the ability to enjoy the rights of citizenship. Without a secure income, an individual cannot satisfy the most basic living needs. This is especially true for some you have provincial, municipal and the federal people who cannot work because of severe disabilities, and those who face significant barriers system. We would like to to workforce participation. Canadian citizenship implies that the federal government will be involved in ensuring and protecting the right of people with disabilities to a secure income. see a centralized system with some local administration.” — Participant in The federal government was the first Canadian government to make a disability income available; it remains the only government that has the potential capacity to offer a disability income that is available to all Canadians with disabilities, wherever they live and wherever they may move to in this country. Governments and other institutions have introduced a number of disability-income programs such as social assistance and Worker’s Compensation, so that there is now a fragmented, uneven mix of programs scattered among providers. Today, although the federal government can have some influence in how the disability-income programs that it supports are managed, it has no control over the complex national picture of disability income. 72 Parry Sound consultation “In many ways, recreational CANADA’S DISABILITY-INCOME “SYSTEM” involvement is a precursor Three out of the six income programs available to persons with disabilities are not disability­ to people feeling organized specific. They are programs that were designed for the general population and that created an add-on component for people with disabilities. There is nothing that could be called a “disability-income system” in Canada. The patchwork of programs and services is complex, enough and interested enough and able enough unwieldy and, for many, inadequate. Because of the different levels of government and and comfortable enough to private-sector organizations involved, it will be difficult to change. consider work or voluntarism or other things they may want to do, because recreation is The responsibility for our current patchwork system is in many hands, as the following partial list illustrates: usually rather painless to get involved with. There are very Federal government programs • • highly competitive levels of The Canada Pension Plan Disability Benefit is managed in partnership with all provinces recreation for people with except Quebec, which manages its own Quebec Pension plan. disablities. It is a learning Some people with disabilities who were in the labour force have access to Employment and a chance to grow, and not Insurance (EI) benefits. to have the eight bucks you need to buy a pair of sneakers Federal-provincial initiative • seems a little ridiculous.” The provinces are responsible for social assistance, which is partially financed through the Canada Health and Social Transfer (CHST). — Participant in Whitehorse consultation 73 Provincial government programs • Provincial auto insurance is mandatory in some provinces. • The provinces are responsible for the Worker’s Compensation system. “I have a client who received assistance under VRDP, CPP, and the old unemployment insurance regulations. They Private-sector programs Private insurance companies offer a variety of long-term disability (LTD) benefits. • gave them training and equipment.... He is now a successful entrepreneur in a In this patchwork system, the cause of the disability, the people’s ages, and their labour force status determine whether they are eligible for income programs, as well as the amounts they different part of the province, making a living and willing are eligible to receive. For example, adults of working age are eligible for several types of to hire someone after being coverage — workers who become disabled could receive either the CPP disability benefit, in business for three months. Worker’s Compensation benefits, or both. As with all contributing workers, people with So this is proof that the old disabilities who work are covered by EI if they lose their jobs. system could work if managed properly.” Other causes may entitle a person to benefits. In some provinces, car insurance plans cover — Participant in any individual whose disability was caused by a car accident. Also, individuals who contribute Fredericton consultation to a private, long-term disability plan are covered in case of disability. Eligible causes, however, vary from one plan to another. Apart from this, the situation is much different for people born with a disability, or for people whose disability was not caused by work, a car accident, or any other cause covered by a private, 74 long-term disability insurance. If these individuals are not in the labour force, their last resort is provincial social assistance. In this case, they may be faced with a difficult trade-off. If they “We must have these programs because the identify themselves as unemployable because of their disability, many provinces will offer them human costs of not doing so an income top-up and access to disability-related supports and services — an attractive option is something that we feel, as to someone at the bottom of the income scale. However, such recipients are automatically a nation, we cannot afford. disqualified from taking advantage of active measures like training and employment services. We need opportunities for all This situation is commonly called the “welfare-trap”. Canadians to participate in both the social and economic THE LONG-TERM VISION The Task Force’s consultations with Canadians with disabilities lead us to assert that any development of their communities.” re-thinking of disability income must include consideration of a comprehensive income plan — Participant in administered by the federal government. Canada has sought change in the past. In the mid- Toronto consultation 1980s, the federal, provincial and territorial governments developed a proposal for a universal disability insurance system. Program design, implementation and costs were studied. There was, however, no follow up. In the following years, various non-governmental organizations have also proposed new approaches or improvements to the existing programs. More recently, support for such reform has again been growing across Canada. The 1996 Annual Premiers Conference indicated that the provinces would support the federal government taking a lead role in reforming income support for persons with disabilities. The Premiers suggested that the governments consider creating a single, national program to address gaps and overlaps, to streamline administration, and to improve client service. A comprehensive universal program, such as a. disability insurance plan, could provide all Canadians with decent coverage regardless of the cause of the disability, the person’s age, or his or her labour market status. Indeed, such a program could provide a simpler system to replace the many complicated programs and levels of coverage that keep some people living under the poverty line while others receive a comfortable, non-taxable income and access to a full range of disability-related supports and services. Although this kind of proposal could simplify the current mix of programs and bring fairness to disability-income, it requires high levels of good will and cooperation. It would force the federal government, the provincial governments and the private sector to work together to create a sustainable and comprehensive disability insurance program. The rationalization of the disability-income system should also lead to appropriate compensation for disability- related costs, independent from any income support. 76 The many problems in the current “system” make change imperative. For many reasons, including fiscal constraints, the implementation of a universal, comprehensive program may “I have lived in many parts of this country and always not be appropriate at this point in time. Nevertheless, we will, no doubt, have to consider this sincerely believed that I was a option seriously sooner or later. In the meantime, the short- and medium-term options we are Canadian and very damn putting forward should work towards the long-term option, and should aim at improving the proud to be part of it. I was federal portion of the income support system. born in one province, educated in another, lived in While discussions on the subject of creating a new income support system continue, no two others. I am trying to person receiving disability income under current programs should be affected by this process. find a spot that I can call No one should lose their disability income or their eligibility for this income because of these home. But I think my ongoing negotiations. country has abandoned me, and I am not sure who I am A COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH IS NEEDED, BASED ON COLLABORATION The immediate need is for dialogue. The federal government must take the lead in placing Canadas disability-income system on the table for discussion with the provinces and or who my country is.” — Participant in Edmonton consultation territories. The ultimate goals must be to simplify the patchwork and make sure that any new system is comprehensive, financially sustainable, and comparable in different provinces and territories. The Government of Canada should approach changes to the disability-income system that reflect the following principles: • Where applicable, disability-income programs should provide incentives for people with disabilities to move into the labour market. 77 • Changes to disability-income programs should remove disincentives to employment. • Income programs should not impede individuals’ mobility between Canadian jurisdictions. The additional costs that disability imposes on an individual should be treated and • compensated separately. We recommend,.. 34. The Government of Canada should, in conjunction with the provinces, initiate a process to work towards putting in place a coherent, comprehensive and sustainable approach to providing income to people with disabilities. The process should include serious consideration of ways to move towards a disability insurance program that covers all Canadians. 35. The Government of Canada should recognize its responsibility to ensure that an adequate disability-income-support system is in place for people with disabilities by: a) including this recognition of its responsibility in the terms of reference of any negotiations with the provinces that involve issues related to income support; and by b) using a transparent process that involves people with disabilities. 78 MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION For persons with disabilities, the reductions in public While governments, people with disabilities and others are working to reform the overall spending that accompanied system of disability income, the federal government can take action to improve the operation of the programs it now administers. It should add enough flexibility to its programs so that they can adapt to various stages of disability and personal circumstances. The federal government the shift or threatened shift from supported training or should initiate the discussion and encourage the provinces and territories to remove outdated education to the high risk of practices in the programs funded jointly by the two levels of government. It should propose reliance on the vagaries of an concrete ways to improve linkages across the various programs. exclusionary labour market could be devastating: an end All partners involved in income security for persons with disabilities should recognize that, to regular baths, or transit to besides their income needs, which are comparable to those of other Canadians living on low get to medical appointment, income, persons with disabilities face the burden of the additional costs associated with their or social and economic disabilities. In the longer term, this fact should lead to action to separate compensation for isolation. disability-related costs from other income-support needs. This would allow people with — Havi Echenberg disabilities who are outside income support programs to maintain coverage for their Labour Market Integration disability-related needs. for Persons with Disabilities: Issues, Overlaps and Options Any new system must be flexible enough to accommodate those people with disabilities who want to work and have abilities and knowledge that they can use on the job. They should not be penalized for trying to find work and, if they do, they should not lose access to the essential support services they may be receiving. 79 We recommend,.. 36. The Government of Canada should: “Why do you have to be productive to be considered a full citizen? The only people a) In the longer term, work with the relevant partners in the public and the private that seem to be viewed as sectors, and with people with disabilities, to reconfigure the existing set of disability-income programs, combining earnings replacement and income-support functions, and taking into account the tax system and the need to find ways to compensate individuals for the additional cost of disability. b) In its discussions with the provinces regarding the Canada Health and Social Transfer, establish the importance of removing the link between income and access to supports and services for persons with disabilities, and introduce the idea of a comprehensive disability-supports program with pan-Canadian objectives, principles and values, to provide disability-related supports and services, independent from income programs. (See recommendation 41.) c) Work with the provinces to determine how to rationalize and maximize the effectiveness of income-support and earnings-replacement systems such as the Canada Pension Plan, Employment Insurance, Worker’s Compensation, social assistance and other disability-income programs, so that they enable participation in the labour force and ensure basic safety and security. 80 valuable are those with jobs.” — Participant in Edmonton consultation SHORT-TERM ACTIONS TO PROMOTE WORKFORCE PARTICIPATION “This week, we were in contact with a person that It has been said that the best form of income support is a job. While a secure income gives us works 31 hours a week, and access to the basic necessities of life, a job gives us a sense of purpose and a sense of belonging. Income-support programs for people with disabilities have often had the effect of raising barriers and obstacles to entering the labour force. the person is on income assistance and his wage is deducted from the total of his income assistance. Which Support during transition periods leaves him with only $ 150 For many people, disability income is needed as a bridge to support them during transition more a month, yet his periods in their lives. There are models available of ways for disability-income programs to transportation costs are support people’s entry or reintegration into the workforce and into the social and economic approximately $100 a system. Early intervention, with rehabilitation strategies and a focus on a return to work, is month. That truly is a known to be effective. There are also different ways to establish links among systems for disincentive for his working. income support and training, so that there is less long-term reliance on disability-income programs. — Participant in Fredericton consultation We recommend.,, 37. In the short term, the Government of Canada should undertake pilot projects that test support measures for early interventions, and that link active measures such as education, training and vocational rehabilitation with passive measures such as income support, to reduce long-term dependency on income programs and facilitate the transition to participation in the labour market. 81 Pilot projects should look for ways to establish smooth linkages between programs so that those receiving income support from more than one source can access a single, high quality, return-to-work support system that includes a single assessment and rehabilitation strategy, supports for a job search, and training tailored to the individual. Eliminate disincentives to working The current disability-income system penalizes people who enter or return to the workforce. First of all, they lose support for assistive devices, medications, transportation and home care, which are linked to disability-income programs. Secondly, women and men with disabilities in Canada tend to be employed in low-wage jobs, even with the same levels of education and training as others. For people in low-wage jobs, the potential of having the State cover the costs of a disability may make them better off on social assistance than in the paid workforce. When people with disabilities who are not in the workforce were asked in 1991 what obstacles were keeping them from working, 21 percent said that they would lose income if they worked; 13 percent pointed to the essential supports that they would lose. 82 To overcome the built-in disadvantages that our system imposes on people with disabilities who want to enter the workforce, the federal government should introduce some type of “I want to know that, wherever I live in this financial incentive through the tax system. With the encouragement of financial support to country, my rights and offset some of their losses, more people with disabilities might be able to seek employment opportunities are protected and greater independence. by my federal government.” — Participant in Winnipeg consultation We recommend... 38. The Government of Canada should build into the tax system an incentive measure to support people making the transition to the labour market. A low-income tax credit should be introduced for those leaving income-support programs to participate in the labour force. For example, in the first year, only earnings above the poverty line — about $17,000 — would be taxable. Second-year earnings could be taxable at a lower level. The Government of Canada should stage pilot projects to demonstrate how such an incentive could be implemented. Link disability-income programs Studies have shown that early intervention is often the key to success in reintegrating people with disabilities into the workforce. It is important to move as quickly as possible to involve people in a disability-management approach. Too often, there is no link between programs that offer income support and programs that help reintegrate individuals into the workforce. 83 Establishing effective linkages between programs like Canada Pension Plan-Disability (CPP-D) and EI can help establish the fact that disabilities do not preclude access to the workforce. The current disability infrastructure is particularly Linkages would also reinforce the idea that society supports individuals in maintaining their inadequate in encouraging attachment to Canadas social and economic life. people with cyclical disabilities, such as people In addition to establishing linkages between federal programs, the Government of Canada should share information with other disability-income programs administered by the provinces and living with HIV or AIDS, participate fully in Canadian territories and others. Such linkages can save public and private insurers money and make all of society. Restrictive benefit these systems more convenient for people with disabilities. This would be another step closer to eligibility requirements, the concept of a “single-window” approach to income-disability in Canada. penalties for part-time or volunteer work, and a nan focus on reducing costs by We recommend,.. 39. In the short term, Human Resources Development Canada should implement measures to ensure that the assessment and application procedures of the Canada Pension Plan reducing benefits provide effective disincentives for them to contribute as citizens an make it possible to identify and quickly refer clients who would be better served by active measures offered under Employment Insurance. ignore the many ways in which those who are cyclic 40. In the medium term, the Canada Pension Plan should be integrated more closely with other disabled can participate in earnings-replacement programs to increase information sharing and reduce administrative duplication and costs. This would involve exploring the links to Employment Insurance, Worker’s Compensation and private insurers. 84 work and social life of Can — Canadian AIDS Society CHAPTER SEVEN Dealing fairly with the costs of disability “We had a person in the group living with AIDS, we had a person from a group Living with a disability almost always entails additional costs. These costs, which vary that deals with people significantly from one individual to another, are currently paid for by the public system, by with learning disabilities. a private insurer, or by the person who has a disability. A person with a disability may need Those do not appear to be to cover the cost of a special diet or nutritional supplements. There are extra costs to make disabilities at all, under the one’s home accessible, or for personal supports and services, technical aids and devices, and the intangible costs associated with daily living that are greater because of disability. We are calling all of these the costs of disability. definition that is out there. Yet they obviously entail some rather significant costs that not all people bear.” Participants in our consultations made us aware of these in several ways. Some people pointed — Participant in out the problems they experience in gaining access to disability-related supports and services that respond to their individual needs. Others described costs that varied significantly from one part Fredericton consultation of a province to another, or from one province to another. In turn, the discrepancies between ways of compensating for the additional cost of disadvantage meant that many people with disabilities could not move to another province without jeopardizing their access to supports and services or assuming additional costs that had been paid for by their province of origin. 85 One of the major reasons for these difficulties is that disability-related supports are not provided or subsidized on the basis of an individual’s requirements but are tied to eligibility for a specific earnings-replacement or income-support program. This means that individuals Persons with disabilities have extraordinary costs vis-à-vis other Canadians.... Some in very similar circumstances may be treated very differently. While the basic need does not are easy to imagine; special change, the availability of the services and supports does. devices or modifications to clothing, and additional costs for personal care and It became obvious to us that one of the main reasons that Canadians with disabilities face transportation. Other costs barriers to participation and mobility is because of the fragmented systems that address the are harder to imagine unless costs of disability. experienced first hand. For example... the extraordinary recommend,.. 41. The Government of Canada should recognize that measures that deal with the costs cost of installing a lift in a vehicle is obvious. Less of disability need to be separated from measures that provide income to persons with obvious is the additional cost disabilities. of having to purchase a van rather than a less expensive compact car or the additional TAXATION AND THE COSTS OF DISABILITY The federal government should take action to address the issue of the costs of disability in areas where it has jurisdiction. This includes the tax system. The federal government, therefore, should follow specific principles for the tax treatment of disability that will help to avoid the anomalies that are presently reflected in the federal tax system. 86 costs of maintenance and repair for a larger vehicle. — Richard Shillington Taxation and Disability We recommend,,, 42. The Government of Canada should base all future revisions to income tax legislation as it affects persons with disabilities to reflect principles that deal with the additional costs of disability. These principles are: • For persons with disabilities normal activities bring extraordinary costs which are involuntary. The courts eventually ruled that the air conditioning costs for those with multiple sclerosis were eligible for tax recognition.... The cost of air conditioning a business office is deductible without • Some of these costs are general and intangible and others can be supported by receipts for expenditures. question regardless if it is truly necessary for • Tax recognition of these costs is not a subsidy based on sympathy or charity but fair earning income. tax treatment. — Richard Shillington • Tax recognition of disability-related costs should encourage, not discourage, the Taxation and Disability employment of persons with disabilities. • The costs associated with disability are more onerous when borne by individuals with limited income. • The costs associated with disability are not limited to those with taxable income, YOU CAN’T DO IT ALONE We are aware that any comprehensive reform to deal with disability-related costs requires the collaboration of provincial governments. Collaboration can ensure that a move towards fairness by one level of government would not be cancelled out by a move to save money by 87 another. We want to create a situation where an increase in federal expenditures leads to a net gain for people with disabilities. We want to minimize the risk, for example, that if the federal government moves to make refundable any tax credit dealing with the costs of disability, the provinces reduce the amount they spend on disability-related supports. We want to avoid the possibility that they might also reduce provincial income support for those who receive social assistance — most of whom would, for the first time, benefit from the tax credit if it were refundable. Canadian governments should attempt to devise a pan-Canadian program that would address the concerns of mobility and equality of outcomes across the country. The aim of such a program would be to ensure that individuals in similar circumstances are treated fairly and equitably. We recommend,.. 43. Taking into account the principles in recommendation 42, the Government of Canada should work with the provinces to deal with the direct costs of disability in order to identify key elements that could be funded through a pan-Canadian program. The federal government should engage two or three provinces to: a) devise new approaches to ensuring that disability-related supports are in place consistent with economic participation and citizenship; and 88 b) identify the transitional financing issues that need to be addressed through federal-provincial collaboration. Individuals with disabilities and their families have to fight for support to remain independent in work and in SHORT-TERM CHANGES IN TAX MEASURES The Government of Canada does not need to wait for any further consideration before it takes action to demonstrate its commitment to the principles outlined in recommendation 42. It can act quickly and put in place some measures that have been the subject of representations by living arrangements. The tax system discourages, rather than encourages, these efforts. organizations of people with disabilities for some years. — David Baker and Harry Beatty The Disability Tax Credit Consultation Report on The Disability Tax Credit (DTC) is a non-refundable credit that applies to people who, over Taxation and Disability a prolonged period of time, are “markedly restricted” in their ability to perform an essential function of daily living, even with the use of aids. The tax system is working from an important clinical tool, the Activities of Daily Living, which is not wholly appropriate to define eligibility for the DTC. The list of essential functions includes seeing and walking, for example, but does not include breathing. The DTC reduces an individual’s federal taxes owing by about $720. Combined with the value of the provincial taxes that the individual also saves, the credit rises to about $1,120. The DTC may be transferred to a supporting relative, but it is of value only to those who pay taxes. 89! Of Canadians identified in the 1991 Health and Activity Limitations Survey as having severe disabilities, only 23 percent claimed the DTC in that year. Of people with moderate “Sometimes what the doctor writes you don’t see. They disabilities, 16 percent claimed the credit. About half of the people in these groups surveyed seal it in an envelope and said that they did not claim the credit because they did not know about it until they were they send it away, and then it asked. The remainder had been refused the credit or thought they would not qualify for it. comes back and you are not approved. Then you have to We make recommendations for a more comprehensive overhaul of the DTC below, but try to defend what the doctor without waiting for these, the Government of Canada can rectify some of the inequities in may or may not have sent, the current credit. without seeing it.” — Participant, Charlottetown consultation We recommend,.. 44. In its 1997 Budget, the Government of Canada should: a) Increase the value of the Disability Tax Credit to offset its erosion due to inflation and fully index the credit to inflation. b) Allow the Disability Tax Credit to be transferred to any supporting person. c) Expand the list of para-medical professionals, such as audiologists, who are able to certify an individual as eligible for the Disability Tax Credit. 90 The Medical Expenses Tax Credit The Medical Expenses Tax Credit (the METC) gives individuals a credit against taxes owed for some medical expenses. The expenses must exceeds percent of net income or $1,614, whichever is lower. The list of eligible expenses includes such things as: “Your wheelchair costs more than mine. However, I can get around with mine, you need yours to get around. We are just talking about • costs for hospital and nursing home care, • personal transportation formedical care, for trips over 40 kilometres, • medical devices such as prosthesesand wheelchairs, our own wheelchair, I would • home renovations, have one a long time before • attendant care, and you would and it seems sort • prescribed drugs. an equal playing field here. If we each had to save up for of ridiculous, particularly when most people with disabilities are trying to Expenses that give individuals some personal benefit are not eligible for the credit. This get into the workforce or includes, for example, the cost of installing air conditioning in the home for individuals with multiple sclerosis, a condition that is made worse by heat. Similarly, the costs of necessary nutritional supplements for persons living with HIV or AIDS are considered personal expenses. stay in the workforce.” — Participant in Whitehorse consultation 91 The combined federal and provincial Medical Expense Tax Credit covers about 26 percent of There is also concern the expenses that an individual claims. Since the credit is based on actual expenses, it is of that the reliance on MDs greater value to those with higher incomes. It provides a proportionately larger benefit to to determine eligibility people who have extraordinary one-time expenses than to those who have ongoing costs for perpetrates a medical model disability-related supports and services. in the understanding of disability which may not Only about 10 percent of people who claim the Disability Tax Credit also make a claim for accommodate the needs of medical expenses. all persons with disabilities. Some feel that the medical model implies an emphasis Again, we make a recommendation for an overhaul of the treatment of itemized expenses to replace the current METC. But until these are put in place, some changes could be made in line with the principles we have set out above. on illness and “Things which are broken,” and is less sensitive to disabilities which are more sensory, emotional We recommend... or cognitive. 45. In its 1997 Budget the Government of Canada should: — Richard Shillington a) Add to the list of eligible items for the Medical Expense Tax Credit all necessary medical expenses, including items such as nutritional supplements for persons living with HIV. Where the cost has a component of personal consumption, a predefined amount should be allowed for the credit based on typical costs. To illustrate, $1,000 92 Taxation and Disability might be allowed for medically necessary air conditioning or $5,000 to reflect the additional cost of installing a lift in a van and to take account of the fact that a person who requires a lifting device cannot purchase a smaller, less expensive vehicle. b) Make eligible for the Medical Expense Tax Credit the reasonable cost of medically necessary attendant care provided by family members. “The Income Tax Act does not define employment, domestic chores, education and leisure activities or the preparation and cooking of food as usual daily living c) Remove the $5,000 limit on claims for attendant care expenses. activities for individuals d) Remove the $1,614 limit on the net income exemption for the METC and use the with disabilities.” funds for other recommendations made in this report. — Participant in Yellowknife consultation Also in the Right Direction Apart from immediate changes to the Disability Tax Credit and the Medical Expenses Tax Credit, there are a number of tax measures that must be changed to increase equity and fairness for people with disabilities. Changes in these measures would be low-cost, but would also demonstrate a commitment to the principles we recommend as the basis for all reforms from now on. For example, while the tax system allows individuals to deduct moving expenses if the move is required to go to a new job or to attend a post-secondary institution, these expenses are not deductible for people who move from inaccessible housing to accessible housing. 93 In addition, the tax treatment of premiums for, and benefits from, disability insurance plans is uneven and leads to significant disadvantages for people with disabilities. While incorporated businesses can deduct the cost of premiums paid on behalf of employees for disability insurance, self-employed individuals cannot deduct this as a business expense. If the premiums are deducted as expenses, any benefits subsequently paid from the plan are taxable in the hands of the person who receives them. If the premiums are not deducted as expenses, any benefits subsequently paid out are not taxable. Self-employed Canadians should have the choice to deduct the premiums as business expenses or not. Today, if the employer pays any portion of the premiums for disability insurance on behalf of an employee, any benefits that the employee subsequently receives under the plan are taxable. This should be changed so that benefits are taxable only if the employer has paid more than 50 percent of the cost of the premiums. We recommend,.. 46. In its 1997 Budget, the Government of Canada should: a) Expand the conditions for tax recognition of moving expenses to include those necessitated by a move to accessible housing. b) Allow self-employed Canadians to deduct the cost of disability insurance premiums, if they choose, recognizing that the benefits would be taxable. 94 c) Treat benefits from disability-income plans as taxable only if the employer pays more than half of the premiums. “The federal government is focussing more and more on cost effectiveness and less and less on value to society.” Applying the Income Tax Act — Participant in People with disabilities have experienced problems with the way the Income Tax Act is Vancouver consultation applied. Many of these problems can be addressed through simple actions such as revisions to interpretation bulletins used by Revenue Canada. For example, people with disabilities told us that even though the law has not been changed, they believe the interpretation used by Revenue Canada on the T2201 form, used for claims for the Disability Tax Credit, has become more restrictive recently. Many people who had submitted claims for the credit now appear to be ineligible. The law must be respected, of course, but the interpretation of the law must be fair and must be seen to be fair. Revenue Canada has retroactively assessed people who claimed the Disability Tax Credit, even though they were previously allowed the credit and had provided a certificate from a medical professional to substantiate their claim. 95 In line with the principles that we outlined in recommendation 42, we also feel that the disability-related expenses covered by the Special Opportunity Grants for students with disabilities who receive Canada Student Loans should not be treated as taxable income. We recommend,.. 47. For the 1996 taxation year, the Government of Canada should review the T2201 form, in consultation with the disability community, to make it consistent with the statutory definition. 48. The Government of Canada should immediately limit “retroactive” assessment of the Disability Tax Credit to cases where no bona fide Disability Tax Credit valid on its face was submitted. The government should not reassess those who were certified eligible by a physician or optometrist. 49. The Government of Canada should allow for a broad interpretation of expenses related to vocational rehabilitation. If possible, this should be accomplished by Revenue Canada through a bulletin rather than by legislation. 50. The Government of Canada should not treat Special Opportunity Grants for students with disabilities under the Canada Student Loans Program as taxable income. 96 A NEW DISABILITY EXPENSE TAX CREDIT The independent experts who studied the tax system as well as the participants in our consultations called for two things: • refundability of a tax credit that recognizes the costs of disability, and • a tax credit that more accurately reflects the actual costs to an individual. The Government of Canada should create a more flexible tax measure to help individuals meet the additional costs of disability. Moving in this direction could be a statement by the federal government that all residents have a right to be a full member of society and that the personal supports, aids and devices that an individual needs to realize this objective would be at least partly paid for by Canada. Such a tax measure would constitute a move in the direction of a pan-Canadian program for disability-related supports and services. It would also be consistent with the broadly based citizenship objectives that ought to underline the federal role in disability. The proposed Disability Expense Tax Credit can combine the best features of the Disability Tax Credit (DTC) and the Medical Expense Tax Credit (METC). Like the DTC, the new credit should be available to persons whose disabilities prevent them from performing basic functions of daily life, even with the assistance of a technical device or aid. Unlike the DTC, 97 the credit should be refundable, so that it benefits people who earn very low incomes. For people who are receiving social assistance, the provincial and territorial governments should not consider amounts received under the Disability Expense Tax Credit (DETC) as income and use them to lower benefits paid to these individuals. This basic portion of the DETC may be set at a lower level than the current Disability Tax Credit, because the full DETC will also take into account receipted disability-related expenses by means of a tax credit more closely related to actual disability-related expenditures. We recommend,.. 51. In its 1997 Budget, the Government of Canada should announce its intention to introduce, for the 1998 tax year, a new Disability Expense Tax Credit to replace the Disability Tax Credit and the Medical Expense Tax Credit for persons with disabilities. The eligibility criteria for the Disability Expense Tax Credit should reflect the current review of the Disability Tax Credit. The exact design of the Disability Expense Tax Credit should depend on consultation with the disability community but it should have the following features: a) The federal value of the credit should be refundable (with the provincial share where arrangements have been made with a province). 98 b) The credit should have two components; a base amount available to all those who meet the overall eligibility criteria; and a second amount which would be based on disability-related “out-of-pocket” expenditures. c) The tax treatment of eligible “out-of-pocket” expenses should be modified as indicated above. Eligible expenses should include medically-necessary expenses and increases in employment-related expenses due to disability. d) The base amount of the credit reflects an “across-the-board” estimate of undocumented costs. This base level should be set recognizing the change in the “Persons with disabilities cut across every segment of society. They are youth. They are Aboriginals. They are our aged populations. They are all of us.” — Participant in Toronto consultation treatment of the recognized, “receipted” expenses. e) The base amount of the credit should be refundable in advance on a quarterly basis much like the practice with the GST credit. f) The tax rate used to calculate the credit, normally 17 percent, should be increased to 29 percent for low-income beneficiaries. INVOLVE THE COMMUNITY We know that we have not resolved all the tax questions related to disability in this report. Some issues require further study prior to instituting reforms. At the same time, we feel that it is important to recognize that a new approach is needed. The disability community should be involved in plans to change and improve the tax system so that problems can be avoided and so that people feel well served by a government that treats them fairly. 99 Because people are not federal or provincial beings, nor are they isolated from business, labour and other groups that help determine how our society functions, true consultation should involve all of these groups as well. There are a number of issues on which reforms have been recommended, and these form the basis of the Task Force’s final recommendation. recommend... 52. The Government of Canada should establish an advisory panel made up of persons with disabilities, representatives of the federal government, provincial governments, the insurance industry, employers and organized labour, to provide within one year, recommendations for, among other things, tax measures that deal with: a) a review of the criteria and definitions used for determining eligibility for the Disability Expense Tax Credit; b) consistent tax treatment of disability-related income sources; c) the tax treatment of trusts; d) determining whether the three claims for dependents with disabilities can be replaced by one claim; e) effective measures to promote barrier removal by businesses; f) allowing non-incorporated businesses the same tax treatment of supplementary health and dental benefits as incorporated businesses; g) other issues relevant to the tax treatment of disability. 100 THANKS The Task Force on Disability Issues thanks the Reference Group of organizations whose representatives helped shape the themes that are reflected in this report. Their willingness to participate in the work of the Task Force, and their collective commitment to the needs of women and men with disabilities in Canada, were invaluable. We hope we have listened carefully to your wise voices. Jean-François Martin, Association des Parents d’Enfants Trisomiques du Montreal Métropolitain; Luciana Soave, Association multi-ethnique pour l’intégration des personnes handicapées du Québec; Russell Armstrong, Canadian Aids Society; Diane Richler, Canadian Association for Community Living (CACL); Jim Roots, Canadian Association of the Deaf; Traci Walters, Canadian Association of Independent Living Centres; John Bullen, Canadian Council of the Blind, Le Conseil canadien des Aveugles; David Pollock and Lynda White, Canadian Council on Rehabilitation & Work (CCRW); Laurie Beachell, Council of Canadians with Disabilities; Janice McNamara, Canadian Hard of Hearing Association, L’Association de malentendants canadiens; Bonnie Pape, Canadian Mental Health Association (CMHA); James Sanders, Canadian National Institute for the Blind (CNIB); Eric Boyd, Canadian Paraplegic Association (CPA); Lucie Lemieux-Brassard, Confédération des organismes de personnes handicapées du Québec (COPHAN); Doreen Demas, DisAbled Womens Network; Pauline Mantha, Learning Disabilities Association of Canada; Heather Stonehouse, Easter Seals/March of Dimes; Frank Smith and Stephanie Pollack, National Educational Association of Disabled Students (NEADS); Gary Birch, Neil Squire Foundation; Ivan Hale, One Voice; Paul Young, People First of Canada. 101 The Task Force on Disability Issues thanks the following people and their organizations for participating in its working groups and undertaking research. Their contributions on issues of concern to people with disabilities were significant and helped define many of the recommendations contained in this report: Marilyn Dahl, Canadian Hard of Hearing Association (CHHA); Yude Henteleff, Learning Disabilities Association of Canada (LDAC); Russell Armstrong, Tony Di Pede and Arn Schilder, Canadian AIDS Society; Eric Boyd, Canadian Paraplegic Association (CPA); Dan MacLellan, Canadian Association of Independent Living Centres (CAILC); Lucie LemieuxBrassard, Confédération des organismes de personnes handicapées (COPHAN) and Council of Canadians with Disabilities (CCD); Richard Shillington, Centre for International Statistics; Greg Williams, Williams & Associates; David Baker, ARCH; Heather Stonehouse, Easter Seals/March of Dimes; Connie Laurin-Bowie, Canadian Association for Community Living (CACL); Angelo Nikias, Council of Canadians with Disabilities (CCD); Doreen Demas, DisAbled Women Network (DAWN Canada); John Bullen, Mary Reid, Council of Canadians with Disabilities (CCD); Sherri Torjman, Caledon Institute of Social Policy; Al Bowden, Canadian Hard of Hearing Association (CHHA); Tony Dolan, Council of Canadians with Disabilities (CCD); Luciana Soave, Association multi-ethnique pour l’intégration des personnes handicapées de Québec; Rosalind Currie, Equality Matters; Tina Head; Frank Smith, National Educational Association of Disabled Students (NEADS); David Pollock and Pat Reiniger, Canadian Council on Rehabilitation and Work (CCRW); Ray McIsaac, Canadian Association for Community Living (CACL); Jim Sanders, Canadian 102 National Institute for the Blind (CNIB); Gordon Fletcher, People First of Canada; Gary Birch, Neil Squire Foundation; Pat Sisco, Canadian Association of Independent Living Centres (CAILC); Michael Huck, Council of Canadians with Disabilities (CCD); Burt Perrin, Burt Perrin Associates; Havi Echenberg; Jane Atkey; James Horan, Learning Disabilities Association of Canada; Paul Young, People First of Canada; Bonnie Pape, Canadian Mental Health Association; Allan Simpson, Canadian Association of Independent Living Centres (CAILC); Laurie Beachell, Council of Canadians with Disabilities (CCD); Linda Studholme, Canadian National Institute for the Blind (CNIB); Diane Richler, Canadian Association for Community Living (CACL); Fraser Valentine, Canadian Association of Independent Living Centres (CAILC); Marcia Rioux, Roeher Institute; Keith Banting, Queen’s University; Michael Mendelsohn; Cam Crawford, Roeher Institute; Yvonne Peters; Sandra Goundry, Equality Matters; Gerald Boychuk; Harry Beatty, Advocacy Resource Centre for the Handicapped (ARCH). A special thank you to the more than 200 individuals and organizations whose briefs and submissions helped inform the work of the Task Force. The range of sectors from business, to labour, to education, to voluntary organizations, to professional associations, to individuals, that took the time to prepare thoughtful commentary and offer constructive advice attests to Canadians’ collective will to act. 103 The Task Force on Disability Issues thanks all those who helped gather departmental information, support its day-to-day operations, organize the consultations, keep the process on track and put together its report: Denise Cameron, Jayne Kingsbury, Marie Lemieux, Peter Lawless, Jamie Hicks, Michel Regnaud, Brian Bell, Joanne Godin, Karin Fuller, Karen Marcotte, Ania Jakubczak, Lianne Beauregard, Jennifer Savoy, Sharon Jones, Jill Willis, Suzanne Potvin, Linda Trudel, Lucie Charlebois, and Louise Pitre. A special thank you to regional Human Resources Development staff across Canada who, with very short notice, made extraordinary efforts to invite a widely representative group of participants to each consultation, find suitable locations, and provide an atmosphere which supported discussion and debate. Thanks as well to staff in the four sponsoring departments who, with very little advance notice, provided comprehensive briefing material to the Task Force, responded to questions quickly and thoroughly and helped make sure that its deliberations and recommendations were based on the most up-to-date and complete information available on departmental programs and services. 104 .And most importantly, the members of the Task Force on Disability Issues would like to thank all of the women and men who took the time to speak with us during the consultations we held across the country. Your contributions are the heart and soul of this report. Gord Koppang, Steven Dennis, Oliver Cardinal, Diane Nicol, Eleanor Burwash, Reid Zittlau, Karen Charlton, Barry Breau, Ed Sawka, Zuhy Sayeed, Catherine Gunter, Gail Robertson, Don McCarthy, Beverley Matthiessen, Chris Lawrence, Larry Banick, Yolanda Stojak, Marie Currie, Maureen Murphy-Black, Audrey Cormack, John MacDonald, Vivian Leigh, Yvonne Collinson, Cecile Gladue, Susan Low, Dorothy Mandy, June MacGregor, Robert Saari, Mary Hatcher, Cathy Miller, Barbara Stewart, Patty Jordan-Huberman, Carol Bailey, Dorothy Battle, Betty Screpnek, Scott Smilie, Gail Thielen, Karen Durda, Mary-Lee Philipps, Marion McGrath, Glenn Tibbles, Ian Kershaw, Toni Tallman, Dawn Wieliczka, Carol Bengtson, Dennis Robock, Debra Lynkowski, Ralph Hechter, Dianna Jossa, Marilyn Kingdon, Colin Cantlie, Sandy Englehart, Annette Martin, Brian Batsch, Brian Gibson, Tony Hudson, W. J. McKeown, Alex Schaefer, Neil Pierce, Terry Holt, Judy Campbell, Andy J. Johansen, Wilma Clark, Joanne Michaels, Steven Hansen, Donna Martyn, Darrel Coates, Donna Van Buskirk, Tom Snell, Pamela Wagner, Colleen Robinson, Diana Brent, Barbara Shumick, Beverly Van Horn, Pat Ferguson, Elvin Collins, Cal Schuler, Alan Douglas, James H. Killick, Bill Stephenson, Martin Salloum, Martin Gaber-Conrad, Doug McNally, Dr. Emery Dosdall, Brian Bechtel, Iris Saunders, Ken Hoskin, Ken Batty, Pearl Dupont, Rhonda Galper, Ayaaz Janhohamed, Cindy Gordon, Raylene Manolescu, Lois Kurlovich, Susan McKenzie, Helen Krimmer, Daryl Holmes, Baldwin Reichwein, Chrisopher Jones, Thom Poulsen, Joyce Van Deuzen, Karin Kosman, Honey Leon, Colleen de Moissac, Bill Lockhart, Lyle D. McKellar, 105 Catherine Piepenburg, Tom Cain, Marvin Littmaan, P. K. O’Brien, Allan O’Byrne, Barbara Dalton, Louise Miller, Jackie Foord, Denise Meneice, Teren Clarke, Rod Hopkins, Donald Wright, Nancy Brine, Helena Burke, Barbara Hitsman, Marion Cook, Harold Barnes, Cathie Duchesne, Mark Pickup, Lisa Lannan, Doti Spittel, Gary McPherson, Sherri Koskewich, Joan Standish, Allan O’Byrne, Barb Cairns, Ed Riediger, Doug Nelson, Margaret Hussey, Garry Hooper, Shirley Dumpmeier, Mark Fox, Belinda Pack, Colleen Barnes, Paul Fitzhughe, Krista Staples, Marion Vasahlo, Jason Slemka, Aldred Neufeld, Mary Perry, Karen Cook, Robert Jickling, Dennis Cornish, Lisa Bacon, Carol Bast, Bradford Bentley, Fred Beyer, Dr. Gary Birch, Margaret Birrel, Clarence Bleackley, Kevin Braun, Margaret Bridgman, Brenda L. Bryan, Laney Bryenton, Christine Burnham, Darrell Burnham, Dick Calkins, Suzee Cameron, Jean Campbell, Cindy Campbell, Ian Hinksman, Oliver Cardinal, Florence Wylie, Toni Tailman, Linda Newman, Archie King, Gilbert Michel, Stephen Pooyak, Floyd Swasson, Blair First Rider, June Delisle, Wendall Nicholas, Linda Fortin, Bernard Wood, Ed McCorrister, Alfred L’Hirondelle, Doreen Demas, Brigitte Fagan, Larry Ducharme, James Tomkins, Doreen Saulis,Yvon LaMarsh, Margaret Moore, Judy Johnny, Barbara Beck, Gary Hubert, Yvette L’Hirondelle, Moses Deacon, Evelyn Major, Duane Redman, Margarite Hamel, Carl Cartier, Roger Carver, The Hon. Raymond Chan, Monica Chappell, Carl Chase, Fred Clarke, Suzanne Clarke, Rick Craig, Melanie Crombie, Gweneth Crook, Tara Culham, Dr. Marilyn Dahl, Lloyd Dahl, Linda Delparte, Lorna Ditmar, Debbie Dobbier, Anita Dodson, Lee Doney, Pam Downey, Patricia Duncan, Kathy Ellis, Steve Estey, Mike Feddell, S. Ferguson, Jock Finlayson, Stacy Fitzgerald, John E. Flatt, Gordon Fletcher, Marlene Franks, Ken Fraser, Adrianna Gamble, Miron Gazda, Marvin Germaine, Bruce Gilmour, Shelley Glossop, Barb 106 Goode, Larry Graves, Bev Guthray, Carol Hamilton, Janet Hanevelt, Rick Hansen, John Hansen, Ron Harris, Barry Harris, Norman Haw, Ian Hinksman, David Hosking, Arlen Johnson, Colleen Johnson, Frank Jonasen, Eva Jordan, Lisa Kallio, Susan Karovitch, Francis Kelly, Ms Alison Klundt, Karin Knudsen, Lori Kohl, Kari Krogh, Kennett Krueger, Angie Kwok, Catherine LaFortune, Lisa Langevin, Carolyn Lawson, Winston Leckie, Danny LeCours, Kevin Leeson, Leslie Liggett, Jane Linle, Gladys Loewen, Bob Logelin, Robin Loxton, James Ludsvigson, Eric MacNaughton, David MacPherson, John Maddison, Cindy Marshall, Margo Massie, Shirley Masuda, Tom McAulay, Monique McDonald, Don McGregor, Joe McLaughlin, Helen McMaster, Geoff McMurchy, Brad McPhee, Joan Meister, Joan Miller, Vaughan Miller, David Mitchell, Harry Monk, Phil Mundy, Betty Nobel, Eileen O’Brian, John Olldym, Robin Pack, Ronnie Phipps, Brian Platts, Allan Postuma, Sue Rimer, Cheryl Robertson, Carolyn Robertson, Donna Rodman, Mary Ann Roscoe, Manuel Salinas, Reeta Sanatani, Stephen Sandiford-Hinds, Ron Scanlan, Jack Scollon, Sue Scott, Laurie Shephard, Robert Shuster, Robert Sochowski, Jennifer Standeven, Cathy Stevens, Guy Stewart, Else Strand, Henry Stuive, Sam Sullivan, Sara Tassone, Paul Thiele, Linda Tobias, Greg Travers, Karen Van Biesen, Carmella Vezza, Pat Vickers, Henry Vlug, Arlene Ward, Ruth Warick, Joanne Waters, Sylvia West, Linda White, Les White, Donna White, Mary Williams, Laurie Williams, Marilyn Yeung, Elaine Zelter Deanna Ziebart, Wolfgang Zimmerman, The Hon. David Anderson, Debbie Anderson, Nick Angelis, Ed Aske, Chris Smith, Janet MacPherson, John MacFarlan, Shana Bourque, Ghislaine O’Hanley, Patricia Brown, Heidi MacDonald, Rita Feehan, Asifa Rahman, Leo Garland, Gloria Duquette, Dan Doran, Scott Crawford, Reid Burke, Sharon Corrigan, Guy Lockerbie, Trent Costello, Reji Martin, George O’Connor, Tony Dolan, Jessie Campbell, John W A. Curtis, Dianne Corrigan, Lois Blunston, 107 Sandy MacDonald, Bernard MacDonald, Pat Coady, Melody Beck, Richard N. Vessey, Brian Bertelsen, Martin Arsenault, Douglas S. Roper, Tim MacKenzie, Loman Hill, Mary MacDonald, Mona O’Shea, Albert Wakkary, Violet Cairns, Helene Kielly, Verna Doucette, Mary McConnell, Christine MacInnis, Laurie Molyneau, Kevin Walsh, Paul Admore, Stephen Dennis, Thom Matheson, Louise Polland, Julia Wright, Joanne Brown, Ben Thompson, Irene Larkin, Dale Murphy, Charles McQuaid, Pat Champion, Joan Coffill, Wendy Guindon, Pat Winchester, Gerard MacLeod, Eric J. McKinnon, Orvide Ross, Amelie Nielsen, Alton Hutchinson, Dorothy Smith, Brock Richards, Ethel Elsworth, Bonnie McOrmond, Andrea Scott, Gerri Costello, Ida Sherrill Ings, Eddie Arsenault, Angie Arsenault, Grace Curtis, Lois MacLean, Anne Christopher, Don Ament, Gary Annable, Laurie Beachell, Wayne Benedet, Arlene Beresford, Marlene Bilous, Brian Blankenberg, Catherine Boldt, Barry Bridgeman, Bert Cenerini, Pat Charter, Francine Chisholm, Rhonda Chorney, Kristine Cowley, April d’Aubin, Laura Dacquisto, Cathi Davison, Claude De Forest, Suzan Deane, Doreen Demas, Maureen Dowds, Theresa Ducharme, Shelly Ferec-LeGall, Gail Finkel, Rose Flag, Ken Friesen, Don Fuchs, Neil Graham, Luci Grechen, Don Halechko, Hasiuk Ernie, Harold Hawkins, Yude Henteleff, Monique Henzel, Sheryl Hildebrand, Carolyn Hole, Marnie Houston, Eilene Hyde, Cassandara Jones, Moira Jones, Joseph Kauleat, Marilyn Keeley, Maureen Koblun, Rod Lauder, Paul Lejeune, Stella Lucyk, Michael Mahon, Patrick Majekodumni, Claire Marcotte, Lionel Marcq, David Martin, Jim Martinuk, Charles Mastin, Davis Matas, Rosetta Matthews, Dean McDonald, Kim McIntyre-Young, Jeanne Mulvenna, Gladys Neilsen, Bernie O’Callaghan, Don Onofriechuk, Anne Paxton Rae, Linda Pichette, Frank Price, Anita Remple, Laurie Ringaert, Susan Rosenberg, Diane Roussin, Arne Schellenberg, Elizabeth 108 Semkiw, Pat Sisco, Carrie Solmundson, Jerry Sopko, David Steen, Brian Stewart, Greg Stoll, George Strang, Theresa Swedick, Lloyd Terry, Jan Thiessen, Marlene Vieno, Colleen Watters, Diane Webster, Erica White, Scott Wingnail, Mary White, Leslie MacLeod, Mel Durdle, Una Tucker, Debbie Prim, Philip Strong, Michelle Neary, Darrell Swain, Mary Ellen Fitzgerald, Gail Howell, Elisabeth Hamilton, Don Balsom, Bob Mercer, Bill Wescott, Gail Dempsey, Linda Paterson, Fabian Philpott, Bryan Johnson, Eric Norman, Matthew Glavine, Winnie Banfield, Barry Gallaway, Lori Seay, Elisabeth Parrel, Jerry Martin, Roger Peach, Cathy Murphy, Bev Brown, Cindy Watts, Frances Dollimont, Ron Stone, Ann Marie Parrell, Helen Gosine, Carol Crocker, Cyril Dillon, Loraine Foley, Louise Miller, Ken O’Brien, Maureen Bethel, Dolores Flynn, Linda Mackay, Pat Braye, Vera Perlin, Brian Prowse, Corrine Gough, Anne Dunphy, Bob Burt, Jim Mullins, Kay Sorenson, Gail St. Croix, Gerard Yetman, Cheryl Hebert, John Dunn, Elaine Drover, Betty Farrel, Sharon Pye, Andrea Crosbie, Bruce Peckford, Tom Hawco, Phyllis Nickel, Lorna Ralley, Dr. Norah Browne, Bruce Simms, Allan Corbet, Niki Stevenson, Yvette Goodland, Scott Toope, Marg Costard, Cheryl Long, Mary Ennis, Bonnie Pope, Sue Martin, Morag Beaumont, Dominic Conforti, Beverly Davis, Marilyn Farrel, Margaret Goddard, Joyce Main, Max Jordan, Carol McGregor, Igor Pilosov, Sam Savona, Scott Seiler, Mayah Sevink, Ruth Stoddart, Sal Vella, Beverley Gordon, Agnes Samler, Debbie Waters, Allen Anderson, Laurie Hall, Naz Husain, Tad Klupsas, Nancy Mousldale, Rob Ranbhawa, Myra Rodrigues, Renate Bedford, Brian Brodersen, Michele Meehan, Paul Dean, Burt Perrin, Ian Desjardins, Wenda Abel, Chris Chamberlain, Stan Delaney, Heather Delisle, Shirley Evans, Yves Fleury, Tina-Marie Lalonde, Claude Maisonneuve, Odette Allard, Christian Généreux, Michel Laporte, Nicole Tremblay, Léon Bossé, Jérome Di Giovani, David Thompson, Denise Destrempes-Marquez, Francyne Nault-Gurarslam, Chantal-Myriam Léger, 109 Luciana Soave, Michèle Salvail, Marie-Odile Morin, Jean-Pierre Bouchard, Raymond Desjardins, Line Ampleman, Francis Montreuil, Serge Galarneau, Fernand Boucher, Sylvain Lepage, Joan Wesland, Nicole Small, Carmel Parizeau de I’Orme, May Polski, Gerald Miller, Marc Éric Desmarais, Nancy Tremblay, Noella Malenfant, Gilles Coutu, Jean Pierre Lapointe, Pauline Lazure, Daniel Ouelette, Louise Leduc, Hélène Lamoureux, Sally Aitken, André Girard, Luc Beaulieu, Dave Nelson, Anne Bartel, Joan Yung, Anna Powell, Michael Huck, Dennis Tottenham, Monica Rivers, Lynne Demeule, Dale Birley, Leona Ames, Cynthia Wolkowski, Joanne Weber, George Ward, Robin East, Donna Alford-Douglas, George Thomas, Merle Gaastra, Blair Younghusband, Lynn Latta, Linda Tweddell, Norma McLennan, Bob Neufeldt, Bev Boehm, Brenda Beaudry, Jan Brown, Ed Ratcliffe, Chris Broten, Jim and Sherry Ehmann, Bob Larsen, Jim Dean, David Greenfield, Kathi Braun, Larry Carlson, Arno Aapro, Al Bowden, Susan Campbell, Allan Deschene, Gail Dowswekk, Tom Dowswell, Dan Edgar, Nancy Eidt, Leslie Emerson, Mary Ruth Engel, Rosamond Forrest, Bob Foster, Bob Gause, Carol Gonneau, Doug Graham, Douglas Hammel, Heather Hollinghead, Kathie Horne, Donna Ivey, Rosayn Jakeman, Mariela Karpecki, Norma Kelly, Karrin Kimberley, Florence Kirkbride, John Lee, George Livingstone, Ruth Lythe, Dale Marchand, Linda McNutt, Shelley McTague, Joan Miller, Margaret Monks, Niilo Simola, Kathleen Wilkinson, Maurice Wilkinson, Tracey Wilson, Douglas Diver, Doreen Saulis, Laura Peters, Christopher Shay, Philip and Eleanor Taylor, Lynn LeBlanc, Doug Bridgeman, Jeffrey Sparks, Shirley McGormly, Heather L. Hughes, Lester A. Morgan, Chris Grady, David Jory, June Hooper, Jane Grady, Robert Amos, Bill Turney, Doreen Kissick, Fabienne McKay, Inez Flemington, Jacques Laroche, David Warman, D. R. Nicholas, Ian Hamilton, Karen 110 Dickinson, Miller LeBlanc, John Lutz, Linda Robichaud, Bob Eckstein, Claude Oliver, Donna Kelly, Normand Robichaud, Floyd C. Stairs, Ted Gaudet, Pauline Michaud, Lynn Haley, Lynn Leblanc, Tiffany Fay, Jay Haines Bacon, Donna Gordon, Paul Thibeau, Wynne Farr, Diana Lane, Rose Marie Patterson, Bob and Florence Chase, Karen Cunningham, Nancy Kearns, Jan Greer, June Hooper, Barbara Wendland, Floyd Stain, Robert McCoy, Mike McKay, Claude Oliver, Lester Morgan, Michele Morgan, Liz Amos, Jeff Sparks, Jacques La Roche, Linda Sobey, Win Poole, Bill Turney, John Carty, John Allaby, Chris Grady, Sharon Qinne Farr, Mel Flemington, Kit Emms, Fabian McKay, Norman Robichaud, Kathy Cole, Jim Noseworthy, Jeff Sparks, Jean McBride, May Burell, Maureen Borland, Rachel Grant, Brad Slaunewhite, Bartholomew Simpson, Dave Hogan, Jamie Eddy, Wally Haines, Barbara Hughes, John Lutz, Lenore Cormier, Jacques La Roche, N. Kearns, Elizabeth Severin, Elsie McArity, Shirley Gormley, Diane Lane, Ian Hamilton, Cynthia Black, Mike Gagnon, Claude Ollsen, Robert McCoy, Mike McKay, Joy Bacon, Barbara Wendlandt, Nanci Morrison, Ken Munshaw, Janice Solomon, Bob Herring, Ralph Machin, Jocelyn Transgard, John Coflin, Jim Seiferling, Barb Carr, Wendy Dean, Lynette Griffin, Jim Browne, Terry Hart, Lynda Blach, Gary Brown, Don Fairbairn, Christine Smith, Francisco Bravo, Faith Bodnar, Ron Wood, Kathy Hamre, Marion Searle, Cheryl Fichter, Len Meier, Rob Raisbeck, Dennis Lynnes, Edie Pastuch, Eldon Wildeman, Pat Detz, Frank Fasano, Phillip Francis, Karl R. Fuller, Doug Jutzi, Anne Musgrave, Tom Proszowski, Reginald Rambarran, Pat Reiniger, Lynda White, Nancy Leamen, David Allen, Brenda-Jean Lycett, Gary Malkowski, Gordon Miller, Joan Miller, Aznive Mallet, Gord Ryall, Gordon Stevenson, Eric Wyeth, Joy Isaacs, Lina Valentini, Marg Presutti, Sandy Buxton, Bobb Geoff, Derek DeGeer, Sharon Dever, Deborah Gardner, Evelyn Gold, Catherine Harper, Dena Maule, David Reville, Ruth Smith, Emily Atkins, Robyn 111 Artemis, Vici Clarke, Steve Kean, Bernita Lee, Judith Lytle, Angelo Nikias, Peter Park, Helen Wagle, Heather Lunergan, Angela Watson, André Theriault, Don Hoyt, Brent Melanson, Connie Gilmour, Valerie Barry Wilson, Gael Hannan, Donna Pionski, Suzanne Levay, Jo-ann Fortin, David Lepofsky, Penny Parnes, Vic Willi, Mindy Pearlman, Fred Kinsie, Dianne Boston-Nyp, Gillian Lynne-Davies, Bev Hallam, Catherine Leitch, Irene MacDonald, Dawn Roper, France Tolhurst, Shirley Ann Desroches, Leslie Chappell, Keith Horner, Louis Levesque, Mark Berlin, Brian Bell, Jane Wood, Linda Fletcher, Hazel Self, Dianne Garde, Les Kehoe, Bena Shuster, Harry Beatty, Sharon Bell-Wilson, Fiona Miller, Lauri Sue Robertson, Meenu Sikand-Taylor, Janice Tait, Bob Waterhouse, Peter Rambert, Valerie Eaton, Joyce Thompson, Ian Parker, Pam Ellis, Kay Leslie, Fraser Valentine, Connie Laurin-Bowie, Audrey King, Bill McQueen, Bonnie Quesnel, Steve Balcom. And, while we did not have the names of the individuals, we would also like to thank those who participated in our consultation in Nova Scotia representing the following organizations: Ability Network Publishing Inc., Abilities Foundation, Advisory Committee for Persons with Disabilities, Affirmative Industries Association of Nova Scotia, AIDS Coalition of Nova Scotia, Alzheimer Society of Nova Scotia, Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Society of NS, Antigonish-Guysborough Committee for Arthritis Society, Asthma Foundation of Nova Scotia, Atlantic Provinces Special Education Authority, Attention Deficit Association of Nova Scotia, Bedford/Sackville Hearing Association, Brain Injury Association of Nova Scotia, Canadian Cystic Fibrosis Foundation, Canadian Cancer Society, Canadian Council of the Blind, Canadian Mental Health Association, Colchester Stroke Club, Canadian National Institute for the Blind, Canadian Paraplegic Association, Canadian Pensioners Concerned Inc., Central Highlands Association 112 of the Disabled, Cerebral Palsy Association, Clare Organization Representing People with Disabilities, Canadian Diabetes Association, Colchester Action Association of Persons with Disabilities, Cumberland Equal Rights for the Disabled, Deafness Advocacy Association of Nova Scotia, Disabled Consumers Society of Colchester, Disabled Farmers Association, Disabled Individuals Alliance, Disabled United for Quality in Life, Employer Link, Epilepsy Association of Nova Scotia, Family Support Network of Nova Scotia, Halifax Association for Community Living, Handicapped Organization Promoting Equality, Heart and Stroke Foundation of Nova Scotia, Injured Employees’ Self-Help Group of Nova Scotia, Integration Action Group, Job Brokerage Centre, Kidney Foundation of Canada, Kings County Association for Community Living, Learning Disabilities Association of Nova Scotia, Life Improvements for the Disabled, Lunenburg County Assistive Technology Centre, Lunenburg/Queens Action Council for Persons with Disabilities, Lupus Society of Nova Scotia, Metro Association for Autistic Children, Metro Association for Women with Disabilities, Metro Resource Centre for Independent Living, Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada, Muscular Dystrophy Association of Canada, New Leaf Entreprise, Nova Scotia .Association for Community Living, Nova Scotia Centre on Aging, Nova Scotia League for Equal Opportunities, Parent Association for Hearing Impaired, Recreation Council for Disabled Nova Scotians, Raymond Bonin, Senior Citizens’ Help Line/Outreach, Society for Treatment of Autism, Society of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Nova Scotians, Special Needs Information Service, Spina Bifida Association of Nova Scotia, Supportive Employment Training, The Gerald Hardy Memorial Society, Schizophrenic Society of Nova Scotia, People First Halifax/Darmouth, The Lung Association, The Self-Help Connection, Total Acces, Tourette Syndrome Foundation, YARCO, YMCA of Greater Halifax/Dartmouth. 113 Designed and produced by The Bytown Group Inc.