HUMA Committee Report

I think the biggest challenge in the area of disability is to try to move it to front of mind. … the bigger breakthroughs come through that public front-of-mindedness. That’s when things really begin to change, and that becomes part of the challenge and the task. (Hon. Ken Dryden, Minister of Social Development, Testimony before the Subcommittee on the Status of Persons with Disabilities, 20 April 2005)

INTRODUCTION

In December 2004, the Technical Advisory Committee on Tax Measures for Persons with Disabilities submitted its much-awaited report entitled Disability Tax Fairness. This concluded a period of almost four years during which the Subcommittee on the Status of Persons with Disabilities made it a priority to analyze tax measures, in particular the revision of the tax credit for persons with disabilities, and was thus able to exert a decisive influence on the recommendations of the Technical Advisory Committee. Almost all of these recommendations were integrated into the federal government’s 2005 Budget. This does not mean, of course, that all the problems have been solved, and the Subcommittee will be keeping an extremely watchful eye on the implementation of these recommendations.

Before opening a new chapter, the Subcommittee members felt it important to begin a transition period in which to take stock of the federal government’s activities relating to persons with disabilities. The theme of accessibility was chosen because it related to a great number of subjects and different departments.

The term “accessibility” is normally used to describe the absence of obstacles preventing a person with disabilities from fully using a building’s facilities. This definition is completely valid, but the Subcommittee members wanted to give the term the broadest possible meaning. In this report, accessibility is understood to be the absence of obstacles to the full enjoyment of the services, programs and public goods over which the Government of Canada or Parliament of Canada exercise jurisdiction.

The objective was thus to get an overview of as many accessibility-related questions as possible in order to identify the weak areas where more concerted action should be a priority. This subcommittee report is thus both an assessment and a program.

The six following subjects are dealt with:

• the follow-up to give to the recommendations of the Technical Advisory Committee on Tax Measures for Persons with Disabilities;
• the accessibility of buildings under federal jurisdiction;
• the accessibility of benefits from the Canada Pension Plan Disability Program;
• the accessibility of means of transportation under federal jurisdiction;
• the accessibility of jobs in the federal public service; and
• all the issues of accessibility related to Parliament Hill and the Administration of the House of Commons.

The Subcommittee’s objective was not to conduct an in-depth analysis of each of these subjects. That would have been impossible in such a short period. The primary objective was to determine whether the responsible institutions can meet their own standards in each of these areas. Given this, the Subcommittee deliberately limited itself to gathering testimony from the representatives of these institutions. The second objective was to assess whether, in light of the problems identified, the Subcommittee should at some point conduct a thorough study of the advisability of adopting a Canadian Persons with Disabilities Act, as the United States has done, and Mexico did quite recently. Such an act might better express Canadians’ vision than the confusing multiplicity of acts, standards, policies and programs that currently prevails.

High standards call for corresponding results. This report is meant to reiterate the high standards that the government of Canada set itself and to assess some of its concrete actions. For the Subcommittee members, the ultimate criterion will remain, with no possible compromise, the full integration of persons with disabilities into Canada’s social, economic and cultural life.

Follow-up on Recommendations by the Technical Advisory Committee on Tax Measures for Persons With Disabilities

It was with deep satisfaction that the members of the Subcommittee learned of the Government of Canada’s decision to incorporate most of the recommendations in the report by the Technical Advisory Committee ^[1] into its 2004 and 2005 budgets. Twenty-one of the twenty five recommendations were wholly or partially accepted.

The Subcommittee would however like to stress the importance of one of the four recommendations that the government did not act on: the Technical Advisory Committee’s recommendation 5.1, which proposed the following:

Going forward, priority should be given to expenditure programs rather than tax measures to target new funding where the need is greatest. The Committee recognizes that the development of such programs would involve consultations with provincial and territorial governments and the disability community ^[2].

This recommendation pointed out the fact that tax measures do very little to help people who pay little or no income tax — the very people whose needs are the greatest. Properly targeted expenditure programs would assure greater fairness by enabling persons with disabilities on low incomes to derive more benefit from the Canadian government’s financial assistance. In the opinion of the Subcommittee’s members, this is the direction the government should take immediately.

RECOMMENDATION 1

The Subcommittee recommends to the Government of Canada that it report on when it intends to implement recommendation 5.1 in the report of the Technical Advisory Committee on Tax Measures for Persons with Disabilities.

TOP OF PAGE

Accessibility of Federal Buildings

The question of the accessibility of buildings under federal jurisdiction arises mainly in the case of office buildings and those that are open to the public. All departments must apply the Treasury Board Real Property Accessibility Policy. This policy requires the application of technical standard B651, developed by the Canadian Standards Association (CSA). The Department of Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC) is the largest manager of such buildings, with almost 2,000 units under its responsibility.

The Subcommittee wants first of all to stress the admirable willingness to collaborate shown by the PWGSC representatives, and their sincere desire to make the buildings for which they are responsible barrier free.

Two problems in particular struck the Subcommittee’s members: the inaccessible premises of the Office for Disability Issues and the lack of clear data on buildings’ compliance with the accessibility standards.

15 Eddy Street

The members of the Subcommittee were flabbergasted to learn that the premises housing the Office for Disability Issues are not fully accessible. Representatives of the Office and PWGSC explained that an increase in the Office’s staff had made the premises at 25 Eddy Street too small, and that use of adjacent premises at 15 Eddy Street was only a temporary measure, while premises with adequate space were made available to house the Office’s 80-some employees permanently ^[3].

The members are well aware of the difficulties posed by the shortage of office space in the National Capital Region. However, the public message that is conveyed by this lack of compliance, however partial or localized, has a highly symbolic significance that is quite simply unacceptable.

RECOMMENDATION 2

The Subcommittee recommends that the Department of Public Works and Government Services Canada identify as promptly as possible premises where the activities of the Office for Disability Issues could be housed as of 2006. These premises will serve as a model for fully barrier-free installations and will have to be compliant in all respects with the 2004 edition of standard B651 (CAN/CSA B651 04), as formulated by the Canadian Standards Association.

Federal Buildings’ Compliance with Accessibility Standards

According to the information provided by PWGSC, there has never been any comprehensive audit on the compliance of federal buildings with the Treasury Board Real Property Accessibility Policy. A preliminary study ^[4] was published by PWGSC in October 2003, but it covered only a 102 building sampling and did not audit all of the Policy’s accessibility elements.

It seems surprising that an exhaustive study has never been undertaken, since according to the PWGSC representatives an accessibility review is part of the report produced annually for each federal government building ^[5]. Given that shortcomings have been identified in buildings with high symbolic value, such as the Confederation Building and the premises of the Office for Disability Issues, the members of the Subcommittee are concerned about the state of buildings that do not receive such attention.

RECOMMENDATION 3

The Subcommittee recommends that the Department of Public Works and Government Services Canada establish in 2005 an ongoing audit program of the compliance of federal buildings with technical standard CAN/CSA B651 04, as formulated by the Canadian Standards Association. A progress report should be tabled in 2007, and all federal buildings must be audited by no later than 2009.